MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802173845 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2018.8462057

A Rotation-Invariant Convolutional Neural Network for Image Enhancement Forensics

2018· article· en· W2802173845 on OpenAlexaff
Yifang Chen, Zi Xian Lyu, Xiangui Kang, Zhuo Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media Forensic Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Invariant (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Rotation (mathematics)Computer visionArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many proposed complex convolutional neural network (CNN) models in image forensics are with a large number of parameters, requiring a huge number of training data and having the risk of being overfitting. Considering the desired rotation invariance in the detection of some specific image manipulations, i.e., image enhancement, we propose employing convolutional filters with an isotropic architecture in the CNN model which can significantly reduce the required number of CNN parameters. With the same weights in symmetric positions, the proposed filter can extract rotation-invariant features for image enhancement forensics. Experimental results show that the proposed rotation-invariant CNN models with much less parameters can achieve much better performance, e.g., yielding more than 13% improvement in terms of detection accuracy in Gamma correction forensics. It also achieves significantly better generalization performances on different databases and better robustness against JPEG compression when compared with the popular BayarNet in [16].

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Media Forensic DetectionFrench-language works237,207