Cited by 159Digital Media Forensic DetectionAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesBenford’s Law and Fraud Detection

A Serial Image Copy-Move Forgery Localization Scheme With Source/Target Distinguishment

Chen, Beijing, Tan, Weijin, Coatrieux, Gouenou, Zheng, Yuhui, Shi, Yun-Qing·2021·IEEE Transactions on Multimedia

Abstract

In this paper, we improve the parallel deep neural network (DNN) scheme BusterNet for image copy-move forgery localization with source/target region distinguishment. BusterNet is based on two branches, i.e., Simi-Det and Mani-Det, and suffers from two main drawbacks: (a) it should ensure that both branches correctly locate regions; (b) the Simi-Det branch only extracts single-level and low-resolution features using VGG16 with four pooling layers. To ensure the identification of the source and target regions, we introduce two subnetworks that are constructed serially: the copy-move similarity detection network (CMSDNet) and the source/target region distinguishment network (STRDNet). Regarding the second drawback, the CMSDNet subnetwork improves Simi-Det by removing the last pooling layer in VGG16 and by introducing atrous convolution into VGG16 to preserve field-of-views of filters after the removal of the fourth pooling layer; double-level self-correlation is also considered for matching hierarchical features. Moreover, atrous spatial pyramid pooling and attention mechanism allow the capture of multiscale features and provide evidence for important information. Finally, STRDNet is designed to determine the similar regions obtained from CMSDNet directly as tampered regions and untampered regions. It determines regions at the image-level rather than at the pixel-level as made by Mani-Det of BusterNet. Experimental results on four publicly available datasets (new synthetic dataset, CASIA, CoMoFoD, and COVERAGE) demonstrate that the proposed algorithm is superior to the state-of-the-art algorithms in terms of similarity detection ability and source/target distinguishment ability.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tmm.2020.3026868

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?

  • Conventional image forensics relies on specific manipulation evidence, using frequency domain and statistical features such as local noise analysis, illumination, and device fingerprints to distinguish deepfakes.

    “Conventional image forensics relies on specific manipulation evidence [24], using frequency domain and statistical features such as local noise analysis, illumination, and device fingerprints to distinguish deepfakes.”

    From Multisemantic Path Neural Network for Deepfake Detection (2022) · cites this paper as [24]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 159

Authors
Chen, B., Tan, W., Coatrieux, G., Zheng, Y., & Shi, Y.-Q.
Affiliations
  • Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology (CN)
  • IMT Atlantique (FR)
  • New Jersey Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Multimedia
Published
2021
Volume
23
Pages
3506-3517
ISSN
  • 1520-9210 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0077
OpenAlex
W3090538384
Cited by
159
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 1
FWCI
6.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Multimedia (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (62072251, 61972206)
  • Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
Keywords
tamper localization, dilated convolution, VGG16, atrous spatial pyramid pooling, attention mechanism, image forgery detection, multi-scale feature extraction

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