mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

DOCFORGE-BENCH: A Comprehensive 0-shot Benchmark for Document Forgery Detection and Analysis

arXiv 2603.01433 ↗First posted 2 Mar 2026cs.CVcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We present DOCFORGE-BENCH, the first unified zero-shot benchmark for document forgery detection, evaluating 14 methods across eight datasets spanning text tampering, receipt forgery, and identity document manipulation. Unlike fine-tuning-oriented evaluations such as ForensicHub [Du et al., 2025], DOCFORGE-BENCH applies all methods with their published pretrained weights and no domain adaptation -- a deliberate design choice that reflects the realistic deployment scenario where practitioners lack labeled document training data. Our central finding is a pervasive calibration failure invisible under single-threshold protocols: methods achieve moderate Pixel-AUC (>=0.76) yet near-zero Pixel-F1. This AUC-F1 gap is not a discrimination failure but a score-distribution shift: tampered regions occupy only 0.27-4.17% of pixels in document images -- an order of magnitude less than in natural image benchmarks -- making the standard tau=0.5 threshold catastrophically miscalibrated. Oracle-F1 is 2-10x higher than fixed-threshold Pixel-F1, confirming that calibration, not representation, is the bottleneck. A controlled calibration experiment validates this: adapting a single threshold on N=10 domain images recovers 39-55% of the Oracle-F1 gap, demonstrating that threshold adaptation -- not retraining -- is the key missing step for practical deployment. Overall, no evaluated method works reliably out-of-the-box on diverse document types, underscoring that document forgery detection remains an unsolved problem. We further note that all eight datasets predate the era of generative AI editing; benchmarks covering diffusion- and LLM-based document forgeries represent a critical open gap on the modern attack surface.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2026.

Builds on

21 of 47 references.

References · 21

  1. 2019CNN-generated images are surprisingly easy to spot... for nowcited by 842
  2. 2023Towards Universal Fake Image Detectors that Generalize Across Generative Modelscited by 483
  3. 2023DIRE for Diffusion-Generated Image Detectioncited by 386
  4. 2020Media Forensics and DeepFakes: an overviewcited by 208
  5. 2021PSCC-Net: Progressive Spatio-Channel Correlation Network for Image Manipulation Detection and Localizationcited by 133
  6. 2022TruFor: Leveraging all-round clues for trustworthy image forgery detection and localizationcited by 130
  7. 2021Image Manipulation Detection by Multi-View Multi-Scale Supervisioncited by 111
  8. 2022ObjectFormer for Image Manipulation Detection and Localizationcited by 78
  9. 2021MIDV-2020: A Comprehensive Benchmark Dataset for Identity Document Analysiscited by 31
  10. 2025ForensicHub: A Unified Benchmark & Codebase for All-Domain Fake Image Detection and Localizationcited by 22
  11. 2024Revisiting Tampered Scene Text Detection in the Era of Generative AIcited by 21
  12. 2023Toward Real Text Manipulation Detection: New Dataset and New Solutioncited by 20
9 more
  1. 2026How well are open sourced AI-generated image detection models out-of-the-box: A comprehensive benchmark studycited by 15
  2. 2025Can Multi-modal (reasoning) LLMs work as deepfake detectors?cited by 14
  3. 2025Do Deepfake Detectors Work in Reality?cited by 11
  4. 2025Can Multi-modal (reasoning) LLMs detect document manipulation?cited by 7
  5. 2025FantasyID: A dataset for detecting digital manipulations of ID-documentscited by 6
  6. 2026TextShield-R1: Reinforced Reasoning for Tampered Text Detectioncited by 6
  7. 2026Out of the box age estimation through facial imagery: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Vision-Language Models vs. out-of-the-box Traditional Architecturescited by 5
  8. 2025Toward Real-world Text Image Forgery Localization: Structured and Interpretable Data Synthesiscited by 3
  9. 2025LogicLens: Visual-Logical Co-Reasoning for Text-Centric Forgery Analysiscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.