Can Performant LLMs Be Ethical? Quantifying the Impact of Web Crawling Opt-Outs

The increasing adoption of web crawling opt-outs by copyright holders of online content raises critical questions about the impact of data compliance on large language model (LLM) performance. However, little is known about how these restrictions (and the resultant filtering of pretraining datasets) affect the capabilities of models trained using these corpora. In this work, we conceptualize this effect as the $\textit{data compliance gap}$ (DCG), which quantifies the performance difference between models trained on datasets that comply with web crawling opt-outs, and those that do not. We measure the data compliance gap in two settings: pretraining models from scratch and continual pretraining from existing compliant models (simulating a setting where copyrighted data could be integrated later in pretraining). Our experiments with 1.5B models show that, as of January 2025, compliance with web data opt-outs does not degrade general knowledge acquisition (close to 0\% DCG). However, in specialized domains such as biomedical research, excluding major publishers leads to performance declines. These findings suggest that while general-purpose LLMs can be trained to perform equally well using fully open data, performance in specialized domains may benefit from access to high-quality copyrighted sources later in training. Our study provides empirical insights into the long-debated trade-off between data compliance and downstream model performance, informing future discussions on AI training practices and policy decisions.

INCLUDE: Evaluating Multilingual Language Understanding with Regional Knowledge

The performance differential of large language models (LLM) between languages hinders their effective deployment in many regions, inhibiting the potential economic and societal value of generative AI tools in many communities. However, the development of functional LLMs in many languages (\ie, multilingual LLMs) is bottlenecked by the lack of high-quality evaluation resources in languages other than English. Moreover, current practices in multilingual benchmark construction often translate English resources, ignoring the regional and cultural knowledge of the environments in which multilingual systems would be used. In this work, we construct an evaluation suite of 197,243 QA pairs from local exam sources to measure the capabilities of multilingual LLMs in a variety of regional contexts. Our novel resource, INCLUDE, is a comprehensive knowledge- and reasoning-centric benchmark across 44 written languages that evaluates multilingual LLMs for performance in the actual language environments where they would be deployed.