Papers › A Hitchhikers Guide to Fine-Grained Face Forgery Detection Using Common Sense Reasoning

A Hitchhikers Guide to Fine-Grained Face Forgery Detection Using Common Sense Reasoning

1 Oct 2024arXiv:2410.00485archive 2025-07-28

Niki Maria Foteinopoulou, Enjie Ghorbel, Djamila Aouada

Explainability in artificial intelligence is crucial for restoring trust, particularly in areas like face forgery detection, where viewers often struggle to distinguish between real and fabricated content. Vision and Large Language Models (VLLM) bridge computer vision and natural language, offering numerous applications driven by strong common-sense reasoning. Despite their success in various tasks, the potential of vision and language remains underexplored in face forgery detection, where they hold promise for enhancing explainability by leveraging the intrinsic reasoning capabilities of language to analyse fine-grained manipulation areas. As such, there is a need for a methodology that converts face forgery detection to a Visual Question Answering (VQA) task to systematically and fairly evaluate these capabilities. Previous efforts for unified benchmarks in deepfake detection have focused on the simpler binary task, overlooking evaluation protocols for fine-grained detection and text-generative models. We propose a multi-staged approach that diverges from the traditional binary decision paradigm to address this gap. In the first stage, we assess the models' performance on the binary task and their sensitivity to given instructions using several prompts. In the second stage, we delve deeper into fine-grained detection by identifying areas of manipulation in a multiple-choice VQA setting. In the third stage, we convert the fine-grained detection to an open-ended question and compare several matching strategies for the multi-label classification task. Finally, we qualitatively evaluate the fine-grained responses of the VLLMs included in the benchmark. We apply our benchmark to several popular models, providing a detailed comparison of binary, multiple-choice, and open-ended VQA evaluation across seven datasets. \url{https://nickyfot.github.io/hitchhickersguide.github.io/}

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

3 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from NickyFot/HitchhikersGuide. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections