Review History


All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.

Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.

View examples of open peer review.

Summary

  • The initial submission of this article was received on January 2nd, 2024 and was peer-reviewed by 3 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The Academic Editor made their initial decision on March 22nd, 2024.
  • The first revision was submitted on May 6th, 2024 and was reviewed by 1 reviewer and the Academic Editor.
  • A further revision was submitted on May 21st, 2024 and was reviewed by 1 reviewer and the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on May 28th, 2024.

Version 0.3 (accepted)

· May 28, 2024 · Academic Editor

Accept

The paper has addressed all reviewer's question.

[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Sedat Akleylek, a 'PeerJ Computer Science' Section Editor covering this Section #]

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

no comment

Experimental design

no comment

Validity of the findings

no comment

Additional comments

no comment

Cite this review as

Version 0.2

· May 17, 2024 · Academic Editor

Minor Revisions

Please read the reviewer's suggestions and revise the paper.

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

Although the paper has addressed my questions. However, some problems still need be addressed as follows:
1. The author should provide the core algorithm pseudocode of the method proposed in this article and provide a detailed discussion.

Experimental design

no comment

Validity of the findings

no comment

Additional comments

no comment

Cite this review as

Version 0.1 (original submission)

· Mar 22, 2024 · Academic Editor

Major Revisions

Please check the reviewers' suggestions and revise the paper.

**PeerJ Staff Note:** It is PeerJ policy that additional references suggested during the peer-review process should only be included if the authors agree that they are relevant and useful.

**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff comments are addressed in a response letter and that any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

The paper proposed an information hiding scheme based on an improved FCdDNet. However, some problems should be addressed as follows:
1. The core optimization section of the method presented in this article is not detailed enough, and it is suggested that the description of this section be strengthened.
2. The theoretical feasibility analysis of the proposed optimal structure is missing.
3. The format of the paper should be noted, such as two-end alignment.
4. Some related references should be cited as follows:
Li H, Dong S. Image steganalysis algorithm based on deep learning and attention mechanism for computer communication[J]. Journal of Electronic Imaging, 2024, 33(1): 013015-013015.
Singh H K, Singh A K. Digital image watermarking using deep learning[J]. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2024, 83(1): 2979-2994.

**PeerJ Staff Note:** It is PeerJ policy that additional references suggested during the peer-review process should only be included if the authors are in agreement that they are relevant and useful.

Experimental design

no comment

Validity of the findings

no comment

Cite this review as

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

The author proposes a method of hiding large-sized color images into small-sized color images. This method utilizes an improved FCdDNet network as the main structure for hiding network sharing, which can achieve 4 times the hiding of information images carrying images.

Experimental design

This manuscript lacks comparisons with the latest research results in the experimental section, and most of the comparison methods are from three years ago.

Validity of the findings

Actually, the proposed method has a certain degree of innovation, and the experiments are also detailed. However, there still are some processes need to be detailed and some mistakes need to be corrected.

Additional comments

The author did not reveal why the method proposed in this article can hide information images that are four times larger than those carrying images and extract high-quality images.

Cite this review as

Reviewer 3 ·

Basic reporting

A scheme of hiding large-size image into small-size image
based on FCdDNet
1. Research needs to make an algorithms of the improvement method
2. Which application used the algorithms of the paper?
3. research needs proofreading.

Experimental design

good

Validity of the findings

it's OK

Additional comments

keywords are necessary for the research structure

Annotated reviews are not available for download in order to protect the identity of reviewers who chose to remain anonymous.
Cite this review as

All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.