Cargando…

Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences

The quality and authenticity of images is essential for data presentation, especially in the life sciences. Questionable images may often be a first indicator for questionable results, too. Therefore, a tool that uses mathematical methods to detect suspicious images in large image archives can be a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Koppers, Lars, Wormer, Holger, Ickstadt, Katja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5539263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27848190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9841-7
_version_ 1783254455102210048
author Koppers, Lars
Wormer, Holger
Ickstadt, Katja
author_facet Koppers, Lars
Wormer, Holger
Ickstadt, Katja
author_sort Koppers, Lars
collection PubMed
description The quality and authenticity of images is essential for data presentation, especially in the life sciences. Questionable images may often be a first indicator for questionable results, too. Therefore, a tool that uses mathematical methods to detect suspicious images in large image archives can be a helpful instrument to improve quality assurance in publications. As a first step towards a systematic screening tool, especially for journal editors and other staff members who are responsible for quality assurance, such as laboratory supervisors, we propose a basic classification of image manipulation. Based on this classification, we developed and explored some simple algorithms to detect copied areas in images. Using an artificial image and two examples of previously published modified images, we apply quantitative methods such as pixel-wise comparison, a nearest neighbor and a variance algorithm to detect copied-and-pasted areas or duplicated images. We show that our algorithms are able to detect some simple types of image alteration, such as copying and pasting background areas. The variance algorithm detects not only identical, but also very similar areas that differ only by brightness. Further types could, in principle, be implemented in a standardized scanning routine. We detected the copied areas in a proven case of image manipulation in Germany and showed the similarity of two images in a retracted paper from the Kato labs, which has been widely discussed on sites such as pubpeer and retraction watch.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5539263
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55392632017-08-17 Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences Koppers, Lars Wormer, Holger Ickstadt, Katja Sci Eng Ethics Original Paper The quality and authenticity of images is essential for data presentation, especially in the life sciences. Questionable images may often be a first indicator for questionable results, too. Therefore, a tool that uses mathematical methods to detect suspicious images in large image archives can be a helpful instrument to improve quality assurance in publications. As a first step towards a systematic screening tool, especially for journal editors and other staff members who are responsible for quality assurance, such as laboratory supervisors, we propose a basic classification of image manipulation. Based on this classification, we developed and explored some simple algorithms to detect copied areas in images. Using an artificial image and two examples of previously published modified images, we apply quantitative methods such as pixel-wise comparison, a nearest neighbor and a variance algorithm to detect copied-and-pasted areas or duplicated images. We show that our algorithms are able to detect some simple types of image alteration, such as copying and pasting background areas. The variance algorithm detects not only identical, but also very similar areas that differ only by brightness. Further types could, in principle, be implemented in a standardized scanning routine. We detected the copied areas in a proven case of image manipulation in Germany and showed the similarity of two images in a retracted paper from the Kato labs, which has been widely discussed on sites such as pubpeer and retraction watch. Springer Netherlands 2016-11-15 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5539263/ /pubmed/27848190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9841-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Koppers, Lars
Wormer, Holger
Ickstadt, Katja
Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title_full Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title_fullStr Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title_full_unstemmed Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title_short Towards a Systematic Screening Tool for Quality Assurance and Semiautomatic Fraud Detection for Images in the Life Sciences
title_sort towards a systematic screening tool for quality assurance and semiautomatic fraud detection for images in the life sciences
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5539263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27848190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9841-7
work_keys_str_mv AT kopperslars towardsasystematicscreeningtoolforqualityassuranceandsemiautomaticfrauddetectionforimagesinthelifesciences
AT wormerholger towardsasystematicscreeningtoolforqualityassuranceandsemiautomaticfrauddetectionforimagesinthelifesciences
AT ickstadtkatja towardsasystematicscreeningtoolforqualityassuranceandsemiautomaticfrauddetectionforimagesinthelifesciences