ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · 8E1EE164 · IMAGE

Analyzed byAnonymous
ZONN Analysis
0

Probably AI-generated

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

Signal ConfidenceLimited · 46/100

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

  • INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)flagged AI · 100/100

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

  • xRayon ConvNeXtV2flagged AI · 97/100

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

Model Agreement

41%

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 67
▸ expand
INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)
100
xRayon ConvNeXtV2
97
Bombek1 SigLIP+DINOv2
90
SigLIP AI Detector
24
CommFor (4803 Generators)
43
Manipulation Map (IML-ViT)
50
Pixel & Frequency Forensics7 detectors · mean 43
▸ expand
Noise Pattern
12
Frequency Analysis
74
Color Distribution
28
Pixel Analysis
35
Error Level Analysis
37
Edge Consistency
62
Compression Quality
56
Provenance & Metadata3 detectors · mean 54
▸ expand
ICC Profile
62
Metadata
50
C2PA Provenance
50

Image Quality

AI-typical dimensions
Dimensions
1024 × 1024 px
Aspect
1.000
File size
267.9 KB
Bytes / pixel
0.262

Frequency Analysis

Radial1.000
DCT0.742
Upsampling1.000
Cross-channel0.234
Power-law β
-2.88
Grid energy
0.388

Edge Consistency

CV 0.277
Cell 1: 42.5748Cell 2: 31.2605Cell 3: 40.2892Cell 4: 47.4930Cell 5: 34.7344Cell 6: 21.0758Cell 7: 24.8054Cell 8: 38.7770Cell 9: 42.6676Cell 10: 42.4156Cell 11: 52.9865Cell 12: 56.9341Cell 13: 22.2469Cell 14: 27.0903Cell 15: 33.4578Cell 16: 31.4495

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

Range: 21.075856.9341

Noise Fingerprint

Variance
262.14
Std deviation
16.19
Mean
-0.0
Spatial corr.
9.080
Mean Δ
3.30
σ
3.12
CV
0.947
Uniformity
0.053

Provenance

Source Dossier

PlatformDirect upload
Author
Content Typeimage
Analyzed OnMay 14, 2026, 11:02 AM
Analyzed byAnonymous