MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097195638 · doi:10.2174/1874120701004010093

Wavelet Packets-Based Blind Watermarking for Medical Image Management

2010· article· en· W2097195638 on OpenAlexaff
Salwa A. K. Mostafa, Naser El‐Sheimy, A. S. Tolba, F. M. Abdelkader, Hisham M. Elhindy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Biomedical Engineering Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital watermarkingComputer scienceWatermarkArtificial intelligenceComputer visionHistogram equalizationNetwork packetEmbeddingImage processingImage (mathematics)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last decade has witnessed an explosive use of medical images and Electronics Patient Record (EPR) in the healthcare sector for facilitating the sharing of patient information and exchange between networked hospitals and healthcare centers. To guarantee the security, authenticity and management of medical images and information through storage and distribution, the watermarking techniques are growing to protect the medical healthcare information. This paper presents a technique for embedding the EPR information in the medical image to save storage space and transmission overheads and to guarantee security of the shared data. In this paper a new method for protecting the patient information in which the information is embedded as a watermark in the discrete wavelet packet transform (DWPT) of the medical image using the hospital logo as a reference image. The patient information is coded by an error correcting code (ECC), BCH code, to enhance the robustness of the proposed method. The scheme is blind so that the EPR can be extracted from the medical image without the need of the original image. Therefore, this proposed technique is useful in telemedicine applications. Performance of the proposed method was tested using four modalities of medical images; MRA, MRI, Radiological, and CT. Experimental results showed no visible difference between the watermarked and the original image. Moreover, the proposed watermarking method is robust against a wide range of attacks such as JPEG coding, Gaussian noise addition, histogram equalization, gamma correction, contrast adjustment, and sharpen filter and rotation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations65
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Biomedical Engineering JournalSame topicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesFrench-language works237,207