Pub-AI.AI in Science

Publication Radar · Source metadata

FYC: FPR-Disparity Weight Perturbation and Youden Calibration for Fair Deepfake Detection

Uzoamaka Ezeakunne, Taiwo Olabamipe, Deevesh Jain, Xiuwen Liu

Publication record

Bibliographic evidence describes where and when a record appeared. It does not validate scientific claims.

First announced by arXiv: 2026-10-30 · Indexed by Pub-AI: 2026-10-30 UTC

preprint

FYC: FPR-Disparity Weight Perturbation and Youden Calibration for Fair Deepfake Detection

Uzoamaka Ezeakunne, Taiwo Olabamipe, Deevesh Jain, Xiuwen Liu

First announced by arXiv: 2026-10-30 · Original record ↗

arxiv
2610.37882
Explicit source versions (1)
  • v1 · Date not supplied
  1. Preprint available

    Source date: 2026-10-30 · First detected: 2026-10-30 UTC · Historical baseline

    Source evidence (1)
    • Official evidence ↗ · RSS guid=oai:arXiv.org:2610.37882v1; arxiv:announce_type=new; item pubDate (official metadata)
Abstract · arxiv

Deepfake detectors routinely achieve high aggregate accuracy while exhibiting substantial demographic disparities in their errors: false-positive rates differ by double digits across gender and skin tone. Most existing remedies require either full retraining with a fairness-aware objective or demographic-annotated training data, both impractical when only a pretrained checkpoint is available, while label-free post-hoc calibrators leave the detector's weights unchanged. We introduce FYC (FPR-disparity Weight Perturbation and Youden Calibration), a two-stage post-hoc method that perturbs a detector's weights under an FPR-disparity criterion, then calibrates a separate decision threshold for each demographic group - requiring no architectural changes and no full retraining. Evaluated against every detector benchmarked on AI-Face v2 across six intersectional gender x skin-tone groups, FYC outperforms the field on 18 of 21 reported fairness and utility metrics, including purpose-built fairness architectures, at a fraction of the training cost. We further identify why the choice of fairness criterion is critical: the original Demographic Parity objective used in prior weight-perturbation work is architecture-dependent and unpredictable, improving two of four evaluated architectures, leaving a third largely unchanged, and substantially degrading the fourth (PG-FDD), with no way to anticipate the outcome for a given checkpoint in advance. Conditioning the same objective on real images only - our FPR-disparity criterion - eliminates this unpredictability, improving fairness and accuracy jointly across all four architectures with no exceptions.