MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408578214 · doi:10.23952/jano.7.2025.1.07

EDFM: An enhanced dual-branch fusion model for face deepfake detection

2025· article· en· W4408578214 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Face (sociological concept)Computer scienceFusionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Face deepfake technology brings serious security risks such as privacy leakage, false information dissemination, and network fraud, which need to be widely concerned and prevented.In recent years, many detection methods were proposed, among which enhancing the robustness and generalization ability of the model has always been an important topic.In this paper, we propose a novel enhanced dual-branch fusion model to improve the robustness and generalization ability of CNN-based face deepfake detector.Our method begins by enhancing the RGB high-frequency noise in the face image to extract its abnormal features, and then performs preservation fusion.Specifically, we use a deep separable convolution module to improve the model performance when extracting image features.When extracting noise features, we use a selective kernel module to adaptively extract more representative noise features by dynamically adjusting the convolution kernel.In addition, we specially design a multi-scale channel spatial attention fusion module to effectively fuse the feature information of each part, thereby reducing model overfitting and enhancing the robustness and generalization ability of the model.Finally, through comprehensive evaluation on several benchmark datasets, it is confirmed that our method has significantly improved robustness and generalization.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied and Numerical OptimizationSame topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207