MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380785564 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3286577

Visual Saliency Guided Foveated Video Compression

2023· article· en· W4380785564 on OpenAlexafffund
Shupei Zhang, Anup Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceRedundancy (engineering)Data compressionHuman visual system modelSalientMotion compensationVideo compression picture typesVideo qualityMultiview Video CodingPerceptionVideo trackingVideo processingImage (mathematics)Metric (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Video compression has become increasingly crucial as video resolution and bitrate have surged in recent years. However, most widely applied video compression methods do not fully exploit the characteristics of the Human Visual System (HVS) to reduce perceptual redundancy in videos. In this paper, we propose a novel video compression method that integrates visual saliency information with foveation to reduce perceptual redundancy. We present a new approach to subsample and restore the input image using saliency data, which allocates more space for salient regions and less for non-salient ones. We analyze the information entropy in video frames before and after applying our algorithm and demonstrate that the proposed method reduces redundancy. Through subjective and objective evaluations, we show that our method produces videos with superior perceptual visual quality. Moreover, our approach can be added to most existing video compression standards without altering their bitstream format.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207