MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380607095 · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2023.3285590

Multi-Modality Ensemble Distortion for Spatial Steganography With Dynamic Cost Correction

2023· article· en· W4380607095 on OpenAlexaff
Fengyong Li, Zongliang Yu, Kui Wu, Chuan Qin, Xinpeng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shanghai
KeywordsPixelDistortion (music)SteganalysisSteganographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEmbeddingAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper tackles a recent challenge in designing an efficient steganographic distortion model, whose goal is to accurately measure the modification cost of a pixel and help design steganographic schemes with high undetectability. Existing distortion models mostly assume that different modification directions of a pixel have an identical cost value and that pixel modifications are independent. These assumptions, however, may not lead to good steganography design because the modification direction of neighbouring pixels may affect the cost measurement of the current pixel. To address this problem, we propose a new distortion calculation method using dynamic cost correction and multi-modality distortion ensemble. The proposed scheme first employs a given distortion model to generate the original cost map. The cost of each pixel is then dynamically adjusted with majority voting according to the modification directions of its neighbouring pixels. Furthermore, different distortion calculation models are integrated to make the final decision on the distortion of each pixel. Experimental results show that compared to existing additive distortion-based steganographic schemes and deep learning-based steganographic schemes, steganography using our proposed distortion model performs better when tested against state-of-the-art steganalysis methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure ComputingSame topicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesFrench-language works237,207