Cited by 37Digital Media Forensic DetectionAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesBenford’s Law and Fraud Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Design of Automated Deep Learning-Based Fusion Model for Copy-Move Image Forgery Detection

Open access
Krishnaraj, N., Sivakumar, B., Kuppusamy, Ramya, Teekaraman, Yuvaraja, Thelkar, Amruth Ramesh·2022·Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience

Abstract

Due to the exponential growth of high-quality fake photos on social media and the Internet, it is critical to develop robust forgery detection tools. Traditional picture- and video-editing techniques include copying areas of the image, referred to as the copy-move approach. The standard image processing methods physically search for patterns relevant to the duplicated material, restricting the usage in enormous data categorization. On the contrary, while deep learning (DL) models have exhibited improved performance, they have significant generalization concerns because of their high reliance on training datasets and the requirement for good hyperparameter selection. With this in mind, this article provides an automated deep learning-based fusion model for detecting and localizing copy-move forgeries (DLFM-CMDFC). The proposed DLFM-CMDFC technique combines models of generative adversarial networks (GANs) and densely connected networks (DenseNets). The two outputs are combined in the DLFM-CMDFC technique to create a layer for encoding the input vectors with the initial layer of an extreme learning machine (ELM) classifier. Additionally, the ELM model’s weight and bias values are optimally adjusted using the artificial fish swarm algorithm (AFSA). The networks’ outputs are supplied into the merger unit as input. Finally, a faked image is used to identify the difference between the input and target areas. Two benchmark datasets are used to validate the proposed model’s performance. The experimental results established the proposed model’s superiority over recently developed approaches.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2022/8501738This paper is marked retracted.

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. A. Doegar, 2019, Cnn based image forgery detection using pre-trained alexnet model, International Journal of Computational Intelligence & IoT, 2
  2. 10.5555/2969033.2969125 · DOI
  3. X. L. Li, 2002, Geothermal-solar combined organic rankine cycle power generation technology research, System Engineering Theory and Practice, 35, 32

Cited by

See all 37

Metadata

Authors
Krishnaraj, N., Sivakumar, B., Kuppusamy, R., Teekaraman, Y., & Thelkar, A. R.
Affiliations
  • SRM Institute of Science and Technology (IN)
  • Sri Sairam College of Engineering (IN)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Jimma University (ET)
Corresponding author
  • Teekaraman, Yuvaraja
  • Thelkar, Amruth Ramesh
Venue
Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-01-31
Volume
2022
Pages
1-13
ISSN
  • 1687-5265 (ISSN-L)
  • 1687-5273
OpenAlex
W4210362228
Cited by
37
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9
FWCI
3.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Status
Retracted
Open access
Locations
  • Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
copy-move forgery detection, image forgery detection, generative adversarial networks, dense convolutional network, extreme learning machine, artificial fish swarm algorithm, hyperparameter optimization, automated model design
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Algorithms, Animals, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted

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