Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization using Genetics Algorithm

TELKOMNIKA, Vol.16, No.6, December 2018, pp.2651~2660
ISSN: 1693-6930, accredited First Grade by Kemenristekdikti, Decree No: 21/E/KPT/2018
DOI: 10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v16i6.10111  2651
Received May 31, 2018; Revised October 1, 2018; Accepted October 24, 2018
Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization
using Genetics Algorithm
Ledya Novamizanti*, Gelar Budiman, Irma Safitri
Electrical Engineering Faculty, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia
*Corresponding author, e-mail: ledyaldn@telkomuniversity.ac.id
Abstract
Ease process digital data information exchange impact on the increase in cases of copyright
infringement. Audio watermarking is one solution in providing protection for the owner of the work. This
research aims to optimize the insertion parameters on Modified Discrete Cosine Transform (M-DCT) based
audio watermarking using a genetic algorithm, to produce better audio resistance. MDCT is applied after
reading host audio, then embedding in MDCT domain is applied by Quantization Index Modulation (QIM)
technique. Insertion within the MDCT domain is capable of generating a high imperceptible watermarked
audio due to its overlapping frame system. The system is optimized using genetic algorithms to improve
the value of imperceptibility and robustness in audio watermarking. In this research, the average SNR
reaches 20 dB, and ODG reaches -0.062. The subjective quality testing on the system obtains an average
MOS of 4.22 out of five songs tested. In addition, the system is able to withstand several attacks. The use
of M-DCT in audio watermaking is capable of producing excellent imperceptibility and better watermark
robustness.
Keywords: audio watermarking, MDCT, genetic algorithm, imperceptibility, robustness
Copyright © 2018 Universitas Ahmad Dahlan. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The presence of the Internet makes the exchange of information can be done very
easily by anyone and anywhere, especially in publishing digital content such as music, songs,
and other audio files. The number of copyright infringement cases that occur so we need a
method to protect the copyright of the owner of the work. One solution is to use a watermarking
method. Audio watermaking is a method of embedding a secret information into a audio host
file, provided it does not damage audio files and can not be perceived by the human sense of
hearing (inaudible) [1]. The embedded secret data must be resistant to various attacks and can
be extracted again. Imperceptibility is a property in which the existence of a secret message can
not be recognized only with the human senses, while resistance is the level of watermark
technique resistance to destructive action. Many research methods can produce high levels of
imperfections but are still susceptible to damage, and vice versa.
Over the last decade, MDCT has emerged as the most effective transform for audio
coding due to its time domain alias cancellation and energy compaction property [2-5]. The
MDCT is a derivative of DCT level IV, where this transformation is devoted to overlapping data
blocks [6]. Using overlapping mechanisms, IMDCT can accurately reconstruct the original signal
and avoid data aliasing at the audio frame boundaries [7]. Jianghua Li [8] discussed several
basic factors that work in all DCT-based digital watermarking algorithms. In [9], watermark
embedding in M-DCT domain can solve the problem in other transformation, that is can
minimize artifact (distortion) that arise between data block due to frame formation. In [10],
MDCT domain for watermarking improved the watermark payload or capacity.
To improve the performance of MDCT in audio watermarking, we use genetic algorithm
(GA) to get the optimal embedding parameter and raise the overall performance. GA algorithms
produce a sequence or series of populations using selection, crossover, and mutation
mechanisms as a search mechanism [11, 12]. GA is capable to manage the trade off between
robustness, imperceptibility and payload. Watermarking optimizing method with GA was found
in several papers, such as in [13-16]. In [15, 16], we used GA to optimize several embedding
parameters in image watermarking and the result was a significant improvement either in
imperceptiblity or robustness.

 ISSN: 1693-6930
TELKOMNIKA Vol. 16, No. 6, December 2018: 2651-2660
2652
Quantization Index Modulation (QIM) is an embedding method for audio watermarking
used in this paper. This kind of technique is popular embedding method in watermarking
because of its capability on improving robustness at watermark while maintaining
imperceptibility on watermarked audio. Chen and Wornell in [17] described QIM theoritically and
applied it firstly in audio watermarking, after then their paper was becoming the main reference
for audio watermarking on QIM embedding method by many researchers. QIM is frequently
used in the frequency domain of the host audio as described in [18-20].
In this paper, we develop audio watermarking in MDCT domain of host audio with QIM
embedding method and GA optimizes the embedding parameter to improve the watermarking
performance. After reading host audio, MDCT transforms the audio signal into double
multi-band signal in frequency domain. This multi-band signal is quite similar but unequal with
previous published papers in [21] and [22]. In that study, the multi-band was generated
according to the watermark, but in this paper, multi-band is the transformation result of host
audio by MDCT. The watermark is then embedded in MDCT domain of audio signal using Direct
Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) based technique. DSSS is a transformation technique that
serves to spread a signal input in time domain [23]. In the implementation the signal is multiplied
'directly' by a random number of random numbers called pseudo noise sequence
(PN Sequence). In [24-28], SS based watermarking schemes can improved the watermark
payload or capacity. Next, QIM is applied on each watermark bits at the certain subband of all
time slots where GA optimize the position of subband to obtain highest imperceptibility and
robustness. After that, frequency domain signal is transformed again into time domain by
inverse MDCT obtaining waternarked audio. GA optimizes the embedding and extraction
process on certain attack with decided target called fitness function (FF). FF consists of several
target/output parameter which will be optimized. In this paper, the output optimize parameter are
BER (robustness) and ODG (imperceptibility).
The structure of this paper consists of several sections. Section 1 describes
introduction, section 2 describes research method and basic formulation of audio watermarking
method, section 3 describes audio watermarking system with embedding and extraction
procedures, section 4 describes the performance of the method, and finally section 5 describes
the audio watermarking method conclusion.
2. Audio Watermarking System
In this study, we designed an audio watermarking system using MDCT method and
performed system optimization with genetic algorithm. Scheme of the system model proposed in
this study is generally illustrated in Figure 1. The first process is to insert a message into the
host audio using the MDCT method [6]. Then the audio host is tested with several attacks.
Optimization is done on audio that has the most damage when attacked. The system evaluated
by the genetic algorithm as a whole to get the most optimal insertion parameters.
Figure 1. Scheme of the proposed method

TELKOMNIKA ISSN: 1693-6930 
Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization using Genetics... (Ledya Novamizanti)
2653
Figure 2. Block diagram of embedding process using MDCT
2.1. Embedding System Design
The MDCT-based embedding process is described in Figure 2. In the segmentation
process, the original audio host in the form of a single column matrix is segmented into a frame
with 50% overlap. The purpose of the segmentation process is that the latest frame contains
half of the contents of the previous frame. The segmented audio is then transformed into the
frequency domain using MDCT. The MDCT processes a signal of length 2N to form a number of
N coefficients [6]. If the length of the frame is 128, and the length is considered to be a 2N
value, the resulting MDCT coefficient is half of the frame length of 64. This applies equally to
other frame lengths. The general formula of MDCT is represented by the following equation [6]:
𝑋(𝑘) = ∑ 𝑥(𝑛) 𝑐𝑜𝑠 [
𝜋
𝑁
(𝑛 +
1
2
+
𝑁
2
) (𝑘 +
1
2
)]2𝑁−1
𝑛=0 (1)
𝑥(𝑛) = ℎ(𝑛) × 𝑎(𝑛) (2)
ℎ(𝑛) = 𝑠𝑖𝑛 [ℎ(𝑛) × (𝑛 +
1
2
) / 2𝑁] (3)
Here, 𝑘 = 0, 1, … , 𝑁 − 1, 𝑋(𝑘) is the coefficient of MDCT, 𝑎(𝑛) is an input signal with the
number of 2N samples, and ℎ(𝑛) is a sinus windowing function. Windowing on MDCT serves to
reduce the impact of discontinuities due to frame cutting. Calculations with combined MDCT
formulas and sinusoidal window functions allow signals to be changed from time domain to
frequency domain and can be reversed appropriately. Signals that have been generated with
MDCT can be returned to the time domain by inverse MDCT (IMDCT) represented by the
following equation [5, 6]:
𝑌(𝑛) =
1
𝑁
∑ 𝑋(𝑘) 𝑐𝑜𝑠 [
𝜋
𝑁
(𝑛 +
1
2
+
𝑁
2
) (𝑘 +
1
2
)]𝑁−1
𝑘=0 (4)
with 𝑛 = 0, 1, … , 2𝑁 − 1.
Before entering the embedding stage, the size of the message is adjusted first by
converting the binary image matrix from 32x32 to a line of 1x1024. Then, PN generator will
produce PN code consisting of random number is 0 and 1, with number 64 bit. The PN code is
used as a key to provide more protection against secret messages [29]. The resulting PN code
is then embedded or spread into messages using the Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum
(DSSS) method. In this process every 1 bit PN code will be XOR to 16 bit value of the image. In
this paper, DSSS process is formulated as follows:
𝑃 = {
1 , if message bit = PN code bit
0 , if message bit ≠ PN code bit
(5)
Here, P is the result of a message that has been multiplied by the PN Code.
Quantization Index Modulation (QIM) is classified as a host-interference rejection
technique, which does not require host signals in the decoder [15]. The insertion is performed
on frames that have an average coefficient above the threshold value. It aims to avoid

 ISSN: 1693-6930
2654
messages embedded on the MDCT coefficient value that is too small, which can cause
messages easily lost when exposed to attacks. Next, the message will be embedded with QIM
technique. First step is initialized by determining the quantization step value (Δ) based on the
following equation:
𝛥 =
1
2(𝑛𝑏𝑖𝑡−1) (6)
where nbit is a quantization bit in QIM. In this study, the value of nbit be varied from 1 to 10,
which determined by the genetic algorithm. Furthermore, the embedding process with QIM is
done by the following formula [15]:
𝐹(𝑛)̂ = {
𝐴 𝑘 , 𝑖𝑓 𝑃𝑖 = 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 arg min |𝐹(𝑛) − 𝐴 𝑘 |
𝐵 𝑘 , 𝑖𝑓 𝑃𝑖 = 0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 arg min |𝐹(𝑛) − 𝐵 𝑘|
(7)
𝐴 𝑘 = (2𝑘 +
1
2
) ∆ , 𝐵 𝑘 = (2𝑘 −
1
2
) ∆ , 𝑘 = 0, ±1, ±2, (8)
Here, 𝐹(𝑛)̂ is the MDCT coefficients from the quantization of 𝐹(𝑛), and 𝑃𝑖 is the
message that will be embedded. Every single bit message is inserted in one frame of the
MDCT, and repetition of the message as many as the number of frames that meet the
threshold. MDCT coefficient inserted message must then be converted back to the time domain
by performing an inverse MDCT. Frame reconstruction process is also done simultaneously
when IMDCT process takes place. The reconstruction process is carried out by summarizing the
overlapping part of the frame. After IMDCT, the audio watermark will be in the time domain, and
the embedding process is complete.
2.2. Extracting System Design
At this stage, the message contained in the audio watermark is retrieved. Basically the
stages in the extraction process are almost the same as the stage done in the embedding
process. The process is done after the MDCT coefficient obtained. Then do the demodulation
process and unlock the message. The extraction process is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Block diagram of extracting process using MDCT
In the segmentation process, the watermarked audio is segmented into a 50% overlap
frame. The size of each frame depends on the selected variation in the embedding process.
Watermarked audio that have been shaped frames are then transformed into the frequency
domain using MDCT. Then the signal is extracted with the QIM technique to retrieve the
messages that have been embedded. The extraction process is carried out by the following
formula [15]:
𝑃𝑖
̂ = 𝑚𝑜𝑑 (⌈
𝐹(𝑛)̂
∆
⌉ , 2) (9)
where 𝐹(𝑛)̂ is the MDCT coefficient that has been embedded message, and 𝑃𝑖
̂ is the message
extraction results. Because the message is embedd with repetition across all frames that meet
the threshold, then the next is calculated the average of the extraction results to get the desired
message. Messages that have been extracted from the audio watermark can not be read
directly because the message still contains a PN code key. Therefore, at this stage the key is

2655
unlocked by performing XOR between the PN code and the message. The value of PN code is
obtained by inputting the key that has been obtained from the embedding process. After
separation the key of the message, the message is still in the form of a line is to be returned to
its original size and the extraction process ends.
2.3. Optimization using Genetic Algorithm
The genetic algorithm works by evaluating all parts of the watermarking process,
including insertion, attack and extraction. From the optimization process, an optimal
watermarking parameter will be obtained. The process of the genetic algorithm is described in
Figure 4.
Figure 4. Flowchart of optimization using a GA [13,14]
Population initialization is the stage of chromosome formation which will be processed
in genetic algorithm. To be able to form a chromosome needs to be defined multiple values,
such as the number of generations and individuals that will be increased, the probability of
mutation and crossover probability. In this study, there are four types of parameters to be
optimized ie frame size, nbit QIM, insertion threshold and insertion position. The chromosome
encoding is performed using binary encoding with the specified chromosome length being 16.
The chromosome design for each parameter is given in Table 1.
Table 1. Chromosome Design
Gene Sequence in Chromosomes Parameter Optimization Value
Gen 1 - 2 Frame Size 128, 256, 512, 1024
Gen 3 - 10 Position the embedding Maximum 256
Gen 11 - 14 Nbit QIM 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Gen 15 - 16 Threshold insertion Coefficient 0.00001, 0.0001, 0.001, 0.005
Before optimization, the embedding process with QIM is done with a threshold and a
fixed position. But at the time of optimization, the threshold and position values will change
according to their respective ranges. The insertion position of the index represents MDCT
coefficients that will be embedded in message. The maximum number of embedded positions is
as much as 256 grades. Selection of this parameter is expected to decrease the value of BER
after the audio is attacked. In this study, evaluation of chromosome means insertion process
using new parameters formed from previous process. The insertion process is carried out as
described in section 2.1. Then, the watermark audio results quality is calculated by the value of
SNR and ODG.
Test attack will be done on the newly formed audio watermark. Test attack on the
optimization process is to test the attacks that generate BER is not 0 in the message. The types
of attacks carried out, namely LPF attacks, BPF, MP3 compression, noise, and time scale
modification (TSM). After an attack test, the message contained in the audio watermark will be
extracted. Then the message of extraction is assessed its quality by calculating the value of
BER. Fitness values are calculated to measure chromosome performance that has undergone
various attack tests. The optimization process stops when a generation has reached the
maximum fitness value. In this study, the fitness value is calculated based on the value of ODG
and BER, with the maximum value is 1. The fitness formula used is as follows:

 ISSN: 1693-6930
2656
𝐹𝐹 = 0.5 × (1 − 𝐵𝐸𝑅̅̅̅̅̅̅) + 0.5 × (
𝑂𝐷𝐺̅̅̅̅̅̅
4
) (10)
where 𝐵𝐸𝑅̅̅̅̅̅̅ and 𝑂𝐷𝐺̅̅̅̅̅̅ are the average value of BER and ODG. In the equation shows that the
ODG has a greater weight than the BER is 1:1, it is to get a level of imperceptibility and
robustness balanced.
The selection process is done by sorting the fitness value that has been obtained. Then
taken two chromosomes that have the highest fitness value. The two chromosomes are crossed
with each other, and the mutation process is performed. Termination criteria are when the
chromosomes reach the highest fitness value, thus resulting optimal insertion parameters. If the
termination criterion has not been reached then the system will iterate the process by inputting
the new parameter. After the termination criterion is achieved, the optimal value will be stored.
Furthermore, the insertion process is based on these parameters.
3. Result and Analysis
System testing is carried out in 3 stages, namely measurement of system performance
before the optimization process, after optimization, and performance comparison with the
previous method. Audio host file is data with * .wav format that has sample rate specification
44100 Hz, 16 bits per sample, mono, with audio duration of approximately 30 seconds.
Messages to be embedded into the audio are binary images of 32×32 pixels. The assessment
is conduct using 5 different types of audio as a host, namely voice, instrumental, country, jazz,
and rock music.
3.1. Performance System Before Optimization Process
In this section, the effect of frame size and nbit QIM will be tested on system
performance. Futhermore, an attack will be given to evaluate system performance.
a. Effect of Frame Size on SNR, ODG and BER
In this scenario, a process of embedded and extraction of QIM uses variation of frame
size, with fixed parameters: Nbit 1, Threshold 0.0001, Insertion position 1 (first coefficient on
each frame). The performance of ODG, SNR and BER measurements of the five tested audio
are as follows:
Table 2. Effect of Frame Size on SNR, ODG, and BER
Frame Size ODG BER SNR (dB)
128 -2.6178 0 0.7100
256 -1.7564 0 3.7560
512 -0.9810 0 6.9288
1024 -0.2283 0 10.2819
From Table 2, it can be seen that BER is constant 0 to all frame types. This means that
messages can be extracted perfectly on each audio and each frame type. SNR and ODG value
is still very low. There is a tendency that the larger the frame size the better the ODG and SNR
values. The larger the frame size, the smaller the number of frames that are formed, therefore
the number of embedded repetition messages will be decreased. The ratio of signal with noise
will be higher, and produce better ODG. Thus, the frame size of 1024 will be used in the next
process because it has the highest ODG and SNR.
b. Effect of Nbit on SNR, ODG and BER.
Nbit represent the number of quantization bits in QIM, where the nbit value will greatly
affect the quantization step (Δ). In this test, QIM embedded will be performed using different nbit
values, and with a frame size of 1024. The effect of nbit values on ODG, SNR and BER of the
five tested audio shown in Table 3.
Table 3 shows that the larger the value of nbit the better the value of ODG and SNR
obtained. The larger the value of nbit means the quantization step value (Δ) will be smaller, the
signal quality will get better because the signal is quantized very close to the original signal.
Thus the parameters used for the next process is the value of nbit 10 and frame size 1024.

2657
Table 3. Effect of Nbit on SNR, ODG, and BER
Nbit ODG BER SNR (dB)
1 -0.2283 0 8.4762
2 -0.1425 0 14.3261
4 -0.0795 0 25.6986
8 -0.0632 0 42.9332
10 -0.0624 0 48.7452
c. Effect of Attacks on BER.
In this section, a system of endurance testing is carried out by giving several attacks on
the audio watermarking system. In the BPF attack the filter type used is the Butterworth Infinite
Impulse Response (IIR). Each attack has different levels of intensity. Table 6 shows that before
optimization, the watermarking audio system is still very weak against several types of attacks.
This is caused by improper insertion position. In the next section, system optimization will be
applied by determining the right combination of parameters with GA.
3.2. Performance System After Optimization Process
In this section, we describe the results obtained from the optimization process with
genetic algorithms. Then, we analyze the results of the attack test using the optimal parameters
that have been obtained. Finally, the test results is compared between before and after
optimization.
a. Parameter Optimization with Genetic Algorithm
A GA is used to determine the correct combination of insertion parameters. There are
four parameters to be optimized such as frame size (nframe), nbit, position, and threshold. The
values for each parameter have been determined in Table 1. The genetic algorithm is performed
with the following conditions: number of generations=300, number of individuals=20,
crossover=0.8, mutation=0.5. To obtain the optimal parameters, testing is done with one type of
attack that MP3 compression at a rate of 96 kbps, and one type of audio that is Rock.wav. MP3
compression chosen because it is a very common type of attack happens in the real world.
While rock.wav is the audio that has the worst BER on the attack. Testing was carried and the
result is shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Effect of Frame Size on SNR, ODG, and BER
Generation Fitness Frame Size Nbit Position Threshold ODG BER SNR (dB)
1 0.983377 512 6 97 0.0001 -0.125 0.001953 38.615
55 0.986063 512 6 225 0.0001 -0.049 0.015625 38.919
59 0.992371 512 6 229 0.0001 -0.049 0.00293 38.915
81 0.993703 512 2 229 0.0001 -0.050 0 21.047
95 0.993788 512 2 231 0.0001 -0.05 0 21.046
119 0.993841 512 4 231 0.0001 -0.049 0 32.340
144 0.995046 128 4 58 0.0001 -0.039 0 27.027
In Table 4, it can be seen that the optimal parameters obtained after entering the 144th
generation with the highest fitness value is 0.995046, and BER is worth 0. BER change is quite
significant when compared with MP3 compression because the insertion position of great
influence on the level of resistance watermarking. Then, the value is used for the embedding of
the five types of audio. The comparison of results obtained from the embedding before and after
obtaining the optimal parameters is described in Table 5.
Table 5. The Effect of Optimization on System Performance
Audio Before Optimization
(Nframe = 1024, nbit = 10, position =
1, threshold = 0.0001)
After Optimization
(Nframe = 128, nbit = 4, position = 58,
threshold = 0.0001)
ODG BER SNR ODG BER SNR
Country -0.213 0 37.327 -0.018 0 22.093
Jazz -0.072 0 53.395 -0.029 0 19.625
Orchestra -0.008 0 38.793 -0.076 0 16.552
Rock -0.003 0 41.078 -0.013 0 27.096
Voice -0.015 0 56.875 -0.175 0 13.020
Average -0.0624 0 45.4935 -0.0622 0 19.677

 ISSN: 1693-6930
2658
As shown in Table 5, the average SNR value decreases after optimization. Frame size
is smaller enough than before, resulting in the repetition of message insertion becomes more.
So the ratio between signal to noise decreases. However, the ODG values do not vary much
with before optimization. When the ODG value is still above -1 and BER is 0, it means that
audio still has a very good quality when heard and the message can be extracted perfectly.
b. Effect of Attacks on Optimal Parameters
The Butterworth IIR filter is used in BPF attacks. The result of attack testing after using
the optimum parameter can be seen in Table 6.
Table 6. Comparative Effect of Attacks Before and After Optimization
Attack Criteria Average BER Average BER
before optimization after optimization
LPF
fc=3 kHz 0.2406 0.3406
fc=6 kHz 0.05 0.0906
fc=9 kHz 0.0375 0
BPF
100 Hz - 3 kHz 0.3187 0.1687
100 Hz - 6 kHz 0.4375 0.0031
100 Hz - 9 kHz 0.0969 0
50 Hz - 6 kHz 0.47266 0.0039
25 Hz - 6 kHz 0.3875 0.0031
Noise
0 dB 0.3594 0.4469
10 dB 0.3281 0.2531
20 dB 0.2312 0.075
Resampling
11 kHz 0.0656 0.025
16 kHz 0.0281 0.1
22 kHz 0.0031 0.1031
24 kHz 0.1031 0.1031
Time Scale
Modification
1% 0.2625 0.3531
2% 0.2344 0.4125
3% 0.4156 0.4094
4% 0.4031 0.45
Linear Speed Change
1% 0.0844 0
5% 0.0812 0
10% 0.0875 0
Equalizer 0.0687 0.1062
Echo 0.3781 0.0562
MP3 Compression
32 kbps 0.2687 0.0094
64 kbps 0.0937 0
128 kbps 0.0719 0
192 kbps 0.0812 0
Average 0.2033 0.12547
The results shows that after the optimization, the change in insertion frequency
positioning makes the system highly resistant to LPF with fc>6 kHz, and BPF with an frequency
upper limit of ≥3kHz. For compression attacks, the system is very resistant to all three types of
compression rates. In addition, the system is also resistant to noise attack up to 20 dB intensity
for all audio except jazz.wav. At TSM attack, BER produced is not a big change from before. It
can be concluded that the system is not resistant to attacks that can modify the tempo of audio.
This is because the system is very sensitive to the position of insertion. If the tempo is
accelerated or slowed the insertion position can shift and cause a change of BER result.
c. Comparative Effect of Attacks Before and After Optimization
The comparison shows how the success of genetic algorithms in optimizing the audio
watermarking system. Before optimization system can not tolerate any attack. However, after
the optimization of the system resistant to seven attacks, namely LPF, BPF, Noise, Resampling,
Linear Speed Change, Equalizer, and MP3 Compression. This is due to changes in the
embedded frequency position after optimization that is no longer in the low frequency range. It
can be concluded that the genetic algorithm is able to optimize the embedded parameters in the
audio watermarking system based on MDCT.
d. Mean Opinion Score (MOS)
MOS is a quality assessment of audio watermarking subjectively [30]. The MOS test is
done by asking 30 respondents to compare the original audio quality with audio that has been
inserted message. Subjective Performance (MOS) can be seen in Table 7. The results obtained
from the measurement of MOS are as follows:

2659
Table 7. Subjective Performance (MOS)
Audio MOS
Country 4.47
Jazz 4.43
Orchestra 3.87
Rock 4.03
Voice 4.30
Table 7 shows that there are four kinds of audio that are considered to have good
quality and only one audio that is quite good is Orchestra. In the audio orchestra genre there is
a voice instrument violin with dominance of high frequency. The sound of screeching and
resembles the noise, so that the respondents' assessment on the audio is not good, although
the value of the resulting excellent ODG. It can be said that this system has good quality in
terms of subjective judgement, that is MOS≥3.87.
3.3. Performance Comparison with Previous Method
MDCT in audio watermarking has good contribution to increase the imperceptibility. In the
same time, this method has good robustness to several attacks as displayed in Table 4. In the
previous paper about audio watermarking with MDCT method, there were lack in reporting the
performance especially in robustness. In [9] and [10], MDCT is used as audio watermarking
method, but there are only imperceptibility reported instead of robustness. In Table 8, we
display the performance comparison between our method with previous method on 4 type
attacks, MP3 32-64 kbps, echo attack, and noise attack with 20 dB power.
Table 8. Performance Comparison
Ref
Robustness Imperceptibility
MP3 32
kbps
MP3 64
kbps
Echo
Noise 20
dB
SNR (dB) ODG
[9] NA NA NA NA NA -0.34
[10] NA NA NA NA NA -0.15
[19] NA 2.96% 4.10% 0.92% 18.21-21.91 0.005
[20] 7.60% 0.90% 9.20% NA 12.5 NA
[22] 47% 9% 0% 0% 8.62 -2.2
Proposed 0.94% 0% 5.62% 7.50% 19.68 -0.06
NA means not available or there is no performance reporting. MDCT with optimized
parameter by Genetics Algorithm gives accepted performance in robustness with those four
types of attacks and gives high performance in imperceptibility. The robustness of the method
has worst result in noise attack with BER 7.5% in which it is still below 10% or acceptable
robustness.
4. Conclusion
Implementation of MDCT-based audio watermarking with Genetics Algorithm
optimization in this work is able to produce high audio watermarking imperceptibility where
ODG>-0.2 with average ODG is -0.06 and with MOS is more than 4. This proposed method is
robust against several attacks indicated by BER which is less than 10%, such as LPF with cut
off frequency ≥ 6 kHz, BPF with cut off frequency 25/50/100 Hz – 6/9 kHz, noise 20 dB, linear
speed change, echo, and MP3 attacks with rate up to 32 kbps. But, the proposed method with
optimized parameters is still not robust against TSM, resampling and equalizer attacks because
optimizing is done by different attack. With unoptimized parameter, the proposed method is
already robust against resampling and equalizer attack.
References
[1] Chauhan SPS, Rizvi SAM. A survey: Digital Audio Watermarking Techniques and Applications.
International Conference on Computer and Communication Technology (ICCCT). India. 2013.
[2] Johnson AW, Bradley AB. Adaptive transform coding incorporating time domain aliasing cancellation.
Speech Comm. 1987; 6 (4): 299-308.
[3] Malvar HS. Signal Processing with Lapped Transforms. Norwood: Artech House Publisher. 1992.

 ISSN: 1693-6930
2660
[4] Yu R, Lin X. A Statistics study of the MDCT coefficient distribution for audio. IEEE International
Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME). Taiwan. 2004: 1483-1486.
[5] Raj VA, Dhas MDK, Gnanadurai D. An overview of MDCT for Time Domain Aliasing
Cancellation. International Conference on Communication and Network Technologies. India. 2014:
203-207.
[6] Shao X, Johnson SG. Type-IV DCT, DST, and MDCT algorithms with reduced numbers of arithmetic
operations. Signal Processing. 2008; 88(6): 1313-1326.
[7] Wang ML, Lin HX, Lee MT. Robust audio watermarking based on MDCT coefficients. International
Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computing. Japan. 2012: 372-375.
[8] Li J, Cao Q. DSDWA : A DCT-based Spatial Domain Digital Watermarking Algorithm. TELKOMNIKA
Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering. 2015; 12(1): 693–702.
[9] Singh SK, Singh J. Audio Watermarking Scheme in MDCT Domain. International Journal of Electrical
and Electronics Engineering (IJEEE). 2012; 1(3): 42-47.
[10] Pinel J, Girin L, Baras C, Parvaix M. A high-capacity watermarking technique for audio signals based
on MDCT-domain quantization. Int. Congr. of Acoust. Australia. 2010: 1–7.
[11] Sheikh RH, Raghuwanshi MM, Jaiswal AN. Genetic Algorithm Based Clustering: A Survey. First Int.
Conf. Emerg. Trends Eng. Technol. India. 2008; 2(6): 314–319.
[12] Suyanto, Algoritma Genetika Dalam Matlab. 2005. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.
[13] Sadeghzadeh M, Taherbaghal M. A New Method for Watermarking using Genetic Algorithms. Int.
Conf. Mach. Learn. Electr. Mech. Eng. Dubai. 2014: 1–8.
[14] Song W, Sun X, Liu C, Tang L. A New Watermarking Frame Based on the Genetic Algorithms and
Wavelet Packet Decomposition. Inf. Hiding Multimed. Signal Process. 2015; 6(3): 613–621.
[15] Budiman G, Novamizanti L, Iwut I. Genetics Algorithm Optimization of DWT-DCT Based Image
Watermarking. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2016; 795(1): 1-8.
[16] Iwut I, Budiman G, Novamizanti L. Optimization of Discrete Cosine Transform-Based Image
Watermarking by Genetics Algorithm. TELKOMNIKA Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering.
2016; 4(1): 1–16.
[17] Chen B, Wornell GW. Quantization index modulation: A class of provably good methods for digital
watermarking and information embedding. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory. 2001; 47(4): 1423–1443.
[18] Zhou Z, Zhou L. A Novel Algorithm for Robust Audio Watermarking Based on Quantification DCT
Domain. International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing.
Southern Yangtza University. Taiwan. 2007: 441-444.
[19] Hu H, Chen S, Hsu L. Incorporation of Perceptually Energy-compensated QIM into DWT-DCT Based
Blind Audio Watermarking. International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia
Signal Processing. Japan. 2014: 748-752.
[20] Khademi N, Akhaee MA, Ahadi SM, Moradi M, Kashi A. Audio watermarking based on Quantization
Index Modulation in the Frequency Domain. IEEE Int. Conf. Signal Process. Commun. Dubai. 2007:
1127–1130.
[21] Aparna S, Baiju PS. Audio Watermarking Technique Using Modified Discrete Cosine Transform.
International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks (ComNet). India. 2016.
[22] Budiman G, Suksmono AB, Danudirdjo D, Usman K, Shin DH. A modified multicarrier modulation
binary data embedding in audio file. Int. J. Electr. Eng. Informatics. 2016; 8(4): 762–773.
[23] Kirovski D, Malvar H. Spread-spectrum audio watermarking: requirements applications and limitations.
IEEE Fourth Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing. France. 2001: 219-224,.
[24] Kirovski D. Malvar H. Robust spread-spectrum audio watermarking. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust. Speech
Signal Process. USA. 2001: 3–6.
[25] Kirovski D, Malvar HS. Spread-spectrum watermarking of audio signals. IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing. 2003; 51(4): 1020–1033.
[26] Singh J, Garg P, De AN. Audio Watermarking using Spectral Modifications. International Journal of
Electronics and Communication Engineering. 2009; 3(11): 2207-2211.
[27] Chen G, Yang S, Zhang Q, Du J. Robustness Performance Analysis of Audio Watermarking Algorithm
Based on Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum. International Conference on Internet Technology and
Applications. China. 2011.
[28] Cox IJ, Kilian J, Leighton FT, Shamoon T. Secure spread spectrum watermarking for multimedia.
IEEE Transactions on Image Processing. 1997; 6: 1673-1687
[29] Swanson MD, Zhu B, Tewfik AH, Boney L. Robust audio watermarking using perceptual masking.
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing. 1998; 66: 337-355.
[30] Lin Y, Abdulla W. Objective quality measures for perceptual evaluation in digital audio watermarking.
Signal Process. IET. 2011: 623–631.

Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization using Genetics Algorithm

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Similar to Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization using Genetics Algorithm (20)

More from TELKOMNIKA JOURNAL (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Modified DCT-based Audio Watermarking Optimization using Genetics Algorithm