Affiliation:
1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North South University, Dhaka 1229, Bangladesh
2. School of Computing and IT, Manipal University Jaipur, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
3. Department of Computer Science, College of Computers and Information Technology, Taif University, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia
4. Department of Information Technology, College of Computers and Information Technology, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia
Abstract
Generation Z is a data-driven generation. Everyone has the entirety of humanity’s knowledge in their hands. The technological possibilities are endless. However, we use and misuse this blessing to face swap using deepfake. Deepfake is an emerging subdomain of artificial intelligence technology in which one person’s face is overlaid over another person’s face, which is very prominent across social media. Machine learning is the main element of deepfakes, and it has allowed deepfake images and videos to be generated considerably faster and at a lower cost. Despite the negative connotations associated with the phrase “deepfakes,” the technology is being more widely employed commercially and individually. Although it is relatively new, the latest technological advances make it more and more challenging to detect deepfakes and synthesized images from real ones. An increasing sense of unease has developed around the emergence of deepfake technologies. Our main objective is to detect deepfake images from real ones accurately. In this research, we implemented several methods to detect deepfake images and make a comparative analysis. Our model was trained by datasets from Kaggle, which had 70,000 images from the Flickr dataset and 70,000 images produced by styleGAN. For this comparative study of the use of convolutional neural networks (CNN) to identify genuine and deepfake pictures, we trained eight different CNN models. Three of these models were trained using the DenseNet architecture (DenseNet121, DenseNet169, and DenseNet201); two were trained using the VGGNet architecture (VGG16, VGG19); one was with the ResNet50 architecture, one with the VGGFace, and one with a bespoke CNN architecture. We have also implemented a custom model that incorporates methods like dropout and padding that aid in determining whether or not the other models reflect their objectives. The results were categorized by five evaluation metrics: accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve. Amongst all the models, VGGFace performed the best, with 99% accuracy. Besides, we obtained 97% from the ResNet50, 96% from the DenseNet201, 95% from the DenseNet169, 94% from the VGG19, 92% from the VGG16, 97% from the DenseNet121 model, and 90% from the custom model.
Subject
General Mathematics,General Medicine,General Neuroscience,General Computer Science
Reference79 articles.
1. Generative adversarial nets, “NIPS” 14;I. J. Goodfellow;Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems,2014
2. Deep learning for deepfakes creation and detection: a survey;T. Nguyen,2019
3. DeepVision: Deepfakes Detection Using Human Eye Blinking Pattern
4. The Emergence of Deepfake Technology: A Review
5. Determining authenticity of video evidence in the age of artificial intelligence and in the wake of Deepfake videos
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献