| Literature DB >> 35978898 |
B T Geetha1, Prakash Mohan2, A V R Mayuri3, T Jackulin4, J L Aldo Stalin5, Varagantham Anitha6.
Abstract
Presently, technological advancements in the healthcare sector pose a challenging problem relevant to the security and privacy of health-related applications. Medical images can be considered significant and sensitive data in the medical informatics system. In order to transmit medical images in an open medium, the design of secure encryption algorithms becomes essential. Encryption can be considered one of the effective solutions for accomplishing security. Although numerous models have existed in the literature, they could not adaptable to the rising number of medicinal images in the health sector. At the same time, the optimal key generation process acts as a vital part in defining the performance of the encryption techniques. Therefore, this article presents a Pigeon Inspired Optimization with Encryption-based Secure Medical Image Management (PIOE-SMIM) technique. The proposed PIOE-SMIM approach majorly concentrates on the development of secret share creation (SSC) and the encryption process. At the initial stage, the medical images are converted into a collection of 12 shares using the SSC approach. In addition, an elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) scheme is employed for the encryption process. In order to optimum key creation procedure in the ECC model, the PIO technique is exploited with the aim of maximizing PSNR. Finally, on the receiver side, the decryption and share reconstruction processes are performed to construct the original images. The PIOE-SMIM model displayed an enhanced PSNR of 59.37 dB in image 1. Improved PSNR of 59.53 dB is given for image 5 using the PIOE-SMIM model. For demonstrating an enhanced performance of the PIOE-SMIM method, a widespread experimental study is made and the results highlighted the supremacy of the PIOE-SMIM model over other techniques.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35978898 PMCID: PMC9377849 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2243827
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Process in ECC.
Figure 2Flowchart of PIO technique.
Figure 3Sample medical images.
Visualization of multi-share creation scheme image 1.
| Test image | Share 1 | Share 2 | Share 3 | Share 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Visualization of multiple share creation scheme image 2.
| Test image | Share 1 | Share 2 | Share 3 | Share 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Result analysis of PIOE-SMIM method with distinct measures and images.
| Test images | MSE | RMSE | PSNR | SSIM | CC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image-1 | 0.0751 | 0.2740 | 59.37 | 99.90 | 99.95 |
| Image-2 | 0.0652 | 0.2553 | 59.99 | 99.99 | 99.91 |
| Image-3 | 0.0853 | 0.2921 | 58.82 | 99.90 | 99.97 |
| Image-4 | 0.0610 | 0.2470 | 60.28 | 99.94 | 99.91 |
| Image-5 | 0.0725 | 0.2693 | 59.53 | 99.90 | 99.96 |
Figure 4PSNR analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with distinct images.
Figure 5SSIM and CC analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with distinct images.
Comparative analysis of PIOE-SMIM method with current methods in terms of MSE and PSNR.
| Input image | PIOE-SMIM | OSC-MI | Hybrid model | GWOE-SCO | SC-ECC | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSE | PSNR | MSE | PSNR | MSE | PSNR | MSE | PSNR | MSE | PSNR | |
| Image-1 | 0.0751 | 59.37 | 0.1050 | 57.92 | 0.1254 | 57.15 | 0.1521 | 56.31 | 1.4460 | 46.53 |
| Image-2 | 0.0652 | 59.99 | 0.1287 | 57.04 | 0.1354 | 56.81 | 0.1479 | 56.43 | 1.9453 | 45.24 |
| Image-3 | 0.0853 | 58.82 | 0.1054 | 57.90 | 0.1268 | 57.10 | 0.1395 | 56.69 | 2.0245 | 45.07 |
| Image-4 | 0.0610 | 60.28 | 0.0812 | 59.04 | 0.1521 | 56.31 | 0.1952 | 55.23 | 1.7516 | 45.70 |
| Image-5 | 0.0725 | 59.53 | 0.0812 | 59.04 | 0.1280 | 57.06 | 0.1542 | 56.25 | 2.1652 | 44.78 |
Figure 6Comparative analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with existing methods.
Result analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with recent algorithm in terms of CC.
| Input image | PIOE-SMIM | OSC-MI | Hybrid model | GWOE-SCO | SC-ECC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image-1 | 99.95 | 99.71 | 98.03 | 98.11 | 97.68 |
| Image-2 | 99.91 | 99.24 | 98.71 | 98.25 | 98.14 |
| Image-3 | 99.97 | 99.78 | 98.78 | 97.11 | 96.52 |
| Image-4 | 99.91 | 99.61 | 98.71 | 97.32 | 97.13 |
| Image-5 | 99.96 | 99.27 | 98.51 | 97.24 | 97.06 |
Figure 7CC analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with existing approaches.
Result analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with recent approaches with respect to PSNR (with and without attack).
| Test images | PIOE-SMIM | OSC-MI | Hybrid model | GWOE-SCO | SC-ECC | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attack | WOA | Attack | WOA | Attack | WOA | Attack | WOA | Attack | WOA | |
| Image-1 | 58.43 | 59.37 | 56.93 | 57.92 | 55.91 | 57.15 | 55.39 | 56.31 | 45.53 | 46.53 |
| Image-2 | 58.99 | 59.99 | 55.97 | 57.04 | 55.61 | 56.81 | 55.46 | 56.43 | 44.20 | 45.24 |
| Image-3 | 57.86 | 58.82 | 57.27 | 57.90 | 55.71 | 57.10 | 55.28 | 56.69 | 44.18 | 45.07 |
| Image-4 | 59.37 | 60.28 | 58.16 | 59.04 | 55.21 | 56.31 | 54.27 | 55.23 | 44.40 | 45.70 |
| Image-5 | 58.52 | 59.53 | 57.96 | 59.04 | 55.68 | 57.06 | 54.76 | 56.25 | 43.40 | 44.78 |
Figure 8PSNR analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique with attacks.
Figure 9PSNR analysis of PIOE-SMIM technique without attacks.