Research on Multimodal Image Tampering Detection and Counterfeit Image Recognition Techniques under Deep Learning Framework
, e
03 feb 2025
INFORMAZIONI SU QUESTO ARTICOLO
Pubblicato online: 03 feb 2025
Ricevuto: 12 set 2024
Accettato: 02 gen 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0018
Parole chiave
© 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 |