MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164778534 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2003.1226296

LPM-based RST invariant digital image watermarking

2004· article· en· W2164778534 on OpenAlexaff
Danchen Zheng, Jingjing Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital watermarkingWatermarkInvariant (physics)ScalingEmbeddingTranslation (biology)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFourier transformRotation (mathematics)MathematicsAlgorithmImage (mathematics)Mathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on log-polar mapping (LPM), this paper presents a novel digital image watermarking scheme that is invariant to rotation, scaling, and translation (RST). We embed watermark in the log-polar mapping (LPM) of the Fourier magnitude spectrum of original image to simplify the effects of RST transformations into simple shifts. For watermark embedding, the approximate ILPM is employed to replace ILPM, in order to eliminate the imprecision caused by ILPM. Therefore actually watermarks are embedded in the Fourier magnitude spectrum of the original image, to achieve the effect of being embedded in LPM domain. Watermark extraction does not need original image, we use exhaustive search in the embedding area to handle the shift of watermark positions in LPM domain caused by rotation and scaling in spatial domain. The scheme avoids computing inverse log-polar mapping (ILPM) to preserve the image quality. Evaluations demonstrate that the scheme is invariant to rotation and translation, sufficiently invariant to scaling transformation, and very robust to JPEG compression and other attacks.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesFrench-language works237,207