A new digital watermarking evaluation and benchmarking methodology using an external group of evaluators and multi‐criteria analysis based on ‘large‐scale data’

Digital watermarking evaluation and benchmarking are challenging tasks because of multiple evaluation and conflicting criteria. A few approaches have been presented to implement digital watermarking evaluation and benchmarking frameworks. However, these approaches still possess a number of limitations, such as fixing several attributes on the account of other attributes. Well‐known benchmarking approaches are limited to robust watermarking. Therefore, this paper presents a new methodology for digital watermarking evaluation and benchmarking based on large‐scale data by using external evaluators and a group decision making context. Two experiments are performed. In the first experiment, a noise gate‐based digital watermarking approach is developed, and the scheme for the noise gate digital watermarking approach is enhanced. Sixty audio samples from different audio styles are tested with two algorithms. A total of 120 samples were evaluated according to three different metrics, namely, quality, payload, and complexity, to generate a set of digital watermarking samples. In the second experiment, the situation in which digital watermarking evaluators have different preferences is discussed. Weight measurement with a decision making solution is required to solve this issue. The analytic hierarchy process is used to measure evaluator preference. In the decision making solution, the technique for order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution with different contexts (e.g., individual and group) is utilized. Therefore, selecting the proper context with different aggregation operators to benchmark the results of experiment 1 (i.e., digital watermarking approaches) is recommended. The findings of this research are as follows: (1) group and individual decision making provide the same result in this case study. However, in the case of selection where the priority weights are generated from the evaluators, group decision making is the recommended solution to solve the trade‐off reflected in the benchmarking process for digital watermarking approaches. (2) Internal and external aggregations show that the enhanced watermarking approach demonstrates better performance than the original watermarking approach. © 2016 The Authors. Software: Practice and Experience published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

[1]  R. Cutler,et al.  An Analytical Study , 2016 .

[2]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  High Securing Cover-File of Hidden Data Using Statistical Technique and AES Encryption Algorithm , 2009 .

[3]  T. Saaty,et al.  Why the magic number seven plus or minus two , 2003 .

[4]  Ghazali Sulong,et al.  A new fuzzy performance modeling for evaluating the trade-off among robustness, quality and capacity in watermaking algorithms , 2012 .

[5]  Francesco G. B. De Natale,et al.  Comparison of watermarking algorithms via a GA-based benchmarking tool , 2009, 2009 16th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP).

[6]  Francesco G. B. De Natale,et al.  Watermarking Robustness Evaluation Based on Perceptual Quality via Genetic Algorithms , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[7]  T. Madhloom,et al.  Novel Approach for High Secure and High Rate Data Hidden in the Image Using Image Texture Analysis , 2009 .

[8]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  A New System for Hiding Data within (Unused Area Two + Image Page) of Portable Executable File using Statistical Technique and Advance Encryption Standared , 2010 .

[9]  Waleed H. Abdulla,et al.  Perceptual evaluation of audio watermarking using objective quality measures , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.

[10]  E. Stanley Lee,et al.  An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making , 2007, Math. Comput. Model..

[11]  Evon M. O. Abu-Taieh,et al.  Comparative Study , 2020, Definitions.

[12]  Fazidah Othman,et al.  Securing cover-file without limitation of hidden data size using computation between cryptography and steganography , 2009 .

[13]  Mohd. Alauddin Mohd. Ali,et al.  Diagnostic Quality of Compressed Medical Images: Objective and Subjective Evaluation , 2008, 2008 Second Asia International Conference on Modelling & Simulation (AMS).

[14]  B. B. Zaidan,et al.  Multi-criteria analysis for OS-EMR software selection problem: A comparative study , 2015, Decis. Support Syst..

[15]  Fabien A. P. Petitcolas,et al.  Watermarking schemes evaluation , 2000, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[16]  B. Zaidan,et al.  New Framework for High Secure Data Hidden in the MPEG Using AES Encryption Algorithm , 2009 .

[17]  Christian Krätzer Visualisation of Benchmarking Results in Digital Watermarking and Steganography , 2006 .

[18]  Zhongliang Yue,et al.  An extended TOPSIS for determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers , 2011, Knowl. Based Syst..

[19]  I. Pitas,et al.  BENCHMARKING OF STILL IMAGE WATERMARKING METHODS : PRINCIPLES AND STATE OF THE ART , 2002 .

[20]  Evangelos Triantaphyllou,et al.  Multi-Criteria Decision Making: An Operations Research Approach , 1998 .

[21]  Pamela C. Cosman,et al.  Evaluating quality of compressed medical images: SNR, subjective rating, and diagnostic accuracy , 1994, Proc. IEEE.

[22]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[23]  B. B. Zaidan,et al.  Evaluation and selection of open-source EMR software packages based on integrated AHP and TOPSIS , 2015, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[24]  Jari Korhonen,et al.  On the relationship between perceptual impact of source and channel distortions in video sequences , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[25]  Tapio Seppänen,et al.  Fusing digital audio watermarking and authentication in diverse signal domains , 2005, 2005 13th European Signal Processing Conference.

[26]  Jana Dittmann,et al.  Practical Audio Watermarking Evaluation Tests and its Representation and Visualization in the Triangle of Robustness , Transparency and Capacity , 2006 .

[27]  Stelios H. Zanakis,et al.  Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[28]  Jana Dittmann,et al.  Transparency benchmarking on audio watermarks and steganography , 2006, Electronic Imaging.

[29]  Jiang Qirong,et al.  Development Trend of Chinese Hydroelectric Generation Technology of Hydro Power Plant (HPP) , 2014 .

[30]  Hoai Bac Le,et al.  Literature Survey on Image Watermarking Tools, Watermark Attacks and Benchmarking Tools , 2010, 2010 Second International Conferences on Advances in Multimedia.

[31]  Bilal Bahaa Zaidan,et al.  High Rate Video Streaming Steganography , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Future Computer and Communication.

[32]  Takehiro Takahashi,et al.  An assessment of VoIP covert channel threats , 2007, 2007 Third International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communications Networks and the Workshops - SecureComm 2007.

[33]  Mangal V. Pati,et al.  Audio Watermarking: A Way to Copyright Protection , 2012 .

[34]  Shujun Li,et al.  OR-Benchmark: An Open and Reconfigurable Digital Watermarking Benchmarking Framework , 2020, DETIPS/DeSECSys/MPS/SPOSE@ESORICS.

[35]  Pingzhi Fan,et al.  APPLICATION OF GREY-RELATIONAL ANALYSIS TO FIND THE MOST SUITABLE WATERMARKING SCHEME , 2011 .

[36]  Sajad Shirali-Shahreza,et al.  High capacity error free wavelet Domain Speech Steganography , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.

[37]  Hong-Juan Zhang,et al.  A Novel Image Steganography Algorithm Against Statistical Analysis , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics.

[38]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  A review of audio based steganography and digital watermarking , 2011 .

[39]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[40]  Ja-Ling Wu,et al.  Fidelity-guaranteed robustness enhancement of blind-detection watermarking schemes , 2009, Inf. Sci..

[41]  Jana Dittmann,et al.  Theoretical Framework for a Practical Evaluation and Comparison of Audio Watermarking Schemes in the Triangle of Robustness, Transparency and Capacity , 2006, Trans. Data Hiding Multim. Secur..

[42]  Yongmin Kim,et al.  Subjective evaluation of compressed image quality , 1992, Medical Imaging.

[43]  Chen-Tung Chen,et al.  Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment , 2000, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[44]  S. Abdul Kather,et al.  Real Steganography in Non Voice Part of the Speech , 2012 .

[45]  Binh Pham,et al.  Semi fragile watermark with self authentication and self recovery , 2009 .

[46]  Evangelos Triantaphyllou,et al.  Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study , 2000 .

[47]  Wen-Hsiang Tsai,et al.  A steganographic method for images by pixel-value differencing , 2003, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[48]  B. B. Zaidan,et al.  Novel Framework for Hidden Data in the Image Page within Executable File Using Computation between Advanced Encryption Standard and Distortion Techniques , 2009, ArXiv.

[49]  B. B. Zaidan,et al.  Towards on Develop a Framework for the Evaluation and Benchmarking of Skin Detectors Based on Artificial Intelligent Models Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques , 2017, Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell..

[50]  Abdullah Gani Novel approach for high (secure and rate) data hidden within triplex space for executable file , 2010 .

[51]  T. Miranda Lakshmi,et al.  A Survey on Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods and Its Applications , 2013 .

[52]  N. Cvejic,et al.  Channel capacity of high bit rate audio data hiding algorithms in diverse transform domains , 2004, IEEE International Symposium on Communications and Information Technology, 2004. ISCIT 2004..

[53]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  An evaluation and selection problems of OSS-LMS packages , 2016, SpringerPlus.

[54]  Tapio Seppänen,et al.  Spread spectrum audio watermarking using frequency hopping and attack characterization , 2004, Signal Process..

[55]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple attribute decision making : an introduction , 1995 .

[56]  Sumeet Kaur,et al.  A Comprehensive Review on Secure Image Steganography , 2012 .

[57]  Deepa Kundur,et al.  Analysis and design of authentication watermarking , 2004, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[58]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  New Technique of Hidden Data in PE-File with in Unused Area One , 2009 .

[59]  Francesco G. B. De Natale,et al.  Robustness and security assessment of image watermarking techniques by a stochastic approach , 2009, Electronic Imaging.

[60]  V. P. Devassia,et al.  A robust audio watermarking in frequency domain , 2006 .

[61]  Mansooreh Mollaghasemi,et al.  Technical Briefing: Making Multiple-Objective Decisions , 1996 .

[62]  Jessica J. Fridrich,et al.  Stochastic approach to secret message length estimation in ±k embedding steganography , 2005, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[63]  Paul S. Fisher,et al.  Image quality measures and their performance , 1995, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[64]  Ali Hamzeh,et al.  A novel steganalysis for TPVD steganographic method based on differences of pixel difference histogram , 2010, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[65]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  Novel multi-cover steganography using remote sensing image and general recursion neural cryptosystem , 2010 .

[66]  David L. Olson,et al.  Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models , 2004, Math. Comput. Model..

[67]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  Using the features of mosaic image and AES cryptosystem to implement an extremely high rate and high secure data hidden: analytical study , 2010 .

[68]  B. Sarkar,et al.  Interval-valued fuzzy $$\phi$$ϕ-tolerance competition graphs , 2016, SpringerPlus.

[69]  S. Tubaro,et al.  Subjective assessment of H.264/AVC video sequences transmitted over a noisy channel , 2009, 2009 International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience.

[70]  A. A. Zaidan,et al.  A novel embedding method to increase capacity and robustness of low-bit encoding audio steganography technique using noise gate software logic algorithm , 2010 .