Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Adversarial Attacks on Audio Deepfake Detection: A Benchmark and Comparative Study

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 2509.07132 v1 pith:VLFUZNGK submitted 2025-09-08 cs.SD cs.AIcs.CVcs.LG

classification cs.SDcs.AIcs.CVcs.LG
keywords methodsattacksdeepfakeaudiocomparativegenerativesignaturessota
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The widespread use of generative AI has shown remarkable success in producing highly realistic deepfakes, posing a serious threat to various voice biometric applications, including speaker verification, voice biometrics, audio conferencing, and criminal investigations. To counteract this, several state-of-the-art (SoTA) audio deepfake detection (ADD) methods have been proposed to identify generative AI signatures to distinguish between real and deepfake audio. However, the effectiveness of these methods is severely undermined by anti-forensic (AF) attacks that conceal generative signatures. These AF attacks span a wide range of techniques, including statistical modifications (e.g., pitch shifting, filtering, noise addition, and quantization) and optimization-based attacks (e.g., FGSM, PGD, C \& W, and DeepFool). In this paper, we investigate the SoTA ADD methods and provide a comparative analysis to highlight their effectiveness in exposing deepfake signatures, as well as their vulnerabilities under adversarial conditions. We conducted an extensive evaluation of ADD methods on five deepfake benchmark datasets using two categories: raw and spectrogram-based approaches. This comparative analysis enables a deeper understanding of the strengths and limitations of SoTA ADD methods against diverse AF attacks. It does not only highlight vulnerabilities of ADD methods, but also informs the design of more robust and generalized detectors for real-world voice biometrics. It will further guide future research in developing adaptive defense strategies that can effectively counter evolving AF techniques.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Uncertainty-Aware Deepfake Detection via Multi-View Structural Learning

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A three-stream detector with disagreement-calibrated evidential uncertainty cuts calibration error roughly in half on four of five cross-dataset deepfake benchmarks.

Pith tools