Skip to main content

Table 4 Validation accuracy for various validation sets after training on Xerox1 data set (see Table 2, Xerox1)

From: Printing and scanning investigation for image counter forensics

 

Bayar2016

Xception

Proposed model

Xerox1 (4c)

0.7036

0.666

0.753

Dell (4c)

0.3018

0.482

0.456

Original (4c)

0.2342

0.3873

0.3649

Xeros2 (4c)

0.4738

0.611

0.572

JPEG (4c)

0.2418

0.3848

0.364

  1. Bold value refer to models that perform better than the rest - to highlight the model performance - its a common practice to do this and usually helps improve readability
  2. We trained each model on images from only the Xerox1 data set, or images after being printed and scanned on the first Xerox printer. We find that while no model is able to perfectly fit the printed and scanned data set, our proposed models significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art models. We also note that transferability to other printers remains weak, indicating significant variance between the printers. Here 4c indicates that we used the restricted set of manipulations (AWGN, GB, MF, and PR) (see Sect. 4)