Joint Encryption and Compression-Based Watermarking Technique for Security of Digital Documents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, due to the increase in popularity of the Internet, the problem of digital data security over the Internet is increasing at a phenomenal rate. Watermarking is used for various notable applications to secure digital data from unauthorized individuals. To achieve this, in this article, we propose a joint encryption then-compression based watermarking technique for digital document security. This technique offers a tool for confidentiality, copyright protection, and strong compression performance of the system. The proposed method involves three major steps as follows: (1) embedding of multiple watermarks through non-sub-sampled contourlet transform, redundant discrete wavelet transform, and singular value decomposition; (2) encryption and compression via SHA-256 and Lempel Ziv Welch (LZW), respectively; and (3) extraction/recovery of multiple watermarks from the possibly distorted cover image. The performance estimations are carried out on various images at different attacks, and the efficiency of the system is determined in terms of peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and normalized correlation (NC), structural similarity index measure (SSIM), number of changing pixel rate (NPCR), unified averaged changed intensity (UACI), and compression ratio (CR). Furthermore, the comparative analysis of the proposed system with similar schemes indicates its superiority to 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".