Video Encoding Macroblock Cost Comparison for Reduced Processing Time

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current video compression technologies require significant processing amounts to calculate inter-frame and intra-frame coding costs, leading to increased processing time and reduced efficiency in video coding.

Innovation Solution

A method that determines the coding scheme for a macroblock by comparing inter-frame and intra-frame coding costs, using a simplified cost calculation equation to reduce the number of coding modes considered, thereby decreasing processing time and improving efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If all inter-frame and intra-frame coding modes are calculated to determine the optimal coding scheme, then the coding quality is improved, but the processing time and computational complexity increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoding qualityVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by calculating coding costs for only a subset of coding modes rather than all modes. Specifically, it computes inter-frame coding costs using motion estimation and intra-frame coding costs using gradient calculations, then selects the optimal mode based on comparing these partial results. This approach achieves satisfactory coding quality while significantly reducing processing time compared to evaluating all possible coding modes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the coding mode selection process into distinct stages: first calculating inter-frame coding costs for motion compensation modes, then calculating intra-frame coding costs for gradient-based modes, and finally comparing these costs to determine the optimal mode. This segmentation allows the system to evaluate different coding strategies separately and efficiently without computing all modes simultaneously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Manufacturing precision

If all inter-frame and intra-frame coding modes are calculated to determine the optimal coding scheme, then the coding quality is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoding qualityVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent reduces computational complexity by performing partial calculations for coding costs. Instead of exhaustively evaluating all inter-frame and intra-frame coding modes, it calculates representative costs using motion estimation for inter-frame modes and gradient calculations for intra-frame modes, then selects the optimal mode based on these partial results.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameters used for cost calculation by using simplified models: motion estimation parameters for inter-frame coding costs and gradient parameters for intra-frame coding costs. These parameter changes enable efficient computation without requiring full evaluation of all coding mode parameters, thereby reducing device complexity while maintaining coding quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If the number of coding modes considered is reduced, then the processing efficiency is improved, but the coding quality may deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing efficiencyVSAvoidcoding quality
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the approach to cost calculation by using gradient-based parameters for intra-frame modes and motion estimation parameters for inter-frame modes. This parameter transformation allows the system to evaluate fewer coding modes while maintaining the ability to capture essential image characteristics, thereby improving processing efficiency without significant quality loss.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent substitutes complex exhaustive search mechanisms with simplified cost comparison mechanisms. Instead of mechanically evaluating all coding modes through full transformation and reconstruction, it uses gradient calculations and motion estimation to substitute for the exhaustive evaluation process, achieving both efficiency and quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentEP3621303B1Processing method and device for video encoding, and storage medium
Publication Date: 2024.02.28 TENCENT TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO LTD
  • EP3621303B1 patent drawingFigure 1A~1B
  • EP3621303B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3621303B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Provided in an embodiment of the present invention are a processing method and device for video encoding, and a storage medium. The method comprises: determining, from a video frame to be encoded, a macro block to be encoded; acquiring, by means of at least one inter-frame encoding mode, costs for inter-frame encoding of the macro block; acquiring, by means of at least one intra-frame encoding mode, costs for intra-frame encoding of the macro block; comparing the costs associated with the inter-frame encoding with the costs associated with the intra-frame encoding to obtain a comparison result; determining, according to the comparison result, an encoding approach for the macro block, the encoding approach comprising intra-frame prediction encoding or inter-frame prediction encoding; and performing encoding on the macro block according to the encoding approach.