Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

The Coherence Trap: When MLLM-Crafted Narratives Exploit Manipulated Visual Contexts

About

The detection and grounding of multimedia manipulation has emerged as a critical challenge in combating AI-generated disinformation. While existing methods have made progress in recent years, we identify two fundamental limitations in current approaches: (1) Underestimation of MLLM-driven deception risk: prevailing techniques primarily address rule-based text manipulations, yet fail to account for sophisticated misinformation synthesized by multimodal large language models (MLLMs) that can dynamically generate semantically coherent, contextually plausible yet deceptive narratives conditioned on manipulated images; (2) Unrealistic misalignment artifacts: currently focused scenarios rely on artificially misaligned content that lacks semantic coherence, rendering them easily detectable. To address these gaps holistically, we propose a new adversarial pipeline that leverages MLLMs to generate high-risk disinformation. Our approach begins with constructing the MLLM-Driven Synthetic Multimodal (MDSM) dataset, where images are first altered using state-of-the-art editing techniques and then paired with MLLM-generated deceptive texts that maintain semantic consistency with the visual manipulations. Building upon this foundation, we present the Artifact-aware Manipulation Diagnosis via MLLM (AMD) framework featuring two key innovations: Artifact Pre-perception Encoding strategy and Manipulation-Oriented Reasoning, to tame MLLMs for the MDSM problem. Comprehensive experiments validate our framework's superior generalization capabilities as a unified architecture for detecting MLLM-powered multimodal deceptions. In cross-domain testing on the MDSM dataset, AMD achieves the best average performance, with 88.18 ACC, 60.25 mAP, and 61.02 mIoU scores.

Yuchen Zhang, Yaxiong Wang, Yujiao Wu, Lianwei Wu, Li Zhu, Zhedong Zheng• 2025

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Multi-modal manipulation detectionROM NYT domain 1.0 (test)
Accuracy94.13
23
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM USA
Accuracy88.8
14
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM (Wash.)
Accuracy86.64
14
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM BBC
Accuracy89.74
14
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM AVG
Accuracy88.18
14
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM NYT
Accuracy92.24
14
Multi-modal Forgery Detection and GroundingMDSM Guardian
Accuracy91.43
14
Multi-modal Manipulation Detection and GroundingDGM4 Guardian domain (test)
Accuracy84.61
13
Multi-modal Manipulation Detection and GroundingDGM4 Average across domains (test)
Accuracy74.47
13
Multi-modal Misinformation DetectionMDSM USA domain
Accuracy88.8
12
Showing 10 of 37 rows

Other info

Follow for update