MuDD: A Multimodal Deception Detection Dataset and GSR-Guided Progressive Distillation for Non-Contact Deception Detection
Authors: Peiyuan Jiang, Yao Liu, Yanglei Gan, Jiaye Yang, Lu Liu, Daibing Yao, Qiao Liu
Organizations: School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China · School of Information and Software Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China · Yizhou Prison, Sichuan Province, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
Non-contact automatic deception detection remains challenging because visual and auditory deception cues often lack stable cross-subject patterns. In contrast, galvanic skin response (GSR) provides more reliable physiological cues and has been widely used in contact-based deception detection. In this work, we leverage stable deception-related knowledge in GSR to guide representation learning in non-contact modalities through cross-modal knowledge distillation. A key obstacle, however, is the lack of a suitable dataset for this setting. To address this, we introduce MuDD, a large-scale Multimodal Deception Detection dataset containing recordings from 130 participants over 690 minutes. In addition to video, audio, and GSR, MuDD also provides Photoplethysmography, heart rate, and personality traits, supporting broader scientific studies of deception. Based on this dataset, we propose GSR-guided Progressive Distillation (GPD), a cross-modal distillation framework for mitigating the negative transfer caused by the large modality mismatch between GSR and non-contact signals. The core innovation of GPD is the integration of progressive feature-level and digit-level distillation with dynamic routing, which allows the model to adaptively determine how teacher knowledge should be transferred during training, leading to more stable cross-modal knowledge transfer. Extensive experiments and visualizations show that GPD outperforms existing methods and achieves state-of-the-art performance on both deception detection and concealed-digit identification.
Figures & tables
Figure 1. Motivation of this work. (a) Visual deception cues are often subtle and subject-dependent, making it difficult to identify stable cross-subject patterns, whereas GSR exhibits more consistent deception-related responses across individuals. (b) Illustration of the cross-modal knowledge distillation paradigm, where GSR serves as the teacher modality to transfer feature-level and logit-level knowledge to non-contact modalities through a teacher–student framework.
Dataset
Subs.
Dur.
Setting
Modalities
Labels
Without physiological signals
CSC Deceptive Speech ( Hirschberg et al., 2005 )
32
7920 min
Interview
A
Bin.
CXD Corpus ( Levitan et al., 2015 )
340
7200 min
False interview
A+T
Bin.
Real-life Trial ( Pérez-Rosas et al., 2015 )
56
<60 min
Courtroom
V+T
Bin.
MU3D ( Lloyd et al., 2019 )
80
<200 min
Social interview
V+T
Bin.
Truth-Tellers ( Monaro et al., 2020 )
60
<480 min
Simulated interview
V
Bin.
Table 1. Comparison of MuDD with existing deception-related datasets. Abbreviations: Subs. = subjects, Dur. = duration, V = video, A = audio, T = text, Pers. = personality traits, Bin. = binary label, and T-10cls = trial-level 10-class label.
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed GSR-guided Progressive Distillation (GPD) framework.
Method
Params (M)
FLOPs/sample (M)
Video modality
Audio modality
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
GENLIE
0.908
36.75
26.8 ± 5.0
35.3 ± 5.7
16.2 ± 2.8
54.4 ± 1.4
29.9 ± 6.7
39.8 ± 5.1
18.1 ± 4.8
56.1 ± 4.2
XKD
1.237
49.32
23.6 ± 6.5
38.4 ± 4.5
13.9 ± 4.9
53.3 ± 1.9
28.9 ± 9.7
39.1 ± 8.6
15.3 ± 4.2
55.1 ± 6.4
SemBridge
1.456
34.16
23.7 ± 5.7
32.9 ± 5.1
12.9 ± 7.1
52.5 ± 3.6
28.4 ± 6.7
39.9 ± 6.3
18.6 ± 5.2
58.3 ± 2.9
HKD-Emotion
1.075
34.16
24.4 ± 7.3
33.7 ± 5.1
8.1 ± 6.9
52.3 ± 1.8
29.9 ± 9.0
36.1 ± 11.5
7.6 ± 7.8
58.0 ± 2.0
DecomKD
1.535
61.78
24.5 ± 6.0
32.1 ± 8.8
5.8 ± 5.7
52.8 ± 2.5
30.0 ± 7.2
39.3 ± 8.1
14.5 ± 7.6
58.5 ± 3.8
Table 2. Main comparison with state-of-the-art CMKD methods on MuDD. Results are reported as mean ± std over five runs with different random seeds. The best results are shown in bold, and the second-best results are underlined.
Method
Video modality
Audio modality
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
GENLIE
26.92
35.38
16.30
53.14
29.86
40.77
18.94
59.03
w/o Llogit\mbox−kd
26.92
37.69
17.00
52.13
30.77
41.27
18.50
57.48
w/o Lfeat\mbox−kd
25.38
36.92
16.70
51.46
32.31
43.08
19.70
57.66
w/o prog. wt.
23.08
35.38
16.72
51.89
30.77
42.47
20.05
59.25
GPD
32.31
40.00
17.43
53.55
35.38
43.84
20.63
59.30
Table 3. Ablation study of different components in GPD on MuDD. Prog. wt. denotes progressive weighting.
Schedule
Video modality
Audio modality
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Linear
30.77
41.54
17.27
52.67
33.08
38.46
18.97
57.07
Step
30.00
41.54
17.74
52.80
34.62
40.76
19.22
57.41
Cosine
30.00
39.23
17.53
52.70
33.08
40.00
19.06
58.20
Sigmoid
32.31
40.00
17.43
53.55
35.38
43.84
20.63
59.30
Table 4. Comparison of different progressive weighting schedules on MuDD.
Route
Video modality
Audio modality
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
No-feat.
30.77
41.54
17.68
52.69
34.62
41.54
19.75
57.47
Feat.-first
31.31
39.23
17.31
52.81
33.08
42.31
19.42
58.14
Logit-first
31.54
40.77
17.47
52.46
33.08
39.23
19.14
56.73
Joint
30.77
39.31
17.46
52.66
32.31
42.31
17.92
58.13
Dyn.
32.31
40.00
17.43
53.55
35.38
43.84
20.63
59.30
Table 5. Comparison of different distillation routes on MuDD.
Wt.
Rt.
Video modality
Audio modality
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Top-1
Top-2
F1
AUC
Sig.
On
32.31
40.00
17.43
53.55
35.38
43.84
20.63
59.30
Off
30.77
42.31
17.37
52.66
33.08
42.31
19.42
58.14
Lin.
On
30.77
41.54
17.27
52.67
33.08
38.46
18.97
57.07
Off
31.54
40.77
17.26
52.52
31.54
41.54
17.77
56.68
Step
On
30.00
41.54
17.74
52.80
34.62
40.76
19.22
57.41
Table 6. Decoupled ablation of routing and weighting on MuDD. “Wt.” and “Rt.” denote weighting schedule and route configuration, while “On” and “Off” indicate whether dynamic routing is enabled. For each weighting schedule, the better result between On and Off is highlighted in bold.
Figure 3. Sensitivity analysis of dynamic routing. Left: varying the EMA momentum μ . Right: uniformly shifting all routing thresholds by Δ .
Figure 4. Effect of distillation on student behavior in the video and audio modalities.
Multimodal deception detection aims to identify deceptive behavior by analyzing audiovisual cues for forensics and security. In these high-stakes settings, investigators need verifiable evidence connecting audiovisual cues to final decisions, along with reliable generalization across domains and cultural contexts. However, existing benchmarks provide only binary labels without intermediate reasoning cues. Datasets are also small with limited scenario coverage, leading to shortcut learning. We address these issues through three contributions. First, we construct reasoning datasets by augmenting existing benchmarks with structured cue-level descriptions and reasoning chains, enabling models to output auditable reports. Second, we release T4-Deception, a multicultural dataset based on the unified ``To Tell the Truth'' television format implemented across four countries. With 1695 samples, it is the largest non-laboratory deception detection dataset. Third, we propose two modules for robust learning under small-data conditions. Stabilized Individuality-Commonality Synergy (SICS) refines multimodal representations by combining learnable global priors with sample-adaptive residuals and applying polarity-aware recalibration. Distilled Modality Consistency (DMC) aligns modality-specific predictions with the fused multimodal predictions via knowledge distillation to prevent unimodal shortcut learning. Experiments on three established benchmarks and our novel dataset demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in both in-domain and cross-domain scenarios, while exhibiting superior transferability across diverse cultural contexts. The datasets and code are available at this link.
Jiajian Huang, Dongliang Zhu, Zitong YU +4
Great Bay University, China · Wuhan University, China · Dongguan Key Laboratory for Intelligence and Information Technology, China +1
Multimodal deception detection is critical for identifying fraudulent intentions, yet existing approaches predominantly rely on end to end black--box paradigms. These methods suffer from a severe lack of interpretability failing to provide transparent reasoning trajectories and struggling to explicitly capture the subtle, cross modal inconsistencies inherent in deceptive behaviors. To transcend these limitations, we propose ThinkDeception, a novel and interpretable multimodal deception detection framework. As a pioneering effort, it introduces Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) into this domain, transforming deception detection from a traditional binary classification task into an explicit cognitive reasoning process. Facilitated by the first meticulously annotated step--by--step multimodal Chain of Thought (CoT) dataset, we develop a foundational model, ThinkDeception Base, empirically validating the critical role of modal inconsistency in decoding deception. Building upon this foundation, our core innovation lies in proposing Visual-Audio Consistency Group Relative Policy Optimization(VAC--GRPO) equipped with a progressive training strategy. Distinct from standard GRPO, we stratify the training data into four progressive difficulty tiers, guiding the model through a psychologically grounded easy--to--hard cognitive transition. By innovatively coupling this dynamic curriculum scheduler with a multi dimensional, process aware reward mechanism and a reflective learning paradigm, we significantly elevate the model's overall reasoning quality. Extensive experiments on mainstream benchmarks demonstrate that ThinkDeception establishes a new SOTA, significantly outperforming existing methods in both detection accuracy and rationale quality. Ultimately, this work successfully drives the field of deception detection toward interpretable, multimodal cognitive reasoning.
Jinhao Song, Shan Liang, Yiqun Yue +2
Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University · Suzhou, China
Deception detection is a critical and highly challenging task within affective computing and behavioral analysis. Existing deep learning methods typically treat this task as a straightforward classification problem; however, this black-box approach lacks interpretability and fails to capture the complex logical deduction processes utilized by human experts when identifying lies. While Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown potential, applying them effectively requires a bridge between low-level audiovisual cues and high-level logical reasoning. In this paper, we propose DeceptionX, a novel MLLM framework that shifts the paradigm of deception detection from black-box classification to an interpretable Observe-Think-Summarize reasoning process. To address the scarcity of high-quality reasoning data, we first constructed DeceptChain, a high-quality dataset developed through a human-in-the-loop process. This dataset synthesizes fine-grained visual and auditory evidence (such as micro-expressions and vocal tremors) into structured chain-of-thought reasoning data. Furthermore, we propose a three-stage training pipeline and a Discrepancy-Aware Redundancy Elimination~(DARE) strategy for DeceptionX to further enhance the model's generalization capabilities. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DeceptionX not only outperforms existing MLLM baselines and state-of-the-art methods on standard real-world benchmarks but also provides transparent, expert-level reasoning paths, bridging the critical gap between accuracy and interpretability in multimodal deception detection.
Jiayu Zhang, Shuo Ye, Jiajian Huang +7
Great Bay University Dongguan, Guangdong, China · Hong Kong Polytechnic University HongKong, China