MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112390972 · doi:10.1109/icnf.2011.5994315

Channel noise and correlation noise of video sequences in distributed video coding

2011· article· en· W2112390972 on OpenAlexaff
Kuganeswaran Thambu, Xavier Fernando, Ling Guan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncoderComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)Residual frameDistributed source codingDecoding methodsCorrelationNoise (video)AlgorithmChannel (broadcasting)ResidualArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSpeech recognitionFrame (networking)Reference frameMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsVariable-length code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed video coding (DVC) is defined such as a correlated video sequence is transmitted via the distributed independent encoders, and it can be decoded conditionally at the decoder. In the DVC coding, if an encoder encodes the video frame X and the side information Y is at the decoder, where the side information is computed using the adjacent frames of the X known as key frames. The side information Y is considered as a prediction of X, and the correlation noise is defined as a residual error between the transmitted frame and the side information at the decoder. In this paper we analyze the behavior of the correlation noise N for different video sequences. We have analyzed the correlation of the adjacent frames or key frames in Foreman video sequence. This paper also discuss the difference between the channel noise and the correlation noise of the video sequences.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207