Royalty Cost Based Optimization for Video Compression Emrah Akyol, Onur G. Guleryuz, and M. Reha Civanlar DoCoMo USA Labs, Palo Alto, CA USA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fountain Coding-based Video Transmission System over Heterogeneous Wireless Networks Presented by Hyunchul Joo POSTECH
Advertisements

Time Slicing in Mobile TV Broadcast Networks with Arbitrary Channel Bit Rates Cheng-Hsin Hsu Joint work with Mohamed Hefeeda April 23, 2009 Simon Fraser.
Introduction to H.264 / AVC Video Coding Standard Multimedia Systems Sharif University of Technology November 2008.
A Performance Analysis of the ITU-T Draft H.26L Video Coding Standard Anthony Joch, Faouzi Kossentini, Panos Nasiopoulos Packetvideo Workshop 2002 Department.
Onur G. Guleryuz & Ulas C.Kozat DoCoMo USA Labs, San Jose, CA 95110
-1/20- MPEG 4, H.264 Compression Standards Presented by Dukhyun Chang
Technion - IIT Dept. of Electrical Engineering Signal and Image Processing lab Transrating and Transcoding of Coded Video Signals David Malah Ran Bar-Sella.
Time Slicing in Mobile TV Broadcast Networks with Arbitrary Channel Bit Rates Cheng-Hsin Hsu Joint work with Dr. Mohamed Hefeeda April 23, 2009 Simon Fraser.
Resilient Peer-to-Peer Streaming Paper by: Venkata N. Padmanabhan Helen J. Wang Philip A. Chou Discussion Leader: Manfred Georg Presented by: Christoph.
Panoptes: A Scalable Architecture for Video Sensor Networking Applications Wu-chi Feng, Brian Code, Ed Kaiser, Mike Shea, Wu-chang Feng (OGI: The Oregon.
1 School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University, Canada Rate-Distortion Optimized Streaming of Fine-Grained Scalable Video Sequences Mohamed Hefeeda.
Optimal Scalable Video Multiplexing in Mobile Broadcast Networks
A Quality-Driven Decision Engine for Live Video Transmission under Service-Oriented Architecture DALEI WU, SONG CI, HAIYAN LUO, UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN.
Recursive End-to-end Distortion Estimation with Model-based Cross-correlation Approximation Hua Yang, Kenneth Rose Signal Compression Lab University of.
1 School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University, Canada Rate-Distortion Optimized Streaming of Fine-Grained Scalable Video Sequences Mohamed Hefeeda.
The MPEG-4 Fine-Grained Scalable Video Coding Method for Multimedia Streaming Over IP Hayder Radha,Mihaela van der Schaar and Yingwei Chen IEEE TRANSACTIONS.
Video Coding with Linear Compensation (VCLC) Arif Mahmood, Zartash Afzal Uzmi, Sohaib A Khan Department of Computer.
Video Transmission Adopting Scalable Video Coding over Time- varying Networks Chun-Su Park, Nam-Hyeong Kim, Sang-Hee Park, Goo-Rak Kwon, and Sung-Jea Ko,
An Error-Resilient GOP Structure for Robust Video Transmission Tao Fang, Lap-Pui Chau Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyan Techonological University.
1 Single Reference Frame Multiple Current Macroblocks Scheme for Multiple Reference IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS FOR VIDEO TECHNOLOGY Tung-Chien.
Real-time smoothing for network adaptive video streaming Kui Gao, Wen Gao, Simin He, Yuan Zhang J. Vis. Commun. Image R. 16 (2005)
Scalable Wavelet Video Coding Using Aliasing- Reduced Hierarchical Motion Compensation Xuguang Yang, Member, IEEE, and Kannan Ramchandran, Member, IEEE.
Multi-Frame Reference in H.264/AVC 卓傳育. Outline Introduction to Multi-Frame Reference in H.264/AVC Multi-Frame Reference Problem Two papers propose to.
Adaptive Delay Aware Error Control for Internet telephony Catherine Boutremans Jean-Yves Le Boudec IP Telephony Workshop’2001 Institute for computer Communication.
Efficient Fine Granularity Scalability Using Adaptive Leaky Factor Yunlong Gao and Lap-Pui Chau, Senior Member, IEEE IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BROADCASTING,
Rate-Distortion Optimized Motion Estimation for Error Resilient Video Coding Hua Yang and Kenneth Rose Signal Compression Lab ECE Department University.
Using Redundancy and Interleaving to Ameliorate the Effects of Packet Loss in a Video Stream Yali Zhu, Mark Claypool and Yanlin Liu Department of Computer.
H.264/AVC for Wireless Applications Thomas Stockhammer, and Thomas Wiegand Institute for Communications Engineering, Munich University of Technology, Germany.
4/24/2002SCL UCSB1 Optimal End-to-end Distortion Estimation for Drift Management in Scalable Video Coding H. Yang, R. Zhang and K. Rose Signal Compression.
Statistical Multiplexer of VBR video streams By Ofer Hadar Statistical Multiplexer of VBR video streams By Ofer Hadar.
Reducing Bandwidth Requirement for Delivering Video Over Wide Area Networks With Proxy Server Wei-hsiu Ma and David H. C. Du IEEE Transactions on Multimedia,
09/24/02ICIP20021 Drift Management and Adaptive Bit Rate Allocation in Scalable Video Coding H. Yang, R. Zhang and K. Rose Signal Compression Lab ECE Department.
Using Interleaving to Ameliorate the Effects of Packet Loss in a Video Stream Mark Claypool and Yali Zhu Computer Science Department Worcester Polytechnic.
Guidelines for Selecting Practical MPEG Group of Pictures The IASTED International Conference on Internet and Multimedia Systems and Applications (EuroIMSA.
G. Valenzise *, M. Tagliasacchi *, S. Tubaro *, L. Piccarreta Picture Coding Symposium 2007 November 7-9, 2007 – Lisboa, Portugal * Dipartimento di Elettronica.
Strictly private and confidential
Variable Bit Rate Video Coding April 18, 2002 (Compressed Video over Networks: Chapter 9)
An Introduction to H.264/AVC and 3D Video Coding.
Delivering More Video Content at Half the Cost Using MPEG-4 AVC Bob Wilson Chairman & CEO
Conference title 1 A WYNER-ZIV TO H.264 VIDEO TRANSCODER José Luis Martínez, Pedro Cuenca, Gerardo Fernández-Escribano, Francisco José Quiles and Hari.
EE 5359 H.264 to VC 1 Transcoding Vidhya Vijayakumar Multimedia Processing Lab MSEE, University of Arlington Guided.
Profiles and levelstMyn1 Profiles and levels MPEG-2 is intended to be generic, supporting a diverse range of applications Different algorithmic elements.
1 Mobility Aware Server Selection for Mobile Streaming Multimedia CDN Muhammad Mukarram Bin Tariq, Ravi Jain, Toshiro Kawahara {tariq, jain,
Adaptive Multi-path Prediction for Error Resilient H.264 Coding Xiaosong Zhou, C.-C. Jay Kuo University of Southern California Multimedia Signal Processing.
Effects of P2P Streaming on Video Quality Csaba Kiraly, Luca Abeni, Renato Lo Cigno DISI – University of Trento, Italy
By: Hitesh Yadav Supervising Professor: Dr. K. R. Rao Department of Electrical Engineering The University of Texas at Arlington Optimization of the Deblocking.
Low-Power H.264 Video Compression Architecture for Mobile Communication Student: Tai-Jung Huang Advisor: Jar-Ferr Yang Teacher: Jenn-Jier Lien.
Rate-distortion Optimized Mode Selection Based on Multi-channel Realizations Markus Gärtner Davide Bertozzi Classroom Presentation 13 th March 2001.
Fundamentals of Multimedia Chapter 12 MPEG Video Coding II MPEG-4, 7 Ze-Nian Li & Mark S. Drew.
Guillaume Laroche, Joel Jung, Beatrice Pesquet-Popescu CSVT
Advances in digital image compression techniques Guojun Lu, Computer Communications, Vol. 16, No. 4, Apr, 1993, pp
Federico Chiariotti Chiara Pielli Andrea Zanella Michele Zorzi QoE-aware Video Rate Adaptation algorithms in multi-user IEEE wireless networks 1.
COM 597 Streaming Media Class 7 July 13, General Notes and Comments Travis Petershagen, Seattle Podcasting Network Pete Grondal, Mobile Devices,
AIMS’99 Workshop Heidelberg, May 1999 Assessing Audio Visual Quality P905 - AQUAVIT Assessment of Quality for audio-visual signals over Internet.
Saving Bitrate vs. Users: Where is the Break-Even Point in Mobile Video Quality? ACM MM’11 Presenter: Piggy Date:
INTRODUCTION:- The approaching 4G (fourth generation) mobile communication systems are projected to solve still-remaining problems of 3G (third generation)
Presenting: Shlomo Ben-Shoshan, Nir Straze Supervisors: Dr. Ofer Hadar, Dr. Evgeny Kaminsky.
Multi-Frame Motion Estimation and Mode Decision in H.264 Codec Shauli Rozen Amit Yedidia Supervised by Dr. Shlomo Greenberg Communication Systems Engineering.
Computational Controlled Mode Selection for H.264/AVC June Computational Controlled Mode Selection for H.264/AVC Ariel Kit & Amir Nusboim Supervised.
Introduction to H.264 / AVC Video Coding Standard Multimedia Systems Sharif University of Technology November 2008.
INTERNET PROTOCOL TELEVISION (IP-TV)
CS644 Advanced Topics in Networking
Overview of the Scalable Video Coding
"Digital Media Primer" Yue-Ling Wong, Copyright (c)2013 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Future Video Coding Prof. Dr.-Ing. Jörn Ostermann.
Video Compression - MPEG
INTERNET PROTOCOL TELEVISION (IP-TV)
Chap 3: Encoding Video Content
Overview: Video sensing
© 2016 Global Market Insights, Inc. USA. All Rights Reserved Fuel Cell Market size worth $25.5bn by 2024 Low Power Wide Area Network.
Presentation transcript:

Royalty Cost Based Optimization for Video Compression Emrah Akyol, Onur G. Guleryuz, and M. Reha Civanlar DoCoMo USA Labs, Palo Alto, CA USA

2 Outline Setup and motivation Setup and motivation Problem definition Problem definition Our solution with some interesting simulation results. Our solution with some interesting simulation results. Conclusion Conclusion

3 Setup-1: Diverse set of terminals in media delivery Cell phones PDAs … HDTVs Media Encoding 1 Encoding 2 Encoding K … Required quality/ effective bandwidth … Increasing media quality/effective bandwidth Example terminals decoding the media content licensing cost 1 content licensing cost 2 content licensing cost K

4 Setup-2: Diverse set of tools Tool 1 Tool 2 Tool 3 Tool 4 … Tool T Media data Decoded Media Tool j = video motion compensation Integer-pixel accuracy motion compensation 1/2-pixel accuracy motion compensation 1/4-pixel accuracy motion compensation 1/8-pixel accuracy motion compensation Increasing quality Compression tools, error correction tools, transport tools, … Tools have different royalty/licensing costs. (Media Consumer)

5 Thought Experiment Many media delivery technologies available. One can transport media through a variety of networks, using a vast range of tools that correspond to vast ranges in efficiency in end to end delivery. Rather than restricting to rigid toolsets, standard profiles, etc., can one be flexible and allow all tools to contribute? Standardization process mostly allows a coarse set of options. It mostly caters to the average good. Many good tools and technologies get cut out because they are not general enough. Selection almost always involves compromises. Standardization royalties may force simple tools and sophisticated tools equal share of the revenue. Impetus for alternative avenues for tool deployment. There is movement in this direction (software decoders, MPEG RVC, …). MPEG RVC (reconfigurable video coding): put many video compression tools (potentially overlapping functionality) in one big library, language syntax to specify which tools are needed in decoding a given video stream. Why?

6 Media Quality Effective Bandwidth Royalty Cost Royalty cost of delivering media at a particular quality and bandwidth. Example surface defined by achievable [quality, bandwidth, royalty cost] triplets. All triplets below the surface are achievable. Media delivery cost surface (content licensing + tool licensing)

7 Cuts from the surface Media Quality Effective Bandwidth Q Media Quality Effective Bandwidth C Royalty Cost Media Quality Effective Bandwidth B Royalty Cost “MPEG-1” “h.264/AVC”

8 Complicated Royalty Costs My content costs $5 for cell phone terminals, $15 for HDTV terminals. My compression tool is free of charge. My compression tool costs $0.001 per use. My tool costs $0.10 per movie, $0.15 for sports,.... My tool costs $0.10 except when combined with all free tools, in which case it too becomes free. My tool is free for not-for-profit use. …

9 System Level: Media Server I will mostly talk about compression related tools

10 Media ServerRegistry User Certificate can be used to verify with information from the user site (for each media segment or periodically) to ensure the legitimacy of the media. Time instant : certificate Time instant : Encoded media and associated certificate System Level: Media Delivery : quality : bandwidth : tool list … Time instant :

11 Rate - Distortion - Royalty Cost Optimization Setup Problem Definition: For each of the M segments, find the set of tools to use such that distortion is minimized under total rate and total royalty cost constraints, i.e., s.t., This is a simplification. Optimization can get elaborate. No reason to pay for the latest/greatest tools if plenty of bandwidth if simple/easy content if cheaper tools are available …

12 Optimization Example Using Compression Tools Table II: Rate and distortion changes with different tools. The utilized tools are subpixel accurate ME, loop filter, advanced entropy coding, and multiple reference frames respectively. The rate reduction is shown as percentage with respect to the baseline along with PSNR gain at QP=25. Clip-1 foreman Clip-2 akiyo Clip-3 coast. Clip-4 mobile Clip-5 bus Tool-1 Rate 56.51%55.93%14.93%51.56%50.05% ΔPSNR Tool-2 Rate 1.05%0.37%0.76%0.02%0.45% ΔPSNR Tool-3 Rate 7.21%4.69%10.85%7.81%4.85% ΔPSNR Tool-4 Rate 15.28%2.45%0.65%19.30%5.87% ΔPSNR Table I: Assigned cost of using each tool for two different cases Case-1Case-2 Tool-1 (Subpixel MV) 10 Tool-2 (Loop filter) Tool-3 (CABAC) Tool-4 (Multiple Ref.) Case 1: “Flat Rate”, similar to today’s licensing. Case 2: “Fair Rate”, each tool gets paid based on its contribution

13 “Flat Rate” Constant toolset: Optimized tools for the entire duration of the content. Adaptive toolset: Optimized tools for each GOP (toolset can change every GOP = media segment) concatenation of 10 clips Significant reduction in royalty costs with small loss in efficiency Inefficient tools get cut out (lobbying for tools is useless). Adaptive ~ constant Quality

14 “Fair Rate” Adaptive better than constant. Significant reductions are difficult. Quality

15 Tool Usage Adaptive allows more tools to contribute (tools that are good in niche situations get used). Tool-1Tool-2Tool-3Tool-4 C=75% Adaptive 97%48%98%57% C=75% Constant 100%0%100%0% C=25% Adaptive 69%0%20%10% C=25% Constant 100%0% C=75% Adaptive 76%72%98%67% C=75% Constant 100% 0% C=25% Adaptive 29%41%2%18% C=25% Constant 0% 100% “Flat Rate” “Fair Rate”

16Conclusion A system that allows practical deployment of royalty cost optimized media delivery. A system that allows practical deployment of royalty cost optimized media delivery. Very interesting optimization problem with sophisticated royalty costs. Very interesting optimization problem with sophisticated royalty costs. Content adaptive. Content adaptive. Increases efficiency. Allows non-standard tools to contribute. Increases efficiency. Allows non-standard tools to contribute. Much reduced royalties when plenty of bandwidth/resources. Much reduced royalties when plenty of bandwidth/resources. Flat rate: significant reductions in royalty cost possible. Flat rate: significant reductions in royalty cost possible. Fair rate: significant reductions difficult. Fair rate: significant reductions difficult. Adaptive optimization allows each tool to contribute when its niche comes. Adaptive optimization allows each tool to contribute when its niche comes. Can allow other resources relevant to media delivery into optimization (power consumption, memory usage, etc.) Can allow other resources relevant to media delivery into optimization (power consumption, memory usage, etc.) Going forward: Going forward: Optimization issues. Optimization issues. More tools. More tools. Dependencies among tools. Dependencies among tools. Addition of communication/networking related tools. Addition of communication/networking related tools. Fair rate Allow segment based licensing

17 Combines game theory and economic concepts with rate-distortion Combines game theory and economic concepts with rate-distortion How much are customers willing to pay to get quality Q at bandwidth B? (Utilization curves). How much are customers willing to pay to get quality Q at bandwidth B? (Utilization curves). Optimal costs based on utilization curves and game theory. Optimal costs based on utilization curves and game theory. What does today’s licensing look like? What does today’s licensing look like? Games Games Going forward: How should tools be priced? Distortion Rate T1 + T2: cost3(R) T2: cost2(R) T1: cost1(R) Free R free region D,R not achievable