Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

How to Distinguish AI-Generated Images from Authentic Photographs

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.08651 v1 pith:ZRZWD6QE submitted 2024-06-12 cs.HC cs.AIcs.CV

classification cs.HCcs.AIcs.CV
keywords imagesai-generatedartifactsguideimplausibilitiesphotographsdiffusiondistinguish
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The high level of photorealism in state-of-the-art diffusion models like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and Firefly makes it difficult for untrained humans to distinguish between real photographs and AI-generated images. To address this problem, we designed a guide to help readers develop a more critical eye toward identifying artifacts, inconsistencies, and implausibilities that often appear in AI-generated images. The guide is organized into five categories of artifacts and implausibilities: anatomical, stylistic, functional, violations of physics, and sociocultural. For this guide, we generated 138 images with diffusion models, curated 9 images from social media, and curated 42 real photographs. These images showcase the kinds of cues that prompt suspicion towards the possibility an image is AI-generated and why it is often difficult to draw conclusions about an image's provenance without any context beyond the pixels in an image. Human-perceptible artifacts are not always present in AI-generated images, but this guide reveals artifacts and implausibilities that often emerge. By drawing attention to these kinds of artifacts and implausibilities, we aim to better equip people to distinguish AI-generated images from real photographs in the future.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Visual Persuasion: What Influences Decisions of Vision-Language Models?

    cs.CV 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Naturalistic edits to background, lighting, and staging systematically shift the choices of frontier vision-language models, and a new optimization-plus-interpretation framework (CVPO) discovers and explains the visua...

  2. AIGI-Holmes: Towards Explainable and Generalizable AI-Generated Image Detection via Multimodal Large Language Models

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    AIGI-Holmes combines visual expert pretraining, SFT on explanation data, and direct preference optimization to deliver human-verifiable explanations and top detection accuracy on unseen AI generators.

Pith tools