MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1513430854 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2015.7168817

Optimum multiplicative watermark detector in contourlet domain using the normal inverse Gaussian distribution

2015· article· en· W1513430854 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Sadreazami, M. Omair Ahmad, M.N.S. Swamy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatermarkContourletGeneralized normal distributionDetectorDigital watermarkingGaussian noiseGaussianConstant false alarm rateComputer scienceInverse Gaussian distributionAlgorithmAdditive white Gaussian noiseArtificial intelligenceFalse alarmNoise (video)MathematicsComputer visionNormal distributionStatisticsDistribution (mathematics)WaveletImage (mathematics)PhysicsTelecommunicationsWavelet transformMathematical analysisWhite noise

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital watermarking has been widely used in the copyright protected images in multimedia. This paper addresses the blind watermark detection problem in contourlet domain. It is known that the contourlet coefficients of images have non-Gaussian property and can be well modelled by non-Gaussian distributions such as the normal inverse Gaussian (NIG). In view of this, we exploit this model to derive closed-form expressions for the test statistics and design an optimum blind watermark detector in the contourlet domain. Through conducting several experiments, the performance of the proposed detector is evaluated in terms of the probabilities of detection and false alarm and compared to that of the other existing detectors. It is shown that the proposed detector using the NIG distribution is superior to other detectors in terms of providing higher rate of detection. It is also shown that the proposed NIG-based detector is more robust than other detectors against attacks, such as JPEG compression and Gaussian noise.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesFrench-language works237,207