The China Mail - AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes

USD -
AED 3.672496
AFN 65.999806
ALL 80.065663
AMD 364.508186
ANG 1.789783
AOA 917.00022
ARS 1494.993551
AUD 1.414697
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.701613
BAM 1.689756
BBD 2.014385
BDT 122.018757
BGN 1.696366
BHD 0.377122
BIF 2988.381635
BMD 1
BND 1.277847
BOB 11.57636
BRL 5.2128
BSD 1.000151
BTN 95.647328
BWP 13.500659
BYN 3.042032
BYR 19600
BZD 2.011491
CAD 1.38791
CDF 2270.000115
CHF 0.810845
CLF 0.023463
CLP 923.440076
CNY 6.743299
CNH 6.741275
COP 3104.88
CRC 449.263467
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.26422
CZK 20.87201
DJF 178.102253
DKK 6.44984
DOP 58.749838
DZD 132.909333
EGP 50.536797
ERN 15
ETB 161.789969
EUR 0.86277
FJD 2.210497
FKP 0.738395
GBP 0.738265
GEL 2.605005
GGP 0.738395
GHS 11.051977
GIP 0.738395
GMD 73.999672
GNF 8785.692687
GTQ 7.628839
GYD 209.246268
HKD 7.84389
HNL 26.815845
HRK 6.501403
HTG 130.826022
HUF 315.642037
IDR 17830
ILS 2.99085
IMP 0.738395
INR 95.707199
IQD 1310.230424
IRR 1374575.000079
ISK 122.690146
JEP 0.738395
JMD 158.034569
JOD 0.709008
JPY 159.236503
KES 129.4971
KGS 87.449576
KHR 4046.085458
KMF 426.000436
KPW 900.000294
KRW 1397.419776
KWD 0.30879
KYD 0.83347
KZT 461.929241
LAK 22540.358638
LBP 89562.572897
LKR 331.975446
LRD 181.52836
LSL 16.225328
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.372767
MAD 9.292836
MDL 17.252581
MGA 4307.838521
MKD 53.155873
MMK 2099.245957
MNT 3597.150887
MOP 8.080143
MRU 40.111452
MUR 46.979692
MVR 15.45959
MWK 1734.310807
MXN 17.05922
MYR 4.063021
MZN 63.904984
NAD 16.225258
NGN 1350.239844
NIO 36.798687
NOK 9.401945
NPR 153.035552
NZD 1.703305
OMR 0.3845
PAB 1.000134
PEN 3.368483
PGK 4.494363
PHP 61.827039
PKR 277.569951
PLN 3.732885
PYG 6034.084282
QAR 3.655881
RON 4.523599
RSD 101.201289
RUB 84.90037
RWF 1473.727865
SAR 3.746587
SBD 8.025811
SCR 13.860891
SDG 601.474966
SEK 9.52765
SGD 1.276725
SHP 0.740866
SLE 24.649879
SLL 20969.499227
SOS 571.623589
SRD 37.966977
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.167221
SVC 8.751096
SYP 13001.999906
SZL 16.213578
THB 33.127958
TJS 9.241263
TMT 3.5
TND 2.929025
TOP 2.40776
TRY 47.931603
TTD 6.782238
TWD 31.901398
TZS 2647.976038
UAH 44.802989
UGX 3730.646945
UYU 40.347315
UZS 11821.830168
VES 771.57685
VND 26178
VUV 118.215486
WST 2.715898
XAF 566.748027
XAG 0.015938
XAU 0.00023
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802528
XDR 0.707052
XOF 566.738234
XPF 103.038184
YER 237.10406
ZAR 16.25505
ZMK 9001.202246
ZMW 18.677668
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.3500

    69

    +0.51%

  • RYCEF

    -0.2500

    20.81

    -1.2%

  • CMSD

    -0.0900

    21.09

    -0.43%

  • BCE

    0.0100

    23.36

    +0.04%

  • BCC

    -1.7600

    80.18

    -2.2%

  • JRI

    -0.0400

    12.44

    -0.32%

  • CMSC

    -0.1200

    21.24

    -0.56%

  • RELX

    0.9500

    34.51

    +2.75%

  • BP

    0.5600

    43.41

    +1.29%

  • BTI

    0.6500

    56.38

    +1.15%

  • AZN

    3.2100

    160.1

    +2%

  • RIO

    -0.5200

    96.69

    -0.54%

  • GSK

    0.8700

    51.15

    +1.7%

  • NGG

    0.8600

    82.15

    +1.05%

  • VOD

    -0.0700

    16.13

    -0.43%

AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes
AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes / Photo: © AFP

AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes

When outraged Filipinos turned to an AI-powered chatbot to verify a viral photograph of a lawmaker embroiled in a corruption scandal, the tool failed to detect it was fabricated -- even though it had generated the image itself.

Text size:

Internet users are increasingly turning to chatbots to verify images in real time, but the tools often fail, raising questions about their visual debunking capabilities at a time when major tech platforms are scaling back human fact-checking.

In many cases, the tools wrongly identify images as real even when they are generated using the same generative models, further muddying an online information landscape awash with AI-generated fakes.

Among them is a fabricated image circulating on social media of Elizaldy Co, a former Philippine lawmaker charged by prosecutors in a multibillion-dollar flood-control corruption scam that sparked massive protests in the disaster-prone country.

The image of Co, whose whereabouts has been unknown since the official probe began, appeared to show him in Portugal.

When online sleuths tracking him asked Google's new AI mode whether the image was real, it incorrectly said it was authentic.

AFP's fact-checkers tracked down its creator and determined that the image was generated using Google AI.

"These models are trained primarily on language patterns and lack the specialized visual understanding needed to accurately identify AI-generated or manipulated imagery," Alon Yamin, chief executive of AI content detection platform Copyleaks, told AFP.

"With AI chatbots, even when an image originates from a similar generative model, the chatbot often provides inconsistent or overly generalized assessments, making them unreliable for tasks like fact-checking or verifying authenticity."

Google did not respond to AFP’s request for comment.

- 'Distinguishable from reality' -

AFP found similar examples of AI tools failing to verify their own creations.

During last month's deadly protests over lucrative benefits for senior officials in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, social media users shared a fabricated image purportedly showing men marching with flags and torches.

An AFP analysis found it was created using Google's Gemini AI model.

But Gemini and Microsoft's Copilot falsely identified it as a genuine image of the protest.

"This inability to correctly identify AI images stems from the fact that they (AI models) are programmed only to mimic well," Rossine Fallorina, from the nonprofit Sigla Research Center, told AFP.

"In a sense, they can only generate things to resemble. They cannot ascertain whether the resemblance is actually distinguishable from reality."

Earlier this year, Columbia University's Tow Center for Digital Journalism tested the ability of seven AI chatbots -- including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Grok, and Gemini -- to verify 10 images from photojournalists of news events.

All seven models failed to correctly identify the provenance of the photos, the study said.

- 'Shocked' -

AFP tracked down the source of Co's photo that garnered over a million views across social media -- a middle-aged web developer in the Philippines, who said he created it "for fun" using Nano Banana, Gemini's AI image generator.

"Sadly, a lot of people believed it," he told AFP, requesting anonymity to avoid a backlash.

"I edited my post -- and added 'AI generated' to stop the spread -- because I was shocked at how many shares it got."

Such cases show how AI-generated photos flooding social platforms can look virtually identical to real imagery.

The trend has fueled concerns as surveys show online users are increasingly shifting from traditional search engines to AI tools for information gathering and verifying information.

The shift comes as Meta announced earlier this year it was ending its third-party fact-checking program in the United States, turning over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as "Community Notes."

Human fact-checking has long been a flashpoint in hyperpolarized societies, where conservative advocates accuse professional fact-checkers of liberal bias, a charge they reject.

AFP currently works in 26 languages with Meta's fact-checking program, including in Asia, Latin America, and the European Union.

Researchers say AI models can be useful to professional fact-checkers, helping to quickly geolocate images and spot visual clues to establish authenticity. But they caution that they cannot replace the work of trained human fact-checkers.

"We can't rely on AI tools to combat AI in the long run," Fallorina said.

burs-ac/sla/sms

E.Lau--ThChM