JECA^2: Judgment-Explanation Consistent Adversarial Attack against Forensic Vision-Language Models

Explanation mechanisms are increasingly used to support transparency and trust in vision-language models (VLMs), particularly in settings where model decisions require human oversight. However, the robustness of these explanations remains insufficiently understood. In this work, we investigate whether explanation heatmaps in VLMs, particularly CLIP-based models, faithfully reflect model reasoning under adversarial conditions. We show that explanation maps can be systematically manipulated while preserving the model's original prediction, revealing a disconnect between predictive behavior and explanation faithfulness. To study this vulnerability, we introduce X-Shift, a novel grey-box attack that perturbs patch-level visual representations to redirect explanation heatmaps toward semantically irrelevant regions without altering the predicted output. Unlike conventional adversarial attacks that aim to induce misclassification, X-Shift specifically targets the integrity of the explanation process itself. The attack operates without modifying model parameters and generalizes across multiple CLIP architectures and explanation methods. We evaluate the proposed approach on ImageNet-1k, MS-COCO, and Flickr30K, demonstrating consistent degradation in explanation alignment under imperceptible perturbations while maintaining prediction stability. Furthermore, standard prediction-oriented adversarial attacks fail to reproduce the same explanation-shifting behavior even under substantially larger perturbation budgets. Our findings highlight a fundamental limitation of current explanation mechanisms in VLMs and raise concerns about their use as reliable indicators of model trustworthiness in high-impact applications.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can produce Natural Language Explanations (NLEs) that sound plausible yet remain inconsistent with the visual evidence they cite. We present Explanation-Driven Counterfactual Testing (EDCT), an intervention-based protocol that extracts visual concepts cited in a model's explanation, applies verified minimal edits to them, and tests whether the resulting answer and explanation remain consistent with the edited image. Using this protocol, we create EDCT-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark spanning three complementary domains: knowledge-intensive visual question answering (OK-VQA), safety-critical driving (DriveLM), and 3D spatial reasoning (3DSRBench). Across the evaluated VLMs, EDCT reveals substantial faithfulness gaps, with models frequently producing responses inconsistent with verified visual changes. Finally, our fine-tuning study suggests that EDCT-generated counterfactuals provide high-impact training signals.

Forensic deepfake analysis demands more than binary classification: investigators need region-grounded natural language explanations they can verify against the image. Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are a natural fit, but pretrained MLLMs fail systematically, producing globally coherent text that misses the small localized cues defining manipulations. We argue this is an inductive bias problem rather than a capacity issue: the image-text contrastive objective training MLLM visual encoders optimizes for whole-image semantic summaries, not patch-level forensic detail. The same mismatch explains why prior deepfake reasoning methods target either face manipulation or fully AI-generated content, never both. We propose FORGE, which addresses the mismatch by routing a second visual stream into the language model from a Vision-Only Model (VOM) trained on dense patch prediction rather than image-text alignment. The MLLM's native encoder and the VOM operate on a shared patch grid, which lets us interleave their tokens with preserved spatial correspondence; we show this beats naive concatenation. A two-stage adapter training protocol (generic image-caption alignment, then joint task-specific optimization) prevents the localized stream from overfitting to training-domain manipulations. Across face-manipulated and fully synthetic content, FORGE produces region-referential explanations answering fine-grained attribute queries ("Does the eyes/nose/mouth look real or fake?") and substantially outperforms in-domain baselines on cross-domain evaluations; region-specific evaluation and human studies confirm explanation faithfulness.