Unmasking Illusions: Understanding Human Perception of Audiovisual Deepfakes

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.04097v1
• Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 07:57:15 GMT
• Title: Unmasking Illusions: Understanding Human Perception of Audiovisual Deepfakes
• Authors: Ammarah Hashmi, Sahibzada Adil Shahzad, Chia-Wen Lin, Yu Tsao, Hsin-Min Wang,
• Abstract summary: This paper aims to evaluate the human ability to discern deepfake videos through a subjective study. We present our findings by comparing human observers to five state-ofthe-art audiovisual deepfake detection models. We found that all AI models performed better than humans when evaluated on the same 40 videos.
• Score: 49.81915942821647
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The emergence of contemporary deepfakes has attracted significant attention in machine learning research, as artificial intelligence (AI) generated synthetic media increases the incidence of misinterpretation and is difficult to distinguish from genuine content. Currently, machine learning techniques have been extensively studied for automatically detecting deepfakes. However, human perception has been less explored. Malicious deepfakes could ultimately cause public and social problems. Can we humans correctly perceive the authenticity of the content of the videos we watch? The answer is obviously uncertain; therefore, this paper aims to evaluate the human ability to discern deepfake videos through a subjective study. We present our findings by comparing human observers to five state-ofthe-art audiovisual deepfake detection models. To this end, we used gamification concepts to provide 110 participants (55 native English speakers and 55 non-native English speakers) with a webbased platform where they could access a series of 40 videos (20 real and 20 fake) to determine their authenticity. Each participant performed the experiment twice with the same 40 videos in different random orders. The videos are manually selected from the FakeAVCeleb dataset. We found that all AI models performed better than humans when evaluated on the same 40 videos. The study also reveals that while deception is not impossible, humans tend to overestimate their detection capabilities. Our experimental results may help benchmark human versus machine performance, advance forensics analysis, and enable adaptive countermeasures.

Related papers

• Deepfake detection in videos with multiple faces using geometric-fakeness features [79.16635054977068]
  Deepfakes of victims or public figures can be used by fraudsters for blackmailing, extorsion and financial fraud. In our research we propose to use geometric-fakeness features (GFF) that characterize a dynamic degree of a face presence in a video. We employ our approach to analyze videos with multiple faces that are simultaneously present in a video.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T13:10:34Z)
• Can deepfakes be created by novice users? [15.014868583616504]
  We conduct user studies to understand whether participants with advanced computer skills can create Deepfakes. We find that 23.1% of the participants successfully created complete Deepfakes with audio and video. We use Deepfake detection software tools as well as human examiner-based analysis, to classify the successfully generated Deepfake outputs as fake, suspicious, or real.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-28T00:32:24Z)
• Seeing is not always believing: Benchmarking Human and Model Perception of AI-Generated Images [66.20578637253831]
  There is a growing concern that the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technology may produce fake photos. This study aims to comprehensively evaluate agents for distinguishing state-of-the-art AI-generated visual content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-25T17:51:59Z)
• Video Manipulations Beyond Faces: A Dataset with Human-Machine Analysis [60.13902294276283]
  We present VideoSham, a dataset consisting of 826 videos (413 real and 413 manipulated). Many of the existing deepfake datasets focus exclusively on two types of facial manipulations -- swapping with a different subject's face or altering the existing face. Our analysis shows that state-of-the-art manipulation detection algorithms only work for a few specific attacks and do not scale well on VideoSham.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-26T17:39:04Z)
• Deepfake Caricatures: Amplifying attention to artifacts increases deepfake detection by humans and machines [17.7858728343141]
  Deepfakes pose a serious threat to digital well-being by fueling misinformation. We introduce a framework for amplifying artifacts in deepfake videos to make them more detectable by people. We propose a novel, semi-supervised Artifact Attention module, which is trained on human responses to create attention maps that highlight video artifacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-01T14:43:49Z)
• Audio-Visual Person-of-Interest DeepFake Detection [77.04789677645682]
  The aim of this work is to propose a deepfake detector that can cope with the wide variety of manipulation methods and scenarios encountered in the real world. We leverage a contrastive learning paradigm to learn the moving-face and audio segment embeddings that are most discriminative for each identity. Our method can detect both single-modality (audio-only, video-only) and multi-modality (audio-video) attacks, and is robust to low-quality or corrupted videos.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-06T20:51:40Z)
• Watch Those Words: Video Falsification Detection Using Word-Conditioned Facial Motion [82.06128362686445]
  We propose a multi-modal semantic forensic approach to handle both cheapfakes and visually persuasive deepfakes. We leverage the idea of attribution to learn person-specific biometric patterns that distinguish a given speaker from others. Unlike existing person-specific approaches, our method is also effective against attacks that focus on lip manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-21T01:57:04Z)
• Human Perception of Audio Deepfakes [6.40753664615445]
  We present results from comparing the abilities of humans and machines for detecting audio deepfakes. In our experiment, 472 unique users competed against a state-of-the-art AI deepfake detection algorithm for 14912 total rounds of the game. We find that humans and deepfake detection algorithms share similar strengths and weaknesses, both struggling to detect certain types of attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-20T09:19:42Z)
• Detecting Deepfake Videos Using Euler Video Magnification [1.8506048493564673]
  Deepfake videos are manipulating videos using advanced machine learning techniques. In this paper, we examine a technique for possible identification of deepfake videos. Our approach uses features extracted from the Euler technique to train three models to classify counterfeit and unaltered videos.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-27T17:37:23Z)
• Deepfake detection: humans vs. machines [4.485016243130348]
  We present a subjective study conducted in a crowdsourcing-like scenario, which systematically evaluates how hard it is for humans to see if the video is deepfake or not. For each video, a simple question: "Is face of the person in the video real of fake?" was answered on average by 19 na"ive subjects. The evaluation demonstrates that while the human perception is very different from the perception of a machine, both successfully but in different ways are fooled by deepfakes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-07T15:20:37Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.