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

USD -
AED 3.672985
AFN 65.000215
ALL 80.742224
AMD 360.120146
ANG 1.789785
AOA 918.000259
ARS 1547.504298
AUD 1.425618
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.704639
BAM 1.737338
BBD 2.013458
BDT 124.459802
BGN 1.747831
BHD 0.377436
BIF 2986.973187
BMD 1
BND 1.277909
BOB 12.120755
BRL 5.462498
BSD 0.999711
BTN 94.558763
BWP 13.724402
BYN 2.982914
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010562
CAD 1.396435
CDF 2312.495179
CHF 0.81689
CLF 0.024512
CLP 964.730095
CNY 6.680898
CNH 6.67278
COP 3233.55
CRC 454.091218
CUC 1
CUP 23.992112
CVE 97.94847
CZK 21.59735
DJF 177.720509
DKK 6.651604
DOP 60.031357
DZD 135.94453
EGP 54.718599
ERN 15
ETB 164.071845
EUR 0.88991
FJD 2.24175
FKP 0.745268
GBP 0.742315
GEL 2.602348
GGP 0.745268
GHS 11.631305
GIP 0.745268
GMD 73.999777
GNF 8855.000423
GTQ 7.639521
GYD 209.448686
HKD 7.845385
HNL 26.868429
HRK 6.76901
HTG 130.971046
HUF 322.277998
IDR 18097.15
ILS 3.153897
IMP 0.745268
INR 94.33125
IQD 1515.529716
IRR 1883408.502283
ISK 121.570181
JEP 0.745268
JMD 158.455068
JOD 0.709023
JPY 158.307502
KES 129.890478
KGS 87.449951
KHR 4064.827605
KMF 440.99974
KPW 899.999961
KRW 1340.964971
KWD 0.31079
KYD 0.833041
KZT 451.807175
LAK 22506.673299
LBP 89519.744527
LKR 332.641939
LRD 169.939285
LSL 16.455617
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.409977
MAD 9.765444
MDL 17.929301
MGA 4515.192027
MKD 54.842921
MMK 2099.52083
MNT 3598.087189
MOP 8.077598
MRU 40.663904
MUR 47.090153
MVR 15.454969
MWK 1733.399066
MXN 18.56657
MYR 4.063499
MZN 63.910116
NAD 16.455325
NGN 1346.419798
NIO 36.784529
NOK 9.301655
NPR 151.29402
NZD 1.77669
OMR 0.384505
PAB 0.999773
PEN 3.450426
PGK 4.485918
PHP 63.245999
PKR 276.534117
PLN 3.901551
PYG 6061.763543
QAR 3.644609
RON 4.753401
RSD 104.687977
RUB 81.79709
RWF 1471.012787
SAR 3.756339
SBD 8.051718
SCR 13.900191
SDG 601.494218
SEK 9.72677
SGD 1.278485
SHP 0.745545
SLE 22.909904
SLL 20969.504398
SOS 571.349894
SRD 37.563995
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.763752
SVC 8.747096
SYP 13001.999685
SZL 16.44674
THB 33.583963
TJS 9.221818
TMT 3.51
TND 2.979449
TOP 2.40776
TRY 50.019702
TTD 6.776725
TWD 32.844598
TZS 2649.99802
UAH 45.52523
UGX 4104.021853
UYU 40.19489
UZS 11886.139647
VES 890.036598
VND 25704.5
VUV 119.472328
WST 2.779309
XAF 583.742545
XAG 0.019088
XAU 0.000245834942
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.801579
XDR 0.707052
XOF 583.742545
XPF 105.938734
YER 236.174953
ZAR 16.396098
ZMK 9001.19797
ZMW 20.274394
ZWL 321.999592
SSP 5745.96484
MXV 2.089881
  • RYCEF

    0.4000

    19.71

    +2.03%

  • CMSC

    0.0000

    20.4

    0%

  • BTI

    0.4200

    56.05

    +0.75%

  • BP

    0.2800

    44.43

    +0.63%

  • RBGPF

    1.6000

    67

    +2.39%

  • RIO

    -0.1500

    94.41

    -0.16%

  • AZN

    -0.4300

    166.15

    -0.26%

  • GSK

    0.4600

    49.7

    +0.93%

  • BCE

    -0.4100

    20.56

    -1.99%

  • NGG

    -0.2500

    75.24

    -0.33%

  • VOD

    -0.0400

    16.58

    -0.24%

  • RELX

    -0.4500

    33.07

    -1.36%

  • BCC

    -0.5500

    76.59

    -0.72%

  • CMSD

    -0.0300

    20.27

    -0.15%

  • JRI

    -0.2500

    10.77

    -2.32%

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