ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · 7F760ACC · IMAGE

ZONN Analysis
0

Probably AI-generated

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

Signal ConfidenceLimited · 44/100

Analysed Specimen

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

Heads up — 6 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.

ML detectors disagree with each other

Note

2 models confidently say "AI" (Ml Python Siglip, Xrayon Convnext) while 2 confidently say "real" (Ml Commfor, Itsnotai V2). This image sits at the edge of what ML can decide — manual review is recommended.

Image is very small

Note

Dimensions 150×150 (under 256×256). Detection models cannot give a reliable answer on inputs this small.

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).

ML detectors see this image differently

Note

ML scores span a wide range (6–95). Different architectures read different feature spaces; the majority vote strengthens the consensus, but no single model is fully reliable here.

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.

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.

Noise Pattern
99
Color Distribution
1
xRayon ConvNeXtV2
95
INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)
6
Error Level Analysis
9
SigLIP AI Detector
86
Frequency Analysis
83
CommFor (4803 Generators)
24
ICC Profile
62
Pixel Analysis
57
Compression Quality
55
Edge Consistency
46
Bombek1 SigLIP+DINOv2
53
Metadata
50
C2PA Provenance
50
Manipulation Map (IML-ViT)
50

Provenance

Source Dossier

PlatformDirect upload
Author
Content Typeimage
Analyzed OnMay 16, 2026, 11:11 PM