MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Securing Digital Images with AI-Augmented NonNegative Matrix Factorization for Tamper Detection

2025· article· W7147441325 on OpenAlex
N. Kurinjivendhan, T. Saravanan, D Thilagam, B. Senthilkumaran, B. Sribharathi, K. Sivakami

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media Forensic Detection
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage (mathematics)Hash functionPattern recognition (psychology)Digital imageAuthentication (law)Hamming distanceMatrix decompositionFactorizationIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A secure hashing method and AI-enhanced Non-Negative Matrix Factorization (NMF) form the foundation of this study’s strong image authentication and tampering detection framework. Hamming distance comparisons between generated image hashes are used by the suggested system to reliably verify and effectively detect image manipulation. The framework is tested on the GenImage and CASIA datasets, focusing on challenging tasks like cross-generator image identification and degraded image classification. It undergoes testing in difficult circumstances, such as image compression, blurring, and low resolution. Using the GenImage dataset, experimental results show that the suggested method achieves exceptional classification accuracy $97.21 \%$, confirming its effectiveness in practical settings.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.241
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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Media Forensic DetectionFrench-language works237,207