跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-09 04:05 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-08 04:17 — 2026-11-09 04:17(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-09 04:05最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-09 04:03(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.37882

FYC: FPR-Disparity Weight Perturbation and Youden Calibration for Fair Deepfake Detection

Uzoamaka Ezeakunne, Taiwo Olabamipe, Deevesh Jain, Xiuwen Liu

原文摘要

Deepfake detectors routinely achieve high aggregate accuracy while exhibiting substantial demographic disparities in their errors: false-positive rates differ by double digits across gender and skin tone. Most existing remedies require either full retraining with a fairness-aware objective or demographic-annotated training data, both impractical when only a pretrained checkpoint is available, while label-free post-hoc calibrators leave the detector's weights unchanged. We introduce FYC (FPR-disparity Weight Perturbation and Youden Calibration), a two-stage post-hoc method that perturbs a detector's weights under an FPR-disparity criterion, then calibrates a separate decision threshold for each demographic group - requiring no architectural changes and no full retraining. Evaluated against every detector benchmarked on AI-Face v2 across six intersectional gender x skin-tone groups, FYC outperforms the field on 18 of 21 reported fairness and utility metrics, including purpose-built fairness architectures, at a fraction of the training cost. We further identify why the choice of fairness criterion is critical: the original Demographic Parity objective used in prior weight-perturbation work is architecture-dependent and unpredictable, improving two of four evaluated architectures, leaving a third largely unchanged, and substantially degrading the fourth (PG-FDD), with no way to anticipate the outcome for a given checkpoint in advance. Conditioning the same objective on real images only - our FPR-disparity criterion - eliminates this unpredictability, improving fairness and accuracy jointly across all four architectures with no exceptions.

cs.CV

新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.37881

Intersectional Invariant Learning for Fair Deepfake Detection

Uzoamaka Ezeakunne, Taiwo Olabamipe, Deevesh Jain, Xiuwen Liu

原文摘要

Deepfake detection models achieve high overall accuracy but exhibit large performance disparities across demographic groups, causing some groups to experience substantially higher false-positive rates than others. Existing fairness-aware methods address this by constraining model outputs to equalize group predictions, but do not tackle the underlying feature-level bias. As a result, models may still rely on demographic characteristics, such as skin texture, as indirect cues for detecting manipulated content. To address this problem, we propose Intersectional Invariant Learning (IIL), a framework that improves feature learning rather than only adjusting model outputs. IIL alternates between identifying the most challenging demographic partitions and learning features that remain consistent across those partitions. The framework also includes a false-positive-rate fairness objective and group-balanced sampling across six gender x skin-tone intersectional groups. We evaluate IIL on a large-scale fairness benchmark containing over one million images, 10 baseline detectors, and 21 fairness and utility metrics. Results show that IIL achieves Pareto-optimal performance, simultaneously attaining an AUC above 99%, a false-positive rate under 2.5%, and the lowest intersectional fairness disparity (FMEO) among all compared methods. IIL outperforms prior fairness-aware methods on the large majority of the 21 evaluation metrics, while reducing both false-positive rates and intersectional fairness disparities by several-fold compared with the strongest competing method.

cs.CV