A fusion framework based on fuzzy integrals for passive-blind image tamper detection

  • Mandeep Kaur
  • Savita Gupta


The innate complexity and uncertainty in the domain of image forensics has made the application of fusion technology an obligatory requirement. Fuzzy integrals, that provide a meaningful formalism for combining different information sources has gained limited consideration in image forensics. The current paper presents a fuzzy integral based fusion framework for image tamper detection that can exploit the interaction between multiple forensic tools for collaborative decision making. Four tools that expose traces of semantic manipulation based on specific statistical cues are designed that work cohesively to allow detection of forgeries in single image (copy-move), composite image (splicing) and two generic artefacts (double JPEG compression and noise inconsistency). The measurement level fusion of tool outcome is carried out with Sugneo and Choquet integrals as the underlying aggregation operators. The classification competency of each tool is evaluated on a specialized dataset of forged images with the respective forgery trace. The empirical evaluation of the fusion framework for blind tamper detection is carried out on a combined master dataset comprising the various forgery traces under study. The Choquet integral based aggregation exhibits an enhanced classification competency on comparison with other fusion approaches like Feature level, Fuzzy Logic based on if-else rules, Behaviour Knowledge Space, Dempster-Shafer combination and classifier ensemble architecture based on Wolpkart’s stacked generalization.


Image forensics Tamper detection Information fusion Fuzzy-integral 


  1. 1.
    Farid, H.: A survey of image forgery detection. Signal Process. Mag. 26(2), 16–25 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mahdian, B., Saic, S.: A bibliography on blind methods for identifying image forgery. J. Signal Process. 25(6), 389–399 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Piva, A.: An overview on image forensics. ISRN Signal Process. J. Article ID 496701, p. 22 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Birajdar, G.K., Mankar, V.H.: Digital image forgery detection using passive techniques: a survey. Digit. Investig. 10(3), 226–245 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bondi, L., Baroffio, L.: First steps toward camera model identification with convolutional neural networks. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 24(3), 259–263 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang, Q., Lu, W.: Joint image splicing detection in DCT and Contourlet transform domain. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 40, 449–458 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li, C., Ma, Q.: Image splicing detection based on Markov features in QDCT domain. Neurocomputing 228, 29–36 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Warif, N.B.A., Wahab, A.W.A., Idris, M.Y.I., Salleh, R., Othman, F.: SIFT-symmetry: a robust detection method for copy-move forgery with reflection attack. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. (2017).
  9. 9.
    Lyu, Y., Shen, X., Chen, H.: Copy-paste detection based on a SIFT marked graph feature vector. Chin. J. Electron. 26(2), 346–350 (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pun, C.-M., Liu, B.: Multi-scale noise estimation for image splicing forgery detection. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 38, 195–206 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thai, T.H., Cogranne, R.: JPEG quantization step estimation and its applications to digital image forensics. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 12(1), 123–133 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barni, M., Costanzo, A.: A Fuzzy approach to deal with uncertainity in image forensics. Signal Process. (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bayram, S., Avcibas, I., Sankur, B., Memon, N.: Image manipulation detection. J. Electron. Imag. 15(4), 041102–041102-17 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsu, Y.F., Chang, S.F.: Statistical fusion of multiple cues for image tampering detection. In: Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, pp. 1–5 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hu, D., Zhou, L.: D-S evidence theory based digital image trustworthiness evaluation model. Multimed. Inf. Netw. Secur. 1, 85–89 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu, D., Zhang, X.: On digital image trustworthiness. Appl. Soft Comput. 48, 240–253 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chetty, G., Singh, M.: Nonintrusive image tamper detection based on Fuzzy fusion. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Netw. Secur. 10(9), 86–90 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hashmi, M.F., Keskar, A.G.: Fuzzy based image forensic tool for detection and classification of image cloning. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syt. 9(2), 351–375 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fontani, M., Bianchi, T., De Rosa, A., Piva, A., Barni, M.: A Dempster–Shafer framework for decision fusion in image forensics. In: WIFS‘2011, Brazil (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fontani, M., Bianchi, T.: A framework for decision fusion in image forensics based on Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 8(4), 593–607 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cozzolino, D., Gargiulo, F., Sansone, C., Verdoliva, L.: Multiple classifier systems for image forgery detection. In: Image Analysis and Processing (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Naples, Italy, vol. 8157, pp. 259–268 (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Anselmo, F., Felipussi, S.C., Alfaro, C., et al.: Behavior knowledge space-based fusion for copy–move forgery detection. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 25(10) (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li, H., Luo, W., Qiu, X., Huang, J.: Image forgery localization via integrating tampering possibility maps. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 12(5) (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cozzolino, D., Gragnaniello, D., Verdoliva, L.: Image forgery localization through the fusion of camera-based, feature-based and pixel-based techniques. In: ICIP 2014, pp. 5302–5306 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Korus, P., Huang, J.: Multi-scale fusion for improved localization of malicious tampering in digital images. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 25(3), 1312–1326 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang, F., Li, J.: Copy-move forgery detection based on hybrid features. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 59, 73–83 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Torra, V., Narukawa, Y.: The interpretation of fuzzy integrals and their application to fuzzy systems. Int. J. Approx. Reasn. 41, 43–58 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Grabisch, M.: The application of fuzzy intgrals in multicriteria decision making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 89(3), 445–456 (1996)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Redi, J.A., Taktak, W.: Digital image forensics: a booklet for beginners. Multimed. Tools Appl. 51, 133–162 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Polikar, R.: Ensemble based systems in decision making. IEEE Circuits Syst. Mag. 6, 21–45 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dasarathy, B.V.: Decision Fusion. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA (1994)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Freedman, D.: Overview of decision level fusion techniques for identification and their application. In: American Control Conference, vol. 2, pp. 1299–1303 (1994)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ruta, D., Gabrys, B.: An overview of classifier fusion methods. Comput. Inf. Syst. 7, 1–10 (2000)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kharrazi, M., Sencar, H.T., Memon, N.: Improving steganalysis by fusion techniques: a case study with image steganography. Trans. Data Hiding Multimed. Secur. 123–137 (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mane, A.M., Dongale, T.D.: Application of Fuzzy measure and fuzzy integral in students failure decision making. IOSR. J. Math. 10(6), 47–53 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Murofushi, T., et al.: Fuzzy measures and fuzzy integrals. Fuzzy Measures Integrals 3–41 (2000)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wang, Z. et al.: Nonlinear integrals and their appliactions in data mining. Adv. Fuzzy Syst. 24 (2010)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Choquet, G.: Theory of capacities. Ann. Inst. Fourier 5, 131–296 (1954)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sugeno, M.: Theory of Fuzzy integrals and its applications. Doctrol Thesis (1974)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Huang, H., et al.: Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images using SIFT algorithm. In: IEEE Pacific-Asia Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Industrial Application, Wuhan, China, pp. 1241–1245 (2008)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pun, C.M., Yuan, X.C.: Image forgery detection using adaptive oversegmentation and feature point matching. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10(8), 1705–1716 (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kaur, M., Gupta, S.: A passive blind approach for image splicing detection based on DWT and LBP histograms. In: Security in Computing and Communications (SSCC 2016) Communications in Computer and Information. Science 625, 318–327 (2016)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pyatykh, S., Hesser, J.: Image noise level estimation by principal component analysis. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22(2), 687–699 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Li, B., et al.: Detecting doubly compressed JPEG images by using mode based first digit features. In: MMSP, Cairns, Queensland, Australia, pp. 730–735 (2008)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Amerini, I., Ballan, L., Caldelli, R., Del Bimbo, A., Serra, G.: A SIFT-based forensic method for copy-move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensic Secur. 6(3), 1099–1110 (2011).
  46. 46.
    Dong, J., Wang, W., Tan, T.: Casia image tampering detection evaluation database. In: 2013 IEEE China Summit & International Conference on Signal and Information Processing (China SIP), pp. 422–426 (2013). http://forensics.idealtest
  47. 47.
    Ojala, T., Pietikainen, M.: Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 24(7), 971–987 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kaur, M., Walia, S.: Forgery detection using noise estimation and hog feature extraction. Int. J. Multimed. Ubiquitous Eng. 11(4), 37–48 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ke, Y., Zhang, Q.: Detecting image forgery based on noise estimation. Int. J. Multimed. Ubiquitous Eng. 9(1), 325–336 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Fu, D., et al.: A generalized Benford’s Law for JPEG coefficients and its applications in image forensics. In: Security, Steganography, and Watermarking of Multimedia Contents, vol. 6505, p. 65051L (2007)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hou, W., Ji, Z.: Double JPEG compression detection based on extended first digit features of DCT coefficients. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 3(5), 512–515 (2013)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kuncheva, L.: Combining Pattern Classifiers: Methods and Algorithms. Wiley, New York (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Amerini, R., et al.: Splicing forgeries localization through the use of first digit features. In: IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS), pp. 143-148 (2014)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Berry, M.W.A.: Soft Computing in Data Science Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Shoaie, Z., et al.: Combination of multiple classifiers with fuzzy integral method for classifying the eeg signals in brain-computer interface. In: International Conference on Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Engineering, Singapore, pp. 157–161 (2006)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bostrom, H., Johansson, R., Karlsson, A.: On evidential combination rules for ensemble classifiers. In: 11th International Conference on Information Fusion, Cologne, pp. 1–8 (2008)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Shapley, L.S.: A value for n-person games. Contrib. Theory Games 2, 307–317 (1953)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gloe, T., et al.: The ‘Dresden Image Database’ for benchmarking digital image forensics. In: 25th Symposium On Applied Computing (ACM SAC 2010), vol. 2, pp. 1585–1591 (2010)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Dang-Nguyen, D.-T., et al.: RAISE—a raw images dataset for digital image forensics. In: ACM Multimedia Systems, Portland, Oregon March 18–20 (2015)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Schaefer, G., Stich, M.: UCID - an uncompressed colour image database. In: Storage and Retrieval Methods and Applications for Multimedia, vol. 5307, pp. 472–480 (2004)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Christlein, V., Riess, C., et al.: An evaluation of popular copy-move forgery detection approaches. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 7(6), 1841–1854 (2012)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Grabisch, M.: k-Order additive discrete fuzzy measures and their representation. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 92(2), 167–189 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University Institute of Engineering and TechnologyPanjab UniversityChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations