ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · 172F6C85 · IMAGE

PAnalyzed by@pic_analyser35
ZONN Analysis
0

Probably AI-generated

More signals lean toward AI generation than real, but some give weaker readings. Treat with caution.

Signal ConfidenceLimited · 41/100

Analysed Specimen

Original analysed image
Forensic suspicion heatmap
OriginalHeatmap
POS55/100
No flagged regions

Heads up — 3 things to know

Why this analysis might be off

We highlight every disagreement and unusual signal we found so you can judge for yourself. Stronger warnings come first; informational notes are at the bottom.

No metadata at all

AI evidence

The file has no EXIF, XMP, IPTC, or ICC metadata. This is common for social-media re-uploads and for many generator outputs — real camera files almost always carry an ICC profile.

Upsampling artifacts in the frequency domain

AI evidence

FFT analysis found strong upsampling patterns — a fingerprint of diffusion-model VAE decoders (latent → pixel-space upscale).

No ICC color profile

AI evidence

The image does not embed an ICC color profile. Real camera files almost always carry sRGB or Adobe RGB profiles — a missing profile is often a sign of generator output or re-encoded media.

Origin Check

Trace this image elsewhere

Cross-reference the source against major reverse-image services. Each link opens in a new tab with the image URL preloaded — ZONN.ai does not re-upload the image.

Why this verdict

  • xRayon ConvNeXtV2flagged AI · 97/100

    ConvNeXtV2 detector trained on FLUX, DALL-E 3, SDXL, SD3.5, and Midjourney v6.

  • Color Distributionread real · 18/100

    Global color distribution shape vs natural-photo baselines.

Model Agreement

54%

Variance across 6 ML detectors. Higher agreement means the models converged on the same reading; lower agreement means treat the verdict with care.

Evidence — 16 detectors reviewed

What each detector saw

Each detector independently gave this imagea score from 0 (definitely real) to 100 (definitely AI). The score above is their weighted consensus — detectors with higher confidence count more. No single detector decides; you read the spread.

ML Models6 detectors · mean 66
▸ expand
xRayon ConvNeXtV2
97
Bombek1 SigLIP+DINOv2
78
INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)
76
CommFor (4803 Generators)
25
SigLIP AI Detector
72
Manipulation Map (IML-ViT)
50
Pixel & Frequency Forensics7 detectors · mean 46
▸ expand
Color Distribution
18
Error Level Analysis
29
Frequency Analysis
71
Noise Pattern
58
Pixel Analysis
45
Edge Consistency
54
Compression Quality
48
Provenance & Metadata3 detectors · mean 54
▸ expand
ICC Profile
62
Metadata
50
C2PA Provenance
50

Image Quality

Dimensions
563 × 679 px
Aspect
0.829
File size
59.1 KB
Bytes / pixel
0.158

Frequency Analysis

Radial1.000
DCT0.839
Upsampling1.000
Cross-channel0.011
Power-law β
-3.53
Grid energy
0.242

Edge Consistency

CV 0.427
Cell 1: 12.3468Cell 2: 10.6735Cell 3: 9.2475Cell 4: 10.2134Cell 5: 17.3591Cell 6: 19.9244Cell 7: 14.0051Cell 8: 15.0734Cell 9: 10.4767Cell 10: 19.1296Cell 11: 20.5211Cell 12: 10.1890Cell 13: 4.3601Cell 14: 6.4819Cell 15: 6.2042Cell 16: 5.1179

Per-region edge density (4 × 4 grid). Uneven distribution may indicate localized editing or splicing; uniform fields are typical of fully synthetic outputs.

Range: 4.360120.5211

Noise Fingerprint

Variance
120.16
Std deviation
10.96
Mean
-0.0
Spatial corr.
2.843
Mean Δ
1.27
σ
1.36
CV
1.069
Uniformity
-0.069

Provenance

Source Dossier

PlatformDirect upload
Author
Content Typeimage
Analyzed OnMay 20, 2026, 5:18 PM
Analyzed by@pic_analyser35