Merge List Ordering for Video Coding Efficiency
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current video compression systems, such as HEVC and VTM-3, do not optimize the ordering of history-based and pairwise motion vector predictor candidates in the merge candidate list for maximum coding efficiency, leading to suboptimal compression performance.
Innovation Solution
The proposed method involves determining history-based and averaged motion vector predictor candidates and inserting them in a list based on the temporal structure of reference frames, with pairwise candidates often being inserted before history-based candidates to improve coding efficiency, especially when the maximum list size is 8 or higher.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If history-based motion vector predictor candidates are inserted before pairwise average candidates in the merge candidate list, then the implementation follows the conventional approach, but coding efficiency is not optimized for certain list sizes
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dynamics by making the insertion order of motion vector predictor candidates adaptive rather than fixed. The order dynamically changes based on the maximum merge candidate list size parameter. When the maximum size is 8 or higher, pairwise average candidates are inserted before history-based candidates; when the maximum size is lower, history-based candidates are inserted first. This dynamic adjustment optimizes coding efficiency for different configuration scenarios without requiring multiple separate implementations.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent utilizes parameter changes by using the maximum merge candidate list size as a controlling parameter that determines the insertion order. By monitoring this parameter value, the system automatically adjusts which candidate type is inserted first. This parameter-driven approach allows a single implementation to handle multiple scenarios optimally, improving coding efficiency across different list size configurations without increasing implementation complexity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If the merge candidate list size is increased to 8 or higher, then more predictor candidates are available for selection, but the ordering optimization becomes more critical to maintain coding efficiency
Solution Approach 1:
The patent makes the candidate insertion order dynamic based on the list size parameter. When the maximum merge candidate list size is 8 or higher, the system automatically prioritizes inserting pairwise average candidates before history-based candidates. This dynamic behavior ensures that with larger list sizes providing more candidates, the ordering is optimized to maintain high coding efficiency by presenting the most useful candidates first to the encoder.
Data Source
AI summary
Different implementations are described; particularly implementations for video encoding and decoding using merge lists comprising history-based motion vector predictor candidates and averaged motion vector predictor candidates. The method comprises: determining for a current block of the picture one or more history-based motion vector predictor candidates using motion information of blocks preceding the current block; determining for the current block one or more averaged motion vector predictor candidates by averaging a pair of motion vector predictor candidates in a list of motion vector predictor candidates, wherein the motion vector predictor candidates in the list are formed using motion information of blocks spatially and/or temporally surrounding the current block; and inserting one or more of the averaged motion vector predictor candidates before one or more of the history-based motion vector predictor candidates in the list of motion vector predictor candidates.