Rate-distortion optimal downsampling of H.264 compressed video using full-resolution information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the problem of downsampling H.264 compressed video, where a full-resolution compressed video sequence conforming to H.264 is transcoded into another compressed video sequence conforming to H.264 at a lower target resolution. A transcoding framework that makes efficient use of full-resolution information is proposed. In this framework, residuals and motion vectors at the target resolution are first predicted from their full-resolution counterparts. These predicted residuals and motion vectors are then applied to optimize the actual rate-distortion (RD) performance. Experimental results show that, compared against the benchmark system, which cascades an H.264 decoder, a spatial downsampler, and an H.264 encoder, and is generally regarded having the best possible RD performance, the proposed framework, surprisingly, provides consistently superior RD performance with up to 0.7 dB gain. Furthermore, the framework has the desired feature of being configurable to strike the right balance between rate-distortion performance and computational complexity according to application requirements.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".