Reversible Data Hiding in Videos for Better Visibility and Minimal Transfer
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
Performing data hiding in videos is very popular now. Video data hiding has large number of applications as it is more secure and also video has high frequency over the internet. When the amount of data to be embedded into the video increases it can adversely affect the quality of the video making it unsuitable for many applications in the area of defence, military, medical, satellite field etc. The important concerns in the area of data hiding in videos are its high visual quality, size of the video stream, the delay that occurs during the network transmission. In the case of MPEG or H.264 videos which are of great visual quality have their size high, so transmission of these videos can be a difficult task even though they are superior in visual quality. Due to the transmission delay, there arise practical problems in using these high quality videos. Among those the most serious issue that the area of data hiding in video face are its poor illumination. Our new method proposes a novel concept where data hiding and the high quality for poor illumination videos are given equal importance. In the proposed method, we are performing contrast enhancement, improving visual quality in the video streams. The noted point is that we are strictly preserving the video file size even after performing contrast enhancement in the videos. The result should always be of better visual quality then only it becomes practically useful.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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