*
Tree Energy Differentiation (TED) Based Wavelet Watermarking for Digital Images
Min-Jen Tsai and Bai-Jiun Chen
Institute of Information Management, National Chiao Tung University, R.O.C.
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we present a novel differential energy watermarking
algorithm called Tree Energy Differentiation (TED) based on the
wavelet tree structure. The wavelet coefficients of the image are
divided into disjoint trees called wavelet trees. A wavelet tree
consists of 21 coefficients and is divided into 6 blocks. One
watermark bit is embedded into one wavelet tree using the energy
differentiation between coefficients of each block. In addition, the
contrast sensitive function (CSF) of human visual system is also
considered for better weighting in watermarking. Using this
approach, we can check each wavelet tree to verify the watermark
existence for copyright protection and ownership verification. The
experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of TED
algorithm in terms of robustness and imperceptibility of
watermarking.
Index Terms—TED, digital image watermarking, wavelet tree
1. INTRODUCTION
As digital data are widely available online or elsewhere, and
because they are easy to be modified, necessary works are required
to protect the copyright and the verification of the embedded
genuine information. Digital watermarking has received significant
attraction recently due to the popularity of the Internet and demand
for the ownership protection [1]. Among the techniques for
watermarking [1-6], the robustness of the digital watermarking is
very crucial to counteract the various attacks of unauthorized
modification.
Cox et al. [1] had proposed a global DCT-based spread
spectrum approach to hide watermarks. Langelaar and Lagendijk
[2] introduced the DEW (Differential Energy Watermarking)
algorithm for JPEG/MPEG streams in the DCT domain. The DEW
algorithm embeds label bits (the watermark) by selectively
discarding high frequency DCT coefficients in certain image
regions. Das, Maitra and Mitra had presented a successful
cryptanalysis against the DEW scheme in [3] and proposed a more
robust scheme.
On the other hand, Wang and Lin [4][5] introduced the
technique of WTQ (Wavelet Tree Quantization) in the DWT
Das and Maitra had presented how that can be accomplished in [6].
In this study, we proposed a tree energy differentiation (TED)
watermarking algorithm which is based on DWT theory. TED
modifies the wavelet coefficient values of images dynamically and
uses the differentiation to embed the watermark. In the embedding
process, we try to find the best coefficient energy differentiation
direction of the embedded watermark bit that make minimal
change of coefficient’s energy. Then we change the wavelet tree
coefficient energy dynamically with differentiation direction, and
embed the designated watermark bits from the energy
differentiation between the coefficients. The purpose of the TED
design is robust to the cryptanalysis of the watermarking attacks
with high visual quality. Under such motivation, TED can
construct a better wavelet tree watermarking algorithm for digital
images and offer more credible technique to protect the digital
intellectual property rights.
This paper will be organized as follows. The details of the
algorithm will be explained in Section 2. Section 3 will show the
experiments with discussion and conclusion is in Section 4.
2. THE APPROACH AND TED ALGORITHM
We employ the same wavelet tree structure as depicted in the
WTQ scheme in Fig. 1. Suppose that a 512×512 image is
transformed, each wavelet tree will be a collection of 21 wavelet
coefficients, one coefficient from level 4, 4 coefficients from level
3, and 16 coefficients from level 2, so we can get 3072 wavelet
trees. Then we divide the 21 coefficients of one tree into 6 blocks,
and 4 nearby coefficients in level 2 and 3 from a block in Fig. 2
To embed the watermark into wavelet trees, the TED algorithm
tries to modify the energy between coefficients in each block of
one tree, so one watermark bit is embedded in one tree by
modifying the coefficient energy 6 times (one time for one block).
We quantize the coefficient of block 1 with a modular value S, and
define the threshold of differentiation T1 and T2 as follows:
S 3S
T1 T2 (1)
4 4
Then we differentiate the coefficient energy of block 1 in tree ˧n
to embed the watermark bit Wn as follows:
G n 1 T n 1 mod S (2)
domain. The wavelet coefficients are grouped into so-called super
trees. The wavelet tree based watermarking algorithm embeds ­T n 1  G n 1  T1 , if Wn  1 and T n 1 t 0
°
watermark bits by selectively quantizing the super trees. Even if °T n 1  G n 1  T 2 , if Wn  1 and T n 1 t 0
T nc 1 ® (3)
the attacker has no knowledge of which two trees are used for °T n 1  G n 1  T1 , if Wn  1 and T n 1  0
embedding, he can still quantize those super trees that are not
quantized earlier with respect to the estimated quantization indices.
______________________________________________________
*
This work was partially supported by the National Science
Council in Taiwan, Republic of China, under NSC95-2416-
H009-027 and NSC96-2416-H009-015.
978-1-4244-1764-3/08/$25.00 ©2008 IEEE 445
°¯T n 1  G n 1  T 2 , if Wn  1 and T n 1  0
For block 2-6 which contains 4 coefficients, TED will modify each
4 coefficients according to the energy differentiation. First, we
must determine a suitable differentiation direction of the block.
There are 3 kinds of differentiation direction: vertical, horizontal
and diagonal direction. If we can modify the energy of one block
ICIP 2008
with different differentiation direction and make minimal change ın,g(Ur )=( T n,g(1)+ T n,g(1))/2
of the coefficients, the direction is exactly the best direction. The (4)
ın,g(Lr )=( T n,g(3)+ T n,g(4))/2
best differentiation direction choice algorithm of wavelet Then TED will calculate the difference difv of ın,g(Ur) and ın,g(Lr)
coefficient energy as follows: as follows:
ın,g(Ur) :The average of 2 Upper coefficients difv=|ın,g(Ur )- ın,g(Lr )| (5)
ın,g(Lr) :The average of 2 Lower coefficients After this step, TED will modify the energy differentiation
ın,g(Lt) :The average of 2 Left coefficients relation between ın,g(Ur) and ın,g(Lr) so we can embed the
ın,g(Rt) :The average of 2 Right coefficients watermark bit. It depends on whether the positive/negative
ın,g(D1) :The average of 2 left-Diagonal coefficients watermark bit as follows:
ın,g(D2) :The average of 2 right-Diagonal coefficients V nc , g Ur  ! V nc , g Lr  , if Wn = -1
1Ǻ V= ın,g(Ur)- ın,g(Lr) (6)
2Ǻ H= ın,g(Lt)- ın,g(Rt) V nc , g Ur   V nc , g Lr  , if Wn = 1
3Ǻ D= ın,g(D1)- ın,g(D2) Let E[.] means the process of difference operation, TED will
4Ǻ if ( Wn = = -1) direction=find_max ( V , H , D ) modify the coefficient energy to satisfy the conditions above as
follows:
5Ǻ else if ( Wn = = 1) direction=find_min ( V , H , D )
­T  j   ' , if V n , g Ur  V n , g  Lr 
If we find the vertical direction as the differentiation direction, we ° n ,g 2
°
must calculate the average value of upper and lower coefficients of °°T n , g  j  , if V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr  and dif v t '
block g of tree n as follows: >
E T n ,g  j  @ j 1,2
® '  dif v
°T n , g  j   2 V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr  and dif v  '
Wn 1
, if
°
°T  j   dif v  ' , if V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr 
LL4 HL 4 °̄ n , g 2
HL3
LH4 HH 4

HL2 ­T  j   ' , if V n , g Ur  V n , g  Lr 
° n ,g
2
LH3 HH3 °
HL1 °°T n , g  j  , if V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr  and dif v t '
>
E T n ,g  j  @ j 3,4
® '  dif v
°T n , g  j   2 V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr  and dif v  '
Wn 1
, if
LH2 HH2 °
°T  j   dif v  ' , if V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr 
°̄ n , g 2 (7)
­T  j   ' , if V n , g Ur  V n , g  Lr 
° n,g 2
°
LH1 HH1 °°T n , g  j  , if V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr  and dif v t '
>
E T n,g  j  @ j 1,2
® '  dif v
°T n , g  j   2 V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr  and dif v  '
Wn 1
, if
°
°T  j   dif v  ' , if V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr 
°̄ n , g 2
Fig.1 A four-level wavelet tree structure. The coefficients ­T  j   ' , if V n , g Ur  V n , g  Lr 
correspond to the same spatial location are grouped together. ° n ,g
2
°
weighting values for each sub-band are indicated at the °°T n , g  j  , if V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr  and dif v t '
center of each band. >
E T n,g  j  @ j 3,4
® '  dif v
°T n , g  j   2 V n , g Ur   V n , g  Lr  and dif v  '
Wn 1
, if
block 2
i =1 °
j=1 j=2 °T  j   dif v  ' , if V n , g Ur  ! V n , g  Lr 
°̄ n , g 2

i =2 i =3 j=3 j=4 The ' is the intensity differentiation threshold. In the equation
we set up the suitable intensity differentiation threshold to ensure
˧n,1(j)
i =4 i =5 the robustness of watermarking. When ' is larger, the
watermarking is more robust, but it will affect the image quality
block 3-6
more.
i =6 i =7 i =10 i =11 j=1 j=2 j=1 j=2 When we have done the energy differentiation process in block
1 to block 6, the watermarking of Wn into Tn is completed. The
i =8 i =9 i =12 i =13 j=3 j=4 j=3 j=4
differentiation direction of every tree must be recorded in a storage
˧n,2(j) ˧n,3(j) space. If the differentiation direction is horizontal or diagonal, the
i =14 i =15 i =18 i =19 differentiation process is similar.
j=1 j=2 j=1 j=2
To extract the watermark from wavelet trees, the TED algorithm
i =16 i =17 i =20 i =21
j=3 j=4 j=3 j=4 must to get the 6 possible outcomes of watermark bit Wn from
block 1 to block 6 in wavelet tree Tn, and then we can determine
˧n,4(j) ˧n,5(j)
the final value of Wn from the 6 outcomes. If D[.] means the
(a) (b) process of watermark extraction, we extract the possible Wn from
Fig. 2 (a) There are 21 coefficients to form a tree and divided block 1 as follows:
into 6 blocks. (b) In block 2-6, 4 nearby coefficients in level
T n 1 T nc1 mod S (8)
2 and 3 from a block separately, then we can modify the
coefficient value of each block to embed a watermark bit.

446
 ­ T  T2 level 2 or level 3. The jth coefficient of block g in Tn is
° 1 , if T n 1  1
D>T nc1@ ® 2
(9)
represented as Tn,g(j).ʳ
T  T2
° 1 , if T n 1 t 1 4) FOR EACH watermark bit wn (n = 0 to Nw – 1) DO
¯ 2 a) Select the modular value S and calculate the Tƍn(1) with (1)-
Then we deal with the extraction process of block 2-6 by (3).
contrast of differentiation direction and coefficient energy. If d(Tn,g) b) Find the suitable differentiation direction of Tn,g and modify
=0,1,2 means the differentiation direction is vertical, horizontal or the energy with (4)-(7).
diagonal of block g in Tn, the equations of watermark extraction as c) Recorder the differentiation direction of Tn,g
follows: 5) Arrange back the modulated trees to their original positions.
­ 1 , if V nc , g Ur  ! V nc , g Lr  and d T n , g  0 6) Pass the modified wavelet coefficients through the inverse DWT
> °
@
D T nc, g ® 1 , if V nc , g Ur   V nc , g Lr  and d T n , g  0
to obtain a watermarked image.
Note:
° 0
¯ , if V nc , g Ur  V nc , g Lr  and d T n , g  0 1) The watermark W is a binary PN sequence of ±1.
, if V nc , g Lt  ! V nc , g Rt  and d T n , g  1
2) The maximal length of watermark = the number of tree = 3072
­ 1
> °
D T nc, g ® 1@ , if V nc , g Lt   V nc , g Rt  and d T n , g  1 (10) TED Watermark Extraction:
, if V nc , g Lt  V nc , g Rt  and d T n , g  1
° 0 1) Generate a seed by mapping a signature/text through a one-way
¯ deterministic function. Obtain a PN sequence W of length Nw
­ 1 , if V nc , g D1  ! V nc , g D2  and d T n , g  2 using the seed k..
> °
@
D T nc, g ® 1 , if V nc , g D1   V nc , g D2  and d T n , g  2 2) Compute wavelet coefficients of a host image. Group the
coefficients to form trees and arrange the trees using the same
° 0
¯ , if V nc , g D1  V nc , g D2  and d T n , g  2
Since the importance of coefficient in different wavelet level is
different, the sensitivity of human vision is also different from
various spatial frequencies (frequency subbands). Since HVS
(Human Visual System) is the key factor in providing a better
visual effect and the imperceptibility of the watermarked image,
TED adopt the CSF of the HVS in [7] to determine the better
weighing values for watermarking. The model of the CSF for
luminance (or grayscale) images is defined as follows:
1. 1
H ( f ) 2.6 * (0.0192  0.114 * f ) * e  ( 0.114* f ) where f fx  f y
2 2
is the spatial frequency in cycles/degree of visual angle (fx and fy
are the spatial frequencies in the horizontal and vertical directions,
respectively). To apply the CSF in the DWT domain, CSF masking
is employed and refers to the method of weighting the wavelet
coefficients relative to their perceptual importance. The wavelet
coefficient CSF of the perceptual importance weight as shown for
each subband in Fig. 1.
If the wavelet tree is consist of coefficients in HL or LH
subband, the judgment value wn is determined as follows:
generator with the information of tree combination and
differentiation direction list.
3) FOR EACH watermark bit wn (n = 0 to Nw – 1) DO
a) Using modular value S and Tƍn,g to calculate the D[Tƍn(1)]
with (8)-(9)
b) Get the differentiation directions of Tƍn,g and determine the
D[Tƍn,g]with (10) for g=2 to 6.
c) Calculate the judgment value wn by (11a) and (11b) IF (wn
•0) THEN wn = -1 ELSE wn = 1
4) Compute the normalized correlation ȡ.
5) If ȡ is above the threshold ȡT, the watermark W exists; otherwise,
it does not exist.
TED-F Watermarking:
Since the information of tree combination and differentiation
direction must be kept secret which addresses extra storage space
is needed, TED may be categorized as a non-blind watermarking
scheme. However, the same seed k in step (1) of TED watermark
embedding could be applied to get a sequence of random number
which enforces the tree combination order and differentiation
wn D> ˧nc 1@ u 3.55  D> ˧nc,1 @ u5.3   D> ˧nc,2 @  D> ˧nc,3 @  D> ˧nc,4 @  D> ˧nc,5 @ u 4.74 (11a)
If the wavelet tree is consist of coefficients in HH subband, the
judgment value wn is determined as follows:
direction. Therefore, a TED-F (F means forced direction) is then
designed which doesn’t need the extra information for watermark
extraction. Therefore, TED-F is same like WTQ as a blind
watermarking scheme. Their performance comparison will be
wn D> ˧nc 1@ u 3.48  D> ˧nc,1 @ u 7.2  (D> ˧nc,2 @  D> ˧nc,3 @  D> ˧nc,4 @  D> ˧nc,5 @) u 3.75 (11b) illustration in the next section.
Finally we will get the extracted watermark bit W nc from wn as
3. EXPERIMENTS AND DISCUSSION
follows:
To evaluate the performance of the proposed method, the 512×512
­  1, w n t 0
W nc ® (12) Lena, Goldhill and Peppers images with 8 bits/pixel resolution are
¯ 1, w n  0 used for watermarking. We employ a four-level wavelet transform
The complete design of the proposed algorithm is summarized as by using 9-7 filters and a watermark sequence of length 512. In
following: order to compare the performance with the WTQ scheme, Lena,
TED Watermark Embedding: Goldhill and Peppers are set at the same PSNR values of 38.2, 38.7
1) Generate a seed by mapping a signature/text through a one-way and 39.8 dB from [5] respectively. With watermark length Nw =
deterministic function. Obtain a PN sequence W of length Nw 512, the threshold ȡT is chosen to be 0.23 for a false positive
using the seed k. probability of 1.03×10-7.
2) Compute wavelet coefficients of a host image. Group the For compression attack, JPEG and SPIHT compression with
coefficients to form trees. different quality factors (QF) and bit rates are preformed on the
3) Randomly arrange the trees using some pseudorandom watermarked image. The correlation values of the extracted
generator and each tree is divided into 6 blocks. The block 1 watermarks are listed in Table I(a)(b)(c) for Lena, Goldhill and
has 1 coefficient in level 4 and block 2-6 has 4 coefficients in Peppers respectively. From those results, we can see that TED and

447
TED-F are robust to JPEG and SPIHT compression. Even for the JPEG (QF=90%) 1.00 1.00 1.00
case that QF is equal to 30 or bit rate as low as 0.3bpp, the JPEG (QF=50%) 1.00 1.00 0.26
watermark can still be detected but WTQ is failed for Lena and JPEG (QF=30%) 1.00 1.00 0.15
Goldhill image. SPIHT (bitrate = 0.7) 1.00 1.00 0.85
Several spatial-domain signal processing techniques are SPIHT (bitrate = 0.5) 1.00 1.00 0.85
performed as attacks on the watermarked image for Lena, Goldhill SPIHT (bitrate = 0.3) 1.00 0.93 0.21
and Peppers. The normalized correlation values from the Median Filtering (4×4) 0.94 0.86 0.23
watermarked images are listed in Table I(a)(b)(c) as well. For all Gaussian Filtering 0.72 0.59 0.64
cases, the watermark information therein can be successfully Sharpening 0.98 0.98 0.46
detected with high robustness. Especially for those cases of [Geometric Attacks]
Median Filtering of 4×4 mask, Gaussian filtering and sharpening, Pixel Shifting (6 pixels) 0.23 0.24 0.34
TED and TED-F algorithms outperform the WTQ scheme with Rotation (0.75°) 0.36 0.27 0.26
high normalized correlation values in all cases. [Security Measurement]
In addition, the geometric attacks including pixel shifting Multiple Watermarking 1.00 0.67 0.11
attacks (circular shift) and rotation attacks (rotation and scaling) (4 watermarks) (31.30 dB) (31.09 dB) (28.05 dB)
along with multiple watermarking and bitplane removal attacks are Bitplane Removal 0.98 0.88 0.11
also preformed for TED and TED-F. The outcomes in Table (5 bitplanes) (33.65 dB) (33.20 dB) (18.47 dB)
I(a)(b)(C) also disclose TED and TED-F are superior to WTQ in (a)
almost all categories with significant high PSNR values. Since
high PSNR has positive correlation with better image quality, the Operations TED TED-F WTQ[5]
CSF human visual system applied in TED and TED-F shows [Signal Processing Attacks]
accurate weighting and visual characteristics. However, TED is JPEG (QF=90%) 1.00 1.00 1.00
better than TED-F since forced differentiation direction doesn’t
JPEG (QF=50%) 1.00 1.00 0.71
guarantee the best choice among selections.
JPEG (QF=30%) 1.00 1.00 0.23
4. CONCLUSION SPIHT (bitrate = 0.7) 1.00 1.00 0.35
SPIHT (bitrate = 0.5) 1.00 0.98 0.23
The tree energy differentiation (TED) watermarking algorithm
SPIHT (bitrate = 0.3) 0.99 0.88 -0.06
based on DWT theory has been presented in this study. Compared
Median Filtering (4×4) 0.94 0.85 0.24
with other watermarking schemes, the proposed algorithm can
Gaussian Filtering 0.80 0.75 0.56
tolerate more common signal processing and geometric attacks. In
Sharpening 0.99 0.98 0.39
addition, the human visual characteristics are considered for better
performance in watermark extraction. Regarding the cryptanalysis [Geometric Attacks]
of the algorithm, the algorithm can be public with the keys Pixel Shifting (6 pixels) 0.29 0.25 0.35
remained private for TED and totally blind detection for TED-F Rotation (0.75°) 0.28 0.23 0.21
algorithm. [Security Measurement]
Multiple Watermarking 1.00 0.71 0.18
REFERENCES (4 watermarks) (31.92 dB) (31.50 dB) (28.57 dB)
[1] I. J. Cox, J. Kilian, F. T. Leighton, and T. Shamoon,, “Secure spread Bitplane Removal 1.00 0.84 0.14
spectrum watermarking for multimedia”, IEEE Trans. on Image (5 bitplanes) (32.22 dB) (31.87 dB) (16.18 dB)
Proc., vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 1673-1687, Dec. 1997.
(b)
[2] G. C. Langelaar and R. L. Lagendijk, “Optimal differential energy
watermarking of DCT encoded images and video”, IEEE Trans. on Operations TED TED-F WTQ[5]
Image Proc., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 148-158, Jan. 2001.
[3] T. K. Das, S. Maitra, and J. Mitra, “Cryptanalysis of optimal [Signal Processing Attacks]
differential energy watermarking (DEW) and a modified robust JPEG (QF=90%) 1.00 1.00 1.00
scheme”, IEEE Trans. on Signal Proc., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 768-775, JPEG (QF=50%) 1.00 1.00 0.70
Feb. 2005. JPEG (QF=30%) 1.00 0.99 0.34
[4] S. H. Wang and Y. P. Lin, “Blind Watermarking Using Wavelet SPIHT (bitrate = 0.7) 1.00 1.00 0.85
Tree Quantization”, IEEE International Conference on Multimedia
and Expo, Vol. 1, pp. 589-592, Aug 2002
SPIHT (bitrate = 0.5) 1.00 1.00 0.65
[5] S. H. Wang and Y. P. Lin, “Wavelet tree quantization for copyright SPIHT (bitrate = 0.3) 0.99 0.92 0.36
protection watermarking”, IEEE Trans. on Image Proc., vol. 13, no. Median Filtering (4×4) 0.96 0.91 0.25
2, pp. 154-165, Feb. 2004. Gaussian Filtering 0.71 0.67 0.74
[6] T. K. Das and S. Maitra, “Cryptanalysis of wavelet tree quantization Sharpening 1.00 0.98 0.62
watermarking scheme”, IWDC 2004, pp. 219-230, 2004. [Geometric Attacks]
[7] B. B. Huang and S. X. Tang, “A contrast-sensitive visible
Pixel Shifting (6 pixels) 0.27 0.26 0.34
watermarking scheme”, IEEE Multimedia, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 60-66,
April-June 2006.
Rotation (0.75°) 0.33 0.28 0.26
TABLE I [Security Measurement]
PERFORMANCE SUMMARY OF TED, TED-F AND WTQ Multiple Watermarking 1.00 0.73 0.22
SCHEMES (a) LENA. (b) GOLDHILL. (c) PEPPERS. (4 watermarks) (32.82 dB) (32.37 dB) (28.81 dB)
Bitplane Removal 0.98 0.49 0.14
Operations TED TED-F WTQ[5] (5 bitplanes) (33.98 dB) (33.66 dB) (16.93 dB)
[Signal Processing Attacks] (c)

448