{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025232403718459494, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00398406374501992, 'mean_word_length': 5.231404958677686, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Steganalysis using logistic regression

We advocate Logistic Regression (LR) as an alternative to the Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifiers commonly used in steganalysis. LR offers more information than traditional SVM methods - it estimates class probabilities as well as providing a simple classification - and can be adapted more easily and efficiently for multiclass problems. Like SVM, LR can be kernelised for nonlinear classification, and it shows comparable classification accuracy to SVM methods. This work is a case study, comparing accuracy and speed of SVM and LR classifiers in detection of LSB Matching and other related spatial-domain image steganography, through the state-of-art 686-dimensional SPAM feature set, in three image sets.