MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132100704 · doi:10.1109/tip.2009.2036716

Low-Complexity Transcoding of JPEG Images With Near-Optimal Quality Using a Predictive Quality Factor and Scaling Parameters

2009· article· en· W2132100704 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéphane Coulombe, Steven Pigeon

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTranscodingComputer scienceImage qualityQuality (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceScalingJPEGComputer visionTransform codingJPEG 2000Factor (programming language)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image processingData compressionMathematicsDiscrete cosine transformImage (mathematics)Image compression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common transcoding operation consists of reducing the file size of a JPEG image to meet bandwidth or device constraints. This can be achieved by reducing its quality factor (QF) or reducing its resolution, or both. In this paper, using the Structural SIMilarity (SSIM) index as the quality metric, we present a system capable of estimating the QF and scaling parameters to achieve optimal quality while meeting a device's constraints. We then propose a novel low-complexity JPEG transcoding system which delivers near-optimal quality. The system is capable of predicting the best combination of QF and scaling parameters for a wide range of device constraints and viewing conditions. Although its computational complexity is an order of magnitude smaller than the system providing optimal quality, the proposed system yields quality results very similar to those of the optimal system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations26
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207