Unmasking Facial DeepFakes: A Robust Multiview Detection Framework for Natural Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DeepFake technology has advanced significantly in recent years, enabling the creation of highly realistic synthetic face images. Existing DeepFake detection methods often struggle with pose variations, occlusions, and artifacts that are difficult to detect in real-world conditions. To address these challenges, we propose a multi-view architecture that enhances DeepFake detection by analyzing facial features at multiple levels. Our approach integrates three specialized encoders—a global view encoder for detecting boundary inconsistencies, a middle view encoder for analyzing texture and color alignment, and a local view encoder for capturing distortions in expressive facial regions such as the eyes, nose, and mouth, where DeepFake artifacts frequently occur. Additionally, we incorporate a face orientation encoder, trained to classify face poses, ensuring robust detection across various viewing angles. By fusing features from these encoders, our model achieves superior performance in detecting manipulated images, even under challenging pose and lighting conditions. Experimental results on challenging datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, outperforming conventional single0view approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".