Evaluates the ability of models to distinguish real photographs from AI-generated images across diverse, out-of-distribution, and post-processed scenarios. It probes both low-level pixel artifact detection and high-level semantic consistency checking to measure real-world generalization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Chameleon, WildRF, AIGI-Bench, Co-SPY-Bench (in-the-wild), BFree-Online, AIGI-Now, GenImage, DRCT-2M, AIGCDetectBenchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports B...
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aigi Detection Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-aigi-detection-eval)
---
name: aigi-detection-eval
description: Evaluates the ability of models to distinguish real photographs from AI-generated images across diverse, out-of-distribution, and post-processed scenarios. It probes both low-level pixel artifact detection and high-level semantic consistency checking to measure real-world generalization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Chameleon, WildRF, AIGI-Bench, Co-SPY-Bench (in-the-wild), BFree-Online, AIGI-Now, GenImage, DRCT-2M, AIGCDetectBenchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Balanced accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2512.06746
bibtex_key: chen2025taskmodelalignment
confidence: high
---
# aigi-detection-eval
> Task-Model Alignment: A Simple Path to Generalizable AI-Generated Image Detection — Chen et al. (2025) (arXiv:2512.06746, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the ability of models to distinguish real photographs from AI-generated images across diverse, out-of-distribution, and post-processed scenarios. It probes both low-level pixel artifact detection and high-level semantic consistency checking to measure real-world generalization.
## Datasets
- **Chameleon** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **WildRF** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **AIGI-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Co-SPY-Bench (in-the-wild)** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **BFree-Online** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **AIGI-Now** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **GenImage** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DRCT-2M** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **AIGCDetectBenchmark** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Balanced accuracy` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Mean of the classification accuracies on real images and synthetic (AI-generated) images: (Accuracy_real + Accuracy_fake) / 2.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Single RGB image (real or AI-generated)
**Output**: Binary classification label: real or synthetic (AI-generated)
## Scoring recipe
```python
def balanced_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
real_mask = gold_labels == 'real'
fake_mask = gold_labels == 'synthetic'
acc_real = (predictions[real_mask] == gold_labels[real_mask]).mean()
acc_fake = (predictions[fake_mask] == gold_labels[fake_mask]).mean()
return (acc_real + acc_fake) / 2
```
## Common pitfalls
- Baselines are evaluated using their officially released checkpoints without per-benchmark retuning, so direct comparison requires strict adherence to the same zero-shot evaluation protocol.
- The full CO-SPY-Bench/in-the-wild dataset is not publicly available due to licensing restrictions; evaluation uses a restricted subset provided by the authors, which may cause score discrepancies compared to original papers.
- Mixed supervision during training dilutes branch specialization, so task-pure supervision (semantic-only for VLM, artifact-only for expert) is critical for optimal performance.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Balanced accuracy is adopted as the primary metric, defined as the mean of the accuracies on real and synthetic images.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{chen2025taskmodelalignment,
title={Task-Model Alignment: A Simple Path to Generalizable AI-Generated Image Detection},
author={Chen et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2512.06746}
}
```
- arXiv: 2512.06746