ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · DC733560 · IMAGE

Analyzed byAnonymous
ZONN Analysis
0

Inconclusive

Signals are mixed or weak. We can't tell with confidence — context, source, and your own judgement matter here.

Signal ConfidenceWeak · 30/100

Analysed Specimen

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

Heads up — 4 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.

Multiple detectors unreachable

Note

2 ML detectors did not respond (Ml Python Siglip, Ml Commfor). The verdict was computed with reduced evidence; reliability is lower than usual.

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).

Signals do not converge

Note

Score 46/100 lands in the middle of the inconclusive zone. Detectors did not agree on a story — review multiple lines of evidence below.

Weak overall confidence

Note

Aggregate verdict confidence is 30/100. Several detectors returned uncertain answers or were offline. Read the verdict as a guideline, not as a final answer.

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

  • Noise Patternread real · 12/100

    Sensor-noise (PRNU) fingerprint check. Real cameras leave camera-unique noise.

  • Frequency Analysisflagged AI · 74/100

    Fast-Fourier inspection. Diffusion outputs leave periodic spectral peaks.

Model Agreement

100%

Variance across 3 ML detectors. Higher agreement means the models converged on the same reading; lower agreement means treat the verdict with care.

Evidence — 13 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 Models3 detectors · mean 50
▸ expand
SigLIP AI Detector
50
CommFor (4803 Generators)
50
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 12, 2026, 12:35 PM
Analyzed byAnonymous