Research on Multimodal Image Tampering Detection and Counterfeit Image Recognition Techniques under Deep Learning Framework
, und
03. Feb. 2025
Über diesen Artikel
Online veröffentlicht: 03. Feb. 2025
Eingereicht: 12. Sept. 2024
Akzeptiert: 02. Jan. 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0018
Schlüsselwörter
© 2025 Meijing Zhang et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Comparison of the average recognition accuracy
| Method | Splicing | Copy movement | Removal | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFCN | 0.968 | 0.968 | ||
| BusterNet | 0.941 | 0.941 | ||
| RGB-N Net | 0.937 | 0.934 | 0.913 | 0.928 |
| YCrCb-N Net | 0.951 | 0.938 | 0.925 | 0.938 |
| RGB-ImroveN Net | 0.953 | 0.951 | 0.932 | 0.945 |
| Our model |
Robust analysis of common post-processing attacks(NIST16)
| Operation | Our model | MVSSNet | IF-OSN | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | AUC | IoU | F1 | AUC | IoU | F1 | AUC | IoU | |
| Control (numerous increases) | 0.82 | 0.93 | 0.75 | 0.95 | 0.61 | 0.81 | |||
| Zooming(0.75×) | 0.83 | 0.68 | 0.91 | 0.62 | 0.98 | 0.84 | |||
| Zooming(0.35×) | 0.57 | 0.91 | 0.47 | 0.81 | 0.98 | 0.78 | |||
| Gaussian blur(4) | 0.68 | 0.92 | 0.62 | 0.95 | 0.80 | ||||
| Gaussian blur(16) | 0.77 | 0.39 | 0.83 | 0.30 | 0.78 | 0.94 | |||
| Gaussian noise(4) | 0.80 | 0.94 | 0.59 | 0.83 | 0.45 | 0.74 | |||
| Gaussian noise(16) | 0.15 | 0.70 | 0.18 | 0.13 | 0.65 | 0.14 | |||
| JPEG compression(120) | 0.89 | 0.73 | 0.95 | 0.64 | 0.98 | 0.83 | |||
| JPEG compression(90) | 0.87 | 0.98 | 0.79 | 0.72 | 0.97 | 0.62 | |||
| JPEG compression(80) | 0.85 | 0.75 | 0.92 | 0.64 | 0.96 | 0.81 | |||
| JPEG compression(60) | 0.70 | 0.94 | 0.66 | 0.74 | 0.95 | 0.81 | |||
Comparison of F1 scores on two standard data sets
| Method | CASIA19 | NISIT21 |
|---|---|---|
| MFCN | 0.787 | 0.783 |
| BusterNet | 0.781 | 0.754 |
| RGB-N Net | 0.783 | 0.782 |
| YCrCb-N Net | 0.795 | 0.772 |
| RGB-ImroveN Net | 0.813 | 0.804 |
| Our model |
Robust analysis of common post-processing attacks(IMD2020)
| Operation | Our model | MVSSNet | IF-OSN | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | AUC | IoU | F1 | AUC | IoU | F1 | AUC | IoU | |
| Control (numerous increases) | 0.35 | 0.78 | 0.30 | 0.61 | 0.87 | 0.52 | |||
| Zooming(0.75×) | 0.41 | 0.81 | 0.32 | 0.57 | 0.82 | 0.51 | |||
| Zooming(0.35×) | 0.21 | 0.80 | 0.23 | 0.47 | 0.78 | 0.30 | |||
| Gaussian blur(4) | 0.38 | 0.91 | 0.29 | 0.55 | 0.82 | 0.50 | |||
| Gaussian blur(16) | 0.19 | 0.91 | 0.14 | 0.40 | 0.85 | 0.37 | |||
| Gaussian noise(4) | 0.33 | 0.83 | 0.35 | 0.53 | 0.89 | 0.35 | |||
| Gaussian noise(16) | 0 | 0.55 | 0 | 0.11 | 0.69 | 0.06 | |||
| JPEG compression(120) | 0.29 | 0.85 | 0.30 | 0.59 | 0.95 | 0.53 | |||
| JPEG compression(90) | 0.38 | 0.86 | 0.27 | 0.59 | 0.95 | 0.45 | |||
| JPEG compression(80) | 0.42 | 0.93 | 0.30 | 0.48 | 0.83 | 0.43 | |||
| JPEG compression(60) | 0.44 | 0.80 | 0.21 | 0.63 | 0.88 | 0.44 | |||
Experimental results
| Model | Data volume | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIST12=581 | CASIA=974 | IMD2016=2022 | ||||
| Accuracy | Time(s) | Accuracy | Time(s) | Accuracy | Time(s) | |
| MFCN | 35.29±2.5% | 23.2 | 43.52±1.93% | 99.6 | 45.31±3.93% | 302.3 |
| BusterNet | 52.37±2.96% | 14.5 | 60.48±2.61% | 49.1 | 64.08±2.87% | 159.1 |
| RGB-N Net | 73.20±1.68% | 27.8 | 78.18±1.56% | 80.4 | 82.80±1.03% | 717.7 |
| YCrCb-N Net | 65.03±2.08% | 19.9 | 75.94±2.02% | 124.7 | 80.12±3.88% | 421.1 |
| RGB-ImroveN Net | 66.15±1.56% | 16.7 | 77.01±2.38% | 43.2 | 81.07±2.78% | 164.3 |
| Our method | 26.4 | 72.8 | 319.9 | |||
