Audio-Visual Cross-Attention for Improved Deepfake Video Detection and Forgery Localization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the emergence of multi-modal generative models, synthesized videos are becoming increasingly realistic, making the detection of deepfakes extremely challenging. While several video deepfake detection models have shown promising performance, their focus has been primarily on the visual modality. To overcome this limitation, we propose a dualstream framework that fuses visual and auditory information via cross-attention computed between embeddings extracted from pre-trained video and audio encoders. Additionally, we design a weakly-supervised forgery localization head that infers frame-level forgery scores from coarse segment-level labels, minimizing the need for fine-grained annotations and allowing for forgery location characterization. In this paper, we describe our preliminary results showing the proposed model outperforming state-of-the-art detectors on both frame-level localization and sequence-level deepfake detection tasks. Ongoing work focuses on investigating the complementarity between the visual and auditory modalities to improve model robustness and explainability.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".