# Efficient Reversible Data Hiding Scheme for AMBTC-Compressed Images
## 4 Experimental Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Schemes** & **Performance** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** & **Peppers** & **F16** & **Goldhill** & **Boat** & **Average** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{AMBTC} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Proposed} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 75,128 & 64,882 & 78,799 & 81,097 & 76,603 & 78,178 & 75,781 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.13 & 2.13 & 2.13 & 2.13 & 2.13 & 2.13 & 2.13 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] et al. (2019)} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 64,008 & 64,008 & 64,008 & 64,008 & 64,008 & 64,008 & 64,008 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.06 & 2.16 & 2.07 & 2.07 & 2.07 & 2.09 & 2.09 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] and [PERSON] (2014)} & PSNR (dB) & 31.66 & 25.91 & 31.23 & 30.85 & 32.53 & 30.79 & 30.50 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 13,048 & 5168 & 13,464 & 12,631 & 12,487 & 11,981 & 11,463 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] et al. (2016)} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 16,384 & 16,384 & 16,099 & 16,384 & 16,384 & 16,384 & 16,337 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] et al. (2017)} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 16,384 & 16,384 & 20,944 & 16,384 & 16,384 & 16,384 & 17,144 \\ \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[PERSON] et al. (2018)} & PSNR (dB) & 33.97 & 26.00 & 33.40 & 31.95 & 33.16 & 31.15 & 31.60 \\ \cline{2-9}  & EC (bits) & 16,789 & 15,378 & 21,976 & 17,659 & 16,784 & 17,082 & 17,611 \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-9}  & Bit rate (bpp) & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 2.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Performance comparison of the proposed scheme and seven previous schemes ([PERSON] et al., 2018; [PERSON] et al. As can be observed in Table 2, the embedding capacity offered by the proposed scheme, on average, was higher than that of [PERSON] et al. 's [20] and [PERSON] et al. 's scheme [19] by more than 10,000 bits, was nearly 2.53 times higher than [PERSON] et al. 's scheme [15], and was four times higher than four other schemes [16; 14; 17; 18], with a slightly higher bit rate of the proposed scheme. Even though a high bit rate is required, however, Figure 9 presents that the proposed scheme has a much higher efficiency rate than the seven previous schemes. Specifically, the efficiency rate of the proposed scheme, on average, outperformed [PERSON] et al. 's scheme [19] by 2%, while it was two times larger than [PERSON] et al. 's scheme and four times that of four other schemes [16; 14; 17; 18]. To demonstrate our performance on image quality (PSNR), embedding capacity (EC), and embedding efficiency can compete with the latest existing scheme, we compare our proposed scheme with [PERSON] et al. 's scheme [20] in Table 3 To provide fair comparisons, all data related to Hong et al. 's scheme are based on the best combinations of (\(\alpha\), \(\beta\)), and the corresponding (\(\alpha\), \(\beta\)) for each test image, as listed in Table 3. From Table 3, we can observe the average image quality is the same as that of Hong et al. 's scheme since both two schemes are reversible data hiding schemes. However, when \(m\) is up to 5, the average hiding capacity will be up to 74,977 bits, which is 10,461 bits higher than that of [PERSON] et al. 's scheme. In other words, the average embedding efficiency offered by our scheme is 0.085 bpp higher than that of Hong et al. 's scheme based on the definition given in Equation (10).