pith. sign in

arxiv: 2405.04097 · v2 · pith:5FYJ3PQDnew · submitted 2024-05-07 · 💻 cs.CV · cs.AI· cs.CY· cs.LG· cs.MM

Unmasking Illusions: Understanding Human Perception of Audiovisual Deepfakes

classification 💻 cs.CV cs.AIcs.CYcs.LGcs.MM
keywords videoshumandeepfakeshumansmachineaudiovisualauthenticitybeen
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The emergence of contemporary deepfakes has attracted significant attention in machine learning research, as artificial intelligence (AI) generated synthetic media increases the incidence of misinterpretation and is difficult to distinguish from genuine content. Currently, machine learning techniques have been extensively studied for automatically detecting deepfakes. However, human perception has been less explored. Malicious deepfakes could ultimately cause public and social problems. Can we humans correctly perceive the authenticity of the content of the videos we watch? The answer is obviously uncertain; therefore, this paper aims to evaluate the human ability to discern deepfake videos through a subjective study. We present our findings by comparing human observers to five state-ofthe-art audiovisual deepfake detection models. To this end, we used gamification concepts to provide 110 participants (55 native English speakers and 55 non-native English speakers) with a webbased platform where they could access a series of 40 videos (20 real and 20 fake) to determine their authenticity. Each participant performed the experiment twice with the same 40 videos in different random orders. The videos are manually selected from the FakeAVCeleb dataset. We found that all AI models performed better than humans when evaluated on the same 40 videos. The study also reveals that while deception is not impossible, humans tend to overestimate their detection capabilities. Our experimental results may help benchmark human versus machine performance, advance forensics analysis, and enable adaptive countermeasures.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Deepfake Detection that Generalizes Across Benchmarks

    cs.CV 2025-08 accept novelty 6.0

    GenD achieves state-of-the-art average cross-dataset AUROC in deepfake detection by parameter-efficient adaptation of a foundational vision encoder with hyperspherical manifold enforcement via L2 normalization and met...

  2. The Illusion of Competence: Self-Perceived Digital Literacy and AI Readiness Among European Secondary Students

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Survey of European secondary students identifies a confidence-competence gap in digital literacy and AI skills, with Dunning-Kruger effects, conditional gender differences, and an AI paradox.

  3. Discerning Authorship in Online Health Communities: Experience, Trust, and Transparency Implications for Moderating AI

    cs.HC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    People show little ability to distinguish AI-generated from human-written health advice in online communities, with detection varying by health condition and unreliable heuristics.

  4. I Hear, Therefore I Trust: A Socio-Technical Investigation of Humans as Synthetic Speech Detectors

    eess.AS 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    An experiment shows humans detect fully synthetic speech below chance but exhibit implicit discrimination via quality ratings in a localization task with trust cue manipulations.