Verifying artificial intelligence-generated images: Socio-technical approaches to authenticity
Abstract
The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed visual media, enabled highly realistic AI-generated images, and raised ethical, social, and security concerns. Generative artificial intelligence (Generative AI) architectures, including Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), Variational Autoencoders (VAEs), and diffusion models, allow content creation that is increasingly indistinguishable from human-made visuals, facilitating creativity, education, and communication. However, these capabilities also introduce risks of manipulation, identity fraud, misinformation, and deepfake attacks across social, political, corporate, academic, and humanitarian domains. This study investigates AI image verification as a socio-technical response to synthetic visuals, focusing on social media, artistic, and forensic contexts. It employed a qualitative design combining thematic literature review and case study analysis. Thematic analysis identified patterns in verification approaches, including pixel-level analysis, metadata forensics, machine learning classifiers, watermarking, and blockchain-enabled methods. Case studies explored real-world applications, highlighting perceptual biases, strategic use of synthetic content, and governance and digital literacy challenges. Findings reveal that human perception alone is insufficient for reliably discerning authenticity, with individuals frequently misclassifying AI-generated images as real. Integrating machine learning, metadata analysis, and blockchain verification, hybrid technical approaches significantly improve detection accuracy. Socio-technical factors, including platform policies, ethical norms, organisational governance, and user literacy, shape the effectiveness of verification methods. The study presents a conceptual framework linking technological, organisational, and societal dimensions, emphasising the need for coordinated strategies that combine algorithmic innovation, regulatory oversight, and public engagement. Practical implications include deploying hybrid verification systems, strengthening governance and ethical standards, enhancing digital literacy, and fostering cross-disciplinary collaboration to safeguard trust, authenticity, and integrity in digital media.
Copyright (c) 2025 Michael Mncedisi Willie

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
[1]Xu Z. Innovative applications of artificial intelligence in new media content creation and dissemination. Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences. 2025; 5(2): 85–91. doi: 10.54691/dz2hgr20
[2]Zhao Y. The synergistic effect of artificial intelligence technology in the evolution of visual communication of new media art. Heliyon. 2024; 10(18): e38008. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38008
[3]Chi J. The evolutionary impact of artificial intelligence on contemporary artistic practices. Communications in Humanities Research. 2024; 35(1): 6–11. doi: 10.54254/2753-7064/35/20240006
[4]Swargiary K, Roy K. Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on visual arts: Technological advancements, market dynamics, ethical considerations, and human creativity. 2024. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381530797_EXPLORING_THE_IMPACT_OF_ARTIFICIAL_INTELLIGENCE_ON_VISUAL_ARTS_TECHNOLOGICAL_ADVANCEMENTS_MARKET_DYNAMICS_ETHICAL_CONSIDERATIONS_AND_HUMAN_CREATIVITY
[5]Sordo Z, Chagnon E, Hu Z, et al. Synthetic scientific image generation with VAE, GAN, and diffusion model architectures. Journal of Imaging. 2025; 11(8): 252. doi: 10.3390/jimaging11080252
[6]Mahajan S, Gite S, Pradhan B, et al. Integrating speech-to-text for image generation using generative adversarial networks. CMES—Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences. 2025; 143(2): 2001–2026. doi: 10.32604/cmes.2025.058456
[7]Zhang Y, Pang Z, Huang S, et al. Unmasking AI-created visual content: A review of generated images and deepfake detection technologies. Journal of King Saud University—Computer and Information Sciences. 2025; 37: 148. doi: 10.1007/s44443-025-00154-8
[8]Bengesi S, El-Sayed H, Sarker MK, et al. Advancements in generative AI: A comprehensive review of GANs, GPT, autoencoders, diffusion model, and transformers. IEEE Access. 2024; 12: 69812–69837. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3397775
[9]Hemraj S. AI and the future of creative development: Redefining digital media production. AI and Ethics. 2025; 5: 5105–5119. doi: 10.1007/s43681-025-00765-x
[10]Al-kfairy M, Mustafa D, Kshetri N, et al. Ethical challenges and solutions of generative AI: An interdisciplinary perspective. Informatics. 2024; 11(3): 58. doi: 10.3390/informatics11030058
[11]Sohail S, Sajjad SM, Zafar A, et al. Deepfake image forensics for privacy protection and authenticity using deep learning. Information. 2025; 16(4): 270. doi: 10.3390/info16040270
[12]Astillero R. Forensic analysis of image metadata to distinguish AI-generated images. Zenodo. 2025. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.16871919
[13]Solanke AA, Biasiotti MA. Digital forensics AI: Evaluating, standardising and optimising digital evidence mining techniques. KI—Künstliche Intelligenz. 2022; 36: 143–161. doi: 10.1007/s13218-022-00763-9
[14]Balasubramaniam S, Chirchi V, Kadry S, et al. The road ahead: Emerging trends, unresolved issues, and concluding remarks in generative AI: A comprehensive review. International Journal of Intelligent Systems. 2024; 2024: 4013195. doi: 10.1155/2024/4013195
[15]Radanliev P, Santos O, Ani UD. Generative AI cybersecurity and resilience. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. 2025; 8: 1568360. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1568360
[16]Thampanichwat C, Wongvorachan T, Sirisakdi L, et al. Mindful architecture from text-to-image AI perspectives: A case study of DALL-E, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion. Buildings. 2025; 15(6): 972. doi: 10.3390/buildings15060972
[17]Yıldırım E. Comparative analysis of Leonardo AI, Midjourney, and DALL-E: AI’s perspective on future cities. Urbanizm. 2023; 28: 82–96.
[18]Babaei R, Cheng S, Duan R, et al. Generative artificial intelligence and the evolving challenge of deepfake detection: A systematic analysis. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks. 2025; 14(1): 17. doi: 10.3390/jsan14010017
[19]Hynek N, Gavurova B, Kubak M. Risks and benefits of artificial intelligence deepfakes: Systematic review and comparison of public attitudes in seven European countries. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge. 2025; 10(5): 100782. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2025.100782
[20]Kaushik P, Garg V, Priya A, et al. Financial fraud and manipulation: The malicious use of deepfakes in business. In: Deepfakes and Their Impact on Business. IGI Global; 2024. pp. 173–196. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3693-6890-9.ch008
[21]Sharma A, Pujari M, Goel A. The rise of AI-generated synthetic identities: A new frontier in social media. International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering and Multidisciplinary Physical Sciences. 2025; 13(2). doi: 10.37082/IJIRMPS.v13.i2.232397
[22]Vecchietti G, Liyanaarachchi G, Viglia G. Managing deepfakes with artificial intelligence: Introducing the business privacy calculus. Journal of Business Research. 2025; 186: 115010. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115010
[23]Romero-Moreno F. Deepfake detection in generative AI: A legal framework proposal to protect human rights. Computer Law and Security Review. 2025; 58: 106162. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106162
[24]Ghiurău D, Popescu DE. Distinguishing reality from AI: Approaches for detecting synthetic content. Computers. 2025; 14(1): 1. doi: 10.3390/computers14010001
[25]Ölvecký M, Host'ovecky M. Digital image forensics using EXIF data of digital evidence. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA); 11–12 November 2021; Košice, Slovakia. doi: 10.1109/ICETA54173.2021.9726649
[26]Ferreira S, Antunes M, Correia ME. Exposing manipulated photos and videos in digital forensics analysis. Journal of Imaging. 2021; 7(7): 102. doi: 10.3390/jimaging7070102
[27]Darwish SM, Abu-Deif MM, Elkaffas SM. Blockchain for video watermarking: An enhanced copyright protection approach for video forensics based on perceptual hash function. PLoS One. 2024; 19(10): e0308451. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308451
[28]Mastoi QUA, Memon MF, Jan S, et al. Enhancing deepfake content detection through blockchain technology. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. 2025; 16(6): 48–58. doi: 10.14569/IJACSA.2025.0160607
[29]Suryawanshi V, Desai TJ, Shinde K, et al. The art of detection: Methods for identifying AI-generated visual content. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts. 2025; 13(6). doi: 10.56975/ijcrt.v13i6.288562
[30]Amerini I, Barni M, Battiato S, et al. Deepfake media forensics: Status and future challenges. Journal of Imaging. 2025; 11(3): 73. doi: 10.3390/jimaging11030073
[31]Aziz B, Blackwell C, Islam S. A framework for digital forensics and investigations: The goal-driven approach. International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics. 2013; 5(2): 1–22. doi: 10.4018/jdcf.2013040101
[32]Bokolo B, Liu Q. Artificial intelligence in social media forensics: A comprehensive survey and analysis. Electronics. 2024; 13(9): 1671. doi: 10.3390/electronics13091671
[33]Lombardo G, Mordonini M, Tomaiuolo M. Adoption of social media in socio-technical systems: A survey. Information. 2021; 12(3): 132. doi: 10.3390/info12030132
[34]Tangi L, Rodriguez Müller AP, Janssen M. AI-augmented government transformation: Organisational transformation and the socio-technical implications of artificial intelligence in public administrations. Government Information Quarterly. 2025; 42(3): 102055. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102055
[35]Al-Debei MM, Avison D. Business model requirements and challenges in the mobile telecommunication sector. Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change. 2011; 8(2): 215–235. doi: 10.1386/jots.8.2.215_1
[36]Savaget P, Geissdoerfer M, Kharrazi A, et al. The theoretical foundations of socio-technical systems change for sustainability: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 206: 878–892. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.208
[37]Priya A. Case study methodology of qualitative research: Key attributes and navigating the conundrums in its application. Sociological Bulletin. 2020; 70(1): 003802292097031. doi: 10.1177/0038022920970318
[38]Velásquez-Salamanca D, Martín-Pascual MÁ, Andreu-Sánchez C. Interpretation of AI-generated vs. human-made images. Journal of Imaging. 2025; 11(7): 227. doi: 10.3390/jimaging11070227
[39]Ricker J, Assenmacher D, Holz T, et al. AI-generated faces in the real world: A large-scale case study of Twitter profile images. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Research in Attacks, Intrusions and Defenses; 30 September–2 October 2024; New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1145/3678890.3678922
[40]Salas Espasa D, Camacho M. From aura to semi-aura: Reframing authenticity in AI-generated art: A systematic literature review. AI and Society. 2025; 40: 6727–6759. doi: 10.1007/s00146-025-02361-3
[41]Ediboglu Bartos G, Özmen Akyol S. Deep learning for image authentication: A comparative study on real and AI-generated image classification. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Applied Informatics and Related Areas; November 2023; Székesfehérvár, Hungary.

