ChatGPT Images 2.5 on Forgery Tasks: Testing Advertised Improvements Against Known Answers
cs.CV
Submitted: 2026-09-12
Updated: 2026-09-16
Comments: 27 pages, 6 figures, 16 tables
Code: https://github.com/JaidedAI/EasyOCR
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
The gist: OpenAI released ChatGPT Images 2.5 on 8 September 2026, advertising more precise local edits, better consistency across edits, more faithful reference products and sharper detail.
Terminology
Abstract
OpenAI released ChatGPT Images 2.5 on 8 September 2026, advertising more precise local edits, better consistency across edits, more faithful reference products and sharper detail. We evaluate these claims on four forgery tasks with answers fixed in advance: receipt-field alteration, repeated editing, product placement and small-print rendering. GPT-Image-2 provides same-week baselines at a cheaper and a more expensive tier. A limited improvement appears in receipt editing. After alignment, OCR detects changes to surrounding text in 31.7% of Flare outputs, against 44.2% for the cheaper baseline. This gain is concentrated on CORD receipts and sensitive to shifts of a pixel or less; the forged value itself is no more often correct. Repeated editing and fine print show no measurable gain. Product codes become more legible mainly because Images 2.5 draws the product larger. Defence outcomes change little: localisation remains weak for both generations. A detector that flags 68.6% of controlled benchmark images flags only 35.9% of images posted online. Advertised improvements therefore transfer unevenly to the tested forgery capabilities, while substantial detection limitations remain.
Sources
- GEditBench v2: A Human-Aligned Benchmark for General Image Editing
- TextDiffuser: Diffusion Models as Text Painters
- DreamBooth: Fine Tuning Text-to-Image Diffusion Models for Subject-Driven Generation
- DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervision
- Spatial Dual-Modality Graph Reasoning for Key Information Extraction
- LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations
- Community Forensics: Using Thousands of Generators to Train Fake Image Detectors
- When the Forger Is the Judge: GPT-Image-2 Cannot Recognize Its Own Faked Documents
- AIForge-Doc: A Benchmark for Detecting AI-Forged Tampering in Financial and Form Documents
- ImgEdit: A Unified Image Editing Dataset and Benchmark
- GPT-Image-2 in the Wild: A Twitter Dataset of Self-Reported AI-Generated Images from the First Week of Deployment
Related papers
- Loss Knows Best: Detecting Annotation Errors in Videos via Loss Trajectories
- AnchorWeave: World-Consistent Video Generation with Retrieved Local Spatial Memories
- Benchmarking the Robustness of Foundation Models for Mammography under Domain Shift
- MambaX-Net: Dual-Input Mamba-Enhanced Cross-Attention Network for Longitudinal MRI Segmentation
- TeleOCR: Navigating Document Parsing Across Digital and Camera-Captured Documents
- A Survey on Efficient Vision-Language-Action Models