MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep learning assisted quality ranking for list decoding of videos subject to transmission errors

2023· article· en· W4385269991 on OpenAlexaff
Alexis Guichemerre, Stéphane Coulombe, Anthony Trioux, François‐Xavier Coudoux, Patrick Corlay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkDecoding methodsArtificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)Video qualityImage qualityComputer visionDeep learningRanking (information retrieval)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a new deep learning-based quality ranking framework to assist video list decoding methods in the context of unreliable video transmissions. The objective is to identify an intact image (corrected video frame) among a list of candidate images generated by a list decoding method, where all candidates, except for the intact image are corrupted. The framework comprises a deep learning-based no-reference image quality assessment (NR-IQA) for non-uniform video distortions (NUD) system to rank the candidate images according to their quality, which allows identifying the best one. To show the validity of our proposed framework, we develop an NR-IQA system relying on a proven patch-based convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture, which we adapt to better account for the non-uniform distortions observed in the candidate images, e.g., H.265 transmission errors during wireless communications. Specifically, we modify the patch size on which our CNN for non-uniform distortions (CNN-NUD) operates to capture a larger and more meaningful spatial context. Moreover, we develop a new training database using images resulting from various bit modifications in the received video packets, to simulate the list decoding process, and train the system using a full reference IQA (FR-IQA) method. Experiments on intra frames of videos encoded using H.265 show the ability of this system to identify an intact image among a set of five candidate images with an average accuracy of 96.6%, whereas traditional NR-IQA metrics or the initially trained CNN system offer poor accuracy ranging between 15.7% and 33.6%, respectively.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207