# Analysing Statistical methods for Automatic Detection of Image Forgery

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12661 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.12661/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Nov 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.04597/) (2015)
- [Image Splicing Localization Using A Multi-Task Fully Convolutional Network (MFCN)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.02016/) (2017)
- [The PS-Battles Dataset - an Image Collection for Image Manipulation Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.04866/) (2018)
- [An Evaluation of Digital Image Forgery Detection Approaches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.09968/) (2017)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Image manipulation and forgery detection have been a topic of research for more than a decade now. New-age tools and large-scale social platforms have given space for manipulated media to thrive. These media can be potentially dangerous and thus innumerable methods have been designed and tested to prove their robustness in detecting forgery. However, the results reported by state-of-the-art systems indicate that supervised approaches achieve almost perfect performance but only with particular datasets. In this work, we analyze the issue of out-of-distribution generalisability of the current state-of-the-art image forgery detection techniques through several experiments. Our study focuses on models that utilise handcrafted features for image forgery detection. We show that the developed methods fail to perform well on cross-dataset evaluations and in-the-wild manipulated media. As a consequence, a question is raised about the current evaluation and overestimated performance of the systems under consideration. Note: This work was done during a summer research internship at ITMR Lab, IIIT-Allahabad under the supervision of Prof. Anupam Agarwal.