UC-VLM: Consistency-Driven Learning for AI-Generated Image Detection with Vision-Language Large Models
Organizations: National University of Singapore, Singapore
Abstract
Vision-Language Large Models (VLLMs) are promising for AI-generated image (AIGI) detection because they can produce both a prediction and a natural-language output. However, most existing VLLM-based detectors primarily fine-tune the language side while giving limited attention to low-level visual forensic cues. They also often depend on manually crafted prompts or human-annotated rationales, which limits scalability.We present UC-VLM, a unified multi-stage framework for AIGI detection that relies solely on binary supervision. UC-VLM first identifies effective instruction variants automatically. It then reuses the same binary label within a multi-stage training framework: (i) a visual discrimination objective that strengthens sensitivity to non-semantic forensic cues, and (ii) a label-conditioned generation objective that uses the binary label to supervise textual outputs. This design turns weak binary supervision into a shared supervision signal for both the visual pathway and the language output. Our key novelty is a unified multi-stage binary-supervised framework that consistently reuses the same authenticity labels for visual adaptation and label-conditioned text generation, while leveraging automatically optimized instructions to reduce prompt sensitivity without requiring human-written rationales or hand-crafted prompts.Experiments show that UC-VLM achieves 96.1% average accuracy on GenImage, exceeding the strongest prior result by 4.6%, and obtains 69.6% / 77.9% accuracy on Chameleon under ProGAN / SDV1.4 training, surpassing the best baseline by 11.2% / 15.3%, respectively.
Figures & tables
| Prompt ID | Accuracy (%) |
| P-1: Authentic/Generated QA | 55.5 |
| P-2: Real/Fake QA | 59.8 |
| P-3: Answer with Explanation | 63.6 |
| Method | Venue | Testing Subset | Avg Accuracy (%) | |||||||
| Midjourney | SDV1.4 | SDV1.5 | ADM | GLIDE | Wukong | VQDM | BigGAN | |||
| ResNet-50 [ 14 ] | CVPR’16 | 54.9 | 99.9 | 99.7 | 53.5 | 61.9 | 98.2 | 56.6 | 52.0 | 72.1 |
| DeiT-S [ 58 ] | ICML’21 | 55.6 | 99.9 | 99.8 | 49.8 | 58.1 | 98.9 | 56.9 | 53.5 | 71.6 |
| Swin-T [ 32 ] | ICCV’21 | 62.1 | 99.9 | 99.8 | 49.8 | 67.6 | 99.1 | 62.3 | 57.6 | 74.8 |
| CNNSpot [ 60 ] | CVPR’20 | 52.8 | 96.3 | 95.9 | 50.1 | 39.8 | 78.6 | 53.4 | 46.8 | 64.2 |
| Spec [ 73 ] | WIFS’19 | 52.0 | 99.4 | 99.2 | 49.7 | 49.8 | 94.8 | 55.6 | 49.8 | 68.8 |
| Training Set | Methods | ||||||||||
| CNNSpot [ 60 ] | FreDect [ 12 ] | Fusing [ 18 ] | GramNet [ 34 ] | LNP [ 28 ] | UniFD [ 44 ] | DIRE [ 63 ] | Patchcraft [ 75 ] | NPR [ 55 ] | AIDE [ 67 ] | UC-VLM | |
| ProGAN | 56.9 | 55.6 | 57.0 | 58.9 | 57.1 | 57.2 | 58.2 | 53.8 | 57.3 | 58.4 | 69.6 |
| SDV1.4 | 60.1 | 56.9 | 57.1 | 61.0 | 55.6 | 55.6 | 59.7 | 56.3 | 58.1 | 62.6 | 77.9 |
| Setting | GenImage (%) | Chameleon (%) |
| Baseline Methods | ||
| Baseline (w/o fine-tuning) | 51.9 | 55.5 |
| Baseline (Visual) | 76.8 | 50.9 |
| Baseline (LLM) | 80.3 | 71.0 |
| Baseline (Visual + LLM) | 77.6 | 52.0 |
| Component-wise Ablations | ||
AI-Generated Image Detection
AI-generated image detection identifies synthetic or AI-edited images and develops methods that generalize across generators, domains, and image transformations.
See all 194 papers