Abstract
In distributed video coding the signal prediction is shifted at the decoder side, giving therefore most of the computational complexity burden at the receiver. Moreover, since no prediction loop exists before transmission, an intrinsic robustness to transmission errors has been claimed. This work evaluates and compares the error resilience performance of two distributed video coding architectures. In particular, we have considered a video codec based on the Stanford architecture (DISCOVER codec) and a video codec based on the PRISM architecture. Specifically, an accurate temporal and rate/distortion based evaluation of the effects of the transmission errors for both the considered DVC architectures has been performed and discussed. These approaches have been also compared with H.264/AVC, in both cases of no error protection, and simple FEC error protection. Our evaluations have highlighted in all cases a strong dependence of the behavior of the various codecs to the content of the considered video sequence. In particular, PRISM seems to be particularly well suited for low-motion sequences, whereas DISCOVER provides better performance in the other cases.
Highlights
Distributed video coding (DVC) is attracting some attention due to the potential innovative application perspectives with respect to the more traditional approaches
DVC is based on the principles of distributed source coding (DSC), a branch of information theory introduced in the 70s by Slepian and Wolf [2] and Wyner and Ziv [3], which have been applied to the transmission of a video sequence
We can notice that the WZ frames that are reconstructed on the basis of the corrupted side information require a higher bitrate than they would need in case no transmission errors had occurred
Summary
Distributed video coding (DVC) is attracting some attention due to the potential innovative application perspectives with respect to the more traditional approaches (see, e.g., [1]). The main idea of DVC attempts to exploit the temporal correlation of a video signal in the decoding phase rather than in the encoding one In this way, the classic motion compensated prediction is not performed any longer at the encoder, with a consequent significant reduction in the computational complexity of the encoder. The decoding phase requires quite complex operations that are conceptually and computationally analogous to the motion estimation performed by an encoder in the traditional video coding schemes. On another hand, only very simple computations can occur at the encoder. DVC is suited for applications that requires very simple, cheap, and low-power encoding
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
