mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Can Multi-modal (reasoning) LLMs detect document manipulation?

arXiv 2508.11021 ↗First posted 14 Aug 2025cs.CV cs.CLcited by 7

On the map: LLM reasoning → Multimodal reasoning

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Document fraud poses a significant threat to industries reliant on secure and verifiable documentation, necessitating robust detection mechanisms. This study investigates the efficacy of state-of-the-art multi-modal large language models (LLMs)-including OpenAI O1, OpenAI 4o, Gemini Flash (thinking), Deepseek Janus, Grok, Llama 3.2 and 4, Qwen 2 and 2.5 VL, Mistral Pixtral, and Claude 3.5 and 3.7 Sonnet-in detecting fraudulent documents. We benchmark these models against each other and prior work on document fraud detection techniques using a standard dataset with real transactional documents. Through prompt optimization and detailed analysis of the models' reasoning processes, we evaluate their ability to identify subtle indicators of fraud, such as tampered text, misaligned formatting, and inconsistent transactional sums. Our results reveal that top-performing multi-modal LLMs demonstrate superior zero-shot generalization, outperforming conventional methods on out-of-distribution datasets, while several vision LLMs exhibit inconsistent or subpar performance. Notably, model size and advanced reasoning capabilities show limited correlation with detection accuracy, suggesting task-specific fine-tuning is critical. This study underscores the potential of multi-modal LLMs in enhancing document fraud detection systems and provides a foundation for future research into interpretable and scalable fraud mitigation strategies.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Aug 2025.

Builds on

6 of 27 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Can Multi-modal (reasoning) LLMs work as deepfake detectors?25 Mar

Other references · 5

  1. 2021ForgeryNet: A Versatile Benchmark for Comprehensive Forgery Analysiscited by 124
  2. 2021MIDV-2020: A Comprehensive Benchmark Dataset for Identity Document Analysiscited by 31
  3. 2022Automated Extraction of Energy Systems Information from Remotely Sensed Data: A Review and Analysiscited by 5
  4. 2025DF2023: The Digital Forensics 2023 Dataset for Image Forgery Detectioncited by 2
  5. 2023Image Generation and Learning Strategy for Deep Document Forgery Detectioncited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026LLM-Assisted Authentication and Fraud Detection
  2. 2026THEMIS: Towards Holistic Evaluation of MLLMs for Scientific Paper Fraud Forensics
  3. 2024Analyzing Images of Legal Documents: Toward Multi-Modal LLMs for Access to Justice
  4. 2025Hidden in Plain Sight: Evaluation of the Deception Detection Capabilities of LLMs in Multimodal Settings
  5. 2025Can GPT tell us why these images are synthesized? Empowering Multimodal Large Language Models for Forensics
  6. 2026Fingerprinting Multimodal Large Language Models
  7. 2026Evidence-Grounded Forensic Reasoning for Detecting and Grounding Multi-Modal Media Manipulation
  8. 2025EVADE-Bench: Multimodal Benchmark for Evaluating and Enhancing Evasive Content Detection