Search for: All records

Artificial intelligence (AI) synthesized faces—so called deepfake images—have been increasingly used for malicious intent and have resulted in prominently adverse impact. Because online users must contend with discerning fake from real, great emphasis has been placed on enhancing human detection of deepfake images. We conducted an online human-subject study (N= 237), investigating the effect of three training strategies (explicit training with visible artifacts in synthetic faces, implicit training with experiencing the generation of synthetic faces using real human faces, and a combination of both artifact and generation) on participants’ detection of synthetic faces generated by the state-of-the-art StyleGAN techniques. Comparing participants’ deepfake detection across three phases (baseline in phase 1 without any training, phase 2 after one training session, and phase 3 after the other training session), we found that all training strategies effectively enhanced participants’ detection of AI-synthesized faces and their decision confidence. We also explored factors that impact participants’ learning and decision-making of deepfake detection. Responses to the open-ended question revealed that participants developed generalized strategies and utilized artifacts beyond the training. Our quantitative and qualitative results provide nuanced insights into the promises and limitations of the training strategies. In addition to advancing theoretical understanding of human training in the context of deepfake image detection, our study findings hold practical implications for interface design. 

Recently, deepfake techniques have been adopted by real-world adversaries to fabricate believable personas (posing as experts or insiders) in disinformation campaigns to promote false narratives and deceive the public. In this paper, we investigate how fake personas influence the user perception of the disinformation shared by such accounts. Using Twitter as an exemplary platform, we conduct a user study (N=417) where participants read tweets of fake news with (and without) the presence of the tweet authors' profiles. Our study examines and compares three types of fake profiles: deepfake profiles, profiles of relevant organizations, and simple bot profiles. Our results highlight the significant impact of deepfake and organization profiles on increasing the perceived information accuracy of and engagement with fake news. Moreover, deepfake profiles are rated as significantly more real than other profile types. Finally, we observe that users may like/reply/share a tweet even though they believe it was inaccurate (e.g., for fun or truth-seeking), which could further disseminate false information. We then discuss the implications of our findings and directions for future research. 

Proper communication is key to the adoption and implementation of differential privacy (DP). In this work, we designed explanative illustrations of three DP models (Central DP, Local DP, Shuffler DP) to help laypeople conceptualize how random noise is added to protect individuals’ privacy and preserve group utility. Following a pilot survey and an interview, we conducted an online experiment ( N = 300) exploring participants’ comprehension, privacy and utility perception, and data-sharing decisions across the three DP models. We obtained empirical evidence showing participants’ acceptance of the Shuffler DP model for data privacy protection. We discuss the implications of our findings. 

Rust is a young systems programming language designed to provide both the safety guarantees of high-level languages and the execution performance of low-level languages. To achieve this design goal, Rust provides a suite of safety rules and checks against those rules at the compile time to eliminate many memory-safety and thread-safety issues. Due to its safety and performance, Rust’s popularity has increased significantly in recent years, and it has already been adopted to build many safety-critical software systems. It is critical to understand the learning and programming challenges imposed by Rust’s safety rules. For this purpose, we first conducted an empirical study through close, manual inspection of 100 Rust-related Stack Overflow questions. We sought to understand (1) what safety rules are challenging to learn and program with, (2) under which contexts a safety rule becomes more difficult to apply, and (3) whether the Rust compiler is sufficiently helpful in debugging safety-rule violations. We then performed an online survey with 101 Rust programmers to validate the findings of the empirical study. We invited participants to evaluate program variants that differ from each other, either in terms of violated safety rules or the code constructs involved in the violation, and compared the participants’ performance on the variants. Our mixed-methods investigation revealed a range of consistent findings that can benefit Rust learners, practitioners, and language designers.