PreprintCited by 785Digital Media Forensic DetectionGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisMisinformation and Its Impacts

Exposing DeepFake Videos By Detecting Face Warping Artifacts

Open access
Li, Yuezun, Lyu, Siwei·2018·arXiv

Abstract

In this work, we describe a new deep learning based method that can effectively distinguish AI-generated fake videos (referred to as {\em DeepFake} videos hereafter) from real videos. Our method is based on the observations that current DeepFake algorithm can only generate images of limited resolutions, which need to be further warped to match the original faces in the source video. Such transforms leave distinctive artifacts in the resulting DeepFake videos, and we show that they can be effectively captured by convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Compared to previous methods which use a large amount of real and DeepFake generated images to train CNN classifier, our method does not need DeepFake generated images as negative training examples since we target the artifacts in affine face warping as the distinctive feature to distinguish real and fake images. The advantages of our method are two-fold: (1) Such artifacts can be simulated directly using simple image processing operations on a image to make it as negative example. Since training a DeepFake model to generate negative examples is time-consuming and resource-demanding, our method saves a plenty of time and resources in training data collection; (2) Since such artifacts are general existed in DeepFake videos from different sources, our method is more robust compared to others. Our method is evaluated on two sets of DeepFake video datasets for its effectiveness in practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1811.00656

Cites

5 of 5 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, Y., & Lyu, S.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
Pages
46-52
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2898877033
Cited by
785
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 146 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 125 · 2021: 161 · 2020: 122 · 2019: 16
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
Keywords
deepfake detection, fake video detection, AI-generated video, convolutional neural networks, 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