ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · 63FC2399 · IMAGE

MAnalyzed by@muzip
ZONN Analysis
0

Very likely real

Most signals point to a real, human-captured source. Detection tools are not perfect — treat this as a strong indication, not a verdict.

Signal ConfidenceLimited · 47/100

Analysed Specimen

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

Heads up — 2 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.

AI generator fingerprints detected

AI evidence

Frequency analysis (FFT score 72/100) shows modern diffusion-style upsampling patterns, but the ML models say "real". This combination is a known blind spot for newer generators (SDXL, FLUX, Midjourney v6) — the verdict above may be misleading.

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).

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

  • INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)read real · 0/100

    BEiT-Large dual-head classifier trained on FLUX, Midjourney, and real photo corpora.

  • SigLIP AI Detectorread real · 5/100

    SigLIP visual-language model probing semantic vs perceptual coherence.

Model Agreement

64%

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 19
▸ expand
INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)
0
SigLIP AI Detector
5
Bombek1 SigLIP+DINOv2
10
CommFor (4803 Generators)
14
xRayon ConvNeXtV2
37
Manipulation Map (IML-ViT)
50
Pixel & Frequency Forensics7 detectors · mean 48
▸ expand
Color Distribution
17
Noise Pattern
80
Error Level Analysis
23
Frequency Analysis
72
Pixel Analysis
45
Compression Quality
53
Edge Consistency
48
Provenance & Metadata3 detectors · mean 54
▸ expand
ICC Profile
62
Metadata
50
C2PA Provenance
50

Image Quality

Dimensions
400 × 400 px
Aspect
1.000
File size
36.5 KB
Bytes / pixel
0.234

Frequency Analysis

Radial1.000
DCT0.827
Upsampling1.000
Cross-channel0.041
Power-law β
-3.46
Grid energy
0.260

Edge Consistency

CV 0.556
Cell 1: 2.7783Cell 2: 6.4925Cell 3: 12.7655Cell 4: 8.6478Cell 5: 7.6207Cell 6: 5.1857Cell 7: 3.7325Cell 8: 1.8297Cell 9: 6.1338Cell 10: 6.0231Cell 11: 13.4667Cell 12: 16.4385Cell 13: 4.3952Cell 14: 4.9933Cell 15: 7.3959Cell 16: 14.6097

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

Range: 1.829716.4385

Noise Fingerprint

Variance
49.87
Std deviation
7.06
Mean
-0.0
Spatial corr.
1.733
Mean Δ
1.24
σ
1.44
CV
1.158
Uniformity
-0.158

Provenance

Source Dossier

PlatformDirect upload
Author
Content Typeimage
Analyzed OnMay 19, 2026, 4:29 PM
Analyzed by@muzip