A New Blind Medical Image Watermarking Based on Weber Descriptors and Arnold Chaotic Map

FD‐based detector for medical image watermarking

“…In Table 3, we have shown the time of embedding andextraction. The average time of embedding is 0.99 s, whereas the average time ofextraction is 0.50 s. The experimental outcomes suggest that our proposedalgorithm gives the results faster than many different known techniques such as[40] (average time taken by thisalgorithm is 1 and 0.60 sec for embedding and extraction, respectively). Theseresults suggest that our proposed technique can be appropriately utilised inreal‐life applications such as telemedicine, telediagnosis, remote health caresolution etc.…”

“…We also study a comparative analysis of these techniques along with our proposed technique. We consider some state‐of‐the‐art techniques such as locally optimal detector (LD) [35], CD [36], NED [37], Soualmi et al [40] detector, and Verma and Kumar Jha [41] detector. The parameters of LD [35], CD [36] and NED [37] are discussed in Section 3 in detail.…”

“…The parameters of LD [35], CD [36] and NED [37] are discussed in Section 3 in detail. However, extraction using Soualmi et al [40] and Verma and Kumar Jha [41] techniques has also been discussed in this section.…”

“…However, our proposed technique produces better results. At the same time, a blind watermark algorithm using Arnold chaotic map (Soualmi et al [40]) and wavelet based (Verma and Kumar Jha [41]) give similar output. Soualmi et al [40] presented the method based on Weber law descriptors and DCT with Arnold scrambling.…”

“… Average PE, PSNR, SSIM and cross‐correlation ( ) shown for different attacks on all input images. LD [35], CD [36], NED [37], Soualmi et al [40] and Verma and Kumar Jha [41]. Here, PD represents the proposed detector at …”