MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162767729 · doi:10.1109/pcs.2010.5702588

An improved iterative algorithm for calculating the ratedistortion performance of causal video coding for continuous sources and its application to real video data

2010· article· en· W2162767729 on OpenAlexaff
En‐hui Yang, Chang Sun, Lin Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Coding and Compression Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMotion compensationAlgorithmRate–distortion theoryCoding (social sciences)Coding tree unitQuantization (signal processing)Data compressionMathematicsDecoding methodsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An improved iterative algorithm is first proposed to calculate the rate-distortion performance of causal video coding for any continuous sources. Instead of using continuous reproduction alphabets, it utilizes finite reproduction alphabets and iteratively updates them along with transitional probabilities from the continuous source to reproduction letters, thus overcoming the computation complexity problem encountered when applying the algorithm recently proposed by Yang et al for discrete sources to continuous sources. The proposed algorithm converges in the sense that the rate-distortion cost is monotonically decreasing until a stationary point is reached. It is then applied to practical video data to establish some theoretic coding performance benchmark. In comparison with H.264, experiments show that under the same motion compensation setting, causal video coding offers a roughly 1 dB coding gain on average over H.264 for the IPPIPP...GOP structure. This suggests that an area one could explore to further improve the rate-distortion performance of H.264 be how quantization and coding should be performed conditionally given previous frames and coded frames and given motion compensation.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Coding and Compression TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207