Large-scale dataset for face forgery detection research containing 60,000 videos with 17.6 million frames, including 50,000 real source videos and 10,000 manipulated videos with systematic perturbations.
Dataset characteristics
- Total videos: 60,000 videos (50,000 real, 10,000 manipulated)
- Total frames: 17.6 million frames
- Real source videos: 1,000 curated YouTube videos (12.6M frames)
- Manipulated videos: 10,000 generated via DF-VAE (5.0M frames)
- Actors: 100 paid professional actors (95 males, 45 females aged 20-45 years from 28 countries)
- Video resolution: 1920 × 1080 fps (HD quality)
- Controlled conditions: Professional indoor studio environment with seven HD cameras at different angles
Key features
Controlled source collection:
- High-quality face capture under professional lighting with seven camera angles
- Diverse identity representation: 55% male, 45% female; 28 different countries represented
- Eight facial expressions per actor: neutral, angry, happy, sad, surprise, contempt, disgust, fear
- Nine lighting conditions from different directions
- Clean faces without occlusion or glasses
DeepFake Variational Auto-Encoder (DF-VAE):
- Novel end-to-end face swapping framework consisting of:
- Structure extraction module for face reenactment
- Disentangled module separating appearance from structure
- Fusion module with temporal consistency constraints
- Addresses artifacts in prior datasets through structure-appearance separation
- MAdaIN (Masked Adaptive Instance Normalization) for style matching
- Temporal continuity constraints to avoid frame discontinuities
Systematic perturbations: Seven types of distortions applied at five intensity levels:
- Color saturation change
- Local block-wise distortion
- Color contrast change
- Gaussian blur
- White Gaussian noise in color components
- JPEG compression
- Video compression rate change
- Total: 5,000 videos with single-level distortions + 1,000 with random-level distortions + 3,000 with random-type distortions
Comprehensive evaluation:
- Hidden test set with manipulated videos from unknown methods
- User study (N=100 actors) validates realism: average rating 4.7/5.0 (vs. 4.5 for FaceForensics++, 2.5 for Celeb-DF)
- Evaluation of five representative detection methods: C3D, TSN, I3D, ResNet-LSTM, XceptionNet
Data split
- Standard training/test split: 1,000 real manipulated videos in training set with ratio 7:1:2 (training:validation:test)
- Test set: 1,000 YouTube videos from the standard set (diverse identities and scenarios)
- Hidden test set: 1,000 additionally selected videos with unknown manipulation methods
Related papers
- 2020-jiang-deepforensics-large-scale-dataset — Introduces DeepForensics-1.0 dataset and DF-VAE synthesis method
- 2019-rossler-faceforensics-plus-plus — FaceForensics++ benchmark (1.8M images, four manipulation methods)
- 2019-li-celeb-df-dataset — Celeb-DF dataset (5,639 high-quality videos of celebrities)
- 2020-dolhansky-dfdc-dataset — DFDC: The DeepFake Detection Challenge Dataset