Interim Presentation on
Topic: Scalable video coding extension of HEVC
(S-HEVC)
A PROJECT UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF DR. K. R. RAO COURSE:
EE5359 - MULTIMEDIA PROCESSING, SPRING 2015
Submitted By:
Aanal Desai
UT ARLINGTON ID: 1001103728
EMAIL ID: aanal.desai@mavs.uta.edu
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS,
ARLINGTON
List of Acronyms:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AVC – Advanced Video Coding
AMVP – Advanced motion vector prediction.
BL – Base Layer
BO – Band Offset
CABAC – Context Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding
CTB – Coding Tree Block
CTU – Coding Tree Unit
CU – Coding Unit
CIF – Common Intermediate Format.
DASH – Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP
DC – Direct Current.
DCT – Discrete Cosine Transform
Diff – Difference
DPB – Decoded Picture Buffer
DST – Discrete Sine Transform
EL – Enhancement Layer
ED – Entropy Decoder
EO – Edge Offset.
FPS – Frames per second
Filt – Filter.
FIR – Finite Impulse Response.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOP – Group of pictures.
HD – High Definition
HDTV – High Definition Television
HEVC – High Efficiency Video Coding
HLS – High Level Syntax
HTTP – Hyper Text Transfer Protocol
ILR – Inter Layer Reference
IEC – International Electro-technical Commission.
IP – Intra Prediction.
IQ – Inverse Quantization.
IT – Inverse Transform.
ITU-T – International Telecommunication Union-Telecommunications standardization sector.
ISO – International Standardization Organization.
JCTVC – Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding
JPEG- Joint Picture Experts Group
LCU – Largest Coding Unit.
LM – Linear Mode.
LP – Loop Filtering.
MANE – Media Aware Network Elements.
•
•
Mbps – Megabits per second
MC – Motion compensation.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MPD – Media Presentation Description
MPEG – Moving Picture Experts Group
MV – Motion Vector
PB – Prediction Block.
PDA – Personal Digital Assistant.
PSNR – Peak Signal to Noise Ratio
PU – Prediction Unit
QCIF – Quarter Common Intermediate Format.
QP – Quantization Parameter.
ROI – Region Of Interest.
SAO – Sample Adaptive Offset
SHVC – Scalable High Efficiency Video Coding
SNR – Signal to Noise Ratio
SVC – Scalable Video Coding.
SPIE – Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers
TU – Transform Unit
TB – Transform Block.
VCEG – Video Coding Experts Group.
VCL – Video Coding Layer.
VGA – Video Graphics Array.
UHD – Ultra High Definition
URL – Uniform Resource Locator
4CIF – 4x CIF.
Overview
• An increasing demand for video streaming to mobile devices such as
smartphones, tablet computers, or notebooks and their broad variety of
screen sizes and computing capabilities stimulate the need for a scalable
extension.
• Modern video transmission systems using the Internet and mobile
networks are typically characterized by a wide range of connection
qualities, which are a result of the used adaptive resource sharing
mechanisms. In such diverse environments with varying connection
qualities and different receiving devices, a flexible adaptation of onceencoded content is necessary[2].
• The objective of a scalable extension for a video coding standard is to
allow the creation of a video bitstream that contains one or more subbitstreams, that can be decoded by themselves with a complexity and
reconstruction quality comparable to that achieved using single-layer
coding with the same quantity of data as that in the sub-bitstream[2].
Introduction
• SHVC provides a 50% bandwidth reduction for the same video quality
when compared to the current H.264/AVC standard. SHVC further offers a
scalable format that can be readily adapted to meet network conditions or
terminal capabilities. Both bandwidth saving and scalability are highly
desirable characteristics of adaptive video streaming applications in
bandwidth-constrained, wireless networks[3].
• The scalable extension to the current H.264/AVC [4] video coding standard
(H.264/SVC) [8] provided resources of readily adapting encoded video
stream to meet receiving terminal's resource constraints or prevailing
network conditions.
• The JCT-VC is now developing the scalable extension (SHVC) [5] to HEVC in
order to bring similar benefits in terms of terminal constraint and network
resource matching as H.264/SVC does, but with a significantly reduced
bandwidth requirement[3]
Types of Scalabilities
• Temporal, Spatial and SNR Scalabilities
• Spatial scalability and temporal scalability defines cases in which a subbitstream represents the source content with a reduced picture size (or
spatial resolution) and frame rate (or temporal resolution), respectively[1].
• Quality scalability, which is also referred to as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)
scalability or fidelity scalability, the sub-bitstream delivers the same spatial
and temporal resolution as the complete bitstream, but with a lower
reproduction quality and, thus, a lower bit rate[2].
Block diagram of spatial scalability:
Figure 1[24]
Block Diagram of SNR Scalability:
Figure 2 [24]
• Block diagrams of spatial and SNR scalable coding are Depicted in Fig.1
and 2, respectively. Note that the down-sampling is a non-normative part,
i.e. not specified in the standard Normative inter-layer processing is
present in spatial scalability case ("up-sampling"). The key idea proposed
in this paper is to replace the trivial copying (dotted in Fig. 1b) by denoising inter-layer filter, which improves the quality of inter-layer texture
prediction so that improves the coding efficiency of the enhancement
layer.[24]
• While analyzing the spectral characteristics of both down-sampling and
up-sampling filters used for spatial scalability, we found that removing
high-frequency noise from the reference signal before prediction is
effective.[24]
• Reference signal in SNR scalability case, i.e. the reconstructed base layer
picture, usually contains more coding noise compared with spatial
scalability case since it is coded with higher QP. Therefore, it is reasonable
to design inter-layer filter for SNR scalability with de-noising properties.
[24]
High-Level Block Diagram of the
Proposed Encoder
Figure 3 [1]
Inter-layer Intra prediction
• A block of the enhancement layer is predicted using the reconstructed
(and up-sampled) base layer signal.[2]
• Inter-layer motion prediction:- The motion data of a block are completely
inferred using the (scaled) motion data of the co-located base layer blocks,
or the (scaled) motion data of the base layer are used as an additional
predictor for coding the enhancement layer motion. [2]
• Inter-layer residual prediction:- The reconstructed (and up-sampled)
residual signal of the co-located base layer area is used for predicting the
residual signal of an inter-picture coded block in the enhancement layer,
while the motion compensation is applied using enhancement layer
reference pictures[2].
Up-sampling filter
• The base-layer pixel samples needs to be up-sampled to support interlayer texture prediction in the spatial scalability case. Presently SHVC
supports spatial scalability ratios of 2:1 and 3:2.
• In order to support these two configurations of spatial scalability, a set of
interpolation filters were introduced in addition to the HEVC motion
compensation interpolation filters. [24]
• Up-sampling filter is the key part of inter-layer texture prediction in the
case of spatial scalability. As shown in SHVC tool experiments, inter-layer
texture prediction delivers the most part of SHVC gain (~18% in terms of
Luma BD-rate reduction). [22]
• The phases in Table 1 and 2 represent theoretically accurate phase shifts
used in filter coefficients design. In actual implementation, division free
phase derivation is used [23]. Filters for zero-phase shift in Tables 1 and 2
are trivial. Outputs of these filters are identical to their inputs. [24]
Up-sampling filter
Table 1: Luma Up-Sampling Filters [24]
Table 2: Chroma Up-Samplimg Filters [24]
Inter-layer texture prediction
• H.264/AVC-SVC [14] presented inter-layer prediction for spatial and SNR
scalabilities by using intra-BL and residual prediction under the restriction
of a single-loop decoding structure.[20]
• To enable the selection of this up-sampled information for prediction in
the enhancement layer, the scalability extension employs a so-called
“reference index” approach [20]. Conceptually, this approach requires an
enhancement layer decoder to insert the up-sampled reference layer
picture into the enhancement layer RPL. [18]
• The up-sampled picture can then be signaled for reference in the same
manner as usually in inter-frame prediction. That is, the enhancement
layer bitstream signals an inter-mode CU, with the reference index
corresponding to the up-sampled picture inserted into the enhancement
layer RPL (with a zero motion vector used for this specific reference
picture). [18]
Figure 4[31]
Figure 5 [31]
• Hong et al [15] proposed a scalable video coding scheme for HEVC,
where the residual prediction process is extended to both intra and
inter prediction modes within a multi-loop decoding framework. In
addition to the intra-BL and residual prediction, a combined prediction
mode, which uses the average of the EL prediction and the intra-BL
prediction as the final prediction, and multi- hypothesis inter
prediction, which produces additional predictions for EL block using BL
block motion information, are also presented.
Intra-BL prediction
•
•
•
•
•
To utilize reconstructed base layer information, two Coding Unit (CU) level
modes, namely intra-BL and intra-BL skip, are introduced[1].
The first scalable coding tool in which the enhancement layer prediction signal
is formed by copying or up-sampling the reconstructed samples of the colocated area in the base layer is called Intra-BL prediction mode. [2]
For an enhancement layer CU, the prediction signal is formed by copying or,
for spatial scalable coding, up-sampling the co-located base layer
reconstructed samples. Since the final reconstructed samples from the base
layer are used, multi-loop decoding architecture is essential. [2]
When a CU in the EL picture is coded by using the intra-BL mode, the pixels in
the collocated block of the up-sampled BL are used as the prediction for the
current CU. [1]
The scalable extension of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC uses 4-tap FIR filters for
upsampling of the luma signal [8], 8-tap filters are applied in the proposed
HEVC extension. For chroma, bi-linear filters are used. [21]
• For supporting arbitrary resolution ratios, for each enhancement layer
sample position, the used filter is selected based on the required phase
shift [21].
• The upsampling filters used for the IntraBL mode are designed to provide
a good coding efficiency over a wide variety of base and enhancement
layer signals. However, even within each picture, video signals may show a
high degree of non-stationarity.[2]
• The operation is similar to the inter-layer intra prediction in the scalable
extension of H.264| MPEG-4 AVC, except that it is likely to use the samples
of both intra and inter predicted blocks from the base layer[2].
• Additionally, quantization errors and noise may show varying
characteristics in different parts of a picture. Hence, to adapt the
upsampling filter to local signal characteristics, another inter-layer intra
coding mode, referred to as InterBLFilt mode is introduced. This mode is
used in the same way as the InterBL mode.
Figure 6. Intra BL mode [2]
Intra residual prediction
• In the intra residual prediction mode, the difference between the intra
prediction reference samples in the EL and collocated pixels in the upsampled BL is generally used to produce a prediction, denoted as
difference prediction, based on the intra prediction mode. The generated
difference prediction is further added to the collocated block in the upsampled BL to form the final prediction.[1]
Figure 7. Intra Residual Prediction [1]
Weighted Intra prediction
• In this mode, the (upsampled) base layer reconstructed signal constitutes
one component for prediction. Another component is acquired by regular
spatial intra prediction as in HEVC, by using the samples from the causal
neighborhood of the current enhancement layer block. The base layer
component is low pass filtered and the enhancement layer component is
high pass filtered and the results are added to form the prediction.[2]
• The weights for the base layer signal are set such that the low frequency
components are taken and the high frequency components are
suppressed, and the weights for the enhancement layer signal are set vice
versa. The weighted base and enhancement layer coefficients are added
and an inverse DCT is computed to obtain the final prediction[2].
• In our implementation, both low pass and high pass filtering happen in the
DCT domain, as illustrated in Figure 8. First, the DCTs of the base and
enhancement layer prediction signals are computed and the resulting
coefficients are weighted according to spatial frequencies.[2]
Figure 8: Weighted intra prediction mode. The (up-sampled) base layer
reconstructed samples are combined with the spatially predicted
enhancement layer samples to predict an enhancement layer CU to be coded.
[2]
Difference prediction modes
• The principle in difference prediction modes is to lessen the systematic
error when using the (up-sampled) base layer reconstructed signal for
prediction. It is accomplished by reusing the previously corrected
prediction errors available to both encoder and decoder. [17]
• To this end, a new signal, denoted as the difference signal, is derived using
the difference amongst already reconstructed enhancement layer samples
and (up-sampled) base layer samples. [17]
• The final prediction is made by adding a component from the (upsampled)
base layer reconstructed signal and a component from the difference
signal [17].This mode can be used for inter as well as intra prediction
cases[2].
• In inter difference prediction shown in Fig 9, the (upsampled) base layer
reconstructed signal is added to a motion-compensated enhancement
layer difference signal equivalent to a reference picture to obtain the final
prediction for the current enhancement layer block.[2]
• For the enhancement layer motion compensation, the same inter
prediction technique as in single-layer HEVC is used, but with a bilinear
interpolation filter[2].
Figure 9: Inter difference prediction mode. The (upsampled) base layer
reconstructed signal is combined with the motion compensated difference
signal from a reference picture to predict the enhancement layer CU to be
coded. [2]
Intra Prediction
• In the intra difference prediction, the (up-sampled) base layer
reconstructed signal constitutes one component for the prediction. The
intra prediction modes that are used for spatial intra prediction of the
difference signal are coded using the regular HEVC syntax. [2]
Fig 10. Intra difference prediction mode. The (upsampled) base layer
reconstructed signal is combined with the intra predicted difference signal to
predict the enhancement layer block to be coded. [2]
Motion vector prediction
• Our scalable video extension of HEVC employs several methods to
improve the coding of enhancement layer motion information by
exploiting the availability of base layer motion information[2]
• In HEVC, two modes can be used for MV coding, namely, “merge” and
“advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP)”. In the both modes, some of
the most probable candidates are derived based on motion data from
spatially adjacent blocks and the collocated block in the temporal
reference picture. The “merge” mode allows the inheritance of MVs from
the neighboring blocks without coding the motion vector difference [16].
• In HEVC, TMVP is used to predict motion information for a current PU
from a co-located PU in the reference picture. The process is defined to
require the prediction modes, reference indices, luma motion vectors and
reference picture order counts (POCs) of the co-located PU. [19]
• The goal of the motion field mapping process is then to project this
motion information from the reference layer to the enhancement layer’s
resolution, while also accounting for the 16×16 TMVP storage units in the
reference layer.[18]
• In the offered scheme, collocated base layer MVs are used in both the
merge mode and the AMVP mode for enhancement layer coding. The base
layer MV is inserted as the first candidate in the merge candidate list and
added after the temporal candidate in the AMVP candidate list. The MV at
the center position of the collocated block in the base layer picture is used
in both merge and AVMP modes[1].
• In HEVC, the motion vectors are compressed after being coded and the
compressed motion vectors are utilized in the TMVP derivation for
pictures that are coded later. [1]
Inferred prediction mode
• For a CU in EL coded in the inferred base layer mode, its motion
information (including the inter prediction direction, reference index and
motion vectors) is not signaled. Instead, for each 4×4 block in the CU, its
motion information is derived from its collocated base layer block. Once
the motion information of a collocated base layer block is unavailable
(e.g., the collocated base layer block is intra predicted), the 4x4 block is
predicted in the same method as in the intra-BL mode[1].
Test Sequences:
No.
Sequence name
Resolutio Type
n
No. of
Frames
1
City
176*144
CQIF
30
352*288
CIF
30
352*288
CIF
30
704*576
4CIF
30
2
Harbour
Fig.11 [34]
Simulation Results:
• For evaluating the efficiency of the proposed scalable HEVC extension, we
compared the coding efficiency of the scalable approach with two layers
to that of simulcast and single layer coding. All layers have been coded
using pictures with a GOP size of 8 pictures. For both scalable coding and
simulcast, the same base layers are used.Here QPs of 22, 27, 32 and 37 for
the base layer and QPs of 20, 25, 30 and 35 for the enhancement layer as
recommended by JCT-VC [27]. The simulation results for various
sequences for a fixed base layer QP of 26. The scalable extension has been
implemented in the HEVC reference software HM-16.0, which has also
been used for producing the anchor bit streams.
BD-PSNR
• Bjøntegaard Delta PSNR (BD-PSNR) was proposed to objectively
evaluate the coding efficiency of the video codecs [26] [28][29]. BDPSNR provides a good evaluation of the rate-distortion (R-D)
performance based on the R-D curve fitting. BD-PSNR is a curve
fitting metric based on rate and distortion of the video sequence.
However this does not take the encoder complexity into account.
BD metrics tell more about the quality of the video sequence.
Ideally, BD-PSNR should increase and BD-bitrate should decrease.
Fig.12 : BD-PSNR vs. quantization parameter for City with BLCIF and EL-CIF
Fig. 13: BD-PSNR vs. quantization parameter for Harbour
with BL-CIF and EL-4CIF
BD-bitrate
• BD-bitrate also determines the quality of the encoded video sequence
similar to BD-PSNR. Ideally BD-bitrate should decrease for a good quality
video [28][29]. Figures 14 and 15 illustrate the BD-bitrate for the
bitstreams of proposed algorithm compared with the bitstreams encoded
using the unaltered reference software. From the figures it can be seen
that the BD-bitrate has decreased by 17% t0 29% which implies that the
quality of the encoded bitstream using the proposed algorithm has not
degraded compared to the bitstream encoded with the unaltered
reference software.
Fig.14: BD-bitrate vs. quantization parameter for
City with BL-QCIF and EL-CIF
Fig.15: BD-bitrate vs. quantization parameter
for Harbour for BL-CIF and EL-4CIF
Bitrate vs. PSNRplots:
Fig.16: PSNR vs. bitrate for City with BL-QCIF and
EL-CIF
Fig.17: PSNR vs. bitrate for Harbour with BL-CIF and
EL-4CIF
Bitstream size:
Fig.18: bitstream size vs. quantization parameter for City with
BL-QCIF and EL-CIF
Fig.19: Encoded bitstream vs. quantization parameter for
Harbour with BL-CIF and EL-4CIF
References
[1] IEEE paper by Jianle Chen, Krishna Rapaka, Xiang Li, Vadim Seregin, Liwei Guo, Marta
Karczewicz, Geert Van der Auwera, Joel Sole, Xianglin Wang, Chengjie Tu, Ying Chen, Rajan Joshi “
Scalable Video coding extension for HEVC”. Qualcomm Technology Inc, Data compression
conference (DCC)2013, DOC 20-22 March 2013
[2] IEEE paper by, Philipp Helle, Haricharan Lakshman, Mischa Siekmann, Jan Stegemann, Tobias
Hinz, Heiko Schwarz, Detlev Marpe, and Thomas Wiegand Fraunhofer Institute for
Telecommunications – Heinrich Hertz Institute, Berlin, Germany. “ScalableVideo coding extension
of HEVC” Data compression conference (DCC)2013, DOC 20-22 March 2013 { T. Hinz et al, “An
HEVC Extension for Spatial and Quality Scalable Video Coding”, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 8666, pp.
866605-1 to 866605-16, Feb. 2013. }
[3] IEEE paper “Scalable HEVC (SHVC)-Based Video Stream Adaptation in Wireless Networks” by
James Nightingale, Qi Wang, Christos Grecos Centre for Audio Visual Communications &
Networks (AVCN). 2013 IEEE 24th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile
Radio Communications: Services, Applications and Business Track
[4] T. Weingand et al, "Overview of the H.264/AVC video coding standard," IEEE Trans.
Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 560-576, July 2003.
[5] T. Hinz et al, "An HEVC extension for spatial and quality scalable video
coding," Proc. SPIE Visual Information Processing and Communication IV, Feb. 2013.
[6] B. Oztas et al, "A study on the HEVC performance over lossy networks," Proc. 19th IEEE
International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), pp.785-788, Dec. 2012.
[7] J. Nightingale et al, "HEVStream: a framework for streaming and
evaluation of high efficiency video coding (HEVC) content in loss-prone networks," IEEE Trans.
Consum. Electron., vol.58, no.2, pp.404-412, May 2012.
[8] H.Schwarz et al, “Overview of the scalable extension of the H.264/AVC standard,”IEEE Trans
Circuits Syst Video Technology, vol.17, pp.1103-1120,Sept 2007
[9] J. Nightingale et al, "Priority-based methods for reducing the impact of packet loss on HEVC
encoded video streams," Proc. SPIE Real-Time Image and Video Processing 2013, Feb. 2013.
[10] T.Schierl et al, “Mobile Video Transmission coding”, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.,
vol. 1217, Sept 2007.
[11] J. Chen, K. Rapaka, X. Li, V. Seregin, L. Guo, M. Karczewicz, G. Van der Auwera, J. Sole, X.
Wang, C. J. Tu, Y. Chen, “Description of scalable video coding technology proposal by Qualcomm
(configuration 2)”, Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding, doc. JCTVC- K0036, Shanghai, China,
Oct. 2012.
[12] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 and ITU-T SG 16, “Joint Call for Proposals on Scalable Video
Coding Extensions of High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)”, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11 (MPEG)
Doc. N12957 or ITU-T SG 16 Doc. VCEG-AS90, Stockholm, Sweden, Jul. 2012.
[13] A. Segall, “BoG report on HEVC scalable extensions”, Joint Collaborative Team on Video
Coding, doc. JCTVC-K0354, Shanghai, China, Oct. 2012 .
[14] H. Schwarz, D. Marpe, T. Wiegand, “Overview of the Scalable Video Coding Extension of the
H.264/AVC Standard”, IEEE Trans. Circuits and Syst. Video Technol., vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 1103􏰃1120,
2007.
[15] D. Hong, W. Jang, J. Boyce, A. Abbas, “Scalability Support in HEVC”, Joint Collaborative Team
on Video Coding (JCT-VC) of ITU-T SG16 WP3 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, JCTVC-F290, Torino,
Italy, Jul. 2011.
[16] G. J. Sullivan, J.-R. Ohm, W.-J. Han, T. Wiegand, “Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding
(HEVC) Standard”, IEEE Trans. Circuits and Syst. Video Technol., to be published.
[17] J. Boyce, D. Hong, W. Jang, A. Abbas, “Information for HEVC scalability extension,” Joint
Collaborative Team on Video Coding, doc. JCTVC-G078, Nov. 2011.
[18] G.J. Sullivan et al, “Standardized extensions of High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)”, IEEE JSTSP, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1001 – 1016, Dec. 2013.
[19] J. Chen. V. Seregin, L. Guo, and M. Karczewicz, “Non-TE5: on motion mapping in SHVC,” Joint
Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCTVC) document JCTVC-L0336, 12th Meeting: Geneva, CH,
14–23 Jan. 2013
[20] J. Dong, Y. He, Y. He, G. McClellan, E.-S. Ryu, X. Xiu, and Y. Ye, “Description of scalable video
coding technology proposal by InterDigital,” Communications Joint Collaborative Team on Video
Coding (JCT-VC) document JCTVC-K0034, 11th Meeting: Shanghai, CN, 10–19 Oct. 2012.
[21] I. Unanue et al, “A Tutorial on H.264/SVC Scalable Video Coding and its Tradeoff between
Quality, Coding Efficiency and Performance”, Recent Advances on Video Coding.[online].
Available: http://www.doc88.com/p-516795349043.html
[22] A. Segall,1. Chen,1. Dong, and E. Alshina, "TEAl: Summary Report Upsampling Filter", JCTVCLO021, Geneva, Switzerland, 14-23 Jan. 2013
[23] J. Chen, "BoG Report on reference layer sample location derivation in SHVC", JCTVC-M0449,
lncheon, Korea, 18-26Apr. 2013.
[24] Inter-Iayer Filtering for Scalable Extension of HEVC Elena Alshina, Alexander Alshin,
Yongjin Cho, and JeongHoon Park Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. {elena _ a.alshina,
alexander _ b.alshin,yongjin9.cho, jeonghoon}@samsung.com Wei Pu, Jianle Chen, Xiang Li,
Vadim Seregin, and Marta Karczewicz QualcommTechnologies Inc. {wpu, cjianle, Ixiang,
vseregin, martak}@qti.qualcomm.com , 2013 IEEE.
[25] Test sequences for scalable video coding. [online]. Available: ftp://ftp.tnt.unihannover.de/pub/svc/testsequences/
[26] C-L. Su, T-M. Che and C-Y. Huang, “Cluster-Based Motion Estimation Algorithm With Low Memory
and Bandwidth Requirements for H.264/AVC Scalable Extension”, IEEE Trans. on CSVT, vol. 24, no. 6, pp.
1016-1024, June 2014.
[27] X. Li et al, “Rate-Complexity-Distortion evaluation for hybrid video coding”, IEEE Trans. on CSVT, vol.
21, pp. 957 - 970, July 2011.
[28] K. Shah, “Reducing the complexity of Inter-prediction mode decision for HEVC”, M.S. Thesis,
University of Texas at Arlington, UMI Dissertation Publishing, April 2014. [online]. Available:
http://www-ee.uta.edu/Dip/Courses/EE5359/KushalShah_Thesis.pdf
[29] S.Vasudevan, “Fast intra prediction and fast residual quadtree encoding implementation in HEVC”,
M.S. Thesis, University of Texas at Arlington, UMI Dissertation Publishing, Nov. 2013. [online]. Available
http://www-ee.uta.edu/Dip/Courses/EE5359/index.html
[30] https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/trac/hevc JCT-VC Document.
[31] Scalable Extension Of HEVC
http://www.mpeg.or.kr/doc/2011/%EC%A0%9C12%ED%9A%8CMPEG%ED%8F%AC%EB%9F%BC%EC%B
4%9D%ED%9A%8C%EB%B0%8F%EA%B8%B0%EC%88%A0%EC%9B%8C%ED%81%AC%EC%83%B5/4-2%ED%95%9C%EC%A2%85%EA%B8%B0-HEVC_extension.pdf
[32] (H.265/HEVC) Tutorial by Madhukar Budagavi m.budagavi@samsung.com
http://www.uta.edu/faculty/krrao/dip/Courses/EE5359/budagaviiscas2014ppt.pdf
[33] H.264 Advanced video coding http://www.vcodex.com/h264.html
[34] Test sequences: https://media.xiph.org/video/derf/
[35] Test Sequences: ftp://ftp.kw.bbc.co.uk/hevc/hm-11.0-anchors/bitstreams/
[36] SHVC software and software manual: The source code for the software and its manual is available in the following
SVN repository.[online]. Available: https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_SHVCSoftware/
[37] SHVC bitstream layer parser.[online]. Available: http://r2d2n3po.tistory.com/70
[38] S. Riabstev, “Detailed overview of HEVC/H.265”, [online]. Available: https://app.box.com/s/rxxxzr1a1lnh7709yvih
[39] K.R. Rao, D.N. Kim and J.J. Hwang, “Video Coding Standards: AVS China, H.264/MPEG-4 Part10, HEVC, VP6, DIRAC and VC-1”, Springer,
2014.
[40] Access to HM 16.0 Reference Software: http://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/
[41] Website on PSNR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_signal-to-noise_ratio