Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deepfake makes it quite easy to synthesize videos or images using deep learning techniques, which leads to substantial danger and worry for most of the world's renowned people. Spreading false news or synthesizing one's video or image can harm people and their lack of trust on social and electronic media. To efficiently identify deepfake images, we propose ResViT, which uses the ResNet model for feature extraction, while the vision transformer is used for classification. The ResViT architecture uses the feature extractor to extract features from the images of the videos, which are used to classify the input as fake or real. Moreover, the ResViT architectures focus equally on data pre-processing, as it improves performance. We conducted extensive experiments on the five mostly used datasets our results with the baseline model on the following datasets of Celeb-DF, Celeb-DFv2, FaceForensics++, FF-Deepfake Detection, and DFDC2. Our analysis revealed that ResViT performed better than the baseline and achieved the prediction accuracy of 80.48%, 87.23%, 75.62%, 78.45%, and 84.55% on Celeb-DF, Celeb-DFv2, FaceForensics++, FF-Deepfake Detection, and DFDC2 datasets, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.012 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".