Papers › Format-Controlled Multi-Scale JPEG Compression Response Analysis for Image-Level...

Format-Controlled Multi-Scale JPEG Compression Response Analysis for Image-Level Forgery Screening

7 Jul 2026arXiv:2607.06615added by Syntology

Sujith K Mandala

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Image forgery detection is a critical task in digital forensics, yet many deep-learning localization approaches are typically GPU-accelerated and computationally heavier than handcrafted screening methods. We propose a lightweight, interpretable feature engineering pipeline for image-level forgery screening using only CPU computation and gradient boosted trees. Our method introduces \emph{multi-scale Error Level Analysis} (ELA) computed at seven JPEG quality levels, combined with novel \emph{cross-quality ELA ratio} features that capture double-compression artifacts characteristic of spliced regions, augmented by spatial entropy, FFT energy bands, edge density, SRM residuals, and DCT blockiness, yielding a 405-dimensional feature vector. CASIA v2.0 contains a format confound (60% of tampered images are TIFF while authentic images are JPEG/BMP and contain no TIFF samples), enabling a trivial \texttt{is_tiff} classifier to reach 0.80 AUC. We address this through rigorous format-controlled evaluation: on the JPEG-only subset (9,501 images, eliminating the TIFF/JPEG container confound), our method achieves AUC~=~0.990 [95% CI: 0.988--0.991] and F1~=~0.905 using 5-fold stratified cross-validation. Under a conservative source-aware group split (preventing related images from appearing in both train and test), AUC remains 0.976. An ablation study reveals that multi-scale ELA provides the dominant gain (+0.180 AUC over single-quality on the format-controlled subset), while cross-quality ratios provide complementary double-compression detection. These results support that the method detects compression-history inconsistencies rather than file-format shortcuts -- while offering feature-level interpretability, CPU-only deployment, and sub-second inference.

Code

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

11 samples harvested; 9 ran; 3 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: 11 of the 11 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 excitedlord/msela-forgery-screening. “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.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2607.06615, was issued in July 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Placed on leaderboards by Syntology Syntology

Syntology's extractor considered 1 leaderboard for this paper and did not place the paper on it: 1 rejected by the independent check. What is not shown.

Syntology has checked 6,795 of the 9,581 papers on this site that are newer than the archive; results from the others appear after they are checked.

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