1 / 10

Joint Effort Group Meeting in Ghent: Scientific Exchange and Policy Discussions

The meeting aims to facilitate scientific exchange beyond subjective quality assessment, emphasizing objective metrics, with a focus on MPEG demanding, JPEG AIC initiative, and patent pool policies. The process involves testing new modules, dataset evaluation, profile definition, and validation, enhancing understanding of new algorithms' benefits.

braima
Télécharger la présentation

Joint Effort Group Meeting in Ghent: Scientific Exchange and Policy Discussions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Joint Effort GroupGhent meetingA. Bourret P. Le Callet

  2. Goals • Scientific exchange not only limited to subjective quality assessment • Links with other communities who have the opposite problem : share on objective metric not on subjective • Context : • MPEG demanding • JPEG AIC initiative

  3. Joint Effort approach • Starting with generic model framework • Testing only new modules' benefit • Source code available • no training possibility • no need for secret sequences • each CE member can run its own tests and report results • better understanding of each new algo benefits

  4. Policies, IPR issues • Among possibilities JVT (H264 …) example : • Contribution and IPR declaration and statement at the same time • Contribution Form : source code • Issue: reference software • Patent pool

  5. Policies : dataset • Dataset (e.g. materials and subjective data) … two steps : • Common Working Dataset WD (known by contributors) to test the contributions • Possibility to present analysis based on non public dataset • Goal : identify limits of contribution in order to further improvement • Validation dataset VD at final stage (joined the WD after)

  6. Process example • Step 1:Scope (limited), rules (performance evaluation), basic framework, call for Evidence • Step 2: WD completed • Step 3: contributions and evaluation on WD => decision (JEG labs) • Step 4: VD design and evaluation • T0 + 3 • T0 + 9 • T0 + 21 • T0 + 27

  7. Possible Scope • Previous test plan • Current • Non existing

  8. Profiles and levels • Name (NR, RR, Hybrid ..): VQM1-NR • Profile: use and context (coding errors, tranmission errors, accuracy and quality range) • Level: resolution, frame rate, coder … • Name: VQM1-H264 • Prolile: NR, RR, FR, Hybrid • Level: resolution, …

  9. First test plan proposal • VQM1-H264 • Profile: NR V (PVS only after decoding) S (Stream only) H (PVS and Stream) • At least : Stream at NAL level • Possibility to define extended profile to cover protocol level parameters (UDP, RTP, DVB …) • Level: from HD to QCIF, transmission error at several bit rate

  10. VQM1-H264 NRV profile Tools that have access to PVS only NRH profile NRS profile Tools that have access to stream only

More Related