## 4 Comparative Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Host** & **Frames** & \(C\) & **Scale \(k\)** & **Capacity (bpp)** & **PSNR (dB)** & **SSIM** & **CCQE (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Documentary 8053–8117} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.95} & 25 & 23.16 & 26.01 & 0.8136 & 75.08 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 23.16 & 25.98 & 0.8201 & 75.24 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 23.16 & 25.9 & 0.8184 & 75.1  
In the Documentary medium-motion segment (Table 8), the PSNR values follow the established pattern of higher PSNR at lower capacities. The PSNR at 17.65 bpp is 45.10 dB when \(C=0.75\), indicating good performance even in medium-motion contexts. Finally, the Documentary fast-motion segment (Table 9) continues to show that lower capacities result in better video quality. The highest PSNR is 36.31 dB at 17.65 bpp, with \(C=0.75\), highlighting the consistent effectiveness of the technique across different motion types and capacities. Table 10 presents the results for the Film slow-motion segment. As the scale \(k\) and capacity (bpp) increase, the PSNR values generally improve. For instance, with a scale of 100 and a capacity of 23.16 bpp, the PSNR is 32.74 dB. In contrast, a lower capacity of 17.65 bpp at the same scale results in a PSNR of 47.66 dB. This demonstrates a positive \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Host** & **Frames** & **C** & **Scale \(k\)** & **Capacity (bpp)** & **PSNR (dB)** & **SSIM** & **CCQE (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Film} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.95} & 25 & 23.16 & 33.16 & 0.8458 & 77.68 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 23.16 & 34.43 & 0.9032 & 79.43 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 23.16 & 34.61 & 0.9155 & 79.78 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 23.16 & 34.64 & 0.9199 & 79.9 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 25 & 20 & 36.65 & 0.8946 & 73.19 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 20 & 41.53 & 0.9629 & 76.12 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 20 & 43.59 & 0.9788 & 77.03 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 20 & 44.46 & 0.9847 & 77.4 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 25 & 17.65 & 36.95 & 0.9029 & 68.58 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 17.65 & 42.79 & 0.9694 & 71.7 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 17.65 & 45.84 & 0.9847 & 72.85 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 17.65 & 47.55 & 0.9905 & 73.42 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: Detailed results of the proposed Octree-hiding technique using **Film medium-motion segment as the host video segment** with a \(32\times 32\times 32\) minimum cube size. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Host** & **Frames** & **C** & **Scale \(k\)** & **Capacity (bpp)** & **PSNR (dB)** & **SSIM** & **CCQE (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Film} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.95} & 25 & 23.16 & 30.46 & 0.8307 & 76.62 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 23.16 & 31.73 & 0.8939 & 78.52 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 23.16 & 31.94 & 0.9059 & 78.87 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 23.16 & 31.98 & 0.9094 & 78.97 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 25 & 20 & 34.65 & 0.9009 & 72.85 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 20 & 39.98 & 0.9708 & 75.93 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 20 & 42.23 & 0.985 & 76.84 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 20 & 43.26 & 0.9899 & 77.23 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 25 & 17.65 & 35.24 & 0.9108 & 68.35 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 50 & 17.65 & 41.4 & 0.9761 & 71.52 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 75 & 17.65 & 44.8 & 0.9893 & 72.7 \\ \cline{3-6}  & & 100 & 17.65 & 46.95 & 0.9939 & 73.36 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: Detailed results of the proposed Octree-hiding technique using **Film fast-motion segment as the host video segment** with a \(32\times 32\times 32\) minimum cube size. correlation between bpp and PSNR; higher capacity enables better quality representation, although with diminishing returns at higher bpp values. Table 11 details the Film medium-motion segment. The trend observed is similar to that in the slow-motion segment: higher bpp values correspond to higher PSNR values. Specifically, with 100 bpp, the PSNR reaches 34.64 dB, whereas at 17.65 bpp, the PSNR is 47.55 dB. This suggests that, regardless of motion speed, increasing the bit rate improves quality.