Cross-Component Prediction History Tables for Video Coding

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing video coding technologies, such as MPEG-2, MPEG-4, ITU-T.263, ITU-T.264/MPEG-4 AVC, ITU-T.265 HEVC, and VVC, face challenges in improving coding efficiency for video processing.

Innovation Solution

Implementing cross-component prediction (CCP) models and history tables (HT) to enhance video processing, allowing for improved coding efficiency by determining CCP models based on history tables and using history-based CCP modes for video block conversions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If conventional video coding technologies (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, H.264, H.265, VVC) are used, then video processing can be performed, but coding efficiency is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoding efficiencyVSAvoidcompression performance
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism by maintaining a history table that stores previously determined CCP model parameters (α and β values). These historical parameters are fed back into the prediction process for current and subsequent video blocks, allowing the system to leverage past prediction results to improve current coding efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary action by pre-calculating and storing CCP model parameters in a history table during the encoding process. These pre-computed parameters are then readily available for reuse in subsequent predictions, avoiding redundant calculations and improving overall coding efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If cross-component prediction models are determined for each video block, then prediction accuracy improves, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction accuracyVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies the discarding and recovering principle by selectively using historical CCP parameters from the history table. Instead of always computing new parameters, the system recovers and reuses previously determined parameters when appropriate, discarding the computational effort of recalculating them while maintaining prediction accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #34Discarding and recovering

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses copying by replicating successful CCP model parameters from the history table to multiple video blocks that exhibit similar characteristics. This allows the same proven parameters to be copied and applied across different blocks, maintaining accuracy while reducing computational complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentUS20250337917A1Method, apparatus, and medium for video processing
Publication Date: 2025.10.30 BYTEDANCE INC
  • US20250337917A1 patent drawing
  • US20250337917A1 patent drawing
  • US20250337917A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Embodiments of the present disclosure provide a solution for video processing. A method for video processing is proposed. In the method, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, at least one cross component prediction (CCP) model of the current video block is determined. The conversion is performed based on the at least one CCP model. At least one history table (HT) of CCP model is determined based on the at least one CCP model.