SynCred-Bench: Benchmarking Synthetic Credibility in AI-Generated Visual Misinformation

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

Introduces SynCred-Bench, a benchmark of 600 AI-generated misinformation images across six credible-form categories, showing that existing detectors (including MLLMs, open-source AIGC detectors, and commercial APIs) perform poorly, with human annotators also struggling.

Recent generative models can now produce visual artifacts with realistic embedded text and layouts, creating a new misinformation threat: synthetic credibility. We introduce SYNCRED-Bench, a benchmark of 600 AI-generated misinformation images balanced across six credible-form categories and seven fine-grained circulation styles, together with FP450, a real-image negative set for measuring false positives. Extensive evaluation shows that existing systems remain unreliable: under a 5% false-positive-rate constraint, 15 MLLMs achieve only 10.5% true positive rate (TPR), open-source AIGC detectors achieve less than 5%, and commercial APIs reach 57.6%. Human annotators also struggled to identify synthetic credibility, reaching only 63% TPR. These findings establish synthetic credibility as a severe and underexplored visual misinformation challenge, and provide a benchmark for developing detectors that reason beyond superficial credibility cues.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 06/04/26, 03:42 AM

Paper page - SynCred-Bench: Benchmarking Synthetic Credibility in AI-Generated Visual Misinformation

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2606.03348

Abstract

AI-generated images with realistic text and layouts pose a significant misinformation threat requiring new detection benchmarks and methods beyond surface-level credibility assessment.

Recentgenerative modelscan now produce visual artifacts with realistic embedded text and layouts, creating a newmisinformationthreat:synthetic credibility. We introduceSYNCRED-Bench, a benchmark of 600 AI-generatedmisinformationimages balanced across six credible-form categories and seven fine-grained circulation styles, together withFP450, a real-image negative set for measuring false positives. Extensive evaluation shows that existing systems remain unreliable: under a 5%false-positive-rateconstraint, 15MLLMsachieve only 10.5%true positive rate(TPR), open-sourceAIGC detectorsachieve less than 5%, andcommercial APIsreach 57.6%. Human annotators also struggled to identifysynthetic credibility, reaching only 63% TPR. These findings establishsynthetic credibilityas a severe and underexplored visualmisinformationchallenge, and provide a benchmark for developing detectors that reason beyond superficial credibility cues.

View arXiv pageView PDFAdd to collection

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.03348 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.03348 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.03348 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles

Every AI Visibility Tool Is Lying to You

Hacker News Top

This article critically examines the accuracy of AI visibility tools that claim to measure brand presence in generative AI responses, arguing that they provide false precision due to nondeterminism, personalization, and scraping biases. It calls for transparency in methodology and warns against treating opaque dashboards as stable truth.

Is this chart lying to me? Automating the detection of misleading visualizations

arXiv cs.CL

This paper introduces Misviz, a benchmark dataset of 2,604 real-world visualizations and 57,665 synthetic ones annotated with 12 types of misleading design violations, enabling automated detection of deceptive charts. The work evaluates state-of-the-art multimodal LLMs and rule-based systems on this challenging task, addressing the gap in resources for training AI models to combat data visualization misinformation.