Cited by 66Digital Media Forensic DetectionFace recognition and analysisGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

DF-Platter: Multi-Face Heterogeneous Deepfake Dataset

Narayan, Kartik, Agarwal, Harsh, Thakral, Kartik, Mittal, Surbhi, Vatsa, Mayank, Singh, Richa·2023·2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Deepfake detection is gaining significant importance in the research community. While most of the research efforts are focused towards high-quality images and videos with controlled appearance of individuals, deepfake generation algorithms now have the capability to generate deep-fakes with low-resolution, occlusion, and manipulation of multiple subjects. In this research, we emulate the real-world scenario of deepfake generation and propose the DF-Platter dataset, which contains (i) both low-resolution and high-resolution deepfakes generated using multiple generation techniques and (ii) single-subject and multiple-subject deepfakes, with face images of Indian ethnicity. Faces in the dataset are annotated for various attributes such as gender, age, skin tone, and occlusion. The dataset is prepared in 116 days with continuous usage of 32 GPUs accounting to 1,800 GB cumulative memory. With over 500 GBs in size, the dataset contains a total of 133,260 videos encompassing three sets. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the largest datasets containing vast variability and multiple challenges. We also provide benchmark results under multiple evaluation settings using popular and state-of-the-art deepfake detection models, for c0 images and videos along with c23 and c40 compression variants. The results demonstrate a significant performance reduction in the deepfake detection task on low-resolution deep-fakes. Furthermore, existing techniques yield declined detection accura…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00939

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 66

Authors
Narayan, K., Agarwal, H., Thakral, K., Mittal, S., Vatsa, M., & Singh, R.
Affiliations
  • Indian Institute of Technology Jodhpur (IN)
  • IIT Jodhpur,India
Venue
2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2023-06
Pages
9739-9748
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386076380
Cited by
66
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 5
FWCI
7.05
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
deepfake detection, deepfake datasets, occlusion, benchmark evaluation

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