# Interesting research paper: “Rethinking open source generative AI: open-washing and the EU AI Act” **URL:** \ **Category:** Open Source AI\ **Created:** [June 28, 2024, 12:21pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/interesting-research-paper-rethinking-open-source-generative-ai-open-washing-and-the-eu-ai-act/429 "2024-06-28T12:21:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![hook](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/discuss.opensource.org/hook/32/872_2.png) [@hook](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/hook)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2024, 12:21pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/interesting-research-paper-rethinking-open-source-generative-ai-open-washing-and-the-eu-ai-act/429/1 "2024-06-28T12:21:47Z")
I was recently forwarded this LinkedIn post, which I found interesting: > **[Etienne Grass on LinkedIn: #opensource #genai #aiact #llm | 27 comments](https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7211620451620392960/)** > > A large number of people support #OpenSource in #GenAI. But rare are the one really able to define it. > > The recent EU #AIAct 🇪🇺 entails a nice provision… | 27 comments on LinkedIn It summarises the paper _“Rethinking open source generative AI: open-washing and the EU AI Act”_ (which, is clearly, even more interesting): [https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3630106.3659005](https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3630106.3659005) > **Abstract** > > The past year has seen a steep rise in generative AI systems that > claim to be open. But how open are they really? The question of > what counts as open source in generative AI is poised to take on > particular importance in light of the upcoming EU AI Act that reg- > ulates open source systems differently, creating an urgent need > for practical openness assessment. Here we use an evidence-based > framework that distinguishes 14 dimensions of openness, from > training datasets to scientific and technical documentation and > from licensing to access methods. Surveying over 45 generative AI > systems (both text and text-to-image), we find that while the term > open source is widely used, many models are ‘open weight’ at best > and many providers seek to evade scientific, legal and regulatory > scrutiny by withholding information on training and fine-tuning > data. We argue that openness in generative AI is necessarily com- > posite (consisting of multiple elements) and gradient (coming in > degrees), and point out the risk of relying on single features like > access or licensing to declare models open or not. Evidence-based > openness assessment can help foster a generative AI landscape in > which models can be effectively regulated, model providers can be > held accountable, scientists can scrutinise generative AI, and end > users can make informed decisions It does mention OSI-AI as well: > **1.2 The moving target of open source AI** > > Until recently, classifications of software as open source could sim- > ply rely on the availability of source code under appropriate li- > censing: if some software is released under a licence approved by > the Open Source Initiative (OSI), it means that it is fully open and > minimally restrictive [45]. For software that is relatively portable > and user-deployable, this was long sufficient, and it afforded users > the rights to make copies, to tinker and, and to make improvements. > However, the rise of large language models and text-to-image gen- > erators means that a different approach is needed [47]. > > There are various efforts underway to update and tailor the > definition of open source to current generative AI systems. One is > a public consultation dubbed the “Open Source AI Deep Dive” that > the OSI board may draw on in their efforts to update their definition > of open source in the age of generative AI. Another is the “Joint > Statement on AI Safety and Openness” by parties including Creative > Commons, Mozilla, LAION and Open Future. The challenge that > these efforts face is to adopt the notion of open source, which used > to be fairly unambiguous, to the increasingly complex world of > generative AI systems [34]. And the interesting pictures … ![Figure 1: Comparison of BloomZ and Llama 2 on 14 dimensions of openness, illustrating the framework.](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/opensource2/original/1X/494cf85bdf4952b288ef3e66096f55bfbd968e70.png) ![Figure 2: Openness of 40 text generators described as open, with OpenAI’s ChatGPT (bottom) as closed reference point. Every cell records a three-level openness judgement (✓ open, ∼ partial or ✗ closed). The table is sorted by cumulative openness, where ✓ is 1, ∼ is 0.5 and ✗ is 0 points. RL may refer to RLHF or other forms of fine-tuning aimed at fostering instruction-following behaviour. For the latest updates see: https://opening-up-chatgpt.github.io](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/opensource2/original/1X/bae3486547cd398e3f9a1665ee5ce33c217028bb.jpeg) ![Figure 3: Overview of 6 text-to-image systems described as open, with OpenAI’s DALL-E as a reference point. Every cell records a three-level openness judgement (✓ open, ∼ partial or ✗ closed). The table is sorted by cumulative openness, where ✓ is 1, ∼ is 0.5 and ✗ is 0 points.](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/opensource2/original/1X/5b16d86aa8c05f1eb9bbcfdd93ae2447f5d5657d.png) ---
**Author:** ![zack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/f6c823/32.png) [@zack](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/zack)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2024, 12:52pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/interesting-research-paper-rethinking-open-source-generative-ai-open-washing-and-the-eu-ai-act/429/2 "2024-07-01T12:52:09Z")
Hello @hook, we have discussed this paper with the authors in a separate thread already, starting at [Open Source AI needs to require data to be viable - #13 by Mark](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/open-source-ai-needs-to-require-data-to-be-viable/351/13) ---
**Author:** ![hook](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/discuss.opensource.org/hook/32/872_2.png) [@hook](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/hook)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2024, 1:11pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/interesting-research-paper-rethinking-open-source-generative-ai-open-washing-and-the-eu-ai-act/429/3 "2024-07-01T13:11:54Z")
Whoops, missed that one, I apologise. ---
**Author:** ![nick](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/discuss.opensource.org/nick/32/542_2.png) [@nick](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/nick)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2024, 3:21pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/interesting-research-paper-rethinking-open-source-generative-ai-open-washing-and-the-eu-ai-act/429/4 "2024-07-01T15:21:51Z")
No worries, @hook. Thank you for sharing the images.