Cited by 33Digital Media Forensic DetectionMisinformation and Its ImpactsSpeech and Audio Processing

Lip Sync Matters: A Novel Multimodal Forgery Detector

Shahzad, Sahibzada Adil, Hashmi, Ammarah, Khan, Sarwar, Peng, Yan-Tsung, Tsao, Yu, Wang, Hsin-Min·2022·2022 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC)

Abstract

Deepfake technology has advanced a lot, but it is a double-sided sword for the community. One can use it for beneficial purposes, such as restoring vintage content in old movies, or for nefarious purposes, such as creating fake footage to manipulate the public and distribute non-consensual pornography. A lot of work has been done to combat its improper use by detecting fake footage with good performance thanks to the availability of numerous public datasets and unimodal deep learning-based models. However, these methods are insufficient to detect multimodal manipulations, such as both visual and acoustic. This work proposes a novel lip-reading-based multi-modal Deepfake detection method called “Lip Sync Matters.” It targets high-level semantic features to exploit the mismatch between the lip sequence extracted from the video and the synthetic lip sequence generated from the audio by the Wav2lip model to detect forged videos. Experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms several existing unimodal, ensemble, and multimodal methods on the publicly available multimodal FakeAVCeleb dataset.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.23919/apsipaasc55919.2022.9980296

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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 performance of any deepfake detection method is highly dependent on the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the datasets used for development.

    “The performance of any deepfake detection method is highly dependent on the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the datasets used for development [18, 21, 25, 40, 44, 47, 49, 51, 52, 61, 63, 69, 72, 75].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shahzad, S. A., Hashmi, A., Khan, S., Peng, Y.-T., Tsao, Y., & Wang, H.-M.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica (TW)
  • National Tsing Hua University (TW)
  • National Chengchi University (TW)
  • Research Center for Information Technology Innovation, Academia Sinica (TW)
Venue
2022 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2022-11-07
Pages
1885-1892
OpenAlex
W4312095900
Cited by
33
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4
FWCI
2.45
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
Keywords
deepfake detection, lip reading, audio-video synchronization, video forgery

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