arXiv Computer Vision

When the Forger Is the Judge: GPT-Image-2 Cannot Recognize Its Own Faked Documents

arXiv Computer Vision
4d ago

DOCFORGE-BENCH: A Comprehensive 0-shot Benchmark for Document Forgery Detection and Analysis

arXiv:2603.01433v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We present DOCFORGE-BENCH, the first unified zero-shot benchmark for document forgery detection, evaluating 14 methods across eight datasets spanni...

By Zengqi Zhao, Weidi Xia, En Wei, Yan Zhang, Jane Mo, Tiannan Zhang, Yuanqin Dai, Zexi Chen, Yiran Tao, Simiao Ren
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 17

ChatGPT Images 2.5 on Forgery Tasks: Testing Advertised Improvements Against Known Answers

arXiv:2609.13617v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: OpenAI released ChatGPT Images 2.5 on 8 September 2026, advertising more precise local edits, better consistency across edits, more faithful refere...

By Ankit Raj, Yuxin Zhang, Kidus Zewde, Tommy Duong, Jiaqi Gan, Xingyu Shen, Yuchen Zhou, Huaiyu Guo, Siyu Zhang, Simiao Ren
arXiv AI
4d ago

GPT4o-Receipt: A Dataset and Human Study for AI-Generated Document Forensics

GPT4o-Receipt is a benchmark dataset of 1,235 receipt images that pairs GPT‑4o‑generated receipts with authentic ones from established datasets. The study evaluates five state‑of‑the‑art multimodal LLMs and a 30‑annotator crowdsourced perceptual study, revealing that humans are better at spotting AI artifacts yet perform worse at binary detection than models like Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemini 2.5 Flash. The paradox is explained by the fact that the dominant forensic signals—arithmetic errors—are invisible to visual inspection but can be quickly verified by LLMs.

By Yan Zhang, Simiao Ren, Ankit Raj, En Wei, Dennis Ng, Alex Shen, Jiayu Xue, Yuxin Zhang, Evelyn Marotta
arXiv Computer Vision
Oct 16

Beyond Generation: Using Multimodal LLMs as Detectors of LLM-Generated Deepfake Facial Images

The paper evaluates whether multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can serve as forensic detectors of deepfake facial images. Six MLLMs—including GPT-4o, GPT-5, GPT-5.2, Gemini 2.5, Gemini 3, and Seed 1.6—were tested on a dataset of 400 images (50 authentic and 350 synthetic) generated by seven leading image models. Results show that several MLLMs achieve high detection accuracy, with GPT-5.2 reaching 97.9% in pairwise comparisons, but the presence of invisible SynthID watermarks can reduce detection performance by about 10% for Gemini.

By Olivia Salamon, Virginia N. L. Franqueira, Shujun Li
arXiv AI
Sep 30

A Benchmark & Dataset for Detecting AI-Manipulated Visual Evidence in the Court System

arXiv:2609.37783v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Photographic evidence is becoming increasingly vulnerable to forms of alteration and fabrication that existing legal and technical workflows are not...

By Kelly McConvey, Sajad Ebrahimi, Nima Jamali, Jalehsadat Mahdavimoghaddam, Matina Mahdizadeh Sani, Maksym Taranukhin, Wentao Zhang, Jacquelyn Burkell, Yuntian Deng, Karen Eltis, Maura R. Grossman, Vered Shwartz, Ebrahim Bagheri
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 22

Dissecting Agentic Forensics: The Role of Triage, Prompting, and Evidence Arbitration in Open-World Fake Image Detection

The paper investigates an agentic framework for open‑world fake image detection that combines specialist detectors with per‑detector triage, prompting, and conflict‑aware evidence arbitration. Experiments across six configurations and three multimodal large language model backbones reveal that naive detector fusion yields high false‑positive rates, while triage and prompting consistently filter unreliable evidence. The most significant improvement comes from the reasoning component: a stronger judge markedly outperforms a weaker one, especially under distribution shift, and overall manipulation recall is nearly saturated, highlighting that the key challenge lies in calibrating trust and arbitrating conflicting forensic evidence rather than detecting manipulations themselves.

By Xianlong Li (IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, Italy), Pietro Bongini (University of Siena, Italy), Niccol\'o Pancino (University of Siena, Italy), Marco Blanchini (IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, Italy), Benedetta Tondi (University of Siena, Italy), Mauro Barni (University of Siena, Italy)