Text-to-image Algorithm

Oct 4, 2014

Encryptor

Java Code:

Private Sub cmdDeleteMessage_Click()
If txtMessage.Text = "" Then
a = MsgBox("No message to delete!", vbInformation, "")
Else: If MsgBox("Do you want to create a new message?", vbYesNo, "New") = vbNo Then Exit Sub
txtMessage.Text = ""
Pic.Picture = LoadPicture()

[Code] .....

Is these codes of the Block cipher encryptor for text-to-image algorithm (B-TTIE algorithm) by Abusukhon 2013? If not, how to make it the same with B-TTIE algorithm?

View Replies

Image Processing Pattern Matching / Combination Algorithm

Jun 9, 2014

The problem I am trying to solve relates to block-matching or image-within-image recognition. This is an algorithm problem I am working on in java, but computationally, my computer can't handle generating all the combinations at one time.

I see an image, extract the [x,y] of every black pixel and create a set for that image, such as

{[8,0], [9,0], [11,0]}

The set is then augmented so that the first pixel in the set is at [0,0], but the relationship of the pixels is preserved. For example, I see {[8,0], [9,0]} and change the set to {[0,0], [1,0]}. The point of the extraction is that now if I see {[4,0], [5,0]}, I can recognize that basic relationship as two vertically adjacent pixels, my {[0,0], [1,0]}, since it is the same image but only in a different location.

I have a list of these pixel sets, called "seen images". Each 'seen image' has a unique identifier, that allows it to be used as a nested component of other sets. For example:

{[0,0], [1,0]} has the identifier 'Z'

So if I see:

{[0,0], [1, 0], [5,6]}

I can identify and store it as:

{[z], [5, 6]}

The problem with this is that I have to generate every combination of [x,y]'s within the pixel set to check for a pattern match, and to build the best representation. Using the previous example, I have to check:

{[0,0], [1,0]},
{[0,0], [5,6]},
{[1,0], [5,6]} which is {[0,0], [4,5]}
{[0,0], [1,0], [5,6]}

And then if a match occurs, that subset gets replaced with it's ID, merged with the remainder of the original set, and the new combination needs to be checked if it is a 'seen image':

{[z],[5, 6]}

The point of all that is to match as many of the [x,y]'s possible, using the fewest pre-existing pieces as components, to represent a newly seen image concisely. The greedy solution to get the component that matches the largest subset is not the right one. Complexity arises in generating all of the combinations that I need to check, and then the combinations that spawn from finding a match, meaning that if some match and swap produces {[z], [1,0], [2,0]}, then I need to check (and if matched, repeat the process):

{[z], [1,0]}
{[z], [2,0]}
{[1,0], [2,0]} which is {[0,0], [1,0]}
{[z], [1,0], [2,0]}

Currently I generate the pixel combinations this way (here I use numbers to represent pixels 1 == [x,y]) Ex. (1, 2, 3, 4): Make 3 lists:

1.) 2.) 3.)
12 23 34
13 24
14

Then for each number, for each list starting at that number index + 1, concatenate the number and each item and store on the appropriate list, ex. (1+23) = 123, (1+24) = 124

1.) 2.) 3.)
12 23 34
13 24
14
---- ---- ----
123 234
124
134

So those are all the combinations I need to check if they are in my 'seen images'. This is a bad way to do this whole process. I have considered different variations / optimizations, including once the second half of a list has been generated (below the ----), check every item on the list for matches, and then destroy the list to save space, and then continue generating combinations. Another option would be to generate a single combination, and then check it for a match, and somehow index the combinations so you know which one to generate next.

How to optimize what I am doing for a set of ~million items. I also have not yet come up with a non-recursive or efficient way to handle that each match generates additional combinations to check.