• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 59, Issue 16, 1615007 (2022)
Pengzhi Geng1, Yunqi Tang1、*, Hongxing Fan2, and Xintong Zhu1
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Criminal Investigation, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China
  • 2Center for Research on Intelligent Perception and Computing, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP202259.1615007 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Pengzhi Geng, Yunqi Tang, Hongxing Fan, Xintong Zhu. Deep Forgery Detection Using CutMix Algorithm and Improved Xception Network[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(16): 1615007 Copy Citation Text show less
    CutMix augmented image example. (a)(b) Original samples; (c) augmented sample
    Fig. 1. CutMix augmented image example. (a)(b) Original samples; (c) augmented sample
    Sampler for unbalanced data sets
    Fig. 2. Sampler for unbalanced data sets
    Proposed network structure
    Fig. 3. Proposed network structure
    ROC curves and AUC values of different models on the validation set
    Fig. 4. ROC curves and AUC values of different models on the validation set
    Influence of hyper-parameter α and probability p on the detection model. (a) CutMix; (b) Mixup
    Fig. 5. Influence of hyper-parameter α and probability p on the detection model. (a) CutMix; (b) Mixup
    Results of data enhancement
    Fig. 6. Results of data enhancement
    Input sizeOperatorNumber of channels
    299×299×3Entry flowConv1,2×232
    149×149×32Conv2,3×364
    147×147×64Block1128
    74×74×128Block2256
    37×37×256Block3728
    19×19×728Middle flowBlock4,3×3728
    19×19×728Block5,3×3728
    19×19×728Block6,3×3728
    19×19×728Block7,3×3728
    19×19×728Block8,3×3728
    19×19×728Block9,3×3728
    19×19×728Block10,3×3728
    19×19×728Block11,3×3728
    19×19×728Exit flowBlock121024
    10×10×1024SeparableConv2d,3×31536
    10×10×1536SeparableConv2d,3×32048
    10×10×2048Pool,1×1
    Table 1. XceptionNet structure
    DatasetNumber of fake imagesNumber of real images
    Train dataset288007200
    Test dataset56001400
    Validation dataset56001400
    Table 2. Description of dataset
    DescriptionLoglossAccuracyParameters /106
    Block60.55390.85545.95
    Block70.53860.86317.56
    Block80.52580.87219.18
    Block90.51850.868410.79
    Block100.53980.868712.41
    XceptionNet0.54970.875720.81
    Table 3. Model optimization experiment
    MethodModelLoglossAccuracyParameters /106
    Method in Ref.[18EfficientNet_b30.58400.880312.23
    Method in Ref.[28ResNet500.54130.868425.56
    Method in Ref.[10SPPNet0.80920.866025.64
    Method in Ref.[20XceptionNet0.54970.875720.81
    Proposed methodXcep_Block80.52580.87219.18
    Table 4. Comparison between the proposed model and other classical algorithms
    DescriptionLoglossAccuracy
    Xcep_Block80.52580.8721
    Xcep_Block8+Over sampling0.43290.8751
    XceptionNet0.54970.8757
    XceptionNet+Over sampling0.47250.8779
    Table 5. Improvements for the imbalance of sample categories
    DescriptionCutMixMixup
    LoglossAccuracyLoglossAccuracy
    α=0.5,p=0.70.32710.87600.31960.8780
    α=0.5,p=0.80.32700.87590.30800.8724
    α=0.5,p=0.90.33340.87340.31170.8737
    α=0.5,p=10.30970.88190.31700.8731
    α=1,p=0.70.32100.87430.31510.8683
    α=1,p=0.80.33760.87670.31620.8704
    α=1,p=0.90.31220.88220.31470.8686
    α=1,p=10.31850.87730.32110.8667
    Table 6. Influence of different parameter settings on hybrid data enhancement results
    DescriptionLoglossAccuracy
    Baseline(Xcep_Block8)0.43290.8751
    +Cutout(size is 50)0.51430.8760
    +Cutout(size is 80)0.52280.8750
    +Cutout(size is 110)0.46740.8744
    +Mixup0.31960.8780
    +CutMix0.31220.8822
    Table 7. Experimental results of data augmentation
    Pengzhi Geng, Yunqi Tang, Hongxing Fan, Xintong Zhu. Deep Forgery Detection Using CutMix Algorithm and Improved Xception Network[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(16): 1615007
    Download Citation