Research
From Advertised Improvements to Measured Capabilities: Evaluating ChatGPT Images 2.5 on Forgery Tasks
arXiv:2609.13617v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We evaluate whether the improvements advertised for ChatGPT Images 2.5 translate into better performance on forgery tasks with predetermined answers. We
arXiv:2609.13617v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We evaluate whether the improvements advertised for ChatGPT Images 2.5 translate into better performance on forgery tasks with predetermined answers. We compare its Flare and Sunburst API models with GPT-Image-2 re-run in the same week, using receipt-field edits, repeated editing, product placement and fine-print rendering. After image registration, Flare and Sunburst show fewer OCR-detected changes to surrounding receipt text (31.7% and 31.2% versus 44.2% for both GPT-Image-2 baselines), mainly on CORD receipts, without a detectable improvement in target-field correctness. Flare retains fewer earlier edits on CORD receipts, while photo-edit sequences provide little separation between models. Product codes are more often legible with Images 2.5, alongside larger product placement; the analyses do not establish a fidelity gain independent of size. Fine-print improvements remain unresolved below the OCR reliability limit. Refusals are rare and localisation is weak in both generations. At a fixed detection threshold, Community Forensics flags 68.6% of controlled Images 2.5 images averaged across cells, versus 35.9% of self-reported images posted online. These results motivate task-specific evaluation of advertised capabilities and defences, with explicit limits on what automatic checks can establish.
Related
- CSGuard: Toward Forgery-Resistant Watermarking in Diffusion Models via Compressed Sensing Constraint
- Multi-Tool Image Editing Attribution in Facial Forgery
Source: arXiv cs.CV | 2026-09-15