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

EUR -
AED 4.241153
AFN 72.754563
ALL 95.904412
AMD 436.077607
ANG 2.067262
AOA 1058.989364
ARS 1607.142281
AUD 1.654835
AWG 2.081601
AZN 1.95977
BAM 1.954803
BBD 2.329412
BDT 141.917624
BGN 1.97398
BHD 0.436272
BIF 3423.45409
BMD 1.154841
BND 1.479146
BOB 7.99182
BRL 6.143319
BSD 1.15661
BTN 108.125857
BWP 15.771435
BYN 3.508935
BYR 22634.884553
BZD 2.326114
CAD 1.587035
CDF 2627.263453
CHF 0.912861
CLF 0.02714
CLP 1072.223987
CNY 7.952696
CNH 7.970476
COP 4285.361066
CRC 540.224494
CUC 1.154841
CUP 30.603288
CVE 110.208795
CZK 24.490831
DJF 205.954966
DKK 7.471741
DOP 68.654987
DZD 152.950997
EGP 60.324739
ERN 17.322616
ETB 182.275564
FJD 2.568655
FKP 0.865578
GBP 0.865213
GEL 3.135356
GGP 0.865578
GHS 12.60757
GIP 0.865578
GMD 84.87984
GNF 10137.829861
GTQ 8.859482
GYD 241.973454
HKD 9.044802
HNL 30.613918
HRK 7.521945
HTG 151.732619
HUF 392.05814
IDR 19571.091251
ILS 3.618573
IMP 0.865578
INR 108.037231
IQD 1515.127308
IRR 1519337.754721
ISK 143.429337
JEP 0.865578
JMD 181.710477
JOD 0.818758
JPY 183.649756
KES 149.66002
KGS 100.990396
KHR 4621.643032
KMF 493.117464
KPW 1039.361533
KRW 1729.189906
KWD 0.354109
KYD 0.963808
KZT 556.046425
LAK 24836.118896
LBP 103580.078814
LKR 360.792877
LRD 211.652061
LSL 19.510581
LTL 3.409946
LVL 0.698551
LYD 7.404224
MAD 10.807448
MDL 20.141554
MGA 4822.686665
MKD 61.484385
MMK 2424.533847
MNT 4119.260525
MOP 9.335739
MRU 46.297389
MUR 53.781172
MVR 17.853984
MWK 2005.63794
MXN 20.652427
MYR 4.549493
MZN 73.795385
NAD 19.51075
NGN 1573.886435
NIO 42.558296
NOK 11.265017
NPR 173.000274
NZD 1.988749
OMR 0.444016
PAB 1.156595
PEN 3.998661
PGK 4.992454
PHP 69.281806
PKR 322.926298
PLN 4.27394
PYG 7554.1475
QAR 4.229343
RON 5.097703
RSD 117.46927
RUB 95.073447
RWF 1682.870906
SAR 4.335248
SBD 9.298388
SCR 16.082539
SDG 694.059788
SEK 10.871788
SGD 1.478179
SHP 0.86643
SLE 28.38022
SLL 24216.451871
SOS 660.97436
SRD 43.2921
STD 23902.878092
STN 24.487512
SVC 10.119839
SYP 127.6839
SZL 19.517722
THB 37.74134
TJS 11.108835
TMT 4.053492
TND 3.415858
TOP 2.78058
TRY 51.180177
TTD 7.84693
TWD 36.92108
TZS 2970.769215
UAH 50.668895
UGX 4371.770464
USD 1.154841
UYU 46.605223
UZS 14100.808802
VES 525.095404
VND 30419.668062
VUV 137.687189
WST 3.150166
XAF 655.633991
XAG 0.017179
XAU 0.000266
XCD 3.121016
XCG 2.084419
XDR 0.815409
XOF 655.622642
XPF 119.331742
YER 275.543707
ZAR 19.622018
ZMK 10394.962502
ZMW 22.582483
ZWL 371.858346
  • RBGPF

    -13.5000

    69

    -19.57%

  • CMSC

    -0.2000

    22.65

    -0.88%

  • VOD

    -0.0900

    14.33

    -0.63%

  • NGG

    -3.5400

    81.99

    -4.32%

  • RIO

    -2.5000

    83.15

    -3.01%

  • GSK

    -0.5300

    51.84

    -1.02%

  • RYCEF

    -1.2600

    15.34

    -8.21%

  • BCC

    -1.5600

    68.3

    -2.28%

  • RELX

    -0.4600

    33.36

    -1.38%

  • BCE

    0.0600

    25.79

    +0.23%

  • AZN

    -5.3300

    183.6

    -2.9%

  • JRI

    -0.3900

    11.77

    -3.31%

  • CMSD

    -0.2420

    22.658

    -1.07%

  • BTI

    -1.3500

    57.37

    -2.35%

  • BP

    -1.0800

    44.78

    -2.41%

AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes
AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes / Photo: Chris Delmas - 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

(K.Lüdke--BBZ)