Page - 169 - in Joint Austrian Computer Vision and Robotics Workshop 2020
Image of the Page - 169 -
Text of the Page - 169 -
Figure3: CreationofNewKeypoints.
3x3 Patch 5x5Patch 7x7Patch 9x9Patch
43.01% 39.76% 34.43% 32.21%
Table2: NewlyGeneratedKeypoints inCA.
Whennewkeypoints arebeinggenerated, it isnot
their number that is most important. The aim of re-
moving keypoints is compromised, if thenewlygen-
erated ones are similar to the removed ones in terms
of their SIFT descriptors. In this case, attacks might
stillberecoveredbytheforensicanalysteventhough
keypoints have been removed. In Fig. 4 we plot the
distance (squared Euclidean distance (SED)) of the
SIFT descriptors describing removed and newly cre-
ated ones. In particular, we compute SED between
removedkeypointsand theirclosestnewlygenerated
keypoints in termsof theirdescriptors. Toavoidbias,
we divide the result by the number of removed key-
points, as we display results in terms of increasing
percentage of removedkeypoints.
For the patch-based techniques, an increase of the
patch size leads to higher SED, which is expected
and desired. When increasing the percentage of re-
moved keypoints, there is a tendency for increasing
SED,except forLSandCAwithsmallerpatchsizes.
The largest SED values (which is the aim when re-
moving keypoints) are seen for techniques involving
GS (not shown) when a large share of all keypoints
is being removed. CA clearly exhibits the lowest
values, which means that the advantage of this ap-
proach in removing all keypoints is endangered by
the creation of new keypoints which are close to the 0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Keypoints Removed ( in Percent)
Distance between Disciptors (Delected & Newly Created)
3x3 Patch
5x5 Patch
7x7 Patch
9x9 patch
(a)LS
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Keypoints Removed ( In Percent)
Distance Between Discriptors
(Deleted & Newly Created)
3x3 Patch
5x5 Patch
7x7 Patch
9x9 patch
(b)CA
Figure4: Distance tonewlycreatedkeypoints.
removedones in termsof theirSIFTdescriptors.
After having analysed four different SIFT key-
point removal techniques with respect to different
properties,wetested thesemethods inanactualcopy
moveforgeryscenario. Thefollowingdefinitionsare
employed:
• TruePositive(TP): A true positive test result
for a forged image is one that detects at least Ï„
matchingkeypointpairs.
• FalseNegative(FN): Afalsenegative test re-
sultforaforgedimageisonethatdetectsatmost
τ−1matchingkeypointpairs.
• TrueNegative(TN): A true negative test re-
sult for an image fromtheBUILDING PHOTO
categoryisonethatdetectsatmostτ−1match-
ingkeypointpairs.
169
Joint Austrian Computer Vision and Robotics Workshop 2020
- Title
- Joint Austrian Computer Vision and Robotics Workshop 2020
- Editor
- Graz University of Technology
- Location
- Graz
- Date
- 2020
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- ISBN
- 978-3-85125-752-6
- Size
- 21.0 x 29.7 cm
- Pages
- 188
- Categories
- Informatik
- Technik