Top Banner
Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC encoding Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW), 2013 IEEE International Conference on Muchen LI, Keiichi Chono, Satoshi Goto 1
20

Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC encoding

Feb 22, 2016

Download

Documents

jersey

Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC encoding. Muchen LI, Keiichi Chono, Satoshi Goto. Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW), 2013 IEEE International Conference on. outline. Introduction Low-complexity merge candidate decision A. GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

1

Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC encodingMultimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW), 2013 IEEE International Conference on

Muchen LI, Keiichi Chono, Satoshi Goto

Page 2: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

2 outline

Introduction Low-complexity merge candidate decision

A. GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision B. Position-Priority Based Merge Candidate Decision

Simulation Results

Page 3: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

3 Introduction #1

Although the Merge mode brings significant coding efficiency improvements, the complexity of its Merge candidate decision associated with Rate-Distortion cost computation is proportional to the number of Merge candidates.

The investigation shows that redundant and unnecessary RD cost computation for particular Merge candidates between Ground-truth MVs (GMVs) obtained by motion estimation (ME) and Merge candidates.

Page 4: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

4 Introduction #2

For each PU, the Merge mode utilizes up to 5 MVP candidates and selects the best one based on computationally expensive Rate-Distortion (R-D) cost check for each Merge candidate. Sun of absolute transformed difference (SATD) 8-tap filter

Page 5: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

5 Introduction #3

Merge mode allows at most 5 Merge MV candidates from the previously inter-coded blocks located in the positions described. 5 spatial 2 temporal

Page 6: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

6 Introduction #4

Page 7: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

7 Introduction #5

As well as Merge mode, AMVP mode also introduces MVP competition technology and predicts the MV of current PU as one of the MVPs. Ground-truth MV

Page 8: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

8 Introduction #6

Page 9: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

9 Introduction #7

In the study, it is found that the Merge candidates are typically distributed in the SR and the Merge candidate decision is based on the R-D cost that also uses the SATD measurement.

Checking the SATD for all the Merge candidates is redundant and excessive in some cases.

Page 10: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

10 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #A1GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision

The ME in the AMVP mode check and the merge candidate decision employ the same SATD measurement and there is a correlation between them.

Basically, the GMV has the minimum SATD in the SR and it can be taken as a reference for the Merge candidate decision.

Page 11: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

11 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #A2GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision

Page 12: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

12 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #A3GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision

In Case (2), the GMV is identical to the BMMV, including the prediction direction, reference picture index and MV components. Case (2) can also be called as equal case.

The GMV represents the true MV of the current PU better than or equal to the BMMV (up to 88.38% for LP and 72.91% for RA).

Page 13: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

13 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #A4GMV Based Merge Candidate Decision

Page 14: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

14 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #B1Position-Priority Based Merge Candidate Decision

Page 15: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

15 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #B2Position-Priority Based Merge Candidate Decision

A1, B1, and T are always the dominant positions for all the cases. When the CU size becomes larger, the total proportion of A1, B1 and T becomes smaller and the order of them is varying a little for different partitions. A1, B1 and T are available A1, B1 and T are not available

Page 16: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

16 Low-complexity merge candidate decision #B3Position-Priority Based Merge Candidate Decision

Page 17: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

17 Simulation Results #1

Page 18: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

18 Simulation Results #2

Page 19: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

19 Simulation Results #3

Page 20: Low-complexity merge candidate decision for fast HEVC  encoding

20 Simulation Results #4