Deepfakes: we need to re-think the concept of "real" images

The wide availability and low usability barrier of modern image generation models has triggered the reasonable fear of criminal misconduct and negative social implications. The machine learning community has been engaging this problem with an extensive series of publications proposing algorithmic solutions for the detection of "fake", e.g. entirely generated or partially manipulated images. While there is undoubtedly some progress towards technical solutions of the problem, we argue that current and prior work is focusing too much on generative algorithms and "fake" data-samples, neglecting a clear definition and data collection of "real" images. The fundamental question "what is a real image?" might appear to be quite philosophical, but our analysis shows that the development and evaluation of basically all current "fake"-detection methods is relying on only a few, quite old low-resolution datasets of "real" images like ImageNet. However, the technology for the acquisition of "real" images, aka taking photos, has drastically evolved over the last decade: Today, over 90% of all photographs are produced by smartphones which typically use algorithms to compute an image from multiple inputs (over time) from multiple sensors. Based on the fact that these image formation algorithms are typically neural network architectures which are closely related to "fake"-image generators, we state the position that today, we need to re-think the concept of "real" images. The purpose of this position paper is to raise the awareness of the current shortcomings in this active field of research and to trigger an open discussion whether the detection of "fake" images is a sound objective at all. At the very least, we need a clear technical definition of "real" images and new benchmark datasets.

Publication Details

Journal
ArXiv.org
Published
2025-09-26
Primary Topic
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deepfakes: we need to re-think the concept of "real" images

ArXiv.org
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
article

Deepfakes: we need to re-think the concept of "real" images

article en

Abstract

The wide availability and low usability barrier of modern image generation models has triggered the reasonable fear of criminal misconduct and negative social implications. The machine learning community has been engaging this problem with an extensive series of publications proposing algorithmic solutions for the detection of "fake", e.g. entirely generated or partially manipulated images. While there is undoubtedly some progress towards technical solutions of the problem, we argue that current and prior work is focusing too much on generative algorithms and "fake" data-samples, neglecting a clear definition and data collection of "real" images. The fundamental question "what is a real image?" might appear to be quite philosophical, but our analysis shows that the development and evaluation of basically all current "fake"-detection methods is relying on only a few, quite old low-resolution datasets of "real" images like ImageNet. However, the technology for the acquisition of "real" images, aka taking photos, has drastically evolved over the last decade: Today, over 90% of all photographs are produced by smartphones which typically use algorithms to compute an image from multiple inputs (over time) from multiple sensors. Based on the fact that these image formation algorithms are typically neural network architectures which are closely related to "fake"-image generators, we state the position that today, we need to re-think the concept of "real" images. The purpose of this position paper is to raise the awareness of the current shortcomings in this active field of research and to trigger an open discussion whether the detection of "fake" images is a sound objective at all. At the very least, we need a clear technical definition of "real" images and new benchmark datasets.

ArXiv.org
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
Antibiotic Use and Resistance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.