A New Statistical Detector for DWT-Based Additive Image Watermarking Using the Gauss–Hermite Expansion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional statistical detectors of the discrete wavelet transform (DWT)-based image watermarking use probability density functions (PDFs) that show inadequate matching with the empirical PDF of image coefficients in view of the fact that they use a fixed number of parameters. Hence, the decision values obtained from the estimated thresholds of these detectors provide substandard detection performance. In this paper, a new detector is proposed for the DWT-based additive image watermarking, wherein a PDF based on the Gauss-Hermite expansion is used, in view of the fact that this PDF provides a better statistical match to the empirical PDF by utilizing an appropriate number of parameters estimated from higher-order moments of the image coefficients. The decision threshold and the receiver operating characteristics are derived for the proposed detector. Experimental results on test images demonstrate that the proposed watermark detector performs better than other standard detectors such as the Gaussian and generalized Gaussian (GG), in terms of the probabilities of detection and false alarm as well as the efficacy. It is also shown that detection performance of the proposed detector is more robust than the competitive GG detector in the case of compression, additive white Gaussian noise, filtering, or geometric attack.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it