Jingyi Deng

Chenhao Lin, Jingyi Deng, Pengbin Hu et al.

Deepfake detection automatically recognizes the manipulated medias through the analysis of the difference between manipulated and non-altered videos. It is natural to ask which are the top performers among the existing deepfake detection approaches to identify promising research directions and provide practical guidance. Unfortunately, it's difficult to conduct a sound benchmarking comparison of existing detection approaches using the results in the literature because evaluation conditions are inconsistent across studies. Our objective is to establish a comprehensive and consistent benchmark, to develop a repeatable evaluation procedure, and to measure the performance of a range of detection approaches so that the results can be compared soundly. A challenging dataset consisting of the manipulated samples generated by more than 13 different methods has been collected, and 11 popular detection approaches (9 algorithms) from the existing literature have been implemented and evaluated with 6 fair-minded and practical evaluation metrics. Finally, 92 models have been trained and 644 experiments have been performed for the evaluation. The results along with the shared data and evaluation methodology constitute a benchmark for comparing deepfake detection approaches and measuring progress.

Chaochao Lu, Chen Qian, Guodong Zheng et al.

Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown impressive abilities in generating reasonable responses with respect to multi-modal contents. However, there is still a wide gap between the performance of recent MLLM-based applications and the expectation of the broad public, even though the most powerful OpenAI's GPT-4 and Google's Gemini have been deployed. This paper strives to enhance understanding of the gap through the lens of a qualitative study on the generalizability, trustworthiness, and causal reasoning capabilities of recent proprietary and open-source MLLMs across four modalities: ie, text, code, image, and video, ultimately aiming to improve the transparency of MLLMs. We believe these properties are several representative factors that define the reliability of MLLMs, in supporting various downstream applications. To be specific, we evaluate the closed-source GPT-4 and Gemini and 6 open-source LLMs and MLLMs. Overall we evaluate 230 manually designed cases, where the qualitative results are then summarized into 12 scores (ie, 4 modalities times 3 properties). In total, we uncover 14 empirical findings that are useful to understand the capabilities and limitations of both proprietary and open-source MLLMs, towards more reliable downstream multi-modal applications.