Resilient Video Coding via Improved Motion Compensated Prediction

Resilient Video Coding via Improved Motion Compensated Prediction

Sunday Nyamweno (McGill University, Canada), Ramdas Satyan (McGill University, Canada) and Fabrice Labeau (McGill University, Canada)
Copyright: © 2013 |Pages: 27
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-2660-7.ch008
OnDemand PDF Download:
List Price: $37.50


Motion compensated prediction (MCP) is at the heart of modern video compression standard because of its ability to remove temporal redundancies. However, MCP is responsible for temporal error propagation, which can result in severe quality degradation in lossy environments. In this chapter, the authors present two innovative methods of improving MCP to be more resilient to packet losses. In the first method, the motion trajectory is used to develop a novel distortion weighting technique, and the second method exploits the presence of Intra macroblocks in previously coded frames to develop increase robustness.
Chapter Preview


Error Resilient (ER) video coding approaches can be classified into 3 broad categories: encoder, decoder and encoder/decoder co-operation techniques, which are summarized below,

  • 1.

    Encoder: These methods involve adding redundancy at source coder, channel coder or both. Bitstream prioritization (Turletti & Huitema, 1996; Zhu, 1997; Sun & Zdepsky, 1994), and Forward Error Correction (FEC) (Chou, Mohr, Wang, & Mehrotra, 2001; Tan & Zakhor, 2001; R. Zhang, Regunathan, & Rose, 2001) fall into this category. Also some interesting work has been done on error resilient techniques that exploit channel characteristics. The main technologies are based on path diversity (Apostolopoulos, Wong, Tan, & Wee, 2002; Nguyen & Zakhor, 2002; Padmanabhan, Wang, & Chou, 2003), network coding (Chou, Wu, & Jain, 2003; Wu, Chou, & Kung, 2005) and cross-layer design/optimization (Wu, Chou, Zhang, et al., 2005; Setton, Yoo, Zhu, Goldsmith, & Girod, 2005).

  • 2.

    Decoder: These methods are also known as error concealment.Despite the use of encoder techniques to protect the video bitstream, some errors or losses may escape/penetrate encoder protections and cause a perceptual degradation of received video quality. Hence it is necessary for the decoder to perform error concealment. Most of these techniques exploit either spatial (Aign & Fazel, 1995; Wang, Zhu, & Shaw, 1993; Sun & Kwok, 1995) or temporal correlations (Aravind, Civanlar, & Reibman, 1996; Wang & Zhu, 1998; Wang, Wenger, Wen, & Katsaggelos, 2000; Lam, Reibman, & Liu, 1993; Lu, Lieu, Letaief, & Chuang, 1998) in order to predict the erroneous pixels.

  • 3.

    Encoder/Decoder: ARQ methods fall into this category (Podolsky, McCanne, & Vetterli, 2001; Chou & Miao, 2006; Miao & Ortega, 2002). A better approach adjusts the encoder prediction upon receiving channel feedback to send a correcting signal that is able to update the decoder prediction to match that in the encoder (Girod & Farber, 1999; Chang & Lee, 2000). These methods may not be suitable for low delay applications such as video telephony.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book: