Simple flamingo painting easy1/11/2024 Most of the concern has been on lifelike portraits. will be able to re-create as well, and it will be very difficult to distinguish the difference.” “In the short term, it is possible that they will be able to perform with some accuracy, but in the long run, anything special a human does with images, A.I. “In general I don’t think they’re great, and I’m not optimistic that they will be,” he said. experts like Chenhao Tan, an assistant professor of computer science at the University of Chicago and the director of its Chicago Human+AI research lab, are less convinced. Note: Images cropped from their original size.ĭetection technology has been heralded as one way to mitigate the harm from A.I. The real images used came from The Times’s photo archive. images from artists and researchers familiar with variations of generative tools such as Midjourney, Stable Diffusion and DALL-E, which can create realistic portraits of people and animals and lifelike portrayals of nature, real estate, food and more. To conduct the tests, The Times gathered A.I. or Not, did not respond to requests for comment. Umm-maybe and Optic, the company behind A.I. Hive added that its misclassifications may result when it analyzes lower-quality images. Several companies, including Sensity, Hive and Inholo, the company behind Illuminarty, did not dispute the results and said their systems were always improving to keep up with the latest advancements in A.I.-image generation. That is one shortcoming of relying on the technology to detect fakes. programs create images.īut the detectors ignore all context clues, so they don’t process the existence of a lifelike automaton in a photo with Mr. Those signals tend to be generated when A.I. They look for unusual patterns in how the pixels are arranged, including in their sharpness and contrast. Art Detector, are designed to detect difficult-to-spot markers embedded in A.I.-generated images. The detectors, including versions that charge for access, such as Sensity, and free ones, such as Umm-maybe’s A.I. The results show that the services are advancing rapidly, but at times fall short. To assess the effectiveness of current A.I.-detection technology, The New York Times tested five new services using more than 100 synthetic images and real photos. will always stay a step ahead of the tools. But some tech leaders and misinformation experts have expressed concern that advances in A.I. Their tools analyze content using sophisticated algorithms, picking up on subtle signals to distinguish the images made with computers from the ones produced by human photographers and artists. To sort through the confusion, a fast-burgeoning crop of companies now offer services to detect what is real and what isn’t. In recent months, however, startlingly lifelike images of these scenes created by artificial intelligence have spread virally online, threatening society’s ability to separate fact from fiction. And filmmakers did not fake the moon landing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |