Table 5 The Comparison of RR average results among the proposed, chang and lin's, and previous averaging schemes for set 1 images
Operation | Type | Specification | Proposed GA scheme | Previous averaging scheme[18] | Chang and Lin's method[1] | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Â | Â | RR | RR | RR | ||||
| Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | t = 160 | t = 180 | t = 200 | t = 230 | t = 250 |
Blurring | Gaussian filter | 9 × 9 | 98.22% | 97.73% | 98.12% | 98.12% | 98.12% | 98.22% | 98.22% |
Surround cropping | Â | 26% | 97.14% | 86.72% | 88.75% | 88.65% | 88.40% | 88.26% | 88.40% |
Quarter cropping | Â | 25% | 96.95% | 85.89% | 87.45% | 88.70% | 89.67% | 90.77% | 91.92% |
Noise addition | Gaussian noise | Mean = 0 Variance = 0.01 | 95.36% | 73.41% | 87.84% | 89.45% | 90.16% | 90.60% | 91.09% |
JPEG compression | Â | Quality factor = 80 | 98.27% | 97.09% | 98.14% | 98.00% | 98.12% | 98.17% | 98.32% |
Scaling | Â | Â | 97.97% | 97.12% | 97.97% | 98.07% | 98.07% | 98.05% | 97.95% |
Sharpening | Linear mapping | Â | 98.27% | 97.71% | 87.87% | 87.50% | 87.28% | 88.45% | 88.82% |
Median filtering | Nonlinear filter | 9 × 9 | 97.22% | 90.65% | 93.73% | 94.53% | 95.12% | 95.58% | 96.19% |
Average filtering | Linear filter | 9 × 9 | 97.05% | 91.24% | 92.72% | 94.04% | 94.56% | 94.80% | 95.41% |
Gamma correction | Â | 0.7 | 98.00% | 97.00% | 94.21% | 94.14% | 93.80% | 93.02% | 93.09% |
Histogram equalization | Â | Uniform | 96.48% | 93.12% | 71.56% | 71.17% | 71.00% | 71.95% | 73.12% |
Pixel shifting |  | 60 × 60 | 90.60% | 51.15% | 48.95% | 51.37% | 54.00% | 58.08% | 61.21% |
ARR | Â | Â | 96.79% | 88.24% | 87.28% | 87.81% | 88.19% | 88.83% | 89.48% |