{"title":"Power: a metric for evaluating watermarking algorithms","authors":"R. Sion","doi":"10.1109/ITCC.2002.1000367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An important parameter in evaluating data hiding methods is hiding capacity (Cohen et al., 1999) i.e. the amount of data that a certain algorithm can \"hide\" until reaching allowable distortion limits. One fundamental difference between watermarking (Cox et al., 1997; 1999) and generic data hiding resides exactly in the main applicability and descriptions of the two domains. In the digital framework, watermarking algorithms that make use of information hiding techniques have been developed and hiding capacity was naturally used as a metric in evaluating their power to hide information. Whereas the maximal amount of information that a certain algorithm can \"hide\" (while keeping the data within allowable distortion bounds) is certainly related to the ability to assert ownership in court, it is not directly measuring its power of persuasion, in part also because it does not consider directly the existence and power of watermarking attacks. We show why, due to its particularities, watermarking requires a different metric, more closely related to its ultimate purpose, claiming ownership in a court of law. We define one suitable metric (watermarking power) and show how it relates to derivates of hiding capacity. We prove that there are cases where considering hiding capacity is sub-optimal as a metric in evaluating watermarking methods whereas the metric of watermarking power delivers good results.","PeriodicalId":115190,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings. International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings. International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ITCC.2002.1000367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21
Abstract
An important parameter in evaluating data hiding methods is hiding capacity (Cohen et al., 1999) i.e. the amount of data that a certain algorithm can "hide" until reaching allowable distortion limits. One fundamental difference between watermarking (Cox et al., 1997; 1999) and generic data hiding resides exactly in the main applicability and descriptions of the two domains. In the digital framework, watermarking algorithms that make use of information hiding techniques have been developed and hiding capacity was naturally used as a metric in evaluating their power to hide information. Whereas the maximal amount of information that a certain algorithm can "hide" (while keeping the data within allowable distortion bounds) is certainly related to the ability to assert ownership in court, it is not directly measuring its power of persuasion, in part also because it does not consider directly the existence and power of watermarking attacks. We show why, due to its particularities, watermarking requires a different metric, more closely related to its ultimate purpose, claiming ownership in a court of law. We define one suitable metric (watermarking power) and show how it relates to derivates of hiding capacity. We prove that there are cases where considering hiding capacity is sub-optimal as a metric in evaluating watermarking methods whereas the metric of watermarking power delivers good results.
评估数据隐藏方法的一个重要参数是隐藏能力(Cohen et al., 1999),即某种算法可以“隐藏”的数据量,直到达到允许的失真限制。水印的一个根本区别(Cox et al., 1997;1999)和通用数据隐藏恰恰存在于这两个领域的主要适用性和描述中。在数字框架下,利用信息隐藏技术的水印算法已经被开发出来,隐藏能力自然被用作评估其隐藏信息能力的一个指标。尽管某种算法可以“隐藏”的最大信息量(同时将数据保持在允许的失真范围内)肯定与在法庭上主张所有权的能力有关,但它并不能直接衡量其说服力,部分原因还在于它没有直接考虑水印攻击的存在和威力。我们展示了为什么,由于其特殊性,水印需要一个不同的度量,与它的最终目的更密切相关,在法庭上声称所有权。我们定义了一个合适的度量(水印能力),并展示了它与隐藏能力的导数的关系。我们证明了在某些情况下,将隐藏容量作为评估水印方法的指标是次优的,而将水印功率作为评估水印方法的指标则可以获得良好的结果。