{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2","short_pith_number":"pith:F2NYS6ME","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"2e9b8979842d1414759dd9f4c3d1796697a92c1f4168d4a581249bc0bbf67a3b","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2506.14398","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"A Comparative Study on Proactive and Passive Detection of Deepfake Speech","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.SD","authors_text":"Chia-Hua Wu, Hsin-Min Wang, Junichi Yamagishi, Wanying Ge, Xin Wang, Yu Tsao","submitted_at":"2025-06-17T10:54:08Z","abstract_excerpt":"Solutions for defending against deepfake speech fall into two categories: proactive watermarking models and passive conventional deepfake detectors. While both address common threats, their differences in training, optimization, and evaluation prevent a unified protocol for joint evaluation and selecting the best solutions for different cases. This work proposes a framework to evaluate both model types in deepfake speech detection. To ensure fair comparison and minimize discrepancies, all models were trained and tested on common datasets, with performance evaluated using a shared metric. We al"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2506.14398","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.SD","submitted_at":"2025-06-17T10:54:08Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"baa136741fc1a507c1602a807fd0604e369aabb0b164f7f6ba68552722c47618","abstract_canon_sha256":"c21938f4936bd0c2b1fc2040311b4c27d2c85eb35d5902f95fd5f9755a26423a"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772825Z","signature_b64":"+ry8SBC6fVgjq3rBLIvT7dmtzWp+EvzrJrBz2EzYdmsWrVFzh534+3Fn3nEbnkmR5gmqlyQHUc0bDOQps72KDQ==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"2e9b8979842d1414759dd9f4c3d1796697a92c1f4168d4a581249bc0bbf67a3b","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772165Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772165Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"A Comparative Study on Proactive and Passive Detection of Deepfake Speech","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.SD","authors_text":"Chia-Hua Wu, Hsin-Min Wang, Junichi Yamagishi, Wanying Ge, Xin Wang, Yu Tsao","submitted_at":"2025-06-17T10:54:08Z","abstract_excerpt":"Solutions for defending against deepfake speech fall into two categories: proactive watermarking models and passive conventional deepfake detectors. While both address common threats, their differences in training, optimization, and evaluation prevent a unified protocol for joint evaluation and selecting the best solutions for different cases. This work proposes a framework to evaluate both model types in deepfake speech detection. To ensure fair comparison and minimize discrepancies, all models were trained and tested on common datasets, with performance evaluated using a shared metric. We al"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2506.14398","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2506.14398/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2506.14398","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2506.14398v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2506.14398","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"F2NYS6MEFUKB","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M5","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"F2NYS6ME","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2506.14398","citing_title":"A Comparative Study on Proactive and Passive Detection of Deepfake Speech","ref_index":2,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2","json":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/F2NYS6ME"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/F2NYS6ME","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2506.14398&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/F2NYS6MEFUKBI5M53H2MHULZM2/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T11:22:54.772265+00:00"}