<-Complexity Reduction Go to ToC
(Informative)
1. Introduction
This chapter provides the Neural Network weights obtained by applying the process specified in:
- Design Procedure applied to
- The standard-definition to high-definition up-sampling, and
- High-definition to Ultra High-Definition up-sampling.
- Complexity Reduction applied to the Neural Network of point 1, namely:
- The standard-definition to high-definition up-sampling, and
- High-definition to Ultra High-Definition up-sampling.
2. Test conditions
Table 1 provides the test conditions employed for the performance verification of the un-pruned and pruned up-sampling filters.
Table 1 – Test conditions for performance verification
Standard sequences | CatRobot, FoodMarket4, ParkRunning3. |
Bits/sample | 8 and 10 bit-depth per component. |
Colour space | YCbCr with 4:2:0 sub sampling. |
Encoding technologies | AVC, HEVC, and VVC. |
Encoding settings | Random Access and Low Delay at QPs 22, 27, 32, 37, 42, 47. |
Up-sampling | SD to HD and HD to UHD. |
Metrics | BD-Rate, BD-PSNR and BD-VMAF |
Deep-learning structure | Same for all QPs |
Table 2 includes the performance results luminance only for Video sequences
- unpruned and pruned up-sampling filters,
- for SD to HD, HD to UHD and for SD to HD using the HD to UHD parameters
- for videos that have been encoded with HEVC and VVC
- in Low Delay (LD) and Random Access (RA) coding settings.
2. Performance results
Results show an impressive improvement for all coding technologies, and encoding options for all three objective metrics when compared with the currently used traditional bicubic interpolation.
Table 2 – Performance of the EVC-UFV Up-sampling Filter
HEVC (LD) | VVC (LD) | HEVC (RA) | VVC (RA) | ||
Unpruned | SD to HD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Unpruned | HD to UHD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Unpruned | SD to HD (using HD to UHD filter) | ||||
Pruned | SD to HD (using own trained filter) | 12.2% | 13.8% | 17.3% | 22.5% |
Pruned | HD to UHD (using own trained filter) | 6% | 6.5% | 6.0% | 7.9% |
Pruned | SD to HD (using HD to UHD filter) | 11.6% | 11.4% | 15.3% | 19.9% |
Table 3 provides the same information for YUV sequences.
Table 3 – Performance of the EVC-UFV Up-sampling Filter
HEVC (LD) | VVC (LD) | HEVC (RA) | VVC (RA) | ||
Unpruned | SD to HD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Unpruned | HD to UHD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Unpruned | SD to HD (using HD to UHD filter) | ||||
Pruned | SD to HD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Pruned | HD to UHD (using own trained filter) | ||||
Pruned | SD to HD (using HD to UHD filter) |
3. Weights of the complexity-reduced network
The un-pruned and pruned weights of the SD (540×960) to HD (1080×1920) and HD (1080×1920) to UHD (2160×3840) up-sampling filters can be downloaded from the MPAI Git.
Table 4 provides all the up-sampling filters’ weights As they are watermarked, the performance obtained by using these weights is slightly inferior to the ones reported in Section 2.
Table 4 – Watermarked weights of up-sampling filters
Un-pruned | Pruned | |
SD to HD | Weights | Weights |
HD to UHD | Weights | Weights |
The number of parameters of the pruned filteris about 40% of the un-pruned filter.
The loss in performance of the pruned filter is less than 1% in BD-rate compared to the performance of the un-pruned filter.
<-Complexity Reduction Go to ToC