mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Comparative Evaluation of Deep Learning Models for Fake Image Detection

arXiv 2605.20971 ↗First posted 20 May 2026cs.CV cs.AI cs.CRcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The growing sophistication of GAN-based image manipulation presents significant challenges for digital forensics. This study compares the performance of four pretrained CNN architectures including VGG16, ResNet50, EfficientNetB0, and XceptionNet for fake image detection using a unified preprocessing and training pipeline. A dataset of real and manipulated images was processed through resizing, normalization, and augmentation to address class imbalance and improve generalization. Models were evaluated using Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1-score, and ROC-AUC. VGG16 achieved the highest accuracy at 91%, with XceptionNet, ResNet50, and EfficientNetB0 each reaching 90%. EfficientNetB0 showed stronger sensitivity to fake images but reduced reliability on real samples, reflecting imbalance-driven bias. Limitations include dataset imbalance, overfitting, and limited interpretability, which affect cross-domain robustness. The study provides a reproducible baseline and underscores the need for balanced datasets, advanced augmentation, and fairness-aware training to develop reliable fake image detection systems.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 May 2026.

Builds on

6 of 18 references.

References · 6

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2019EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 6,442
  3. 2016Xception: Deep Learning with Depthwise Separable Convolutionscited by 2,332
  4. 2019FaceForensics++: Learning to Detect Manipulated Facial Imagescited by 1,101
  5. 2020Media Forensics and DeepFakes: an overviewcited by 209
  6. 2020DeepFake Detection by Analyzing Convolutional Tracescited by 81

Built on by

Not cited yet.