Journal of Computer Applications ›› 2022, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (6): 1716-1723.DOI: 10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2021061495
Special Issue: 2021年全国开放式分布与并行计算学术年会(DPCS 2021)论文
• National Open Distributed and Parallel Computing Conference 2021 (DPCS 2021) • Previous Articles Next Articles
Xiangyu ZHANG1, Yang YANG1(), Guohui FENG2, Chuan QIN1
Received:
2021-08-23
Revised:
2021-11-07
Accepted:
2021-11-17
Online:
2022-01-10
Published:
2022-06-10
Contact:
Yang YANG
About author:
ZHANG Xiangyu, born in 1997, M. S. candidate. His research interests include reversible data hiding.Supported by:
通讯作者:
杨阳
作者简介:
张翔宇(1997—),男,浙江温州人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向:可逆信息隐藏基金资助:
CLC Number:
Xiangyu ZHANG, Yang YANG, Guohui FENG, Chuan QIN. Reversible data hiding in encrypted image based on multi-objective optimization[J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2022, 42(6): 1716-1723.
张翔宇, 杨阳, 冯国徽, 秦川. 基于多目标优化的加密图像可逆信息隐藏[J]. 《计算机应用》唯一官方网站, 2022, 42(6): 1716-1723.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.joca.cn/EN/10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2021061495
条件 | 块类型 | 块描述 | 块标识位 |
---|---|---|---|
Bad | 不能嵌入信息 | 00 | |
G-I | 所有的像素都为1 | 11 | |
G-Ⅱ | 所有的像素都为0 | 10 | |
G-Ⅲ | 大多数像素为1 | 011 | |
G-Ⅳ | 大多数像素为0 | 010 |
Tab. 1 Block classification and marking conditions
条件 | 块类型 | 块描述 | 块标识位 |
---|---|---|---|
Bad | 不能嵌入信息 | 00 | |
G-I | 所有的像素都为1 | 11 | |
G-Ⅱ | 所有的像素都为0 | 10 | |
G-Ⅲ | 大多数像素为1 | 011 | |
G-Ⅳ | 大多数像素为0 | 010 |
X | 直接解密图像 PSNR/dB | 嵌入率/bpp | 恢复图像 PSNR/dB | 提取错误率 | 评价函数 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 37.93 | 0.004 9 | +∞ | 0 | 0.000 98 | 0.000 98 | 0.000 98 | 0.999 000 | 0.005 5 |
204 | 38.68 | 0.350 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.199 20 | 0.199 20 | 0.926 40 | 0.800 800 | 0.418 2 |
408 | 39.63 | 0.690 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.389 40 | 0.398 40 | 0.985 50 | 0.601 600 | 0.553 9 |
684 | 41.32 | 1.160 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.668 00 | 0.668 00 | 0.995 20 | 0.332 000 | 0.619 7 |
816 | 42.43 | 1.380 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.796 90 | 0.796 90 | 0.997 50 | 0.203 100 | 0.598 9 |
1 023 | 45.26 | 1.710 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.999 00 | 0.999 00 | 1.000 00 | 0.000 977 | 0.176 7 |
Tab. 2 Experimental results of Lena under different X (S=16)
X | 直接解密图像 PSNR/dB | 嵌入率/bpp | 恢复图像 PSNR/dB | 提取错误率 | 评价函数 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 37.93 | 0.004 9 | +∞ | 0 | 0.000 98 | 0.000 98 | 0.000 98 | 0.999 000 | 0.005 5 |
204 | 38.68 | 0.350 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.199 20 | 0.199 20 | 0.926 40 | 0.800 800 | 0.418 2 |
408 | 39.63 | 0.690 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.389 40 | 0.398 40 | 0.985 50 | 0.601 600 | 0.553 9 |
684 | 41.32 | 1.160 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.668 00 | 0.668 00 | 0.995 20 | 0.332 000 | 0.619 7 |
816 | 42.43 | 1.380 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.796 90 | 0.796 90 | 0.997 50 | 0.203 100 | 0.598 9 |
1 023 | 45.26 | 1.710 0 | +∞ | 0 | 0.999 00 | 0.999 00 | 1.000 00 | 0.000 977 | 0.176 7 |
S | X | 嵌入率/bpp | 直接解密图像 PSNR/dB | 恢复图像 PSNR/dB | 提取 错误率 | 执行 时长/s | 评价函数 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 11 264 | 1.64 | 39.71 | 48.56 | 0.15 | 7.27 | 0.687 5 | 0.687 5 | 0.937 3 | 0.312 5 | 0.610 0 |
8 | 2 755 | 1.51 | 40.07 | 59.08 | 0.01 | 5.88 | 0.672 6 | 0.672 6 | 0.981 6 | 0.327 4 | 0.617 5 |
12 | 1 218 | 1.28 | 41.42 | 64.70 | 0.00 | 5.05 | 0.669 1 | 0.669 1 | 0.991 5 | 0.330 9 | 0.619 1 |
16 | 684 | 1.16 | 41.37 | +∞ | 0.00 | 6.50 | 0.668 0 | 0.668 0 | 0.995 2 | 0.322 0 | 0.619 7 |
20 | 437 | 1.02 | 42.03 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.30 | 0.668 0 | 0.668 0 | 0.996 9 | 0.333 2 | 0.619 9 |
24 | 303 | 0.89 | 42.16 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.14 | 0.665 8 | 0.665 8 | 0.997 8 | 0.334 2 | 0.620 1 |
28 | 223 | 0.81 | 42.37 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.18 | 0.666 9 | 0.666 9 | 0.998 4 | 0.333 1 | 0.620 2 |
32 | 170 | 0.70 | 42.21 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.31 | 0.664 1 | 0.664 1 | 0.998 8 | 0.335 9 | 0.620 2 |
36 | 130 | 0.63 | 42.43 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.08 | 0.642 7 | 0.642 7 | 0.998 9 | 0.357 3 | 0.619 6 |
Tab. 3 Experimental data corresponding to relative optimal solution of Lena under different S
S | X | 嵌入率/bpp | 直接解密图像 PSNR/dB | 恢复图像 PSNR/dB | 提取 错误率 | 执行 时长/s | 评价函数 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 11 264 | 1.64 | 39.71 | 48.56 | 0.15 | 7.27 | 0.687 5 | 0.687 5 | 0.937 3 | 0.312 5 | 0.610 0 |
8 | 2 755 | 1.51 | 40.07 | 59.08 | 0.01 | 5.88 | 0.672 6 | 0.672 6 | 0.981 6 | 0.327 4 | 0.617 5 |
12 | 1 218 | 1.28 | 41.42 | 64.70 | 0.00 | 5.05 | 0.669 1 | 0.669 1 | 0.991 5 | 0.330 9 | 0.619 1 |
16 | 684 | 1.16 | 41.37 | +∞ | 0.00 | 6.50 | 0.668 0 | 0.668 0 | 0.995 2 | 0.322 0 | 0.619 7 |
20 | 437 | 1.02 | 42.03 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.30 | 0.668 0 | 0.668 0 | 0.996 9 | 0.333 2 | 0.619 9 |
24 | 303 | 0.89 | 42.16 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.14 | 0.665 8 | 0.665 8 | 0.997 8 | 0.334 2 | 0.620 1 |
28 | 223 | 0.81 | 42.37 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.18 | 0.666 9 | 0.666 9 | 0.998 4 | 0.333 1 | 0.620 2 |
32 | 170 | 0.70 | 42.21 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.31 | 0.664 1 | 0.664 1 | 0.998 8 | 0.335 9 | 0.620 2 |
36 | 130 | 0.63 | 42.43 | +∞ | 0.00 | 5.08 | 0.642 7 | 0.642 7 | 0.998 9 | 0.357 3 | 0.619 6 |
图像 | 加密前的熵 | 加密后的熵 |
---|---|---|
Airplane | 6.677 6 | 7.991 4 |
Baboon | 7.357 9 | 7.991 6 |
Barbara | 7.632 1 | 7.991 4 |
Boat | 7.123 8 | 7.991 3 |
Lena | 7.445 6 | 7.991 7 |
Peppers | 7.571 5 | 7.991 5 |
Tab. 4 Comparison of entropy values before and after images encryption
图像 | 加密前的熵 | 加密后的熵 |
---|---|---|
Airplane | 6.677 6 | 7.991 4 |
Baboon | 7.357 9 | 7.991 6 |
Barbara | 7.632 1 | 7.991 4 |
Boat | 7.123 8 | 7.991 3 |
Lena | 7.445 6 | 7.991 7 |
Peppers | 7.571 5 | 7.991 5 |
S | 算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | UCID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 本文算法 | 1.64 | 1.60 | 1.21 | 0.73 | 1.27 |
VRAE算法 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | |
RRBE算法 | 2.35 | 2.30 | 1.73 | 1.02 | 1.83 | |
8 | 本文算法 | 1.51 | 1.48 | 1.13 | 0.67 | 1.20 |
VRAE算法 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | |
RRBE算法 | 2.23 | 2.16 | 1.65 | 0.99 | 1.77 | |
16 | 本文算法 | 1.16 | 1.09 | 0.83 | 0.54 | 1.00 |
VRAE算法 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | |
RRBE算法 | 1.71 | 1.59 | 1.21 | 0.80 | 1.49 | |
32 | 本文算法 | 0.70 | 0.59 | 0.46 | 0.35 | 0.78 |
VRAE算法 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | |
RRBE算法 | 1.08 | 0.94 | 0.66 | 0.54 | 1.13 |
Tab. 5 Comparison of image embedding rate under different S
S | 算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | UCID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 本文算法 | 1.64 | 1.60 | 1.21 | 0.73 | 1.27 |
VRAE算法 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | |
RRBE算法 | 2.35 | 2.30 | 1.73 | 1.02 | 1.83 | |
8 | 本文算法 | 1.51 | 1.48 | 1.13 | 0.67 | 1.20 |
VRAE算法 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | |
RRBE算法 | 2.23 | 2.16 | 1.65 | 0.99 | 1.77 | |
16 | 本文算法 | 1.16 | 1.09 | 0.83 | 0.54 | 1.00 |
VRAE算法 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | |
RRBE算法 | 1.71 | 1.59 | 1.21 | 0.80 | 1.49 | |
32 | 本文算法 | 0.70 | 0.59 | 0.46 | 0.35 | 0.78 |
VRAE算法 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | |
RRBE算法 | 1.08 | 0.94 | 0.66 | 0.54 | 1.13 |
S | 算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | ||
4 | 本文算法 | 39.71 | 48.56 | 39.90 | 47.01 | 41.48 | 46.49 | 39.69 | 42.51 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | 43.49 | 37.94 | 41.93 | 37.93 | 41.50 | 37.94 | 39.64 | |
RRBE算法 | 40.88 | +∞ | 41.21 | +∞ | 45.18 | +∞ | 50.68 | +∞ | |
8 | 本文算法 | 40.07 | 59.08 | 40.26 | 52.34 | 41.44 | 50.16 | 42.54 | 47.39 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | 54.30 | 37.95 | 51.93 | 37.93 | 45.51 | 37.92 | 42.95 | |
RRBE算法 | 41.72 | +∞ | 42.39 | +∞ | 45.55 | +∞ | 51.17 | +∞ | |
16 | 本文算法 | 41.37 | +∞ | 41.48 | +∞ | 41.96 | 54.75 | 42.38 | 51.97 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | +∞ | 37.94 | +∞ | 37.94 | 49.84 | 37.93 | 47.09 | |
RRBE算法 | 45.28 | +∞ | 45.82 | +∞ | 48.51 | +∞ | 52.06 | +∞ | |
32 | 本文算法 | 42.21 | +∞ | 42.44 | +∞ | 42.44 | +∞ | 42.47 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | +∞ | 37.95 | +∞ | 37.94 | 55.78 | 37.92 | 55.99 | |
RRBE算法 | 49.92 | +∞ | 51.40 | +∞ | 52.93 | +∞ | 53.81 | +∞ |
Tab. 6 Comparison of DPSNR of directly decrypted image and RPSNR of restored image under different S
S | 算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | DPSNR | RPSNR | ||
4 | 本文算法 | 39.71 | 48.56 | 39.90 | 47.01 | 41.48 | 46.49 | 39.69 | 42.51 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | 43.49 | 37.94 | 41.93 | 37.93 | 41.50 | 37.94 | 39.64 | |
RRBE算法 | 40.88 | +∞ | 41.21 | +∞ | 45.18 | +∞ | 50.68 | +∞ | |
8 | 本文算法 | 40.07 | 59.08 | 40.26 | 52.34 | 41.44 | 50.16 | 42.54 | 47.39 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | 54.30 | 37.95 | 51.93 | 37.93 | 45.51 | 37.92 | 42.95 | |
RRBE算法 | 41.72 | +∞ | 42.39 | +∞ | 45.55 | +∞ | 51.17 | +∞ | |
16 | 本文算法 | 41.37 | +∞ | 41.48 | +∞ | 41.96 | 54.75 | 42.38 | 51.97 |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | +∞ | 37.94 | +∞ | 37.94 | 49.84 | 37.93 | 47.09 | |
RRBE算法 | 45.28 | +∞ | 45.82 | +∞ | 48.51 | +∞ | 52.06 | +∞ | |
32 | 本文算法 | 42.21 | +∞ | 42.44 | +∞ | 42.44 | +∞ | 42.47 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 37.93 | +∞ | 37.95 | +∞ | 37.94 | 55.78 | 37.92 | 55.99 | |
RRBE算法 | 49.92 | +∞ | 51.40 | +∞ | 52.93 | +∞ | 53.81 | +∞ |
S | 算法 | DPSNR | RPSNR | S | 算法 | DPSNR | RPSNR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 本文算法 | 40.88 | 45.61 | 16 | 本文算法 | 41.21 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | ||
RRBE算法 | 44.55 | +∞ | RRBE算法 | 47.02 | +∞ | ||
8 | 本文算法 | 40.82 | 48.67 | 32 | 本文算法 | 41.66 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | ||
RRBE算法 | 44.91 | +∞ | RRBE算法 | 49.86 | +∞ |
Tab. 7 Comparison of DPSNR and RPSNRof images in UCID image library
S | 算法 | DPSNR | RPSNR | S | 算法 | DPSNR | RPSNR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 本文算法 | 40.88 | 45.61 | 16 | 本文算法 | 41.21 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | ||
RRBE算法 | 44.55 | +∞ | RRBE算法 | 47.02 | +∞ | ||
8 | 本文算法 | 40.82 | 48.67 | 32 | 本文算法 | 41.66 | +∞ |
VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | VRAE算法 | 25.78 | 25.77 | ||
RRBE算法 | 44.91 | +∞ | RRBE算法 | 49.86 | +∞ |
算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | UCID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
本文算法 | 6.50 | 6.05 | 5.51 | 5.30 | 4.32 |
VRAE算法 | 5.01 | 5.16 | 4.73 | 5.39 | 3.93 |
RRBE算法 | 13.44 | 12.92 | 12.86 | 12.68 | 7.86 |
Tab. 8 Running time comparison when S=16
算法 | Lena | Peppers | Barbara | Baboon | UCID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
本文算法 | 6.50 | 6.05 | 5.51 | 5.30 | 4.32 |
VRAE算法 | 5.01 | 5.16 | 4.73 | 5.39 | 3.93 |
RRBE算法 | 13.44 | 12.92 | 12.86 | 12.68 | 7.86 |
1 | TIAN J. Reversible watermarking by difference expansion[C/OL]// Proceedings of the 2002 Multimedia and Security Workshop at ACM Multimedia 2002. [2021-03-20]. . |
2 | WENG S W, ZHAO Y, PAN J S, et al. Reversible watermarking based on invariability and adjustment on pixel pairs[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2008, 15:721-724. 10.1109/lsp.2008.2001984 |
3 | OU B, LI X L, ZHAO Y, et al. Pairwise prediction-error expansion for efficient reversible data hiding[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2013, 22(12): 5010-5021. 10.1109/tip.2013.2281422 |
4 | LI X L, ZHANG W M, GUI X L, et al. Efficient reversible data hiding based on multiple histograms modification[J]. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2015, 10(9): 2016-2027. 10.1109/tifs.2015.2444354 |
5 | MA B, SHI Y Q. A reversible data hiding scheme based on code division multiplexing[J]. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2016, 11(9): 1914-1927. 10.1109/tifs.2016.2566261 |
6 | ZHANG W M, HU X C, LI X L, et al. Recursive histogram modification: establishing equivalency between reversible data hiding and lossless data compression[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2013, 22(7): 2775-2785. 10.1109/tip.2013.2257814 |
7 | PUTEAUX P, PUECH W. An efficient MSB prediction-based method for high-capacity reversible data hiding in encrypted images[J]. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2018, 13(7): 1670-1681. 10.1109/TIFS.2018.2799381 |
8 | ZHANG X P, LONG J, WANG Z C, et al. Lossless and reversible data hiding in encrypted images with public-key cryptography[J]. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2016, 26(9): 1622-1631. 10.1109/tcsvt.2015.2433194 |
9 | MA K D, ZHANG W M, ZHAO X F, et al. Reversible data hiding in encrypted images by reserving room before encryption[J]. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2013, 8(3): 553-562. 10.1109/tifs.2013.2248725 |
10 | GUAN B, XU D W. An efficient high-capacity reversible data hiding scheme for encrypted images[J]. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 2020, 66: No.102744. 10.1016/j.jvcir.2019.102744 |
11 | QIAN Z X, ZHANG X P. Reversible data hiding in encrypted images with distributed source encoding[J]. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2016, 26(4): 636-646. 10.1109/tcsvt.2015.2418611 |
12 | ZHOU J T, SUN W W, DONG L, et al. Secure reversible image data hiding over encrypted domain via key modulation[J]. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2016, 26(3): 441-452. 10.1109/tcsvt.2015.2416591 |
13 | QIN C, ZHANG X P. Effective reversible data hiding in encrypted image with privacy protection for image content[J]. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 2015, 31: 154-164. 10.1016/j.jvcir.2015.06.009 |
14 | QIN C, HE Z H, LUO X Y, et al. Reversible data hiding in encrypted image with separable capability and high embedding capacity[J]. Information Sciences, 2018, 465: 285-304. 10.1016/j.ins.2018.07.021 |
15 | YIN Z X, JI Y, LUO B. Reversible data hiding in JPEG images with multi-objective optimization[J]. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2020, 30(8): 2343-2352. 10.1109/tcsvt.2020.2969463 |
16 | ZHANG X P. Reversible data hiding in encrypted image[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2011, 18(4): 255-258. 10.1109/lsp.2011.2114651 |
17 | YI S, ZHOU Y C. Binary-block embedding for reversible data hiding in encrypted images[J]. Signal Processing, 2017, 133: 40-51. 10.1016/j.sigpro.2016.10.017 |
18 | 吴友情,郭玉堂,汤进,等. 基于自适应哈夫曼编码的密文可逆信息隐藏算法[J]. 计算机学报, 2021, 44(4): 846-858. 10.11897/SP.J.1016.2021.00846 |
WU Y Q, GUO Y T, TANG J, et al. Reversible data hiding in encrypted images using adaptive Huffman encoding strategy[J]. Chinese Journal of Computers, 2021, 44(4): 846-858. 10.11897/SP.J.1016.2021.00846 | |
19 | SCHAEFER G, STICH M. UCID: an uncompressed color image database[C]// Proceedings of the SPIE 5307, Storage and Retrieval Methods and Applications for Multimedia 2004. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, 2003: 472-480. 10.1117/12.525375 |
[1] | Yue LI, Dan TANG, Minjun SUN, Xie WANG, Hongliang CAI, Qiong ZENG. Efficient reversible data hiding scheme based on two-dimensional modulo operations [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(6): 1880-1888. |
[2] | Lin GAO, Yu ZHOU, Tak Wu KWONG. Evolutionary bi-level adaptive local feature selection [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(5): 1408-1414. |
[3] | Ye TIAN, Jinjin CHEN, Xingyi ZHANG. Hybrid optimizer combining evolutionary computation and gradient descent for constrained multi-objective optimization [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(5): 1386-1392. |
[4] | Kaiwen ZHAO, Peng WANG, Xiangrong TONG. Two-stage search-based constrained evolutionary multitasking optimization algorithm [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(5): 1415-1422. |
[5] | Tao JIANG, Zhenyu LIANG, Ran CHENG, Yaochu JIN. GPU-accelerated evolutionary optimization of multi-objective flow shop scheduling problems [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(5): 1364-1371. |
[6] | Jianqiang LI, Zhou HE. Hybrid NSGA-Ⅱ for vehicle routing problem with multi-trip pickup and delivery [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(4): 1187-1194. |
[7] | Qingyu YUAN, Tiegang GAO. Reversible information hiding based on pixel prediction and secret image sharing [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(3): 780-787. |
[8] | Yongjian MA, Xuhua SHI, Peiyao WANG. Constrained multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on two-stage search and dynamic resource allocation [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2024, 44(1): 269-277. |
[9] | Saijuan XU, Zhenyu PEI, Jiawei LIN, Genggeng LIU. Constrained multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on multi-stage search [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(8): 2345-2351. |
[10] | Pan YANG, Minqing ZHANG, Yu GE, Fuqiang DI, Yingnan ZHANG. Color image information hiding algorithm based on style transfer process [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(6): 1730-1735. |
[11] | Canghong JIN, Yuhua SHAO, Qinfang HE. Long-tail recommendation model based on adaptive group reranking [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(4): 1122-1128. |
[12] | Junyan LIU, Feibo JIANG, Yubo PENG, Li DONG. Multi-objective optimization model for unmanned aerial vehicles trajectory based on decomposition and trajectory search [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(12): 3806-3815. |
[13] | Chunfeng LIU, Zheng LI, Jufeng WANG. Multi-objective optimization of minicells in distributed factories [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(12): 3824-3832. |
[14] | Na ZHOU, Ming CHENG, Menglin JIA, Yang YANG. Medical image privacy protection based on thumbnail encryption and distributed storage [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(10): 3149-3155. |
[15] | Erchao LI, Shenghui ZHANG. Dynamic multi-objective optimization algorithm based on adaptive prediction of new evaluation index [J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2023, 43(10): 3178-3187. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||