Dodging DeepFake Detection via Implicit Spatial-Domain Notch Filtering
September 19, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE transactions on circuits and systems for video technology (Print)
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Yihao Huang, Felix Juefei-Xu, Qing Guo, Yang Liu, Geguang Pu
arXiv ID
2009.09213
Category
cs.CV: Computer Vision
Cross-listed
cs.CR,
cs.LG
Citations
34
Venue
IEEE transactions on circuits and systems for video technology (Print)
Last Checked
6 months ago
Abstract
The current high-fidelity generation and high-precision detection of DeepFake images are at an arms race. We believe that producing DeepFakes that are highly realistic and 'detection evasive' can serve the ultimate goal of improving future generation DeepFake detection capabilities. In this paper, we propose a simple yet powerful pipeline to reduce the artifact patterns of fake images without hurting image quality by performing implicit spatial-domain notch filtering. We first demonstrate that frequency-domain notch filtering, although famously shown to be effective in removing periodic noise in the spatial domain, is infeasible for our task at hand due to the manual designs required for the notch filters. We, therefore, resort to a learning-based approach to reproduce the notch filtering effects, but solely in the spatial domain. We adopt a combination of adding overwhelming spatial noise for breaking the periodic noise pattern and deep image filtering to reconstruct the noise-free fake images, and we name our method DeepNotch. Deep image filtering provides a specialized filter for each pixel in the noisy image, producing filtered images with high fidelity compared to their DeepFake counterparts. Moreover, we also use the semantic information of the image to generate an adversarial guidance map to add noise intelligently. Our large-scale evaluation on 3 representative state-of-the-art DeepFake detection methods (tested on 16 types of DeepFakes) has demonstrated that our technique significantly reduces the accuracy of these 3 fake image detection methods, 36.79% on average and up to 97.02% in the best case.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Computer Vision
π
π
Old Age
π
π
Old Age
Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks
π
π
Old Age
SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detector
π
π
Old Age
Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks
π
π
Old Age
Fast R-CNN
π
π
Old Age
Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted