MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147635633 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2007.367

Motion-Compensated Frame Prediction with Global Motion Estimation for Image Sequence Compression

2007· article· en· W2147635633 on OpenAlexaff
Kehua Jiang, Éric Dubois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionInter frameArtificial intelligenceMotion estimationMotion compensationComputer scienceQuarter-pixel motionFrame (networking)Block (permutation group theory)Block-matching algorithmTranslation (biology)Motion fieldData compressionRotation (mathematics)Motion (physics)Reference framePerspective (graphical)MathematicsVideo processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on a perspective projection model of six-parameter camera motions, a novel motion-compensated frame prediction approach is presented, taking into consideration all types of camera motions including camera translations. With the assumption of a continuously changing scene-depth distribution, a block-based scaled-depth estimation technique is proposed for obtaining the scaled-depth map of the predicted frame. The motion-compensated predicting frame is generated by using the global camera rotation and translation parameters combined with the scaled block-depth map. Compared with traditional block matching algorithms (BMA), more accurate predicting frames are obtained with the proposed motion-compensated frame prediction approach. As a result of fewer parameters required for motion compensation and reduced prediction residues, this approach is potentially more efficient if applied in frame prediction for image sequence compression. Experimental results on test images demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, and also demonstrate its superior performance over the traditional BMA applied for motion-compensated frame prediction.

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 score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207