Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Complementary rPPG-Derived and Lip-Region Frequency Cues for Talking-Face Deepfake Detection

Summary

arXiv:2609.22284v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Talking-face (TF) deepfakes are detected unevenly by rPPG-based methods across generators. We study two lightweight visual-only cues, rPPG-derived waveforms extracted by RhythmFormer and lip-region discrete cosine transform (DCT) coefficients, on the seven TF methods of Celeb-DF++ under a subject-independent protocol. In-domain, lip-region DCT matches or exceeds the rPPG-derived 1D ResNet on every method except SadTalker, and Concat fusion reaches AUC 0.891 against 0.824 and 0.827 for the unimodal baselines. Under leave-one-generator-out evaluation the cues split: each transfers clearly better to three held-out methods, and IP-LAP is near chance for both. Concat averages 0.798 but falls below rPPG alone where DCT transfers poorly, so static…

SourcearXiv Computer VisionAuthor: Othmane Harraq, Tamer Aldwairi
Complementary rPPG-Derived and Lip-Region Frequency Cues for Talking-Face Deepfake Detection
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 13 Sep 2026]

Title:Complementary rPPG-Derived and Lip-Region Frequency Cues for Talking-Face Deepfake Detection

View a PDF of the paper titled Complementary rPPG-Derived and Lip-Region Frequency Cues for Talking-Face Deepfake Detection, by Othmane Harraq and Tamer Aldwairi

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Talking-face (TF) deepfakes are detected unevenly by rPPG-based methods across generators. We study two lightweight visual-only cues, rPPG-derived waveforms extracted by RhythmFormer and lip-region discrete cosine transform (DCT) coefficients, on the seven TF methods of Celeb-DF++ under a subject-independent protocol. In-domain, lip-region DCT matches or exceeds the rPPG-derived 1D ResNet on every method except SadTalker, and Concat fusion reaches AUC 0.891 against 0.824 and 0.827 for the unimodal baselines. Under leave-one-generator-out evaluation the cues split: each transfers clearly better to three held-out methods, and IP-LAP is near chance for both. Concat averages 0.798 but falls below rPPG alone where DCT transfers poorly, so static fusion only partly exploits this complementarity. Lip-region DCT outperforms full-face DCT on six of seven methods. We treat the rPPG-derived signal as an empirical cue and do not claim it is cardiac in origin.

Subjects:

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Image and Video Processing (eess.IV)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.22284 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2609.22284v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.22284

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Tamer Aldwairi [view email] [v1] Sun, 13 Sep 2026 03:52:54 UTC (378 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Complementary rPPG-Derived and Lip-Region Frequency Cues for Talking-Face Deepfake Detection, by Othmane Harraq and Tamer Aldwairi

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CV

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI cs.CR eess eess.IV

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.22284v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Talking-face (TF) deepfakes are detected unevenly by rPPG-based methods across generators. We study two lightweight visual-only cue…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.