1 / 50

Madhu Peringassery Krishnan Multimedia Processing Lab, University of Texas at Arlington, TX, USA.

Implementation and Performance Analysis of 2-D Order 16 Integer Transforms in H.264/AVC and AVS-video for HD video coding. Madhu Peringassery Krishnan Multimedia Processing Lab, University of Texas at Arlington, TX, USA. Advisor: Dr. K. R. Rao. Outline. Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT-II)

channing-wells
Download Presentation

Madhu Peringassery Krishnan Multimedia Processing Lab, University of Texas at Arlington, TX, USA.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Implementation and Performance Analysis of 2-D Order 16 Integer Transforms in H.264/AVC and AVS-video for HD video coding Madhu Peringassery Krishnan Multimedia Processing Lab, University of Texas at Arlington, TX, USA. Advisor: Dr. K. R. Rao

  2. Outline • Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT-II) • Development of Integer Cosine Transform (ICT) • ICT in H.264/AVC • ICT in AVS-video • Order 16 ICT • 2-D order 16 ICT and HD video coding • Simple order 16 ICT (SICT) • Modified order 16 ICT (SICT) • binDCT-L • Implementation • Performance Analysis • Conclusions • References

  3. Discrete Cosine Transforms (ICT) • Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT-II) [1] • - • - • k, n = 0,1,2,……..,N-1 • 2-D transform is separable into two 1-D transforms evaluated • along rows followed by columns [2].

  4. Pros and Cons DCT-II • Pro : Good energy compaction capability Fast algorithms for implementation • Con : Involves floating-point arithmetic Mismatch between forward and inverse transform ICT [3] • Pro : Integer arithmetic implementation Avoid mismatch between forward and inverse transform Good energy compaction capability if well designed Fast algorithms can be developed • Con : Orthogonality depends on the elements of transform matrix

  5. Development of ICT • Approximation of DCT-II - [3] where k is scaling factor and T is ICT • Elements of T [3] - Maintain relative magnitude and signs - Posses dyadic symmetry [4] - Orthogonality

  6. H.264/AVC encoder Typical block diagram of a H.264/AVC encoder [5]

  7. H.264/AVC decoder Typical block diagram of a H.264/AVC decoder [5]

  8. ICT in H.264/AVC ICT • Order 4 ICT [6] • Order 8 ICT [7] Other transforms: • 4 × 4 Hadamard transform applied to the DC coefficients of 4 × 4 integer transforms (intra-predicted 16 x 16 macroblocks) • Additional 2 × 2 Hadamard transform applied to DC coefficients of 4 × 4 integer transforms for chroma components

  9. ICT in H.264/AVC • 4 x 4 ICT matrix - • 4 x 4/2 x 2 Hadamard matrix -

  10. ICT in H.264/AVC • 8 x 8 ICT matrix - • Non-normalized • Fast implementation [8]

  11. ICT in H.264/AVC • Flow diagram for 8 x 8 ICT [9] -

  12. ICT in H.264/AVC • Sparse matrix factors : where

  13. AVS-video encoder Typical block diagram of AVS-video encoder [10]

  14. AVS-video decoder Typical block diagram of AVS-video decoder [10]

  15. ICT in AVS-video • Order 8 ICT [11] - • Order 16 ICT : extended from order 8 ICT • Fast implementation

  16. ICT in AVS-video • Flow diagram for 8 x 8 ICT [9] -

  17. ICT in AVS-video • Sparse matrix factors : where

  18. Order 16 ICT • Approximated from order 16 DCT-II - [12] • General transform matrix [13] - ‘E’ denotes even symmetry and ‘O’ denotes odd symmetry about the solid line (mirror image and negative of mirror image)

  19. Order 16 ICT and HD video coding • Spatial correlation of HD videos are higher - [14] where E is the ensemble average operator x(n1) and x(n2): intensity values of n1,n2 1,2: mean 1,2: standard deviation • Better coding efficiency using higher order transforms

  20. Order 16 ICT and HD video coding • Prediction error : Difference between original and intra or inter predicted • macroblocks Table showing spatial correlation of prediction error

  21. Simple order 16 ICT (SICT) • Extension of order 8 ICT [15] • Low complexity • Comparable transform coding gain with DCT-II (Plot 1) • Transform matrix of order 16 SICT for AVS-video • Requires 24 shifts and 88 additions

  22. Simple order 16 ICT (SICT) • Transform matrix of order 16 SICT for H.264/AVC • Requires 20 shifts and 80 additions

  23. Simple order 16 ICT • Flow diagram 16 x 16 SICT [15]

  24. Simple order 16 ICT • Sparse matrix factors : H.264/AVC : where AVS-video : where where and order of input as shown in flow diagram

  25. Modified order 16 ICT • Low complexity (more complex than SICT) • Comparable transform coding gain (better than SICT) • Steps involved in development [9] - Order 8 ICT of H.264/AVC or AVS-video is borrowed as the even part (T8e) - Modified dyadic symmetry of odd part of order 16 DCT-II symmetry (M8o) [9]

  26. Modified order 16 ICT • Transform matrix of order 16 MICT for H.264/AVC

  27. Modified order 16 ICT • Transform matrix of order 16 MICT for AVS-video

  28. Modified order 16 ICT • Elements {x1, x3,….,x15} are {11, 11, 11, 9, 8, 6, 4, 1} • M8o is implemented in three stages M8o= M1.M2.M3 • Constraints for M1 , M2 ,M3 - Contain integers - Small magnitude - Sparse - Orthogonality • Requires 32 shifts and 150 additions

  29. Modified order 16 ICT • Flow diagram 16 x 16 MICT (shifts for M8o not shown for clarity) [9]

  30. Modified order 16 ICT • Sparse matrix factors : H.264/AVC : where AVS-video : where where and order of input as shown in flow diagram

  31. Order 16 binDCT-L • Based on Loeffler et al. factorization [16] • Planar rotation in DCT-II represented as lifting steps (shears) [17] where

  32. Order 16 binDCT-L • Rotation needing 4 multiplications and 2 additions implemented using 3 multiplications and 3 additions • Irrational parameters represented as dyadic-rational coefficients • Coding efficiency improved by tuning the approximations • Involves 51 shifts and 107 additions

  33. Order 16 binDCT-L • Flow diagram for 16 x 16 binDCT-L [18]

  34. Implementation in H.264/AVC • JM 17.2 reference software [19] • H.264 high profile • Integration of SICT, MICT and binDCT-L • Defining a parameter for selecting them (tLCT) • Simulations run on an i7 quad 4, 2.60 GHz processor ,6GB RAM I : Intra predicted frames P : Predicted frames B : Bidirectionally predicted Configuration parameters

  35. Implementation in AVS-video • RM 52e reference software [20] • AVS-video enhanced profile • Integration of SICT, MICT and binDCT-L • Defining a parameter for selecting them (tLCT) • Simulations run on an i7 quad 4, 2.60 GHz processor ,6GB RAM Configuration parameters

  36. Transform Coding gain • Measures energy compaction efficiency of transforms • Source : 1-D, zero mean, unit variance first order Markov process • Transform coding gain : - = [21] where is the covariance of the coefficients in transform domain

  37. Transform Coding gain Plot 1 Variation of transform coding gain with correlation coefficient for order 16 SICT, MICT, binDCT-L and order 16 DCT-II

  38. Transform Coding gain Comparison of transform coding gains of order 16 SICT, MICT, binDCT-L with order 16 DCT-II

  39. SICT in H.264/AVC (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings [22] : 2.57 % • BD-PSNR gain [22] : 0.19 dB

  40. MICT in H.264/AVC (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings : 5.30 % • BD-PSNR gain : 0.31 dB

  41. binDCT-L in H.264/AVC (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings : 4.73 % • BD-PSNR gain : 0.36 dB

  42. SICT in AVS-video (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings : 5.18 % • BD-PSNR gain : 0.29 dB

  43. MICT in AVS-video (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings : 2.57 % • BD-PSNR gain : 0.34 dB

  44. binDCT-L in AVS-video (1280 x 720) • BD-bitrate savings : 7.45 % • BD-PSNR gain : 0.41 dB

  45. Vidyo1(1280 x 720) First frame of vidyo1

  46. Conclusions • 2-D order 16 ICTs give considerable bitrate savings or PSNR gain for HD videos • Low complexity (SICT); easy to implement • MICT and binDCT-L ; though requiring more operations, give better bitrate savings or PSNR gain

  47. References [1] N. Ahmed, T. Natarajan, and K. R. Rao, “Discrete cosine transform,” IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. C-23, pp. 90-93, Jan. 1974. [2] K. R. Rao and P. Yip, “Discrete cosine transform: Algorithms, advantages, applications,” Boca Raton FL: Academic Press, 1990. [3] W. K. Cham, “Development of integer cosine transforms by the principle of dyadic symmetry”, IEE Proc. I: Communications, Speech and Vision, Vol. 136, No. 4, pp. 276-282, Aug. 1989. [4] W. K. Cham and R.J. Clarke, “Application of the principle of dyadic symmetry to the generation of orthogonal transform”, IEE Proc. F: Communications, Radar and Signal Processing, Vol. 133, No. 3, pp. 264-270, June 1986. [5] H. Kalva, “The H.264 video coding standard,” IEEE Multimedia, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 86–90, Oct. 2006. [6] A. Luthra, G. J. Sullivan, and T. Wiegand, Eds., Special issue on the “H.264/AVC video coding standard,” IEEE Tran. CSVT, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 148-153, July 2003.

  48. References [7] D. Marpe and T. Wiegand, “H.264/MPEG4-AVC fidelity range extensions: Tools, profiles, performance, and application Areas”, Proc. IEEE ICIP, vol. 1, pp. 592 - 596, 11-14 Sept. 2005. [8] H. S. Malvar et al, “Low-complexity transform and quantization in H.264/AVC”, IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 598-603, July 2003. [9] J. Dong et al, "2D order-16 integer transforms for HD video coding", IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol.19, No.10, pp.1462-1474, Oct. 2009. [10] L. Fan, S. Ma and F. Wu, “Overview of AVS video standard,” IEEE ICME, vol. 1, pp. 423-426, June 2004. [11] L. Yu et al, “Overview of AVS-Video: Tools, performance and complexity,” SPIE VCIP, vol. 5960, pp. 596021-1~ 596021-12, July 2005.

  49. References [12] W. K. Cham and Y. T. Chan, “An Order-16 integer cosine transform”, IEEE Trans. on Signal Processing, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 1205-1208, May 1991. [13] W. Cham and C. Fong “Simple order-16 integer transform for video coding” IEEE ICIP 2010, pp. 161-165, Hong Kong, Sept.2010. [14] S. Naito and A. Koike, “Efficient coding scheme for super high definition video based on extending H.264 high profile,” in Proc. SPIE Vis. Commun. Image Process., vol. 6077, pp. 607727-1-607727-8, Jan. 2006. [15] J. Dong et al, “A universal approach to developing fast algorithm for simplified order-16 ICT,” IEEE ISCAS, pp. 281-284, June 2007. [16] C. Loeffler, A. Lightenberg, and G. Moschytz, “Practical fast 1-D DCT algorithms with 11 multiplications,” Proc. IEEE ICASSP, vol. 2, pp. 988-991, Feb. 1989.

  50. References [17] I. Daubechies and W. A. Pearlman, “Factoring wavelet transforms into lifting steps,” J. Fourier Anal. Appl., vol. 4, pp. 247-269, 1998. [18] J. Liang and T. D. Tran, "Fast multiplierless approximations of the DCT with the lifting scheme," IEEE Trans. on Signal Processing, vol. 49, pp. 3032-3044, Dec. 2001. [19] Link for H.264/AVC reference software: http://iphome.hhi.de/suehring/tml/download/ [20] Link for AVS reference software (RM 52e): ftp://159.226.42.57/public/avs_doc/avs_software. [21] N. S. Jayant and P. Noll, Digital coding of waveforms: principles and applications to speech and video. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984. [22] G. Bjontegaard, Calculation of Average PSNR differences between RD curves, VCEG-M33, April 2001. [23] Special issue on “AVS and its applications,” SP : IC, vol. 24, pp. 245-246, April 2009.

More Related