2021
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2112.13522
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dual Contrastive Learning for General Face Forgery Detection

Abstract: With various facial manipulation techniques arising, face forgery detection has drawn growing attention due to security concerns. Previous works always formulate face forgery detection as a classification problem based on cross-entropy loss, which emphasizes category-level differences rather than the essential discrepancies between real and fake faces, limiting model generalization in unseen domains. To address this issue, we propose a novel face forgery detection framework, named Dual Contrastive Learning (DC… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
(10 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Evaluation Metrics. Following the previous works [9], [28], [57], we use Accuracy score (ACC), Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC), and Equal Error Rate (EER) as our evaluation metrics. Data Preprocessing.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Evaluation Metrics. Following the previous works [9], [28], [57], we use Accuracy score (ACC), Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC), and Equal Error Rate (EER) as our evaluation metrics. Data Preprocessing.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the more challenging cross-dataset setting, we further evaluate our method on DFD, DFDCP, Deepwild, and CDF. Following the setup in the SOTA method [9], we train our model on the c23 version of FF++ and test on other four datasets. The results are shown in Table III, where our method presents superior performance on all four datasets.…”
Section: A Comparing With Previous Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detection of facial manipulation, as a passive defense measure against abuses, has been widely studied in recent years. Most works (Sun et al 2021b;Qian et al 2020;Li et al 2020;Guan et al 2023c) are formulated as a binary classification problem, with the objective of identifying preexisting fake contents. While powerful deep neural networks could provide a good understanding of the differences between real faces and the generated fake ones, recent studies (Sun et al 2021a;Luo et al 2021;Guan et al 2022;Dong et al 2022;Yao et al 2023;Yan et al 2023;Dong et al 2023) find it hard to keep a consistent performance from the training set to untapped manipulations.…”
Section: Facial Manipulation Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These methods only utilize the information from the spatial domain, which generally overfits the classification boundary. On the other hand, some works [11,28,30,36,40,49] observe the diversity of real faces and fake faces in the frequency domain and propose the face forgery detection method with the frequency clues. F 3 -Net [36] integrates the frequency-aware decomposition and local frequency statistics into a whole learning framework to classify the real and fake faces.…”
Section: Face Forgery Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%