The DOI matches its DataCite record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The DeepFake Detection Challenge (DFDC) Dataset
Open accessAbstract
Deepfakes are a recent off-the-shelf manipulation technique that allows anyone to swap two identities in a single video. In addition to Deepfakes, a variety of GAN-based face swapping methods have also been published with accompanying code. To counter this emerging threat, we have constructed an extremely large face swap video dataset to enable the training of detection models, and organized the accompanying DeepFake Detection Challenge (DFDC) Kaggle competition. Importantly, all recorded subjects agreed to participate in and have their likenesses modified during the construction of the face-swapped dataset. The DFDC dataset is by far the largest currently and publicly available face swap video dataset, with over 100,000 total clips sourced from 3,426 paid actors, produced with several Deepfake, GAN-based, and non-learned methods. In addition to describing the methods used to construct the dataset, we provide a detailed analysis of the top submissions from the Kaggle contest. We show although Deepfake detection is extremely difficult and still an unsolved problem, a Deepfake detection model trained only on the DFDC can generalize to real "in-the-wild" Deepfake videos, and such a model can be a valuable analysis tool when analyzing potentially Deepfaked videos. Training, validation and testing corpuses can be downloaded from https://ai.facebook.com/datasets/dfdc.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Facebook fosters the development of high-performance DeepFake detection tools by hosting the DeepFake Detection Challenge (DFDC) (Dolhansky et al. 2020) in December 2019 with 2114 worldwide participants generating more than 35,000 models.”
From Countering Malicious DeepFakes: Survey, Battleground, and Horizon (2022) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The dataset DeeperForensics-1.0 (Jiang et al. 2020b) and DFDC (Dolhansky et al. 2020) used by these two challenges are significantly larger than the previous datasets. They have 100,000 videos and 100,000,000 numbers of frames.”
From Countering Malicious DeepFakes: Survey, Battleground, and Horizon (2022) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The DFDC is a publicly-available face swap video dataset, with 128,514 videos, over 100,000 total clips sourced from 3426 actors.”
From Countering Malicious DeepFakes: Survey, Battleground, and Horizon (2022) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“many existing detection methods struggle to recognize Deepfakes, synthetic facial images and videos, generated by newer synthesis techniques [8, 12, 26, 27, 43, 54].”
From Towards More General Video-based Deepfake Detection through Facial Component Guided Adaptation for Foundation Model (2024) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“ML-based detection approaches incorporate conventional machine learning techniques. Identifying patterns, anomalies, or inconsistencies in media information is typically accomplished using statistical models and algorithms (Dolhansky etal. 2020).”
From Deepfake video detection: challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“DFDC (Deepfake Detection Challenge) full dataset (Dolhansky et al., 2020): This dataset contains 128,154 face videos of 960 subjects, including 23,654 real videos from 3,426 paid actors and 104,500 deepfake videos created using eight different methods (DF-128, DF-256, MM/NN face swap, NTH, FSGAN, StyleGAN, refinement, and audio swap).”
From Deepfake: definitions, performance metrics and standards, datasets, and a meta-review (2024) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al., 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These datasets can be broken down into three generations [10] according to factors such as age, scale, and visual quality: first (FaceForensics++), second (Celeb-DF), and third (DeeperForensics-1.0).”
From WaveConViT: Wavelet-Based Convolutional Vision Transformer for Cross-Manipulation Deepfake Video Detection (2025) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The evolution of deepfake datasets has closely followed advances in generative AI, transitioning from early GAN and VAE-based techniques [21], [22], [24], [25] to sophisticated Diffusion Models (DM) [32], [33], [34].”
From Evolving from Single-modal to Multi-modal Facial Deepfake Detection: Progress and Challenges (2024) · cites this paper as [24]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“While these benchmarking methodologies have made significant contributions, they specifically focus on their own datasets, without offering a standardized way to handle data across different datasets”
From DeepfakeBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Deepfake Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In recent years, there have been two famous DeepFake challenge: DeepFake Detection Challenge (DFDC) (Dolhansky et al. 2020) and DeeperForensics Challenge 2020 (Jiang et al. 2021a).”
From Countering Malicious DeepFakes: Survey, Battleground, and Horizon (2022) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Neekhara et al. (2021) further study the adversarial attack-based evasion methods on the more challenging DeepFake Detection Challenge (DFDC) dataset (Dolhansky et al. 2020) and find that the input-preprocessing steps, as well as face detection methods across DeepFake detectors, make the adversarial transferability difficult.”
From Countering Malicious DeepFakes: Survey, Battleground, and Horizon (2022) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In order to ensure a fair comparison, Seferbekov, FTCN, LipForensics and Real Forensics are all trained on the FaceForensics++ dataset [49], which includes different types of facial manipulation (both FS and FR). MDS-based FD and Joint AV are trained on DFDC [18], which includes also audio manipulations. ICT is trained on a publicly available data-set of pristine faces of 1 million identities, MS-”
From Audio-Visual Person-of-Interest DeepFake Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [18]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“DFDC provides more than 100,000 videos (real and fake) with varying manipulation techniques (e.g., face swaps) and diverse lighting conditions.”
From Comprehensive Evaluation of Deepfake Detection Models: Accuracy, Generalization, and Resilience to Adversarial Attacks (2025) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“They proposed the Deep Fake dataset (DFDC).”
From Deepfake video detection: challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Now, most recent deepfake datasets are considered third-generation datasets (Dolhansky etal. 2020).”
From Deepfake video detection: challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“DFDC dataset is the largest Deepfake dataset currently accessible and one of the only datasets to include video recorded to be used in machine learning applications (Dolhansky etal. 2020).”
From Deepfake video detection: challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as Dolhansky et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Most of the available datasets provide examples of face manipulations through either face swapping [16, 34, 77] or face reenactment [31, 35] techniques.”
From AV-Deepfake1M: A Large-Scale LLM-Driven Audio-Visual Deepfake Dataset (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“With the rapid advancements in content generation technology, several large-scale datasets such as DFDC [16], DeeperForensics [28], KoDF [35], and DF-Platter [41] have been proposed.”
From AV-Deepfake1M: A Large-Scale LLM-Driven Audio-Visual Deepfake Dataset (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“On a sample of 166 videos from the largest publicly available dataset of deepfake videos to date from the Deepfake Detection Contest (DFDC)48, people are significantly better than chance but far from perfect at discerning whether an unknown actor’s face has been visually manipulated by a deepfake algorithm49.”
From Human detection of political speech deepfakes across transcripts, audio, and video (2024) · cites this paper as [48]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Media were sourced from various datasets including DFDC [9], Perceptual Experiments on Face Swaps (PEFS) [19], trusted media challenge (TMC) [20], FaceForensics++ + [21], and Celeb-DF [10].”
From Human Performance in Deepfake Detection: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [9]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The reason is as an on-policy algorithm, PPO tackles the problem of sample efficiency by employing surrogate objectives to keep the new policy from drifting too much from the old policy [27].”
From On Improving Cross-dataset Generalization of Deepfake Detectors (2022) · cites this paper as [27]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
Xception: Deep Learning with Depthwise Separable Convolutions
Chollet, F. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.195 · Cited by 20,380
EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks
Tan, M., & Le, Q. V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1905.11946 · Cited by 17,072
A Style-Based Generator Architecture for Generative Adversarial Networks
Karras, T., Laine, S., & Aila, T. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2019.00453 · Cited by 11,714
Quo Vadis, Action Recognition? A New Model and the Kinetics Dataset
Carreira, J., & Zisserman, A. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.502 · Cited by 9,570
Joint Face Detection and Alignment Using Multitask Cascaded Convolutional Networks
Zhang, K., Zhang, Z., Li, Z., & Qiao, Y. (2016) · IEEE Signal Processing Letters · doi:10.1109/lsp.2016.2603342 · Cited by 6,214
mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimization
Zhang, H., Cisse, M., Dauphin, Y. N., & Lopez-Paz, D. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.09412 · Cited by 5,831
SlowFast Networks for Video Recognition
Feichtenhofer, C., Fan, H., Malik, J., & He, K. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00630 · Cited by 4,007
FaceForensics++: Learning to Detect Manipulated Facial Images
Rossler, A., Cozzolino, D., Verdoliva, L., Riess, C., Thies, J., & Niessner, M. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00009 · Cited by 3,314
Celeb-DF: A Large-Scale Challenging Dataset for DeepFake Forensics
Li, Y., Yang, X., Sun, P., Qi, H., & Lyu, S. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00327 · Cited by 1,846 · cited 6×
“Furthermore, as we observed that many publicly-released datasets [14, 17, 18, 23, 30] did not guarantee that their subjects were willing participants or agreed to have their faces modified, we solicited video data from 3,426 paid actors and actresses speaking in a variety of settings for roughly 15 minutes each.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialExposing Deep Fakes Using Inconsistent Head Poses
Yang, X., Li, Y., & Lyu, S. (2019) · ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) · doi:10.1109/icassp.2019.8683164 · Cited by 1,196
Media Forensics and DeepFakes: An Overview
Verdoliva, L. (2020) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2020.3002101 · Cited by 979
Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security
Chesney, R., & Citron, D. K. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3213954 · Cited by 880
FSGAN: Subject Agnostic Face Swapping and Reenactment
Nirkin, Y., Keller, Y., & Hassner, T. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00728 · Cited by 706
Few-Shot Adversarial Learning of Realistic Neural Talking Head Models
Zakharov, E., Shysheya, A., Burkov, E., & Lempitsky, V. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00955 · Cited by 687
DeeperForensics-1.0: A Large-Scale Dataset for Real-World Face Forgery Detection
Jiang, L., Li, R., Wu, W., Qian, C., & Loy, C. C. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00296 · Cited by 599
DeepFakes: a New Threat to Face Recognition? Assessment and Detection
Korshunov, P., & Marcel, S. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.08685 · Cited by 497
The Deepfake Detection Challenge (DFDC) Preview Dataset
Dolhansky, B., Howes, R., Pflaum, B., Baram, N., & Ferrer, C. C. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.08854 · Cited by 413
Self-citationHu, T., Qi, H., Huang, Q., & Lu, Y. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.09891 · Cited by 262
Artificial Intelligence, Deepfakes and a Future of Ectypes
Floridi, L. (2018) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-018-0325-3 · Cited by 203
A Brief History of Motion Capture for Computer Character Animation
Sturman, D. J. (1994) · Cited by 57
Facial Action Transfer with Personalized Bilinear Regression
Huang, D., & la Torre, F. D. (2012) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33709-3_11 · Cited by 37
TTS Skins: Speaker Conversion via ASR
Polyak, A., Wolf, L., & Taigman, Y. (2020) · Interspeech (USB) · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2020-1416 · Cited by 35
Fake photographs : making truths in photography
Jolly, M. (2003) · UPT. Syiah Kuala University Library (Syiah Kuala University) · Cited by 4
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Multi-attentional Deepfake Detection
Zhao, H., Wei, T., Zhou, W., Zhang, W., Chen, D., & Yu, N. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00222 · Cited by 1,019
A Lip Sync Expert Is All You Need for Speech to Lip Generation In the Wild
Prajwal, K. R., Mukhopadhyay, R., Namboodiri, V. P., & Jawahar, C. V. (2020) · Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia · doi:10.1145/3394171.3413532 · Cited by 897
Masood, M., Nawaz, M., Malik, K. M., Javed, A., Irtaza, A., & Malik, H. (2023) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-022-03766-z · Cited by 543
Lips Don't Lie: A Generalisable and Robust Approach to Face Forgery Detection
Haliassos, A., Vougioukas, K., Petridis, S., & Pantic, M. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00500 · Cited by 537
Dynamic Neural Radiance Fields for Monocular 4D Facial Avatar Reconstruction
Gafni, G., Thies, J., Zollhöfer, M., & Nießner, M. (2021) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00854 · Cited by 536
Metadata
- Authors
- Dolhansky, B., Bitton, J., Pflaum, B., Lu, J., Howes, R., Wang, M., & Ferrer, C. C.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2006.07397
- OpenAlex
- W3095986900
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 86 · 2024: 135 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- TIB Data Manager
- 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, face swapping, video manipulation, DFDC, synthetic video dataset
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
