The DOI matches its Crossref record.
CASIA Image Tampering Detection Evaluation Database
Abstract
Image forensics has now raised the anxiety of justice as increasing cases of abusing tampered images in newspapers and court for evidence are reported recently. With the goal of verifying image content authenticity, passive-blind image tampering detection is called for. More realistic open benchmark databases are also needed to assist the techniques. Recently, we collect a natural color image database with realistic tampering operations. The database is made publicly available for researchers to compare and evaluate their proposed tampering detection techniques. We call this database CASI-A Image Tampering Detection Evaluation Database. We describe the purpose, the design criterion, the organization and self-evaluation of this database in this paper.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 10.1109/ICIP.2009.5414611 · DOI · Paper page
- ng, 2004, A Data Set of Au-thentic and Spliced Image Blocks
- 10.1109/TIFS.2007.916285 · DOI · Paper page
- sencar, 0, Discrimination of computer synthesized or recaptured images from real images, IEEE International Con-ference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing Taipei Taiwan, 1053
- 10.1109/MSP.2008.931079 · DOI · Paper page
- wang, 2009, A survey of passive image tampering detection, 8th Internation-al Workshop on Digital Watermarking, 308, 10.1007/978-3-642-03688-0_27 · DOI
- farid, 0, Examples of Photo Tampering Throughout History
- 10.1109/CISS.2006.286646 · DOI
- qu, 2009, Detec-t digital image splicing with visual cues, 11th In-ternational Workshop on Information Hiding, 247, 10.1007/978-3-642-04431-1_18 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICASSP.2009.4959768 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1117/12.838888 · doi:10.1117/12.838888
- farid, 0, Digital Forensic Database
- cao, 0, Edge-based blur metric for tamper detection, Journal of Infor-mation Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing, 11, 20
- 10.1109/ICIP.2009.5413549 · DOI
Cited by
Media Forensics and DeepFakes: An Overview
Verdoliva, L. (2020) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2020.3002101 · Cited by 979
Two-Stream Neural Networks for Tampered Face Detection
Zhou, P., Han, X., Morariu, V. I., & Davis, L. S. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2017.229 · Cited by 700
RAISE: a raw images dataset for digital image forensics
Dang-Nguyen, D.-T., Pasquini, C., Conotter, V., & Boato, G. (2015) · Proceedings of the 6th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/2713168.2713194 · Cited by 508
TruFor: Leveraging All-Round Clues for Trustworthy Image Forgery Detection and Localization
Guillaro, F., Cozzolino, D., Sud, A., Dufour, N., & Verdoliva, L. (2023) · 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01974 · Cited by 275
Snis: a signal noise separation-based network for post-processed image forgery detection
Chen, J., Liao, X., Wang, W., Qian, Z., Qin, Z., & Wang, Y. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2022.3204753 · Cited by 129
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dong, J., Wang, W., & Tan, T.
- Venue
- 2013 IEEE China Summit and International Conference on Signal and Information Processing
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2013-07
- Pages
- 422-426
- OpenAlex
- W2169439181
- Cited by
- 813
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.35
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CASIA Image Tampering Detection Evaluation Database. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/chinasip.2013.6625374
- The paper
- Dong, J., Wang, W., & Tan, T. (2013). CASIA Image Tampering Detection Evaluation Database. 2013 IEEE China Summit and International Conference on Signal and Information Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/chinasip.2013.6625374
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
