# Human-AI Ensembles Improve Deepfake Detection in Low-to-Medium Quality Videos

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.14658 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.14658/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 54 of its 91 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Mar 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 54)

- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.11946/) (2019)
- [Quo Vadis, Action Recognition? A New Model and the Kinetics Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07750/) (2017)
- [Is Space-Time Attention All You Need for Video Understanding?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.05095/) (2021)
- [VideoMAE: Masked Autoencoders are Data-Efficient Learners for Self-Supervised Video Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.12602/) (2022)
- [Depth Map Prediction from a Single Image using a Multi-Scale Deep Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1406.2283/) (2014)
- [FaceForensics++: Learning to Detect Manipulated Facial Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.08971/) (2019)
- [CNN-generated images are surprisingly easy to spot... for now](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.11035/) (2019)
- [A Lip Sync Expert Is All You Need for Speech to Lip Generation In The Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.10010/) (2020)
- [Celeb-DF: A Large-scale Challenging Dataset for DeepFake Forensics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.12962/) (2019)
- [Hollywood in Homes: Crowdsourcing Data Collection for Activity Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1604.01753/) (2016)
- [Thinking in Frequency: Face Forgery Detection by Mining Frequency-aware Clues](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.09355/) (2020)
- [MesoNet: a Compact Facial Video Forgery Detection Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.00888/) (2018)
- [SadTalker: Learning Realistic 3D Motion Coefficients for Stylized Audio-Driven Single Image Talking Face Animation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12194/) (2022)
- [Multi-attentional Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.02406/) (2021)
- [Detecting Deepfakes with Self-Blended Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.08376/) (2022)
- [Expanding Language-Image Pretrained Models for General Video Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.02816/) (2022)
- [FSGAN: Subject Agnostic Face Swapping and Reenactment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.05932/) (2019)
- [Exposing DeepFake Videos By Detecting Face Warping Artifacts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.00656/) (2018)
- [WIDER FACE: A Face Detection Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.06523/) (2015)
- [Generalizing Face Forgery Detection with High-frequency Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.12376/) (2021)
- [On the Detection of Digital Face Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01717/) (2019)
- [Spatial-Phase Shallow Learning: Rethinking Face Forgery Detection in Frequency Domain](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01856/) (2021)
- [SimSwap: An Efficient Framework For High Fidelity Face Swapping](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.06340/) (2021)
- [Capsule-Forensics: Using Capsule Networks to Detect Forged Images and Videos](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.11215/) (2018)
- [UCF: Uncovering Common Features for Generalizable Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.13949/) (2023)
- [Learning Self-Consistency for Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.09311/) (2020)
- [Self-supervised Learning of Adversarial Example: Towards Good Generalizations for Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.12208/) (2022)
- [DeepfakeBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01426/) (2023)
- [DF40: Toward Next-Generation Deepfake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.13495/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [The Calibrated Deepfake Trust Score (CDTS): Competence-Coupled Trust Degradation Across Deepfake Detectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.29484/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Deepfake detection is widely framed as a machine learning problem, yet how humans and AI detectors compare under realistic conditions remains poorly understood. We evaluate 200 human participants and 95 state-of-the-art AI detectors across two datasets: DF40, a standard benchmark, and CharadesDF, a novel dataset of videos of everyday activities. CharadesDF was recorded using mobile phones leading to low/moderate quality videos compared to the more professionally captured DF40. Humans outperform AI detectors on both datasets, with the gap widening in the case of CharadesDF where AI accuracy collapses to near chance (0.537) while humans maintain robust performance (0.784). Human and AI errors are complementary: humans miss high-quality deepfakes while AI detectors flag authentic videos as fake, and hybrid human-AI ensembles reduce high-confidence errors. These findings suggest that effective real-world deepfake detection, especially in non-professionally produced videos, requires human-AI collaboration rather than AI algorithms alone.