arXiv Computer Vision By Peifeng Liu, Bin Li, Qingsong Zhang, Yangxin Yu, Leqing Chen, Xiaoye Qiu

Evidence-Guided Detection, Localization and Explanation for Text-Centric Image Forensics

Read the original on arXiv Computer Vision →

The paper introduces an evidence‑guided detector‑localizer‑reasoner system for text‑centric image forensics, addressing the challenges posed by AI‑generated content. It combines an image‑level authenticity detector, a localizer that extracts tampered regions, and an MLLM‑based reasoner that generates structured forensic reports grounded in the detected evidence. The system employs iterative difficulty‑aware mining and report‑mask consistency post‑processing, achieving a score of 0.638 and ranking second in the ACM Multimedia 2026 GenText‑Forensics Challenge.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computer Vision.

arXiv Computer Vision
Oct 8

MSU Team at the Explainable Deepfake Detection Challenge 2026: Grounded Artifact Evidence for Deepfake Detection

The MSU team presents a modular approach to the Explainable Deepfake Detection Challenge, combining multiple DINOv3 backbones with Mesorch manipulation-localization features for real/fake classification. They incorporate a Grounding-DINO-based pseudo-mask pipeline to generate artifact evidence maps and a local contrastive objective to separate artifact from authenticity cues. For explanations, class-conditional Qwen3-VL models produce complex descriptions, which are then simplified by a GRPO-optimized text model, achieving high detection and explanation scores on the XPlainVerse dataset.

By Artem Filippov, Aleksandr Gushchin, Kirill Koltsov, Dmitriy Vatolin, Anastasia Antsiferova
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)
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 30

From Sharp Eyes to Expert Mind: Internalizing Expert Knowledge in MLLMs for Tampered Text Detection

arXiv:2609.36145v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tampered Text Detection (TTD) is essential for safeguarding document authenticity in security-critical workflows. Existing expert models are effective...

By Kaiqing Lin, Songze Li, Shen Chen, Yunfei Guo, Xiaoye Qiu, Haodong Li, Taiping Yao, Bo Wang, Youchang Xiao, Bin Li, Shouhong Ding