Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 75, Issue 24, pp 16881–16903 | Cite as

Combining cellular automata and local binary patterns for copy-move forgery detection

  • Dijana TralicEmail author
  • Sonja Grgic
  • Xianfang Sun
  • Paul L. Rosin


Detection of duplicated regions in digital images has been a highly investigated field in recent years since the editing of digital images has been notably simplified by the development of advanced image processing tools. In this paper, we present a new method that combines Cellular Automata (CA) and Local Binary Patterns (LBP) to extract feature vectors for the purpose of detection of duplicated regions. The combination of CA and LBP allows a simple and reduced description of texture in the form of CA rules that represents local changes in pixel luminance values. The importance of CA lies in the fact that a very simple set of rules can be used to describe complex textures, while LBP, applied locally, allows efficient binary representation. CA rules are formed on a circular neighborhood, resulting in insensitivity to rotation of duplicated regions. Additionally, a new search method is applied to select the nearest neighbors and determine duplicated blocks. In comparison with similar methods, the proposed method showed good performance in the case of plain/multiple copy-move forgeries and rotation/scaling of duplicated regions, as well as robustness to post-processing methods such as blurring, addition of noise and JPEG compression. An important advantage of the proposed method is its low computational complexity and simplicity of its feature vector representation.


Copy-move forgery Duplicated regions Cellular automata Local binary pattern 


  1. 1.
    Amerini I, Ballan L, Caldelli R, Del Bimbo A, Giuseppe S (2011) A SIFT-based forensic method for copy-move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 6(3):1099–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bashar M, Noda K, Ohnishi N, Mori K (2010) Exploring duplicated regions in natural images. IEEE Trans Image Process. Accepted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bayram S, Sencar H, Memon N (2009) An efficient and robust method for detecting copy-move forgery. IEEE Int Conf Acoust Speech Signals Process: 1053–1056Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhatnagar G, Wu QMJ, Raman B (2011) A new aspect in robust digital watermarking. Multimedia Tools Appl 66(2):179–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bo X, Junwen W, Guangjie L, Yuewei D (2010) Image copy-move forgery detection based on SURF. Multimedia Inf Netw Secur: 889–892Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bravo-Solorio S, Nandi AK (2011) Exposing duplicated regions affected by reflection, rotation and scaling. Int Conf Acoust Speech Signal Process: 1880–1883Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Christlein V, Riess C, Jordan J, Riess C, Angelopoulou E (2012) An evaluation of popular copy-move forgery detection approaches. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 7(6):1841–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farid H (2009) Image forgery detection: a survey. IEEE Signal Process Mag 26(2):16–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fridrich J, Soukal D, Lukas J (2003) Detection of copy move forgery in digital images. Proc. Digital Forensic Research WorkshopGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hou X, Zhang T, Xiong G, Zhang Y, Ping X (2014) Image resampling detection based on texture classification. Multimedia Tools Appl 72(2):1681–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li L, Li S, Zhu H, Chu S, Roddick J, Pan J (2013) An efficient scheme for detecting copy-move forged images by local binary patterns. J Inf Hiding Multimedia Signal Process 4(1):46–56Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lin H, Wang C, Kao Y (2009) Fast copy-move forgery detection. WSEAS Trans Signal Process 5(5):188–197Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Luo W, Huang J, Qiu G (2006) Robust detection of region-duplication forgery in digital images. IEEE Inf Forensics Secur 4:746–749Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muja, M, Lowe, DG (2012) Fast matching of binary features. Comput Robot Vision (CRV), pp 404–410Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ojala T, Pietikainen M, Maeenpaa T (2002) Multiresolution gray- scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24(7):971–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Popescu A, Farid H (2004) Exposing digital forgeries by detecting duplicated image regions, tech. rep. tr2004-515. Dartmouth CollegeGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Redi JA, Taktak W, Dugelay J-L (2011) Digital image forensics: a booklet for beginners. Multimedia Tools Appl 51(1):133–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosin PL (2007) Training cellular automata for image processing. IEEE Trans Image Process 15(7):2076–2087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ryu S, Lee M, Lee H (2010) Detection of copy-rotate-move forgery using Zernike moments. Inf Hiding Conf: 51–65Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shivakumar BL, Baboo S (2011) Detection of region duplication forgery in digital images using SURF. Int J Comput Sci Issues 8(4):199–205Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun X, Rosin PL, Martin RR (2011) Fast rule identification and neighborhood selection for cellular automata. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B 41(3):749–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Swaminathan A, Min W, Liu K (2013) Copy-move forgery detection using multiresolution local binary patterns. Forensic Sci Int 231(1–3):61–72Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tralic D, Rosin PL, Sun X, Grgic S (2014) Detection of duplicated image regions using cellular automata. Proceed Int Conf Syst Signals Image Process: 167–170Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tralic D, Rosin PL, Sun X, Grgic S (2014) Copy-move forgery detection using cellular automata. In: Rosin P L, Adamatzky A, Sun X (eds) Cellular Automata in Image Processing and Geometry. Springer, pp 105 – 125Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tralic D, Zupancic I, Grgic S, Grgic M (2013) CoMoFoD - new database for copy-move forgery detection. In: Proc. 55th International Symposium ELMAR-2013. pp 49–54Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang J, Liu G, Zhang Z, Dai Y, Wang Z (2009) Fast and robust forensics for image region-duplication forgery. Acta Autom Sin 35(12):1488–1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dijana Tralic
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sonja Grgic
    • 1
  • Xianfang Sun
    • 2
  • Paul L. Rosin
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical Engineering and ComputingUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.School of Computer Science and InformaticsCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations