REVIEW 1 cited by
Community Forensics: Using Thousands of Generators to Train Fake Image Detectors
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
One of the key challenges of detecting AI-generated images is spotting images that have been created by previously unseen generative models. We argue that the limited diversity of the training data is a major obstacle to addressing this problem, and we propose a new dataset that is significantly larger and more diverse than prior work. As part of creating this dataset, we systematically download thousands of text-to-image latent diffusion models and sample images from them. We also collect images from dozens of popular open source and commercial models. The resulting dataset contains 2.7M images that have been sampled from 4803 different models. These images collectively capture a wide range of scene content, generator architectures, and image processing settings. Using this dataset, we study the generalization abilities of fake image detectors. Our experiments suggest that detection performance improves as the number of models in the training set increases, even when these models have similar architectures. We also find that detection performance improves as the diversity of the models increases, and that our trained detectors generalize better than those trained on other datasets. The dataset can be found in https://jespark.net/projects/2024/community_forensics
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
VendorBench-100: A Unified Cross-Paradigm Benchmark for Deepfake Image Detection
A 36-model cross-paradigm benchmark on a hard 100-image corpus shows commercial APIs lead on MCC, open-source detectors trail on average, and a subset of strong rankers are miscalibrated at their default threshold.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.