1 / 13

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Description on current UEP problems and the resolutions to the problems] Date Submitted: [March 18, 2008]

vance
Download Presentation

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

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. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Description on current UEP problems and the resolutions to the problems] Date Submitted: [March 18, 2008] Source: [Seung-Eun Hong1 , Yongsun Kim2, Wooyong Lee3, Jinkyeong Kim4, Kyeongpyo Kim5, Hyoungjin Kwon6] Company: [Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)] Address: [ETRI, 161 Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700, Republic of Korea] Voice: [], FAX: [], E-Mail: [iptvguru@etri.re.kr 1,doori@etri.re.kr2, wylee@etri.re.kr3, jkkim@etri.re.kr4, kpkim@etri.re.kr5, kwonjin@etri.re.kr6] Re: [] Abstract: [We describe current UEP problems in DF1 and propose resolutions to the problems.] Purpose: [To be considered in IEEE 802.15.3c standard] Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release:The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. ETRI

  2. Overview • Problems of Current UEP Process • Current UEP only supports a pixel data with 8/8/8 bit depth • Needs to support video data with various bit depths such as 16/16/16 • Current UEP is not optimized to various video formats • UEP can be applied to YCbCr as well as RGB color format • In case of YCbCr, current UEP scheme may not be optimized because Y is more important than CbCr. • UEP for compressed video can also be considered • New Proposal of UEP process • Considers color depths and color format of the video data • supports the bit position for separation of MSBs and LSBs ETRI

  3. Current UEP Process • Separates MSBs and LSBs according to fixed bit position of a pixel data with 8/8/8 bit depth • Different FEC coding rates (or MCSs) can be applied to MSBs and LSBs, respectively • UEP mapping can be applied inorder to weight MSBs and LSBs differently ETRI

  4. Problems of Current UEP • Current UEP process supports only fixed color depth of 8 bits (comment 48 & comment 49 in DF0) • Not support various color depths • Not indicate bit position to separate MSBs from LSBs Using Current UEP

  5. Problems of Current UEP • Current UEP is not optimized to various video format • In case of YCbCr, video quality may not be optimized because even LSBs of Y might be more important than MSBs of Cb/Cr (comment 50 in DF0) ETRI

  6. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 • Method 1: During UEP negotiation, required information, such as color depth, bit position and color format, is delivered in advance • Method 2: Like subframe information and UEP mapping indication field in MAC subheader, the color depth and bit position fields are included in the subheader • ETRI prefers method 1 to method 2 because method 2 requires much overhead in every single frame ETRI

  7. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 • Method 1: UEP negotiation • Current UEP Information Request/Response Command • Suggested UEP Information Request Command ETRI

  8. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 • Method 1: UEP negotiation (cont’d) • Example of Color (pixel) depth field ETRI

  9. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 • Method 1: UEP negotiation (cont’d) • Example of bit separation pointfield ETRI

  10. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 • Method 1: UEP negotiation (cont’d) • Example of color format field ETRI

  11. Proposed Resolution to Comment 48 & 49 Method 1: UEP negotiation (cont’d) - summary March, 2008 Slide 11 ETRI

  12. Proposed Resolution to Comment 50 • Color format-based separation of MSBs/LSBs • Unlike RGB color format, the luminance is more important than chrominance in YCbCr color format • For example, Y can be MSBs, and Cb/Cr can be considered as LSBs if bit separation point field is used. Y Cb Y Cb Cr Cr Video component 8 8 8 8 8 8 Color depth in bits 4:4 4:4 4:4 8 8 8 MSB bits:LSB bits 1:1 1:2 MSB data rate weight:LSB data rate weight MSBs LSBs MSBs LSBs ETRI

  13. Conclusion • It is recommend to include fields for bit separation point, color depth and color format in UEP command frame to support various bit depths and color formats • If we use the bit separation point field, it’s possible to make luminance more weighted than chrominance ETRI

More Related