Robust Watermarking Approach for 3D Triangular
Mesh using Self Organization Map
Mona M.Soliman Aboul Ella Hassanien
Faculty of Computers and information Faculty of Computers and information Faculty of Computers and information
Cairo university, Cairo, Egypt Cairo university, Cairo, Egypt
Email:mona.solyman@fci-cu.edu.eg Scientific Research Group in Egypt (SRGE)
http://www.egyptscience.net
Abstract—The objective of this paper is to explore innovative
ways to insert the maximum amount of secret information into
3D mesh models without causing perceptual distortion and also
make it difficult for the attacker to guess where the watermark
was inserted. It is based on clustering 3D vertices into appropriate
or inappropriate candidates for watermark insertion using Self
Organization Map (SOM). Two methods were used to embed
the watermark into 3D model. The first method is a statistical
approach that modified the distribution of vertex norms to
hide watermark information into host 3D model while the
second method is a mixed insertion of watermark bits into host
model using vertex norm distribution and mesh vertices at the
same time. The robustness of proposed techniques is evaluated
experimentally by simulating attacks such as mesh smoothing,
noise addition and mesh cropping.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Graphics data are more and more widely applied to a
variety of applications, including video gaming, engineering
design, architectural walk-through, virtual reality, e-commerce,
and scientific visualization. For digital items, including 3D
graphics models, the threat of copying, tampering with, or
illegally distributing has generated a highly urgent demand for
robust copyright protection methods. It is essential to provide
a robust technique for copyright protection and/or content
authentication of graphics data in a universal multimedia
access framework. One approach to meet this requirement is
the use of digital watermarking [1].
Unlike cryptography, the digital watermarking technique is
able to protect digital works (assets) after the transmission
phase and the legal access. Watermarking algorithms are
classified into non-blind and blind watermarking schemes
depending on whether or not the original digital work is
needed at extraction phase [2]. Watermark robustness is the
ability to recover the watermark even if the watermarked 3D
model has been manipulated. Usually, one hopes to construct
a robust watermark which is able to go through common
malicious attacks for copyright protection purposes[3]. Wa-
termarking algorithms can also be broadly classified into
first, second and third generations of watermarking [4]. In
the first generation watermarking algorithms, watermark is
inserted in spatial domain by either modifying vertex positions
or modifying the connectivity of the vertices [5]-[6]. The
spatial domain watermarking schemes are usually less robust
978-1-4799-0080-0/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE 99
Hoda M.Onsi
Cairo university,Cairo, Egypt
Email:h.onsi@fci-cu.edu.eg
to attacks like compression and noise addition [7]. The second
generation algorithms use various transformations to insert the
watermark in the transform domain coefficients to enhance
robustness [8]-[12]. The second generation based on hiding
information in domain other than spatial domain [21],[23].
In the second generation, spectral decomposition and multi
resolution techniques such as wavelet transform and progres-
sive meshes are used to decompose a 3D model into a lower
resolution and the watermark is inserted in the bit stream.
Second generation algorithms increased the robustness of the
algorithm by inserting the watermark at multiple resolutions
[13]. Third generation watermarking techniques build on the
first and second generation techniques by adding an intelligent
layer of optimization for high density watermark insertion [4].
This paper focuses on building watermark of third gener-
ation by optimally inserting high density watermarks in 3D
models without causing perceptible distortion to the human
eye viewer. This performed by proposing a novel approach that
utilizes unsupervised learning technique (e.g. SOM). SOM is
a kind of competitive neural network in which the networks
learn to form their own classifications of the training data
without external help. In this work we use curvature features
as proposed in [15] to cluster mesh vertices into suitable
and unsuitable candidates for being watermark carrier. This
curvature measure determines the eligibility of the patch area
for watermark addition. The patch area is restricted to an 1-ring
neighborhood for each vertex. The watermark is then inserted
in selected vertices based on two methods, the first one used
a statistical approach that modifies the distribution of vertex
norms to hide watermark information into host 3-D meshes
[14]. The basic idea proposed in [14] is to split the distribution
of vertex norm into distinct sets called bins and embed one
bit per bin. The distribution of vertex norms is modified by
either shifting the mean value of the distribution according
to the watermark bit to be embedded and or changing its
variance. The other method used for watermark insertion is
to use a mixed insertion strategy that split watermark into two
parts and insert the first part in the vertex norm distribution as
proposed in [14], while the other part is inserted directly in the
vertex itself [15]. Our work is considered an improvement of
the original method proposed in [14] which has been proven
by the experimental results.
 The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Some useful
and important preliminary ideas relating to this work are
presented in Section II. The proposed approaches are outlined
in Section III and the experimental results are given in Section
IV. Finally, conclusions of this work is shown in section V.
II. P RELIMINARIES
A. Self Organization Map
Kohonen Self-Organizing Maps (or just Self-Organizing
Maps, or SOMs for short), are a type of neural networks.
They were developed in 1982 by Tuevo Kohonen, a professor
emeritus of the Academy of Finland. Self- Organizing Maps
are aptly named. Self-Organizing means no supervision is
required. SOMs learn on their own through unsupervised
competitive learning. Maps means they attempt to map their
weights to conform to the given input data [16]. In competitive
learning, the elements of the network compete with each other
for the right to provide the output associated with an input
vector. Only one element is allowed to answer the query and
this element simultaneously inhibits all other competitors.
In the case of unsupervised learning [17], the n-dimensional
input is processed by exactly the same number of computing
units as there are clusters to be individually identified. For the
problem of three clusters we could use the network shown in
Fig.1. The inputs x1 and x2 are processed by the three units
in Fig.1. Each unit computes its weighted input, but only the
unit with the largest excitation is allowed to fire a 1. The other
units are inhibited by this active element through the lateral
connections shown in the figure. Deciding whether or not to
activate a unit requires therefore global information about the
state of each unit. The firing unit signals that the current
input is an element of the cluster of vectors it represents.
We could also think of this computation as being performed
by perceptrons with variable thresholds. The thresholds are
adjusted in each computation in such a way that just one unit
is able to fire.
Fig. 1. A network of three competing units
B. 3D Mesh Background
Mathematically, a 3D mesh containing N vertices and M
edges can be modelled as a signal M = G, C, where
G = {vi }i=1,2,.......N , vi = (xi , yi , zi ) (1)
C = {(vk1 , vk2 )}, k1 = 1, 2, ...N, k2 = 1, 2, .....N (2)
100
Each vertex element vi in G is numbered by an index i and
is described by its three-dimensional coordinates (xi , yi , zi );
C has M elements and each element stands for an edge
connecting two different vertices indexed by k1 and k2,
respectively. In practice, instead of a list of edges, users
usually prefer a list of all the mesh facets with their respective
component vertices in a certain cyclic order [7]. Fig.2 shows an
example of a 3D mesh. The set of all the neighbours of a vertex
vi is called 1-ring of the vertex. The set of all neighbours of
the 1-ring neighbours of a vertex vi along with the set of their
1-ring neighbours is called 2-ring of the vertex. The number
of neighbours of vi in it’s 1-ring neighborhood is the valence
or degree of the vertex vi [4].
Fig. 2. Example of a 3D mesh and a close-up illustrating the valence of a
vertex and the degree of a facet.
C. Vertex Smoothness Measure
Curved surface consist of a number of smaller triangles
to give the perception of smooth surface. Normal variation
usually gives a good indication of the surface curvature [4].
Gaussian and mean curvatures are the most commonly used
measures for finding the curvature of a surface. However,
these curvature measures capture the global characteristics of
a surface [19]. In this work we used angle variation between
surface normals and the average normal corresponding to
a vertex to determine the vertex smoothness measure [18].
Such computed measure is considered local and relative to
the geometry of the surface. This measure was then used to
determine the amount of watermark to be added. The feature
vector is a set of angles derived by computing the orientation
of the surface normals to the average normal of the triangular
faces that form a 1-ring neighborhood for a vertex, as shown
in Fig.3 . This feature vector represents the curvature of the
1-ring vertex neighborhood. The length of the feature vector
is equal to the valence of the vertex, which is the count of
how many other vertices the vertex is connected to in the 3D
model.
III. T HE P ROPOSED 3D WATERMARKING APPROACH
In a watermarking algorithm, vertices are randomly se-
lected and information is added by perturbing the vertex
positions without causing perceptible distortion to 3D model.
At the same time it is required that for the watermark to
be robust, the watermark should survive unintentional attacks
such as compression loss, affine transformations, smoothing,
and noise. The requirements of having high capacity and

Fig. 3. Surface normal’s (in red) and average normal (in green) for a 1-ring
vertex neighborhood of valance 5.
robustness are in direct conflict with the requirement of being
imperceptible. Thus, there is a need for an algorithm to insert
high energy robust watermarks which are imperceptible at
the same time, there is a need to maximize the amount of
watermark information to be inserted in 3D mesh without
causing perceptible distortion, and without being detected by
an attacker to determine where and how much the watermark
information was inserted.
The objective of this proposed work is to achieve such
contradictory requirements by utilizing an intelligent algo-
rithm such as unsupervised learning using SOM. The main
goal of using SOM is to watermark a 3D model in those
locations which will produce imperceptible distortions in the
final watermarked model. This proposed approach as shown
in Fig.4 for 3D watermarking goes through three basic steps
starting by clustering vertices into suitable and unsuitable
candidates for being watermark carrier using SOM, followed
by insertion procedure that inserts watermark bits into those
selected locations, In the end there is the extraction procedure
that goes through the same steps of insertion on the receiver
side.
Fig. 4. Framework of the Proposed approaches for 3D mesh watermarking
A. Vertex Clustering Based on Self Organization Map
In this work we utilize SOM neural network to cluster the
vertices into suitable and unsuitable watermark carrier. The
choice of feature vectors to be clustered is critical for the
performance of SOM neural networks training. We use angle
101
variation between surface normals and the average normal
corresponding to a vertex to determine the vertex smoothness
measure [18]. The feature vector extraction method as shown
in Fig.5 results in a set of angles derived by computing the
orientation of the surface normals to the average normal of the
triangular faces that form a 1-ring neighborhood for a vertex.
Such a smoothness measure reflect the local geometry of a
surface or region that is if the region is flat, the angles will
be small in magnitude. In peak regions the angles will be
high in magnitude. If we aim to achieve high imperceptibility
both flat and peak regions can’t be used to hide watermark
bits. We have to neglect these regions and mark their vertices
as unsuitable watermark carrier. We only consider angles of
medium value to be watermark carriers. This performed by
using SOM to cluster the whole mesh vertices into three
clusters (large, medium, and low), label the medium clusters’
vertices to be suitable watermark carriers.
Since each vertex valance lead into different length feature
vector, We train four SOM neural networks, each of which
is trained by different feature vectors of length (4,5,6,7)
respectivly. equations 3 and 4 provide an example of feature
vector of length four for vertex valence = 4.
F eatureV ectorF = {α1 , α2 , α3 , α4 } (3)
Ni .Navg
αi = cos−1 ( ) (4)
|Ni ||Navg |
Fig. 5. Procedure of feature vector extraction from 3D model
B. Watermark Insertion Procedure
Once the locations of watermark insertion is determined us-
ing SOM output, a random watermark sequence w is required
to be inserted in those locations, In the insertion procedure
we use two insertion methods. The first method is based on
embedding watermark into the 3-D mesh model by modifying
the distribution of vertex norms [14]. The distribution is
divided into distinct sections, referred to as bins, each of which
is used as a watermark embedding unit to embed one bit of
watermark. The embedding is performed by making the mean
value of vertex norms greater or smaller than a reference value
according to watermark bit that we want to insert. Assume that
the vertex norms of cover meshes are mapped into the interval
[0,1] and have a uniform distribution over the interval. To
embed a watermark bit of +1, the distribution is modified so
that its mean value is greater than a reference value. To embed
−1, the distribution is modified so that it is concentrated on the
left side, and the mean value becomes smaller than a reference
value.
The second method is based on a new idea of partitioning
the watermark bits into two part, The first part is inserted
on the norm distributions as illustrated before while the Fig. 6. Original 3D mesh models
second part is inserted directly in the vertices according to
the following equation [18]: TABLE I
M ESH O BJECT U SED IN E XPERIMENTS

v (x, y, z) = v(x, y, z) + kw (5)
Mesh Model No. of Vert No. of Faces No. of Modifying Vert
 bunny 34,835 69,666 12,604
where v is the watermarked vertex, k is the scaling factor.
hand 36,619 72,958 6,601
Both methods of insertion lead into different results for dragon 50,000 100,000 12,617
impressionability and robustness, which will be declared in venus 100,759 201,514 17,955
the experimental results part. we refer to the two insertion
method as proposed approach I and proposed approach II.
A. Distortion Evaluation
C. Watermark Extraction Procedure One of the aims of watermarking graphical objects is to
The proposed approach I using the first method of insertion achieve minimal distortion. The quality of the watermarked
is considered a semi-blind watermarking procedure thus at objects is measured by Vertex Signal-to-Noise Ratio(VSNR)
extraction phase there is no need for the original model, All we that quantifies the visual differences between the original and
need is the trained SOM to detect the locations of watermark watermarked models. The amount of distortion in the 1-ring
insertion. Once these locations are detected watermark bits can be measured by computing the signal to noise ratio (SNR)
w are extracted by applying the same steps of embedding as follows:
procedure [18]. The watermark bits are determined by com- N
(x2i + Yi2 + Zi2 )
paring the mean value of norm distributions by reference i=1
SN R = N (6)
value. For proposed approach II we need the original mesh 
model at extraction phase, So it is considered as non-blind [(xi − x−i ) 2 + (Y − Y − )2 + (Z − Z − )2 ]
i i i i
i=1
watermarking procedure. Once the locations of watermark bits
are located the extraction goes through two steps, the first step where N is the number of vertices in the 1-ring neighborhood
uses the extraction procedure of approach I to extract the first of the centre vertex including the centre vertex; Xi , Yi , and
part of watermark sequence w. The other part of sequence is Zi are the Cartesian coordinates of the vertices in the 1-ring
extracted by simply calculating the vertex difference between neighborhood including the center vertex; Xi− , Yi− , Zi− are
original and watermarked model. Then we merge the two parts the modified coordinates of the center vertex.
to provide the whole watermark sequence V SN R = 20 ∗ log10 (SN R) (7)
As shown in Table II, our proposed approach I gives the
IV. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
highest value of VSNR compared to the work proposed by
Several simulations are performed on four 3D models [14] and our proposed approach II. This is reasonable because
shown in Fig. 6 to evaluate the performance of the proposed watermark is only inserted in suitable locations of original
watermarking approach. We conducted a series of experiments model. This also expected for proposed approach II as part
to test the proposed watermarking method for robustness and of watermark sequence is inserted by modifying vertex value
imperceptibility. Table I described the four mesh models with directly which reduces VSNR value.
their corresponding number of vertices and faces with last
TABLE II
column indicating number of vertices modified in insertion VSNR VALUE FOR E ACH M ODEL
phase of two proposed approachs I and II. The watermark
used for insertion is 64 binary bit sequence. The experimental Mesh Model Cho approach proposed I Proposed II
results will show different results for proposed approach I and bunny 112.50 116.05 103.03
proposed approach II and compare them with the original work hand 109.94 121.63 105.99
of watermark insertion based on watermark insertion in the dragon 109.94 119.57 105,78
vertex norm distribution as proposed by Cho in [14] without venus 126.93 137.83 120.21
any intelligence in selecting watermark carrier.

102
B. Robustness Evaluation V. C ONCLUSIONS
Robustness of the system is verified by applying different This work provides a novel watermarking algorithm in
attacks on the watermarked model including: Similarity Trans- which vertices are selected from the 3D model for watermark-
formations: This is a very common attack applied on the 3D ing by using SOM neural networks without causing perceptible
watermarked model. It includes translation, rotation, uniform distortion. We use statistical watermarking methods for 3D
scaling, and combinations of the above three operations. As mesh models that modify the distribution of vertex norms via
the rotation and translation transformations only change the changing the mean of each bin. To enhance both transparency
location of the model not the actual contents, the watermarked and robustness we introduced two novel approaches that insert
model is safe so system is invariant to rotation, translation and watermark bits based on intelligence vertex selection. The
uniform scaling. Noise analysis: random Noise is added to the first proposed approach provides good results in terms of
watermarked model with different noise amplitude. Smoothing imperceptibility while the second proposed approach provides
attack: Laplacian smoothing is applied to the watermarked better results in terms of robustness and at the same time it
model smooths the sharp edges in the model by applying maintain accepted results of imperceptibility.
a low pass gradient filter to the vertices. Cropping attack:
TABLE IV
cropping is performed by cutting 3d model with different E VALUATION OF ROUBSTNES AGAINST A DDITIVE N OISE ATTACKS
levels indicating the percentage of cropped vertices. We list
all these typical attacks with their associated parameters used Model A Cho approach Proposed I Proposed II
Bunny 0.1% 0.928 0.825 0.998
in our experiments in Table III. 0.3% 0.467 0.567 0.938
0.5% 0.167 0.124 0.839
TABLE III Hand 0.1% 0.991 0.848 0.993
ROBUSTNESS ATTACK PARAMETERS 0.3% 0.580 0.406 0.869
0.5% 0.256 0.282 0.858
Attack Parameter parameter value Dragon 0.1% 0.901 0.901 0.993
0.3% 0.691 0.717 0.960
Similarity Transform times 3
0.5% 0.339 0.546 0.913
Noise Addition A 0.1% 0.3% 0.5% Venus 0.1% 0.783 0.948 0.993
Smoothing λ=0.1 Nit 5 10 30 0.3% 0.230 0.241 0.830
Cropping %crooping 10% 30% 50%80% 0.5% 0.148 0.155 0.667

The robustness is evaluated in terms of correlation coeffi-


cient between the extracted watermark bit sequence wn and the TABLE V
E VALUATION OF ROBUSTNESS AGAINST S MOOTHING ATTACK
originally inserted one wn as given by the following equation
[22]: Model Nit Cho approach Proposed I Proposed II
Bunny 5 0.876 0.910 0.966
N−1   10 0.780 0.462 0.919
(wn − w− )(wn − w− ) 30 0.156 -0.059 0.521
Corr =  n=1 (8) Hand 5
10
0.876
0.819
0.901
0.842
0.958
0.869
N−1 N
−1
  30 0.402 0.198 0.436
(wn − w− )2 (wn − w− )2 Dragon 5 0.843 0.969 0.948
n=1 n=1 10 0.684 0.654 0.849
 30 0.373 0.302 0.379
Where w− and w− indicate respectively the averages of Venus 5 0.951 0.950 0.955

the watermark bit sequence wn and wn . This correlation 10 0.83 0.842 0.864
30 0.495 0.219 0.571
value measures the similarity between two strings and varies
between 1 (orthogonal sequence) and +1 (the same sequence).
Tables IV-VI show the correlation results for different types TABLE VI
of attacks with different parmters for the Cho method [14] and E VALUATION OF ROBUSTNESS AGAINST C ROPPING ATTACK
our two proposed approaches. Model %Cropp Cho approach Proposed I Proposed II
Fig. 7-9 show the robustness response for the Cho approach Bunny 10% 0.128 1 1
and two proposed approach for random noise attack, smooth- 30% 0.166 1 1
50% 0.048 -0.027 0.999
ness attack, cropping attack respectively for the bunny model. 80% -0.023 0.002 0.649
Although proposed approach I provides the best VSNR Hand 10% 0.059 1 1
30% 0.002 1 1
compared to proposed approach II and Cho approach [14], 50% 0.094 0.146 1
its robustness response is the same or less than Cho approach. 80% -0.065 0.236 0.662
This is due to the fact that the basic method of insertion used Dragon 10% -0.113 1 1
30% -0.0499 1 1
which depends on bit insertion in the norm distribution is 50% -0.142 1 1
affected by the number of vertices per each bin. The proposed 80% -0.233 0.107 0.667
Venus 10% -0.115 1 1
approach II provides an improvement of Cho approach in 30% -0.165 1 1
terms of robustness as the number of vertices compared to 50% -0.132 1 1
number of bins is increased, at the same time it maintains 80% 0.045 0.250 0.660
acceptable imperceptibility requirement.

103
 Fig. 7. Robustness response of random noise attack for bunny model
Fig. 8. Robustness response of smoothing attack for bunny model
R EFERENCES
[1] C.T. Kuo, S.H. CHENG, D.C. WU and C.C. CHANG, A Blind Robust
Watermarking Scheme for 3D Triangular Mesh Models Using 3D Edge
Vertex Detection, Asian Journal of Health and Information Sciences, vol.
4, no. 1, pp. 36-63, 2009.
[2] C.T. Sharvari and R.R. Deshmukh, Watermarking 3D Surface Models into
3D Surface Models Based on ANFIS, Advances in Computing 2012, vol.
2, no. 3, pp. 29-34, DOI: 10.5923/j.ac.20120203.01, 2012.
[3] C.T. Sharvari and R.R. Deshmukh, Blind 3D Model Watermarking Based
On Multi-Resolution Representation And Fuzzy Logic, International Jour-
nal of Computer Science & Information Technology (IJCSIT), vol. 4, no.
1, DOI: 10.5121/ijcsit.2012.4110, pp. 117-126, 2012.
[4] M.C. Motwani, Third Generation 3D Watermarking:Applied Computa-
tional Intelligence Techniques, A dissertation submitted in partial ful-
filment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Computer Science and Engineering , 2011.
[5] O. Benedens, Geometry-based watermarking of 3D models, IEEE Com-
puters and Applications, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 46-55, 1999.
[6] R. Ohbuchi, H. Masuda and M. Aono, Watermarking three dimensional
polygonal models through geometric and topological modifications, IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 551-
560, 1998.
[7] K. Wang, G. Lavoue, F. Denis and A. Baskurt, A Comprehensive
Survey on Three-Dimensional Mesh Watermarking, IEEE Transactions
on multimedia, vol. 10, Issue. 8, pp. 1513-1527, 2008.
[8] E. Praun, H. Hoppe and A. Finkelstein, Robust mesh watermarking,
SIGGRAPH Proceedings, pp. 69-76, 1999.
[9] S. Kanai, H. Date and T. Kishinami, Digital watermarking for 3D
polygons using multi-resolution wavelet decomposition, Proceedings of
104
Fig. 9. Robustness response of cropping attack for bunny model
the sixth IFIP WG 5.2 international workshop on geometric modeling:
fundamentals and applications (GEO-6), pp. 296-307, 1998.
[10] K.K. Yin, Z.G. Pan, J.Y. Shi and D. Zhang, Robust mesh watermarking
based on multiresolution processing, Computers & Graphics, vol. 25, no.
3, pp. 409-420, 2001.
[11] I. Guskov, W. Sweldens and P. Shroder, Multiresolution signal process-
ing for meshes, Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer
graphics and interactive techniques, pp. 325-334, 1999.
[12] R. Ohbuchi, S. Takahashi, T. Miyazawa and A. Mukaiyama, Watermark-
ing 3D polygonal meshes in the mesh spectral domain, Proceedings of
the graphics interface, Canada, pp. 9-17, 2001.
[13] M.S. Kim, S. Valette, H.Y. Jung, and R. Prost, Watermarking of 3D
Irregular Meshes Based on Wavelet Multiresolution Analysis, IWDW’05
Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Digital Watermarking
, pp. 313-324 , 2005.
[14] J.W. Cho, R. Prost and H.Y. Jung, An Oblivious Watermarking for
3-D Polygonal Meshes Using Distribution of Vertex Norms, IEEE
transaction on signal processing, vol. 55, issue. 1 , pp. 144-152,
DOI:10.1007/11551492-24, 2005.
[15] R.C. Motwani, M.C. Motwani and F.C. Harris, An Eigen-Normal Ap-
proach for 3D Mesh Watermarking Using Support Vector Machines,
Journal Of Electronic Science and Technology, vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 237-243,
2010.
[16] H. Simon, Self-organizing maps Neural networks - A comprehensive
foundation , Prentice-Hall. ISBN 0-13-908385-5, 1999.
[17] R. Rojas, Neural Networks A Systematic Introduction, A book Foreword
by Jerome Feldman, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, New-York, 1996.
[18] R.C. Motwani, M.C. Motwani, F.C. Harris and B.D. Bryant, Watermark
Embedder Optimization for 3D Mesh Objects using Classification Based
Approach, International Conference on Signal Acquisition and Process-
ing, DOI 10.1109/ICSAP.2010.83, pp. 125-129, 2010.
[19] R. Motwani, C. Frederick and Jr. Harris, Robust 3D Watermarking Using
Vertex Smoothness Measure, Proceedings of the 2009 International Con-
ference on Image Processing, Computer Vision, and Pattern Recognition
(IPCV’09),Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 287-293, 2009.
[20] K. Wanga, G. Lavouea, F. Denisb and A. Baskurta, Robust and blind
mesh watermarking based on volume moments, Computers & Graphics,
vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1-19, 2011.
[21] M.F. Tolba, M.Al-S. Ghonemy, I.H. Taha, A.S. Khalifa, Reliable Blind
Informamtion Hiding into Colored Images Using Reversible Wavelet
Transforms, International Journal of Computers and Their Applications,
vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 133-140, 2005.
[22] N. Zawawi, R. El-Gohary, M. Hamdy, and M. F. Tolba, A Novel
Watermarking Approach for Data Integrity and Non-repudiation in Ra-
tional Databases, First International Conference on Advanced Machine
Learning Technologies and Applications, AMLTA2012, Cairo, Egypt,
December 8-10, 2012, pp. 532-542, 2012.
[23] M.F. Tolba, M. Al-Said Ghonemy, I. A.Taha, and A. S. Khalifa High
capacity image steganography using wavelet-based fusion. Proceedings
of the 9th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, Alexan-
dria, Egypt,vol .1, pp. 430-435, 2004.