MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096533084 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1995.526422

A new object-oriented approach for video compression at very low bit rate

2002· article· en· W2096533084 on OpenAlexaff
Dam LeQuang, A. Zaccarin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion estimationComputer scienceQuarter-pixel motionBlock-matching algorithmComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMotion fieldData compressionSegmentationAlgorithmComputational complexity theoryMotion compensationImage segmentationCoding (social sciences)Maximum a posteriori estimationBlock (permutation group theory)Video trackingObject (grammar)MathematicsMaximum likelihood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object-oriented approaches have been proposed for coding video sequences at very low bit rate. Typically, object-oriented coding algorithms segment each image into regions of uniform motion and estimate motion of these regions to generate more accurate motion compensated images. Due to the iterative computing of complex motion models' parameters, the computational complexity of object-oriented algorithms is often high. The present author gives a two-stage algorithm for motion field segmentation and estimation in an object-oriented coder whose computational complexity is reduced by delaying the use of complex motion models at the end of the proposed algorithm. In the first stage of the algorithm, a standard block-matching algorithm and a maximum a posteriori probability estimate are used to compute a translational motion field and its segmentation. That segmentation is then utilized in the second stage to estimate the parameters of complex motion models. Compared to standard block-based algorithms, simulation results show that the proposed algorithm significantly reduces the bit rate needed to encode video sequences and is appropriate for very low bit rate applications.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.258
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207