Video Coding Sub-picture Segmentation and Adaptive Filtering

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current video coding technologies face challenges in efficiently managing bandwidth demand due to the increasing number of connected devices, particularly in digital video transmission, where existing methods do not effectively optimize video processing for sub-picture based coding and decoding.

Innovation Solution

The proposed techniques involve methods for video processing that include conversion between video blocks and bitstreams, utilizing sub-picture based coding, palette coding, and dynamic resolution conversion, while disabling certain filtering processes to improve efficiency and adaptability in video coding standards like HEVC and VVC.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If sub-picture based coding is performed, then coding efficiency and bandwidth usage are improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoding efficiencyVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The picture is divided into multiple sub-pictures, each with independent coding parameters and processing constraints. This segmentation allows optimized coding for each sub-picture region while maintaining overall system manageability through structured organization of coding units.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different coding parameters such as loop filtering disable/enable status, deblocking filtering constraints, and motion estimation region sizes are changed based on sub-picture boundaries. This enables adaptive parameter adjustment to improve coding efficiency without requiring complete system redesign.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Loss of time

If loop filtering is disabled across sub-picture boundaries, then processing time is reduced, but video quality deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing timeVSAvoidvideo quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

Loop filtering is selectively enabled or disabled based on local characteristics of different sub-pictures and boundary conditions. This local adaptation allows quality preservation in regions where it benefits most while reducing processing time in regions where computational resources are constrained.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of applying loop filtering uniformly across all boundaries, the method applies filtering selectively to specific sub-picture boundaries based on configured constraints. This partial application reduces overall processing time while maintaining adequate quality through strategic filtering where most needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Device complexity

If deblocking filtering is disabled at sub-picture boundaries, then processing complexity is reduced, but artifacts increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing complexityVSAvoidartifacts
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The deblocking filtering process is dynamically adjusted based on boundary characteristics and sub-picture configurations. Filtering strength and application are modified adaptively rather than applied uniformly, reducing complexity where boundaries are less critical while maintaining artifact reduction where needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

Deblocking filtering parameters such as filter strength, application threshold, and processing scope are changed based on sub-picture boundary conditions. This enables the system to reduce processing complexity by disabling or weakening filtering at boundaries where artifacts are less noticeable while maintaining quality where artifacts would be more prominent.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Measurement precision

If merge estimation region size is increased, then motion prediction accuracy is improved, but processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemotion prediction accuracyVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The motion estimation process is segmented into different regions with different MER sizes based on sub-picture boundaries and motion characteristics. This allows high-precision motion prediction in regions where it is most important while using smaller, faster-to-process MERs in regions where motion is less variable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The size and characteristics of merge estimation regions are locally adapted based on sub-picture content and boundary conditions. This enables optimized motion prediction accuracy for each local region while controlling overall processing time through selective application of computationally intensive operations only where necessary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS20240107036A1Constraints for video coding and decoding
Publication Date: 2024.03.28 DOUYIN VISION CO LTD
  • US20240107036A1 patent drawing
  • US20240107036A1 patent drawing
  • US20240107036A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of video processing is provided that includes performing a conversion between a block of a video and a bitstream of the video. The bitstream conforms to a formatting rule specifying that a size of a merge estimation region (MER) is indicated in the bitstream and the size of the MER is based on a dimension of a video unit. The MER comprises a region used for deriving a motion candidate for the conversion.