Loading [MathJax]/extensions/MathZoom.js
Pareto-Based Method for High Efficiency Video Coding With Limited Encoding Time | IEEE Journals & Magazine | IEEE Xplore

Pareto-Based Method for High Efficiency Video Coding With Limited Encoding Time


Abstract:

Several different methods have been investigated in recent years, aiming at computational complexity reduction and scaling of High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) software...Show More

Abstract:

Several different methods have been investigated in recent years, aiming at computational complexity reduction and scaling of High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) software implementations. However, maintaining the encoding time per frame or group of pictures (GOPs) below an adjustable upper bound is still an open research issue. A solution for this problem is devised in this paper based on a set of Pareto-efficient encoding configurations, identified through rate-distortion-complexity analysis. The proposed method combines a medium-granularity encoding time control with a fine-granularity encoding time control to accurately limit the HEVC encoding time below a predefined target for each GOP. It is shown that the encoding time can be kept below a desired target for a wide range of encoding time reductions, e.g., up to 90% in comparison with the original encoder. The results also show that compression efficiency loss (Bjøntegaard delta-rate) varies from negligible (0.16%) to moderate (9.83%) in the extreme case of 90% computational complexity reduction.
Published in: IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology ( Volume: 26, Issue: 9, September 2016)
Page(s): 1734 - 1745
Date of Publication: 18 August 2015

ISSN Information:

Funding Agency:

References is not available for this document.

I. Introduction

The High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) standard was finished in 2013 by the Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC), a joint activity of International Telecommunication Union Video Coding Experts Group and International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission Moving Picture Experts Group [1]. The standard became the state of the art method for video compression and is expected to gradually substitute its predecessor, the H.264/Advanced Video Coding (AVC) standard, in consumer equipment able to receive, display, capture, and transmit high-resolution video. When compared with H.264/AVC High profile (HP), HEVC Main profile reduces bit rates by 40% on average, maintaining a similar objective reconstructed image quality [2]. However, the improved compression efficiency of HEVC is obtained at the expense of a significant increase in computational complexity, mainly resulting from much more intensive processing tools, nested partitioning structures and optimization algorithms dealing with larger amounts of data. According to [3], the encoding computational complexity of HEVC is higher than H.264/AVC HP from 9% to 502%, depending on the HEVC Test Model (HM) [4] configuration used. Such wide variation in computational complexity is due to the large number of optional coding tools that can be used within the standard compliance bounds. In [2], the computational complexity of HEVC was found to be 40% higher than that of H.264/AVC HP when only the most important coding tools are enabled.

Select All
1.
High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Text Specification Draft 10, 2013.
2.
J. Vanne, M. Viitanen, T. D. Hamalainen and A. Hallapuro, "Comparative rate-distortion-complexity analysis of HEVC and AVC video codecs", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1885-1898, Dec. 2012.
3.
G. Correa, P. Assuncao, L. Agostini and L. A. da Silva Cruz, "Performance and computational complexity assessment of high-efficiency video encoders", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1899-1909, Dec. 2012.
4.
High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Test Model 13 (HM13) Encoder Description, 2013.
5.
S. Cho and M. Kim, "Fast CU splitting and pruning for suboptimal CU partitioning in HEVC intra coding", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 1555-1564, Sep. 2013.
6.
H. Zhang and Z. Ma, "Fast intra mode decision for High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 660-668, Apr. 2014.
7.
J.-H. Lee, C.-S. Park and B.-G. Kim, "Fast coding algorithm based on adaptive coding depth range selection for HEVC", Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Consum. Electron., pp. 31-33, Sep. 2012.
8.
K. Goswami, B.-G. Kim, D.-S. Jun, S.-H. Jung and J. S. Choi, "Early coding unit (CU)-splitting termination algorithm for High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)", Electron. Telecommun. Res. Inst. J., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 407-417, Jun. 2014.
9.
S. Ahn, B. Lee and M. Kim, "A novel fast CU encoding scheme based on spatiotemporal encoding parameters for HEVC inter coding", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 422-435, Mar. 2015.
10.
J. Lee, S. Kim, K. Lim and S. Lee, "A fast CU size decision algorithm for HEVC", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 411-421, Mar. 2015.
11.
J. Vanne, M. Viitanen and T. D. Hamalainen, "Efficient mode decision schemes for HEVC inter prediction", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 1579-1593, Sep. 2014.
12.
T. Zhao, Z. Wang and S. Kwong, "Flexible mode selection and complexity allocation in High Efficiency Video Coding", IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1135-1144, Dec. 2013.
13.
M. U. K. Khan, M. Shafique and J. Henkel, "An adaptive complexity reduction scheme with fast prediction unit decision for HEVC intra encoding", Proc. 20th IEEE Int. Conf. Image Process. (ICIP), pp. 1578-1582, Sep. 2013.
14.
L. Shen, Z. Zhang and Z. Liu, "Adaptive inter-mode decision for HEVC jointly utilizing inter-level and spatiotemporal correlations", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1709-1722, Oct. 2014.
15.
Y. Shi, Z. Gao and X. Zhang, "Early TU split termination in HEVC based on quasi-zero-block", Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Electr. Electron., pp. 450-454, Nov. 2013.
16.
C. Kiho and E. S. Jang, "Early TU decision method for fast video encoding in High Efficiency Video Coding", Electron. Lett., vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 689-691, 2012.
17.
W.-J. Hsu and H.-M. Hang, "Fast coding unit decision algorithm for HEVC", Proc. Asia-Pacific Signal Inf. Process. Assoc. Annu. Summit Conf., pp. 1-5, Nov. 2013.
18.
L. Shen, Z. Liu, X. Zhang, W. Zhao and Z. Zhang, "An effective CU size decision method for HEVC encoders", IEEE Trans. Multimedia, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 465-470, Feb. 2013.
19.
X. Shen, L. Yu and J. Chen, "Fast coding unit size selection for HEVC based on Bayesian decision rule", Proc. Picture Coding Symp., pp. 453-456, May 2012.
20.
G. Corrêa, P. Assuncao, L. Agostini and L. A. da Silva Cruz, "Complexity control of high efficiency video encoders for power-constrained devices", IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 1866-1874, Nov. 2011.
21.
G. Correa, P. Assuncao, L. V. Agostini and L. A. da Silva Cruz, "Fast HEVC encoding decisions using data mining", IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 660-673, Apr. 2015.
22.
G. Correa, P. Assuncao, L. Agostini and L. A. da Silva Cruz, "Complexity scalability for real-time HEVC encoders", J. Real-Time Image Process., [online] Available: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11554-013-0392-8.
23.
Common Test Conditions and Software Reference Configurations, 2012.
24.
G. Bjontegaard, "Calculation of average PSNR differences between RD-curves", 13th VCEG-M33 Meeting, Apr. 2001.
25.
Common Test Conditions of 3DV Core Experiments, 2014.
26.
Ultra Video Group, Apr. 2015, [online] Available: http://ultravideo.cs.tut.fi/.
27.
Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, H. R. Sheikh and E. P. Simoncelli, "Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity", IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 600-612, Apr. 2004.

Contact IEEE to Subscribe

References

References is not available for this document.