MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139438093 · doi:10.1109/icip.2002.1039052

On steganalysis of random LSB embedding in continuous-tone images

2003· article· en· W2139438093 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - International Conference on Image Processing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteganalysisLeast significant bitEmbeddingSteganographyComputer scienceImage (mathematics)PixelKey (lock)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an LSB steganalysis technique that can detect the existence of hidden messages that are randomly embedded in the least significant bits of natural continuous-tone images. The technique is inspired by the recent work of J. Fridrich et al. (see Proc. ACM Workshop on Multimedia and Security, p.27-30, 2001) and just like their work, it can also precisely measure the length of the embedded message, even when the hidden message is very short relative to the image size. The key to our success is the formation of some subsets of pixels whose cardinalities change with LSB embedding, and such changes can be precisely quantified under the assumption that the embedded bits are randomly scattered. Interestingly, our study on steganalysis of LSB embedding sheds light on the work of Fridrich et al. on the detection of LSB embedding, and offers an analytical proof of an observation made by them.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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