MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966283235 · doi:10.1109/tmm.2015.2389714

Anchor View Allocation for Collaborative Free Viewpoint Video Streaming

2015· article· en· W1966283235 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Multimedia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Coding and Compression Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersInnovation and Technology FundInnovation and Technology Commission - Hong KongHong Kong University of Science and Technology
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Control reconfigurationMerge (version control)Distributed computingComputer visionParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In free viewpoint video, a viewer can choose at will any camera angle or the so-called “virtual view” to observe a dynamic 3-D scene, enhancing his/her depth perception. The virtual view is synthesized using texture and depth videos of two anchor camera views via depth-image-based rendering (DIBR). We consider, for the first time, collaborative live streaming of a free viewpoint video, where a group of users may interactively pull and cooperatively share streams of different anchor views. There is a cost to access the anchor views from the live source, a cost to “reconfigure” the peer network due to a change in selected anchors during view switching, and a distortion cost due to the distance of the virtual views to the received anchor views at users. We optimize the anchor views allocated to users so as to minimize the overall streaming cost given by the access cost, reconfiguration cost, and view distortion cost. We first show that, if the reconfiguration cost due to view switching is negligible, the view allocation problem can be optimally and efficiently solved in polynomial time using dynamic programming. For the case of non-negligible reconfiguration cost, the problem becomes NP-hard. We thus present a locally optimal and centralized algorithm inspired by Lloyd's algorithm used in non-uniform scalar quantization. We further propose a distributed algorithm with convergence guarantee, where each peer group independently makes merge-and-split decisions with a well-defined fairness criteria. Simulation results show that our algorithms achieve low streaming cost due to its excellent anchor view allocation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it