Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Preprint

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Should ChatGPT and Bard Share Revenue with Their Data Providers? A New Business Model for the AI Era

Zhang, Dong·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2305.02555arXiv 2305.02555
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

With various AI tools such as ChatGPT becoming increasingly popular, we are entering a true AI era. We can foresee that exceptional AI tools will soon reap considerable profits. A crucial question arise: should AI tools share revenue with their training data providers in additional to traditional stakeholders and shareholders? The answer is Yes. Large AI tools, such as large language models, always require more and better quality data to continuously improve, but current copyright laws limit their access to various types of data. Sharing revenue between AI tools and their data providers could transform the current hostile zero-sum game relationship between AI tools and a majority of copyrighted data owners into a collaborative and mutually beneficial one, which is necessary to facilitate the development of a virtuous cycle among AI tools, their users and data providers that drives forward AI technology and builds a healthy AI ecosystem. However, current revenue-sharing business models do not work for AI tools in the forthcoming AI era, since the most widely used metrics for website-based traffic and action, such as clicks, will be replaced by new metrics such as prompts and cost per prompt for generative AI tools. A completely new revenue-sharing business model, which must be almost independent of AI tools and be easily explained to data providers, needs to establish a prompt-based scoring system to measure data engagement of each data provider. This paper systematically discusses how to build such a scoring system for all data providers for AI tools based on classification and content similarity models, and outlines the requirements for AI tools or third parties to build it. Sharing revenue with data providers using such a scoring system would encourage more data owners to participate in the revenue-sharing program. This will be a utilitarian AI era where all parties benefit.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2305.02555

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Brown TB, Mann B, Ryder N, Subbiah M, Kaplan J, et al. Language Models Are Few-Shot Learners. In: 34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2020). 2020. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.14165.pdf · arXiv
  2. Ouyang L, Wu J, Jiang X, Almeida D, Wainwright CL, Mishkin P, et al. Training Language Models to Follow Instructions With Human Feedback. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.02155.pdf · arXiv
  3. Pereira F, Norvig P, Halev A. The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data. IEEE Intell Syst. 2009;24:8-12.
  4. Sun C, Shrivastava A, Singh S, Gupta A. Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Era. 2017. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.02968.pdf · arXiv
  5. Zhu Y, Kiros R, Zemel R, Salakhutdinov R, Urtasun R, et al. Aligning Books and Movies: Towards Story-Like Visual Explanations by Watching Movies and Reading Books. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision (ICCV). 2015: 19-27.
  6. Taylor R, Kardas M, Cucurull G, Scialom T, Hartshorn A, et al. Galactica: A Large Language Model for Science. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.09085.pdf · arXiv
  7. Chowdhery A, Narang S, Devlin J, Bosma M, Mishra G, Roberts A, et al. PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways. ArxiV preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.02311.pdf · arXiv
  8. Thoppilan R, Freitas DD, Hall J, Shazeer N, Kulshreshtha A, et al. 'LaMDA: Language Models for Dialog Applications. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.08239.pdf · arXiv
  9. Zhang S, Roller S, Goyal N, Artetxe M, Chen M, et al. OPT: Open Pretrained Transformer Language Models. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.01068.pdf · arXiv
  10. Touvron H, Lavril T, Izacard G, Martinet X, Lachaux M-A, et al. 'LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models. 2023. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.13971.pdf · arXiv
  11. Soltan S, Ananthakrishnan S, FitzGerald J, Gupta R, Hamza W, et al. AlexaTM 20B: Few- Shot Learning Using a Large-Scale Multilingual Seq2Seq Model. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2208.01448.pdf · arXiv
  12. Smith S, Patwary M, Norick B, LeGresley P, Rajbhandari S, et al. Using Deep Speed and Megatron to Train Megatron-Turing NLG 530B, A Large-Scale Generative Language Model. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.11990.pdf · arXiv
  13. Wang S, Sun Y, Xiang Y, Wu Z, Ding S, et al. ERNIE 3.0 Titan: Exploring Larger- scale Knowledge Enhanced Pretraining for Language Understanding and Generation. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2112.12731.pdf · arXiv
  14. Bai Y, Kadavath S, Kundu S, Askell A, Kernion J, et al. Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.08073.pdf · arXiv
  15. Hoffmann J, Borgeaud S, Mensch A, Buchatskaya E, Cai T, et al. Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.15556.pdf · arXiv
  16. Rae JW, Borgeaud S, Cai T, Millican K, Hoffmann J, et al. Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gopher. 2021. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2112.11446.pdf · arXiv
  17. Black S, Biderman S, Hallahan E, Anthony Q, Gao L, et al. GPT-NeoX-20B: An Open-Source Autoregressive Language Model. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.06745.pdf · arXiv
  18. Scao T Le, Fan A, Akiki C, Pavlick E, Ilić S, et al. BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Model. BigScience workshop. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.05100.pdf · arXiv
  19. Wu S, Irsoy O, Lu S, Dabravolski V, Dredze M, et al. BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Finance. 2023. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.17564.pdf · arXiv
  20. Ren X, Zhou P, Meng X, Huang X, Wang Y, et al. 'PanGu-Σ: Towards Trillion Parameter Language Model with Sparse Heterogeneous Computing. 2023. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10845.pdf · arXiv
  21. Liang P, Bommasani R, Lee T, Tsipras D, Soylu D, et al. Holistic Evaluation of Language Models. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.09110.pdf · arXiv
  22. Mosca E, Szigeti F, Tragianni S, Gallagher D, Groh G. SHAP Based Explanation Methods: A Review for NLP Interpretability. In: Proceedings of the 29th international conference on computational linguistics. Gyeongju, Republic of Korea. 2022: 4593-4603.
  23. Zhao W, Joshi T, Nair VN, Sudjianto A. 'SHAP Values for Explaining CNN-based Text Classification Models. 2020. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2008/2008.11825.pdf
  24. Devlin J, Chang MW, Lee K, Toutanova K. 'BERT: Pretraining of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. 2018. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.04805.pdf · arXiv
  25. Reimers N, Gurevych I. Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERTNet- works,' EMNLP, 2019. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10084.pdf · arXiv
  26. Han W, Pang B, Wu YN. Robust Transfer Learning With Pretrained Language Models Through Adapters. 2021. ArXiv preprint https://arxiv.org/pdf/2108.02340.pdf · arXiv
  27. Xu R, Luo F, Zhang Z, Tan C, Chang B, et al. Raise a Child in Large Lan- guage Model: Towards Effective and Generalizable Fine-Tuning. 2021. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.05687.pdf · arXiv
  28. Ramesh A, Pavlov M, Goh G, Gray S, Voss C, et al. ZeroShot Text-to-Image Generation. 2021. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.12092.pdf · arXiv
  29. Radford A, Kim JW, Hallacy C, Ramesh A, Goh G, et al. 'Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision. 2021. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.00020.pdf · arXiv
  30. Schuhmann C, Beaumont R, Vencu R, Gordon C, Wightman R, et al. 'LAION5B: An Open Large-Scale Dataset for Training Next Generation Image-Text Models. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.08402.pdf · arXiv
  31. Cinà G, Röber T, Goedhart R, Birbil I. Why We Do Need Explainable AI for Healthcare. 2022. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.15363.pdf · arXiv
  32. McDuff D, Curran T, Kadambi A. Synthetic Data in Healthcare. 2023. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.03243.pdf · arXiv
  33. Gao L, Biderman S, Black S, Golding L, Hoppe T, et al. The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling. 2021. ArXiv preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.00027.pdf · arXiv

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, D.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2305.02555
arXiv
2305.02555
Type
Preprint
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Should ChatGPT and Bard Share Revenue with Their Data Providers? A New Business Model for the AI Era. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2305.02555
The paper
Zhang, D. (2023). Should ChatGPT and Bard Share Revenue with Their Data Providers? A New Business Model for the AI Era. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2305.02555