Multi-Tool Image Editing Attribution in Facial Forgery
Read the original on arXiv Computer Vision →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computer Vision.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computer Vision.
arXiv:2608.28802v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Facial appearance editing powers popular applications like FaceApp and Photoshop. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and 3D Morphable Models (3DM...
Generating and editing a person's face demands high precision, as even minor modifications can significantly alter a subject's perceived identity. Current personalization and editing methods built on general-purpose text-to-image models, however, often lack the precision required for fine-grained facial edits.
arXiv:2606. 08016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current image editing software often hinges on fixed filters or expert tuning, leaving a gap between amateur users' intent and outcomes.
arXiv:2608. 06865v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The malicious use of generative artificial intelligence to create highly realistic deepfake videos raises serious ethical concerns and poses substantial challenges to AI safety.
Makeup-transfer applies the reference makeup to the source face while preserving the source identity. Despite advances in full-face editing by diffusion-based methods, strong regional controllability, makeup fidelity, and identity preservation remain challenging.
The paper presents lightweight architectures for detecting GAN-generated synthetic faces, comparing a compact Swin Transformer, pre‑trained Swin‑Tiny and Swin‑Small models, and a hybrid EfficientNet‑B0 + Swin Transformer. Using the 140K Real and Fake Faces dataset, the hybrid model achieved 99% accuracy and 99.44% recall on 5,000 test images, outperforming both pure Swin variants and a CNN‑only baseline. The study demonstrates that combining hierarchical CNN features with shifted‑window self‑attention yields an efficient, computationally lightweight detection method.