Image splicing forgery detection based on low-dimensional singular value decomposition of discrete cosine transform coefficients

  • Zahra Moghaddasi
  • Hamid A. JalabEmail author
  • Rafidah Md. Noor
Original Article


Digital image forgery has significantly increased due to the rapid development of several tools of image manipulation. Based on the manipulation used to produce a tampered image, image forgery techniques can be characterized into three types: copy–move forgery, image splicing, and image retouching. Image splicing is achieved by adding regions from one image into another. This technique changes the content of the target image and causes variations in image features which are used to detect the forgery regions. In this study, an image splicing forgery detection method based on low-dimensional singular value decomposition of discrete cosine transform (DCT) coefficients has been presented. The suspicious input image is divided into multi-size blocks, and each block is transformed into 2D DCT. The DCT coefficients are calculated correspondingly to each block. The features from DCT are extracted using SVD algorithm. The roughness measure is calculated for the set of singular values obtained. Lastly, four types of statistical features—mean, variance, third-order moment skewness, and fourth-order moment kurtosis—are extracted from SVD features and are then arranged in a feature vector. Feature reduction has been applied by kernel principal component analysis. Finally, support vector machine is used to distinguish between the authenticated and spliced images. The proposed method was evaluated against three standard image datasets CASIA v1, DVMM v1, and DVMM v2. The proposed method shows an average detection accuracy of 97.15, 99.30, and 96.97 for DVMM v1, CASIA v1, and DVMM v2, respectively. These results outperform several current image splicing detection methods.


Image splicing SVM Kernel PCA SVM DCT 



Area under curve


Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Automation


Condition number


Discrete cosine transform


Digital video multi media


False negative


False positive


Kernel principal component analysis




Singular value decomposition


Support vector machine


True negative


True positive


True-negative rate


True-positive rate


Luma (Y) and two chrominance (CbCr) components color space



The authors wish to acknowledge the helpful comments of the anonymous reviewers which helped improve and clarify this manuscript. This project is supported by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), Project: FP073-2015A, MHE, Malaysia.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally and significantly in writing this article and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article.


  1. 1.
    Alkawaz MH et al (2018) Detection of copy–move image forgery based on discrete cosine transform. Neural Comput Appl 30:183–192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrews H, Patterson C (1976) Singular value decompositions and digital image processing. IEEE Trans Acoust Speech Signal Process 24(1):26–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anusudha K et al (2010) Image splicing detection involving moment-based feature extraction and classification using artificial neural networks. ACEEE Int J Signal Image Process 1(3):9–13Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chang CC, Lin CJ (2011) LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 2(3):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dong J, Wang W (2011) CASIA tampered image detection evaluation databaseGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganic E, Zubair N, Eskicioglu AM (2003) An optimal watermarking scheme based on singular value decomposition. In: Proceedings of the IASTED international conference on communication, network, and information securityGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghodsi A (2006) Dimensionality reduction a short tutorial. Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Waterloo, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gu Q, Zhu L, Cai Z (2009) Evaluation measures of the classification performance of imbalanced data sets. In: International symposium on intelligence computation and applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gul G, Kurugollu F (2010) SVD-based universal spatial domain image steganalysis. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 5(2):349–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hakimi F, Hariri M, GharehBaghi F (2015) Image splicing forgery detection using local binary pattern and discrete wavelet transform. In 2015 2nd international conference on knowledge-based engineering and innovation (KBEI). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    He Z et al (2011) Digital image splicing detection based on approximate run length. Pattern Recogn Lett 32(12):1591–1597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    He Z, Lu W, Sun W, Huang J (2012) Digital image splicing detection based on Markov features in DCT and DWT domain. Pattern Recogn 45:4292–4299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    He Z et al (2012) Digital image splicing detection based on Markov features in DCT and DWT domain. Pattern Recogn 45(12):4292–4299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsu C-W, Chang C-C, Lin C-J (2010) A practical guide to support vector classification. citeseerx 1–12Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ibrahim RW et al (2015) Fractional differential texture descriptors based on the machado entropy for image splicing detection. Entropy 17(7):4775–4785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jalab HA, Ibrahim RW (2012) Texture feature extraction based on fractional mask convolution with cesáro means for content-based image retrieval. In: Pacific rim international conference on artificial intelligence. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jalab HA, Ibrahim RW (2013) Texture enhancement based on the Savitzky-Golay fractional differential operator. Math Probl Eng 2013:1–8MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jalab HA, Ibrahim RW (2015) Fractional conway polynomials for image denoising with regularized fractional power parameters. J Math Imaging Vis 51(3):442–450MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khayam SA (2003) The discrete cosine transform (DCT): theory and application. Michigan State University, East LansingGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kohl M (2012) Performance measures in binary classification. Int J Stat Med Res 1(1):79–81Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leach S (1995) Singular value decomposition-a primer. Department of Computer Science, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA (unpublished manuscript)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li X, Jing T, Li X (2010) Image splicing detection based on moment features and Hilbert–Huang transform. In: IEEE international conference on information theory and information security (ICITIS). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mitra S, Acharya T (2005) Data mining: multimedia, soft computing, and bioinformatics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moghaddasi Z et al (2014) Improving RLRN image splicing detection with the use of PCA and kernel PCA. Sci World J 2014:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moghaddasi Z, Jalab HA, Noor RM (2014) SVD-based image splicing detection. In: International conference on information technology and multimedia (ICIMU). IEEE, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moghaddasi Z, Jalab HA, Noor RM (2015) A comparison study on SVD-based features in different transforms for image splicing detection. In: IEEE international conference on consumer electronics-Taiwan (ICCE-TW). IEEE, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moonen M, Van Dooren P, Vandewalle J (1992) A singular value decomposition updating algorithm for subspace tracking. SIAM J Matrix Anal Appl 13(4):1015–1038MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ng T-T, Chang S-F, Sun Q (2004) A data set of authentic and spliced image blocks. Columbia University, ADVENT Technical Report 2004; 203-2004. Accessed 10 Apr 2017
  29. 29.
    Ng T-T, Hsu J, Chang S-F (2009) Columbia image splicing detection evaluation dataset. aposGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Park TH et al (2016) Image splicing detection based on inter-scale 2D joint characteristic function moments in wavelet domain. EURASIP J Image Video Process 2016(1):30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rosipal R et al (2001) Kernel PCA for feature extraction and de-noising in nonlinear regression. Neural Comput Appl 10(3):231–243CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sadek RA (2012) SVD based image processing applications: state of the art, contributions and research challenges. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl (IJACSA) 3(7):9Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shi YQ, Chen C, Chen W (2007) A natural image model approach to splicing detection. In: Proceedings of the 9th workshop on multimedia and security. ACMGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Solomon M, Barrett D, Broom N (2005) Computer forensics jumpstart, 2nd edn. SYBEX, Wiley Publishing,Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Somayeh S et al (2017) State of the art in passive digital image forgery detection: copy–move image forgery. Pattern Anal Appl. Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Srinivasan S (2006) Security and privacy in the computer forensics context. In: International conference on communication technology, 2006. ICCT’06. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stokman H, Gevers T (2007) Selection and fusion of color models for image feature detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 29(3):371–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sutthiwan P et al. (2010) New developments in color image tampering detection. In: Proceedings of 2010 IEEE international symposium on circuits and systems (ISCAS). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Uliyan DM et al (2016) A novel forged blurred region detection system for image forensic applications. Expert Syst Appl 64:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Uliyan DM et al (2016) Image region duplication forgery detection based on angular radial partitioning and Harris key-points. Symmetry 8(7):62MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang W, Dong J, Tan T (2009) A survey of passive image tampering detection. In: Digital watermarking. Springer, Berlin, pp 308–322Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zhang J, Zhao Y, Su Y (2009) A new approach merging Markov and DCT features for image splicing detection. In: IEEE international conference on intelligent computing and intelligent systems, ICIS 2009. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zhao X et al. (2011) Detecting digital image splicing in chroma spaces. In: Digital watermarking. Springer, Berlin, pp 12–22Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science and Information TechnologyUniversity MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations