2014
DOI: 10.1117/12.2064524
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An improved reversible data hiding algorithm based on modification of prediction errors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In signal processing, a window function (also known as an apodization function or tapering function) is a mathematical function that is zerovalued outside of some chosen interval [45,48,49]. At this point, the output signal is processed through a hamming window which allows diminishing discontinuity of every frame at both ends by applying the following equation [34,62]:…”
Section: B) Modified Mel-frequency Cepstrum Coefficientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In signal processing, a window function (also known as an apodization function or tapering function) is a mathematical function that is zerovalued outside of some chosen interval [45,48,49]. At this point, the output signal is processed through a hamming window which allows diminishing discontinuity of every frame at both ends by applying the following equation [34,62]:…”
Section: B) Modified Mel-frequency Cepstrum Coefficientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As we mentioned earlier, most prediction-based RDH rely on the use of a single predictor to compute predictions that are used for data embedding. This may put a limitation on the prediction accuracy, since different predictors behave differently at the same pixel in the image [20,21] which consequently affects the embedding capacity and possibly the visual quality of the stego image.…”
Section: The Proposed Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As far as the watermarking techniques are concerned, they can be classified into six different categories in accordance with the following [24][25][26]: robustness, reversibility, scope, symmetry, blindness, and domain. In robustness category and according to their resistance to natural noise and artificial modifications (attacks), the watermarking algorithms can be grouped as robust, semi-fragile, and fragile.…”
Section: Digital Watermarking: Classification Evaluation and Relatementioning
confidence: 99%