Trustworthy media needs flexible evidence throughout its lifecycle
Trustworthy synthetic visual media: Evidence across the media lifecycle
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Summary
Photos and videos used to clearly show what actually happened, but now computer-generated images can look very real and can be changed without leaving clear proof. The authors explain that to trust these visual media, we need to collect and keep different kinds of evidence that show how the media was made and changed over time. This evidence might come directly from the media itself or from records made when creating or editing it. They also explain that no single proof can guarantee truth; the right kind of evidence depends on the question and must be shared with the person judging the media’s trustworthiness.
What this means in practice
- •For digital content verifiers: Determine what types of evidence best verify an image or video’s origin and changes at different lifecycle stages to improve verification accuracy.
- •For media asset managers: Design systems that capture and preserve relevant media history and production context to maintain trustworthy circulation of images and videos.
A survey. It maps existing work.
Authors
Zexi Jia, Zhiqiang Yuan, Jie Zhou, Jinchao Zhang
Abstract
Images and videos have long helped people understand what happened and how a work came into being. Generative systems complicate that role. Realistic media can now be produced and revised without leaving a stable history, so appearance no longer reveals whether a scene was captured, synthesized, or altered along the way. Trust must instead come from evidence that explains the path an asset has taken and the circumstances in which it was used. Some of this evidence can be recovered from the media, while some must be recorded during production and preserved as the asset circulates. This review brings those approaches together and asks when their claims remain meaningful after ordinary processing or deliberate manipulation. We argue that trustworthy media do not depend on one universal marker of authenticity. The evidence must suit the question at hand, reach the person making the judgment, and remain open to correction when better information emerges. The larger goal is to keep the history of media intelligible even as the media itself continues to change.