19_9_767.hwp

Similar documents
03이승호_ok.hwp

1 : HEVC Rough Mode Decision (Ji Hun Jang et al.: Down Sampling for Fast Rough Mode Decision for a Hardware-based HEVC Intra-frame encoder) (Special P

2 : (JEM) QTBT (Yong-Uk Yoon et al.: A Fast Decision Method of Quadtree plus Binary Tree (QTBT) Depth in JEM) (Special Paper) 22 5, (JBE Vol. 2

그림 2. 최근 출시된 스마트폰의 최대 확장 가능한 내장 및 외장 메모리 용량 원한다. 예전의 피쳐폰에 비해 대용량 메모리를 채택하고 있지 만, 아직 데스크톱 컴퓨터 에 비하면 턱없이 부족한 용량이다. 또한, 대용량 외장 메모리는 그 비용이 비싼 편이다. 그러므로 기존

3 : S-JND HEVC (JaeRyun Kim et al.: A Perceptual Rate Control Algorithm with S-JND Model for HEVC Encoder) (Regular Paper) 21 6, (JBE Vol. 21,

5 : HEVC GOP R-lambda (Dae-Eun Kim et al.: R-lambda Model based Rate Control for GOP Parallel Coding in A Real-Time HEVC Software Encoder) (Special Pa

1 : S-JND HEVC (JaeRyun Kim et al.: S-JND based Perceptual Rate Control Algorithm of HEVC) (Regular Paper) 22 3, (JBE Vol. 22, No. 3, May 2017)

13김상민_ok.hwp

2 : HEVC (Woo-Jin Han et al. : Early Decision of Inter-prediction Modes in HEVC Encoder) (Regular Paper) 20 1, (JBE Vol. 20, No. 1, January 201

03홍성욱.hwp

05안용조.hwp

(JBE Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2015) (Special Paper) 20 2, (JBE Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2015) ISSN

09권오설_ok.hwp

(JBE Vol. 21, No. 1, January 2016) (Regular Paper) 21 1, (JBE Vol. 21, No. 1, January 2016) ISSN 228

(JBE Vol. 24, No. 2, March 2019) (Regular Paper) 24 2, (JBE Vol. 24, No. 2, March 2019) ISSN

08김현휘_ok.hwp

1 : MV-HEVC (Jae-Yung Lee et al.: Fast Disparity Motion Vector Searching Method for the MV-HEVC) High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) [1][2]. VCEG MPEG

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

1 : HEVC (Jeonghwan Heo et al.: Fast Partition Decision Using Rotation Forest for Intra-Frame Coding in HEVC Screen Content Coding Extension) (Regular

14최해철_ok.hwp

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE. vol. 29, no. 10, Oct ,,. 0.5 %.., cm mm FR4 (ε r =4.4)

1. 3DTV Fig. 1. Tentative terrestrial 3DTV broadcasting system. 3D 3DTV. 3DTV ATSC (Advanced Television Sys- tems Committee), 18Mbps [1]. 2D TV (High

02손예진_ok.hwp

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Nov.; 26(11),

(JBE Vol. 20, No. 6, November 2015) (Regular Paper) 20 6, (JBE Vol. 20, No. 6, November 2015) ISSN

À±½Â¿í Ãâ·Â

(JBE Vol. 23, No. 5, September 2018) (Regular Paper) 23 5, (JBE Vol. 23, No. 5, September 2018) ISSN

6.24-9년 6월

(JBE Vol. 20, No. 6, November 2015) ISO/IEC HEVC [1]. LG 7680x4320 8k UHD TV 4 HEVC. HEVC H.264/AVC 3 2 [2]. UHD,,, HEVC.,,. Davinci Resolve

High Resolution Disparity Map Generation Using TOF Depth Camera In this paper, we propose a high-resolution disparity map generation method using a lo

°í¼®ÁÖ Ãâ·Â

04-다시_고속철도61~80p

05( ) CPLV12-04.hwp

02이주영_ok.hwp

歯3일_.PDF

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Feb.; 29(2), IS

8-VSB (Vestigial Sideband Modulation)., (Carrier Phase Offset, CPO) (Timing Frequency Offset),. VSB, 8-PAM(pulse amplitude modulation,, ) DC 1.25V, [2

인문사회과학기술융합학회

Left Center Right 3차원 L 비디오 C 부호화시스템 R LCR 가상시점영상 N- 시점영상출력 깊이정보맵생성 L C R 깊이정보맵 가상시점영상합성 1. 3 N- Fig. 1. N-view system with the 3-view configuration.

1 : UHD (Heekwang Kim et al.: Segment Scheduling Scheme for Efficient Bandwidth Utilization of UHD Contents Streaming in Wireless Environment) (Specia

???? 1

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Jul.; 27(7),

example code are examined in this stage The low pressure pressurizer reactor trip module of the Plant Protection System was programmed as subject for

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Sep.; 30(9),

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: : Researc

(JBE Vol. 21, No. 6, November 2016) (Special Paper) 21 6, (JBE Vol. 21, No. 6, November 2016) ISSN

a), b), c), b) Distributed Video Coding Based on Selective Block Encoding Using Feedback of Motion Information Jin-soo Kim a), Jae-Gon Kim b), Kwang-d

(JBE Vol. 23, No. 6, November 2018) (Special Paper) 23 6, (JBE Vol. 23, No. 6, November 2018) ISSN 2

(JBE Vol. 24, No. 1, January 2019) (Regular Paper) 24 1, (JBE Vol. 24, No. 1, January 2019) ISSN 2287

(JBE Vol. 23, No. 2, March 2018) (Regular Paper) 23 2, (JBE Vol. 23, No. 2, March 2018) ISSN

04 김영규.hwp

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE. vol. 29, no. 6, Jun Rate). STAP(Space-Time Adaptive Processing)., -

<35335FBCDBC7D1C1A42DB8E2B8AEBDBAC5CDC0C720C0FCB1E2C0FB20C6AFBCBA20BAD0BCAE2E687770>

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Dec.; 27(12),

2 : MMT QoS (Bokyun Jo et al. : Adaptive QoS Study for Video Streaming Service In MMT Protocol). MPEG-2 TS (Moving Picture Experts Group-2 Transport S

03-서연옥.hwp

01이국세_ok.hwp

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

Æ÷Àå½Ã¼³94š

ȲÀμº Ãâ·Â

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

03허영수.hwp

3. 클라우드 컴퓨팅 상호 운용성 기반의 서비스 평가 방법론 개발.hwp

Microsoft Word - 1-차우창.doc

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Mar.; 25(3),

07변성우_ok.hwp

14.531~539(08-037).fm

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Jun.; 27(6),

1 : (Sunmin Lee et al.: Design and Implementation of Indoor Location Recognition System based on Fingerprint and Random Forest)., [1][2]. GPS(Global P

디지털포렌식학회 논문양식

<313120C0AFC0FCC0DA5FBECBB0EDB8AEC1F2C0BB5FC0CCBFEBC7D15FB1E8C0BAC5C25FBCF6C1A42E687770>

04 최진규.hwp

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Mar.; 28(3),

2 : (Juhyeok Mun et al.: Visual Object Tracking by Using Multiple Random Walkers) (Special Paper) 21 6, (JBE Vol. 21, No. 6, November 2016) ht

(JBE Vol. 21, No. 3, May 2016) HE-AAC v2. DAB+ 120ms..,. DRM+(Digital Radio Mondiale plus) [3] xhe-aac (extended HE-AAC). DRM+ DAB HE-AAC v2 xhe-aac..

[ReadyToCameral]RUF¹öÆÛ(CSTA02-29).hwp

878 Yu Kim, Dongjae Kim 지막 용량수준까지도 멈춤 규칙이 만족되지 않아 시행이 종료되지 않는 경우에는 MTD의 추정이 불가 능하다는 단점이 있다. 최근 이 SM방법의 단점을 보완하기 위해 O Quigley 등 (1990)이 제안한 CRM(Continu

(JBE Vol. 23, No. 5, September 2018) (Regular Paper) 23 5, (JBE Vol. 23, No. 5, September 2018) ISSN

<31362DB1E8C7FDBFF82DC0FABFB9BBEA20B5B6B8B3BFB5C8ADC0C720B1B8C0FC20B8B6C4C9C6C32E687770>

歯1.PDF

$08.Tech&trend

19_9_767.hwp

Output file


(JBE Vol. 22, No. 5, September 2017) (Special Paper) 22 5, (JBE Vol. 22, No. 5, September 2017) ISSN

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA

<B8F1C2F72E687770>

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Jul.; 27(7),

2 : HEVC (Dongmin Park et al.: Object Tracking in HEVC Bitstreams) (Regular Paper) 20 3, (JBE Vol. 20, No. 3, May 2015)

(JBE Vol. 23, No. 2, March 2018) (Special Paper) 23 2, (JBE Vol. 23, No. 2, March 2018) ISSN

삼성955_965_09

<31325FB1E8B0E6BCBA2E687770>

책임연구기관

10(3)-10.fm

05 목차(페이지 1,2).hwp

박선영무선충전-내지

THE JOURNAL OF KOREAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE Jan.; 26(1),

Analysis of objective and error source of ski technical championship Jin Su Seok 1, Seoung ki Kang 1 *, Jae Hyung Lee 1, & Won Il Son 2 1 yong in Univ

2 : HEVC (Yongtae Kim et al.: Performance Analysis of Scalable HEVC Coding Tools) (Special Paper) 20 4, (JBE Vol. 20, No. 4, July 2015)

., 3D HDTV. 3D HDTV,, 2 (TTA) [] 3D HDTV,,, /. (RAPA) 3DTV [2] 3DTV, 3DTV, DB(, / ), 3DTV. ATSC (Advanced Television Systems Committee) 8-VSB (8-Vesti

Transcription:

(Special Paper) 19 6, 2014 11 (JBE Vol. 19, No. 6, November 2014) http://dx.doi.org/10.5909/jbe.2014.19.6.836 ISSN 2287-9137 (Online) ISSN 1226-7953 (Print) HEVC a), a) Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter Hong-rae Lee a) and Kwang-deok Seo a) (UHD: Ultra High Definition) H.264/AVC HEVC (High-Efficiency Video Codec). HEVC H.264/AVC. HEVC 35 H.264/AVC. 35 4 PU (Prediction Unit). 2% BD-rate 7%. Abstract To expedite UHD (Ultra High Definition) video service, the HEVC (High-Efficiency Video Coding) technology has recently been standardized and it achieves two times higher compression efficiency than the conventional H.264/AVC. To obtain the improved efficiency, however, it employs many complex methods which need complicated calculation, thereby resulting in a significantly increased computational complexity when compared to that of H.264/AVC. For example, to improve the coding efficiency of intra frame coding, up to 35 intra prediction modes are defined in HEVC, but this results in an increased encoding time than the H.264/AVC. In this paper, we propose a fast intra prediction mode decision scheme which reduces computational complexity by changing the number of intra prediction mode in accordance with the percentage of PU sizes for a given video resolution, and by classifying the 35 intra prediction modes into 4 categories considering video resolution and quantization parameter. The experimental results show that the total encoding time is reduced by about 7% on average at the cost of only 2% increase in BD-rate. Keyword : HEVC Intra coding, Quantization Parameter, Fast encoder design, Intra Prediction Mode

1 : HEVC (Hong-rae Lee et al. : Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter). UHD (Ultra High Definition),, Full HD. Full HD UHD [1].. ISO/IEC MPEG ITU-T VCEG 2010 1 JCT-VC (Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding) HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding) [2] 2013 1. HEVC H.264/AVC [3], 40~50% [4],[5] HEVC,,,., HEVC CTU (Coding Tree Unit). CTU 64 64, 32 32, 16 16 [6]. CTU (Quad-tree) CTU CU (Coding Unit). CU a) (Yonsei University) Corresponding Author : (Kwang-deok Seo) E-mail: kdseo@yonsei.ac.kr Tel: +82-33-760-2788 2013 ( ) (No. NRF-2013R1A1A2011635). 2014. Manuscript received September 2, 2014 Revised October 27,2014 Accepted October 27,2014 64 64, 32 32, 16 16, 8 8, CU PU(Prediction Unit) TU(Transform Unit). PU CU 64 64, 32 32, 16 16, 8 8, 4 4. CU 2N 2N, 2N N, N 2N, N N. TU [7]. H.264/AVC 16 16 4, 8 8 4 4 9 [8] HEVC 35 [9],[10]. [11],[12]. Y. Piao RDO (Rate distortion optimization) RMD (Rough Mode Decision) [13]. RMD N PU 64 64, 32 32, 16 16 3, 8 8, 4 4 8. RMD RDO RMD 35. H.264/AVC 16 16 4, 8 8 4 4 9. HEVC PU. [14]. RMD. 2 HEVC

RMD. 3 4.. HEVC HEVC PU CU 2N 2N 8 8 CU N N 4 4 PU. PU (luma) 35, (chroma) 6. PU. H.264/AVC HEVC PU. PU HEVC Class B, Class C, Class D test QP (Quantization Parameter) 22, 27, 32, 37 All-Intra. test QP PU. 1, 8 8 PU,. 64 64 PU,. HEVC Class B, Class C, Class D test QP 22, 27, 32, 37 All-Intra. test QP. 2, 3, 4 Class B, Class C, Class D 1%. Class Planar(0), DC(1), Horizontal(10), Vertical(26). Horizontal(10), Vertical(26). 8 8 Vertical(26) 1. PU Table 1. Selection ratio of PU in accordance with video resolution and quantization parameter Class (Video Resolution) B Class (1920 1080) C Class (832 480) D Class (416 240) PU_Size QP=22 QP=27 QP=32 QP=37 8 43.87% 28.44% 20.55% 13.39% 16 24.65% 28.36% 29.08% 27.41% 32 25.78% 34.14% 36.97% 40.74% 64 5.70% 9.07% 13.41% 18.46% 8 67.55% 59.12% 49.40% 38.32% 16 21.46% 26.06% 31.88% 35.75% 32 9.75% 13.21% 16.63% 22.50% 64 1.24% 1.61% 2.09% 3.44% 8 70.11% 63.09% 56.91% 46.41% 16 17.85% 21.83% 25.33% 30.93% 32 11.53% 14.20% 16.59% 20.66% 64 0.51% 0.87% 1.17% 2.01%

1 : HEVC (Hong-rae Lee et al. : Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter) 2. Class B QP (QP=22, 27, 32, 37 ) Table 2. Selection ratio of Prediction mode in accordance with quantization parameter from Class B (QP=22, 27, 32, 37) QP = 22 QP = 27 0 25.67% 24.92% 22.10% 7.27% 0 24.99% 25.47% 27.84% 19.91% 1 17.61% 25.98% 41.92% 57.81% 1 15.62% 20.19% 31.95% 41.10% 2 1.13% 0.59% 0.66% 0.17% 2 0.92% 0.60% 0.76% 0.70% 3 0.67% 0.58% 0.49% 0.08% 3 0.72% 0.65% 0.60% 0.63% 4 0.67% 0.71% 0.53% 0.11% 4 0.73% 0.76% 0.66% 0.65% 5 0.94% 0.96% 0.57% 0.11% 5 1.03% 1.10% 1.07% 1.08% 6 2.30% 2.79% 0.77% 0.14% 6 2.87% 3.45% 1.72% 1.05% 7 2.85% 2.19% 0.83% 0.15% 7 3.41% 4.03% 2.51% 0.65% 8 2.79% 2.94% 1.19% 0.23% 8 3.06% 3.55% 1.97% 0.64% 9 3.73% 2.87% 2.61% 0.96% 9 3.19% 3.05% 2.88% 1.45% 10 4.03% 3.84% 4.11% 5.64% 10 4.17% 3.80% 4.47% 6.68% 11 3.25% 2.27% 2.06% 0.66% 11 2.88% 2.50% 2.35% 1.32% 12 1.92% 1.97% 0.62% 0.11% 12 1.73% 2.00% 0.72% 0.37% 13 1.56% 1.49% 0.59% 0.25% 13 1.46% 1.55% 0.66% 0.51% 14 1.52% 1.07% 0.44% 0.17% 14 1.61% 1.20% 0.48% 0.55% 15 1.19% 0.80% 0.37% 0.09% 15 1.43% 0.88% 0.37% 0.25% 16 0.90% 0.64% 0.32% 0.12% 16 1.00% 0.77% 0.31% 0.21% 17 0.89% 0.55% 0.27% 0.12% 17 1.00% 0.61% 0.26% 0.36% 18 1.31% 0.51% 0.27% 0.13% 18 1.21% 0.56% 0.24% 0.32% 19 0.79% 0.45% 0.27% 0.13% 19 0.87% 0.52% 0.24% 0.33% 20 0.80% 0.49% 0.28% 0.17% 20 0.91% 0.58% 0.23% 0.32% 21 0.89% 0.58% 0.28% 0.10% 21 0.87% 0.64% 0.25% 0.27% 22 1.04% 0.92% 0.33% 0.09% 22 1.12% 0.86% 0.31% 0.27% 23 1.14% 1.04% 0.37% 0.07% 23 1.20% 1.01% 0.43% 0.22% 24 1.43% 1.27% 0.45% 0.14% 24 1.39% 1.36% 0.53% 0.30% 25 2.90% 3.50% 4.08% 11.04% 25 2.62% 2.97% 2.77% 7.02% 26 7.72% 7.46% 9.08% 13.06% 26 9.82% 8.29% 8.49% 10.01% 27 2.12% 1.25% 1.05% 0.42% 27 2.03% 1.45% 1.25% 0.91% 28 1.26% 1.27% 0.54% 0.14% 28 1.26% 1.26% 0.68% 0.43% 29 0.99% 1.08% 0.50% 0.07% 29 1.02% 1.13% 0.65% 0.29% 30 0.91% 0.81% 0.39% 0.06% 30 0.92% 0.83% 0.50% 0.20% 31 0.82% 0.66% 0.41% 0.05% 31 0.73% 0.75% 0.47% 0.21% 32 0.63% 0.57% 0.40% 0.03% 32 0.69% 0.57% 0.44% 0.21% 33 0.65% 0.51% 0.43% 0.06% 33 0.70% 0.54% 0.41% 0.21% 34 0.99% 0.48% 0.43% 0.04% 34 0.84% 0.52% 0.51% 0.36% QP = 32 QP = 37 0 27.08% 27.18% 30.94% 30.00% 0 28.77% 28.68% 31.66% 31.97% 1 15.27% 18.38% 26.53% 30.57% 1 15.32% 17.41% 23.40% 26.45% 2 0.91% 0.69% 0.65% 0.74% 2 1.02% 0.79% 0.70% 1.46% 3 0.64% 0.60% 0.50% 0.74% 3 0.65% 0.64% 0.50% 0.82% 4 0.68% 0.73% 0.65% 0.87% 4 0.65% 0.73% 0.70% 1.02% 5 1.03% 1.00% 1.16% 1.68% 5 1.03% 1.02% 1.17% 1.88% 6 2.89% 3.95% 2.68% 1.52% 6 2.81% 3.82% 3.81% 2.43% 7 3.37% 4.39% 3.02% 0.91% 7 3.20% 4.24% 3.65% 1.36% 8 2.85% 3.12% 2.05% 0.86% 8 2.39% 2.97% 2.11% 1.18% 9 2.72% 2.91% 3.08% 1.50% 9 2.31% 2.51% 2.72% 1.52% 10 3.73% 3.68% 4.24% 6.01% 10 3.14% 3.30% 3.88% 5.45% 11 2.41% 2.68% 2.38% 1.29% 11 2.10% 2.39% 2.36% 1.28% 12 1.52% 1.67% 0.80% 0.43% 12 1.41% 1.48% 0.89% 0.47% 13 1.29% 1.42% 0.73% 0.62% 13 1.09% 1.26% 0.75% 0.65% 14 1.60% 1.26% 0.59% 0.48% 14 1.59% 1.31% 0.72% 0.51% 15 1.37% 0.90% 0.39% 0.19% 15 1.68% 0.97% 0.53% 0.23% 16 1.04% 0.73% 0.34% 0.18% 16 1.02% 0.76% 0.42% 0.24% 17 1.01% 0.69% 0.29% 0.16% 17 0.97% 0.75% 0.33% 0.17% 18 1.21% 0.64% 0.25% 0.16% 18 1.35% 0.63% 0.29% 0.16% 19 0.92% 0.57% 0.25% 0.20% 19 0.95% 0.70% 0.28% 0.16% 20 0.97% 0.63% 0.26% 0.25% 20 1.03% 0.75% 0.31% 0.16% 21 0.95% 0.68% 0.24% 0.28% 21 1.00% 0.80% 0.31% 0.20% 22 1.12% 0.82% 0.31% 0.18% 22 1.08% 0.82% 0.34% 0.19% 23 1.18% 0.95% 0.46% 0.34% 23 1.24% 1.00% 0.47% 0.39% 24 1.34% 1.29% 0.60% 0.43% 24 1.28% 1.37% 0.67% 0.53% 25 2.51% 2.97% 2.72% 4.92% 25 2.24% 2.97% 2.59% 3.18% 26 10.52% 8.62% 9.12% 11.05% 26 10.82% 9.19% 9.56% 11.94% 27 1.82% 1.46% 1.23% 0.98% 27 1.68% 1.39% 1.22% 0.89% 28 1.22% 1.19% 0.69% 0.51% 28 1.27% 1.15% 0.67% 0.54% 29 1.02% 1.05% 0.64% 0.42% 29 1.14% 1.03% 0.65% 0.51% 30 0.94% 0.78% 0.51% 0.24% 30 0.90% 0.80% 0.53% 0.38% 31 0.75% 0.67% 0.47% 0.26% 31 0.73% 0.63% 0.50% 0.34% 32 0.66% 0.57% 0.40% 0.25% 32 0.64% 0.57% 0.41% 0.29% 33 0.67% 0.54% 0.37% 0.32% 33 0.60% 0.54% 0.39% 0.37% 34 0.82% 0.57% 0.47% 0.49% 34 0.92% 0.61% 0.53% 0.66%

3. Class C QP (QP=22, 27, 32, 37 ) Table 3. Selection ratio of Prediction mode in accordance with quantization parameter from Class C (QP=22, 27, 32, 37) QP = 22 QP = 27 0 16.49% 19.58% 25.86% 8.81% 0 18.73% 20.69% 23.34% 20.90% 1 13.31% 17.20% 38.77% 70.95% 1 14.50% 16.65% 30.95% 47.40% 2 1.17% 0.73% 0.97% 0.08% 2 1.25% 0.75% 0.72% 0.11% 3 1.00% 0.55% 0.35% 0.08% 3 1.04% 0.60% 0.36% 0.07% 4 0.93% 0.71% 0.33% 0.00% 4 0.94% 0.67% 0.41% 0.10% 5 1.01% 0.79% 0.33% 0.04% 5 0.88% 0.60% 0.42% 0.09% 6 1.92% 1.27% 2.02% 0.06% 6 2.14% 1.78% 3.96% 0.03% 7 2.68% 2.43% 0.41% 0.04% 7 2.29% 2.32% 0.44% 0.12% 8 1.74% 1.58% 0.90% 0.38% 8 1.53% 1.50% 1.18% 0.19% 9 2.82% 2.65% 1.84% 0.44% 9 2.56% 2.66% 2.48% 0.68% 10 4.61% 7.06% 2.65% 0.09% 10 4.30% 8.11% 4.09% 1.40% 11 2.27% 1.85% 1.50% 0.40% 11 2.05% 1.96% 1.77% 1.05% 12 1.52% 1.08% 0.39% 0.18% 12 1.39% 1.08% 0.54% 0.47% 13 1.13% 0.70% 0.50% 0.00% 13 1.04% 0.60% 0.41% 0.05% 14 1.07% 0.56% 0.15% 0.00% 14 0.95% 0.59% 0.26% 0.06% 15 1.10% 0.77% 0.24% 0.02% 15 1.03% 0.62% 0.26% 0.00% 16 1.50% 2.25% 0.20% 0.00% 16 1.19% 2.04% 0.28% 0.02% 17 1.81% 2.28% 0.31% 0.00% 17 1.69% 1.44% 0.48% 5.52% 18 3.75% 3.01% 1.57% 0.00% 18 3.59% 2.62% 2.41% 0.02% 19 3.17% 2.40% 1.25% 10.71% 19 2.81% 2.58% 3.54% 2.53% 20 2.65% 2.56% 1.91% 0.00% 20 2.51% 2.48% 1.47% 1.53% 21 2.41% 3.34% 1.10% 0.04% 21 2.28% 2.85% 2.13% 0.02% 22 3.22% 2.54% 0.82% 0.13% 22 3.17% 2.56% 1.08% 0.05% 23 2.44% 2.80% 2.52% 0.04% 23 2.19% 3.16% 1.72% 0.21% 24 2.00% 1.86% 0.78% 0.09% 24 1.79% 1.74% 1.07% 0.12% 25 2.27% 1.54% 1.33% 0.22% 25 2.07% 1.52% 1.47% 0.19% 26 8.34% 7.25% 6.76% 6.90% 26 9.27% 7.64% 8.24% 16.68% 27 2.07% 1.54% 1.07% 0.06% 27 1.85% 1.58% 1.32% 0.10% 28 1.89% 2.03% 0.93% 0.04% 28 1.73% 1.73% 0.91% 0.03% 29 1.64% 1.52% 0.65% 0.09% 29 1.42% 1.33% 0.47% 0.10% 30 1.48% 1.14% 0.34% 0.00% 30 1.44% 1.11% 0.55% 0.05% 31 1.33% 0.91% 0.46% 0.04% 31 1.20% 0.85% 0.33% 0.07% 32 1.32% 0.67% 0.24% 0.02% 32 1.28% 0.69% 0.37% 0.02% 33 1.00% 0.52% 0.29% 0.00% 33 0.88% 0.50% 0.28% 0.00% 34 0.94% 0.32% 0.24% 0.00% 34 0.99% 0.42% 0.29% 0.02% QP = 32 QP = 37 0 21.90% 22.52% 24.17% 16.60% 0 25.47% 24.66% 25.37% 22.76% 1 15.21% 17.50% 23.66% 32.78% 1 14.84% 16.91% 20.23% 26.10% 2 1.28% 0.71% 0.65% 0.44% 2 1.28% 0.78% 0.80% 1.07% 3 0.85% 0.60% 0.42% 0.53% 3 0.80% 0.56% 0.45% 0.70% 4 0.80% 0.83% 0.49% 0.13% 4 0.69% 0.90% 0.55% 0.84% 5 0.78% 0.64% 0.56% 0.14% 5 0.84% 0.82% 0.54% 0.53% 6 2.67% 2.00% 4.09% 1.85% 6 2.57% 2.45% 3.37% 4.12% 7 2.07% 1.61% 0.49% 0.15% 7 1.80% 2.01% 0.73% 0.46% 8 1.44% 1.59% 1.79% 0.73% 8 1.25% 1.44% 1.64% 0.56% 9 2.43% 2.64% 2.50% 0.62% 9 2.19% 2.49% 2.46% 0.76% 10 3.93% 7.83% 5.22% 2.29% 10 3.56% 6.66% 8.00% 2.47% 11 2.05% 1.99% 1.60% 0.66% 11 2.05% 1.93% 1.93% 0.60% 12 1.33% 1.16% 0.64% 0.37% 12 1.32% 1.14% 0.59% 0.33% 13 0.95% 0.61% 0.57% 0.09% 13 0.88% 0.68% 0.54% 0.13% 14 0.94% 0.62% 0.34% 0.04% 14 0.82% 0.53% 0.46% 0.07% 15 0.98% 0.73% 0.44% 0.03% 15 0.88% 0.64% 0.39% 0.04% 16 1.08% 0.95% 0.42% 0.22% 16 0.95% 0.90% 0.73% 0.27% 17 1.36% 1.55% 1.16% 2.09% 17 1.31% 1.26% 1.12% 1.04% 18 2.83% 2.73% 2.83% 2.56% 18 2.50% 2.22% 2.48% 4.86% 19 2.10% 2.62% 2.99% 6.60% 19 1.77% 2.05% 2.63% 1.45% 20 2.46% 2.23% 1.84% 0.85% 20 2.37% 2.53% 1.99% 1.44% 21 1.99% 2.42% 1.80% 2.82% 21 1.88% 2.11% 1.79% 1.44% 22 2.70% 2.17% 1.41% 0.43% 22 2.72% 2.14% 1.84% 0.96% 23 1.99% 2.50% 2.16% 0.31% 23 1.79% 2.17% 1.83% 0.68% 24 1.70% 1.77% 0.97% 0.34% 24 1.42% 1.74% 0.99% 0.26% 25 1.80% 1.41% 1.61% 0.30% 25 1.60% 1.46% 1.57% 0.49% 26 10.09% 7.69% 9.69% 24.89% 26 10.59% 7.92% 9.15% 23.37% 27 1.61% 1.62% 1.47% 0.27% 27 1.40% 2.08% 1.60% 0.66% 28 1.46% 1.81% 1.01% 0.18% 28 1.35% 1.71% 0.96% 0.34% 29 1.40% 1.38% 0.77% 0.24% 29 1.32% 1.34% 0.81% 0.55% 30 1.38% 0.97% 0.61% 0.19% 30 1.12% 1.02% 0.69% 0.22% 31 1.20% 0.84% 0.61% 0.21% 31 1.31% 0.89% 0.59% 0.26% 32 1.37% 0.78% 0.34% 0.05% 32 1.37% 0.70% 0.52% 0.11% 33 0.86% 0.51% 0.35% 0.01% 33 0.95% 0.58% 0.33% 0.04% 34 1.01% 0.45% 0.33% 0.03% 34 1.04% 0.57% 0.34% 0.02%

1 : HEVC (Hong-rae Lee et al. : Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter) 4. Class D QP (QP=22, 27, 32, 37 ) Table 4. Selection ratio of Prediction mode in accordance with quantization parameter from Class D (QP=22, 27, 32, 37) QP = 22 QP = 27 0 18.01% 22.43% 24.93% 6.23% 0 20.74% 24.56% 27.87% 12.52% 1 12.71% 23.01% 42.26% 61.13% 1 13.66% 19.99% 40.22% 56.01% 2 1.90% 0.68% 1.39% 0.00% 2 1.94% 0.69% 0.75% 0.00% 3 1.40% 0.39% 0.43% 0.00% 3 1.36% 0.54% 0.47% 0.00% 4 1.40% 0.67% 0.23% 0.00% 4 1.14% 1.03% 0.29% 0.00% 5 1.63% 1.14% 0.68% 0.00% 5 1.43% 1.04% 0.72% 0.00% 6 2.32% 1.13% 0.29% 0.00% 6 2.19% 1.31% 0.26% 0.00% 7 2.00% 1.26% 0.22% 0.00% 7 1.75% 1.17% 0.35% 0.25% 8 1.72% 1.50% 0.35% 0.00% 8 1.45% 1.26% 0.50% 0.00% 9 2.15% 1.41% 1.60% 0.00% 9 1.71% 1.33% 1.66% 0.26% 10 4.03% 5.10% 2.22% 0.59% 10 3.46% 4.96% 2.07% 1.32% 11 4.05% 7.92% 4.70% 5.59% 11 3.25% 7.77% 4.50% 1.85% 12 2.53% 3.48% 0.97% 0.00% 12 2.16% 3.69% 1.08% 0.13% 13 1.76% 0.90% 0.27% 0.00% 13 1.66% 1.13% 0.26% 0.00% 14 1.73% 0.84% 0.08% 0.00% 14 1.88% 0.69% 0.13% 0.00% 15 1.51% 0.44% 0.17% 0.00% 15 1.48% 0.68% 0.29% 0.00% 16 1.21% 0.97% 0.07% 0.00% 16 1.19% 1.11% 0.22% 0.00% 17 1.37% 0.62% 0.06% 0.00% 17 1.32% 0.68% 0.03% 0.00% 18 1.74% 0.48% 0.17% 0.00% 18 1.83% 0.60% 0.10% 0.00% 19 1.62% 0.81% 0.08% 0.00% 19 1.56% 0.61% 0.16% 0.00% 20 1.61% 0.91% 0.04% 0.00% 20 1.44% 1.36% 0.10% 0.00% 21 1.55% 0.85% 0.26% 0.00% 21 1.49% 0.87% 0.23% 0.00% 22 2.17% 1.24% 0.28% 0.00% 22 2.11% 1.22% 0.18% 0.00% 23 2.22% 1.55% 0.30% 0.00% 23 2.06% 1.54% 0.27% 0.00% 24 2.75% 4.43% 4.59% 0.00% 24 2.51% 3.80% 4.02% 0.00% 25 2.51% 2.28% 6.26% 0.00% 25 2.15% 2.33% 4.35% 0.00% 26 7.05% 5.87% 3.89% 1.47% 26 8.29% 6.08% 5.29% 2.51% 27 1.99% 1.33% 1.44% 0.00% 27 1.87% 1.38% 1.53% 0.00% 28 2.09% 1.47% 0.44% 0.00% 28 1.84% 1.30% 0.42% 0.13% 29 1.83% 1.07% 0.08% 0.00% 29 1.75% 1.29% 0.29% 0.00% 30 2.20% 1.36% 0.17% 0.00% 30 2.02% 1.34% 0.21% 0.00% 31 1.62% 0.91% 0.21% 0.00% 31 1.57% 1.07% 0.34% 0.00% 32 1.24% 1.05% 0.32% 0.00% 32 1.25% 0.93% 0.29% 0.00% 33 1.17% 0.33% 0.29% 0.00% 33 1.26% 0.37% 0.27% 0.00% 34 1.19% 0.20% 0.30% 0.00% 34 1.25% 0.27% 0.28% 0.00% QP = 32 QP = 37 0 25.34% 27.47% 30.44% 30.67% 0 29.88% 32.09% 36.50% 40.82% 1 14.83% 17.81% 33.29% 58.74% 1 15.27% 17.48% 24.06% 37.41% 2 1.90% 0.80% 0.81% 1.03% 2 1.77% 0.92% 1.32% 1.58% 3 1.13% 0.71% 0.74% 0.17% 3 0.87% 0.83% 0.75% 0.74% 4 0.96% 1.28% 0.67% 0.17% 4 0.92% 1.00% 1.18% 2.43% 5 1.29% 1.17% 1.19% 0.09% 5 1.09% 1.07% 1.81% 1.33% 6 1.78% 1.24% 1.45% 0.00% 6 1.50% 1.27% 2.12% 1.08% 7 1.59% 1.38% 1.29% 0.17% 7 1.41% 1.04% 1.18% 0.77% 8 1.41% 1.49% 0.68% 0.17% 8 1.05% 1.30% 1.29% 1.38% 9 1.39% 1.12% 1.49% 0.98% 9 1.13% 0.98% 1.56% 2.27% 10 3.13% 3.69% 3.40% 0.64% 10 2.27% 3.04% 3.64% 1.69% 11 2.74% 7.47% 4.62% 1.55% 11 2.28% 6.43% 5.53% 3.12% 12 1.94% 3.11% 1.34% 0.09% 12 1.70% 1.92% 1.26% 0.39% 13 1.40% 1.29% 0.26% 0.00% 13 1.09% 1.03% 0.50% 0.04% 14 1.45% 0.71% 0.15% 0.00% 14 1.39% 0.87% 0.33% 0.00% 15 1.19% 1.07% 0.31% 0.00% 15 1.00% 1.07% 0.37% 0.00% 16 0.95% 1.26% 0.25% 0.00% 16 0.91% 1.16% 0.33% 0.00% 17 1.22% 0.69% 0.11% 0.00% 17 1.25% 0.71% 0.14% 0.10% 18 1.78% 0.71% 0.20% 0.00% 18 1.51% 0.88% 0.30% 0.00% 19 1.48% 0.82% 0.40% 0.00% 19 1.54% 1.00% 0.28% 0.10% 20 1.29% 1.13% 0.06% 0.00% 20 1.26% 1.29% 0.35% 0.00% 21 1.52% 1.04% 0.32% 0.00% 21 1.39% 0.96% 0.45% 0.00% 22 1.83% 1.36% 0.22% 0.00% 22 1.45% 1.14% 0.39% 0.00% 23 1.75% 1.55% 0.34% 0.00% 23 1.85% 1.62% 0.58% 0.10% 24 2.04% 2.91% 2.00% 0.00% 24 1.66% 1.99% 1.48% 0.04% 25 2.00% 1.90% 4.07% 0.00% 25 1.53% 1.39% 1.78% 0.04% 26 8.90% 6.44% 5.42% 5.24% 26 10.19% 6.73% 6.18% 3.99% 27 1.64% 1.13% 1.59% 0.09% 27 1.47% 1.18% 1.03% 0.09% 28 1.60% 1.46% 0.50% 0.00% 28 1.66% 1.81% 0.67% 0.00% 29 1.61% 1.39% 0.39% 0.00% 29 1.36% 1.31% 0.33% 0.00% 30 1.86% 1.42% 0.29% 0.00% 30 1.55% 1.18% 0.41% 0.10% 31 1.59% 0.95% 0.40% 0.00% 31 1.56% 1.09% 0.36% 0.09% 32 1.15% 0.84% 0.45% 0.17% 32 1.06% 0.93% 0.41% 0.00% 33 1.21% 0.66% 0.36% 0.00% 33 1.02% 0.59% 0.29% 0.10% 34 1.11% 0.55% 0.51% 0.00% 34 1.14% 0.67% 0.85% 0.20%

. Horizontal(10). 64 64 Vertical(26) ( 2 ), Vertical(26) ( 3, 4 ). QP 8 8 2~4(Class B~D) 1% 16 16 3(Class C) 1%, 2(Class B) 4(Class D) 1%. 32 32 64 64 2~4 (Class B~D) 1%. Class PU 1%. 1 PU 1%. 8 8 Class D 70% Class B 40% 1% 4(Class D) 1, 3(Class C) 6, 2(Class B) 12 1. RMD 1, 2, 3, 4 Fig. 1. Proposed candidate SET 1, 2, 3, 4 for RMD prediction

1 : HEVC (Hong-rae Lee et al. : Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter). 16 16 32 32 QP, 3(Class C) 1% 16 16 12, 32 32 19 2(Class B) 4(Class D) 1% 2~6 Planar(0), DC(1). 64 64 1%. RMD 35 PU. HEVC RMD 35 4 PU. 5 RMD 4. SET 1 4 SET 2 Horizontal(10), Vertical(26) 2 18. 2, 3, 4 Horizontal(10), Vertical(26) 1% 18. SET 3 Horizontal(10), Vertical (26) 3 18 1. SET 4 5. RMD Table 5. Candidate sets of the proposed RMD prediction mode SET 1 RMD DC(0), Plnanar(1), Horizontal(10), Vertical(26) SET 2 DC(0), Plnanar(1), 8,9,10,11,12,18,24,25,26,27,28 SET 3 SET 4 DC(0), Plnanar(1), 7,8,9,10,11,12,13,17,18,19,23,24,25,26,27,28,29 35 modes 35. 1.., HEVC HM12.0 [15] HEVC. 6 7. 6. Table 6. Test environment CPU RAM OS Compiler Intel Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40Ghz 8.00 GB Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Visual C++ 2010 sp1 x86 Test Model HM 12.0 Configure All intra main QP 22, 27, 32, 37 7. Table 7. Test sequence Class (Video Resolution) B Class (1920 1080) C Class (832 480) D Class (416 240) Sequence Frames Frame rate Kimono 240 24 ParkScene 240 24 Cactus 500 50 BasketballDrive 500 50 BQTerrace 600 60 BasketballDrill 500 50 BQMall 600 60 PartyScene 500 50 RaceHorsesC 300 30 BasketballPass 500 50 BQSquare 600 60 BlowingBubbles 500 50 RaceHorses 300 30

8 QP PU 5. HEVC Time (1). Class (Video Resolution) B Class (1920 1080) C Class (832 480) D Class (416 240) 8. QP PU Table 8. Mode selection of considering each video resolution, QP and PU ratio PU_Size QP=22 QP=27 QP=32 QP=37 8 SET 3 SET 3 SET 2 SET 2 16 SET 2 SET 2 SET 2 SET 2 32 SET 2 SET 2 SET 3 SET 3 64 SET 1 SET 1 SET 2 SET 2 8 SET 4 SET 4 SET 3 SET 3 16 SET 3 SET 3 SET 3 SET 3 32 SET 1 SET 1 SET 2 SET 2 64 SET 1 SET 1 SET 2 SET 2 8 SET 4 SET 4 SET 3 SET 3 16 SET 3 SET 3 SET 2 SET 2 32 SET 2 SET 2 SET 2 SET 2 64 SET 1 SET 1 SET 1 SET 1 9. Class B 6.7% 3.8%. Class C 3.6% 2.9%. Class D 3.8% 2.2%. Class C D QP 32 37 6% Class B 6%. 8 8 PU Class C D HEVC 35 SET 4 Class B 9. Table 9. Test results Class Sequence BD-rate Y QP Time 22-6.83% Kimono 2.8% 27-7.09% 32-7.35% 37-7.81% 22-6.86% ParkScene 1.2% 27-6.62% 32-7.07% 37-7.45% 22-7.19% 27-6.35% Cactus 4.5% B 32-6.94% 37-7.54% 22-6.26% BasketballDrive 5.9% 27-6.59% 32-6.90% 37-6.21% 22-5.12% BQTerrace 4.7% 27-5.92% 32-6.19% 37-5.93% Overall 3.8% -6.71% Class Sequence BD-rate Y QP Time 22-1.52% BasketballDrill 6.1% 27-1.78% 32-4.70% 37-5.49% 22-2.47% BQMall 1.4% 27-2.69% 32-4.72% 37-5.49% C 22-1.58% PartyScene 1.1% 27-1.87% 32-5.29% 37-4.89% 22-2.66% RaceHorses 2.8% 27-2.92% 32-4.96% 37-5.09% Overall 2.9% -3.63% Class Sequence BD-rate Y QP Time 22-1.14% BasketballPass 2.3% 27-1.50% 32-6.25% 37-6.32% 22-1.18% BQSquare 1.8% 27-1.72% 32-6.52% 37-6.25% D 22-1.07% BlowingBubbles 1.8% 27-1.52% 32-6.26% 37-6.19% 22-1.56% RaceHorses 2.9% 27-1.84% 32-6.28% 37-6.58% Overall 2.2% -3.89% Overall 3.0% -4.7%

1 : HEVC (Hong-rae Lee et al. : Scheme for Reducing HEVC Intra Coding Complexity Considering Video Resolution and Quantization Parameter) SET 1~3. 8 8 PU Class C D 8 8 PU Class C D Class B. Class B Frame rate 50 Cactus, BasketballDrive, BQTerrace 5% 6.4% Frame rate 24 Kimono 2.8% 7%, ParkScene 1.2% 7.3%. 8 8 PU 8 8 PU Class B Frame rate.. HEVC RMD 35 4 RMD PU 4. HM 12.0, 8 8 PU, Class B Flame rate 2.0% 7.1%. UHD Flame rate QP. (References) [1] U. Parka, H. Choi, J. Kang, and J. Kim, Scalable Video Coding Using Large Block and its Performance Analysis, Journal of Broadcast Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 249-260, Mar. 2013. [2] JCT-VC, High Efficiency Video Coding(HEVC) text specification draft 8, JCTVC-J1003, Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC) 10th Meeting, Stockholm, Sweden, July 2012. [3] ITU-T and ISO/IEC JTC 1, Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services, ITU-T Recommendation H.264 and ISO/IEC 14496-10 (MPEG4-AVC), Forth edition: Sep. 2008. [4] B. Li, G. Sullivan, and J. Xu, Comparison of compression performance of HEVC working draft 5 with AVC high profile, JCTVC-H0360, San Jose, CA, Feb. 2012. [5] J. Ohm, G. Sullivan, H. Schwarz, T. Tan, and T. Wiegand, Comparison of the Coding Efficiency of Video Coding Standards-Including High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 22, No. 12, pp. 1669-1684, Dec. 2012. [6] G. Sullivan, and R. Baker, Efficient Quadtree Coding of Images and Video, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 3 No. 3 pp. 327-331, May 1994. [7] G. Sullivan, J. Ohm, W. Han, and T. Wiegand, Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Standard, IEEE Transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, Vol. 22, No. 12, Dec. 2012 [8] B. La, M. Eom, and Y. Choe, Fast Mode Decision for Intra Prediction in H.264/AVC Encoder, IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, Vol. 5, pp. 321-324 Oct. 2007. [9] J. Min, S. Lee, I. Kim, W. Han, J. Lainema, and K. Ugur, Unification of the directional intra prediction methods in TMuC, document JCTVC-B100, Mar. 2012. [10] F. Bossen, T. Tan, and J. Takiue, simplified angular intra prediction, document JCTVC-B093, Jul. 2010. [11] F. Bossen, B. Bross, K. Suhring, and D. Flynn HEVC Complexity and Implementation Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 22, No. 12 pp. 1685-1696, Dec. 2012. [12] J. Vanne, M. Vitanen, T. Hamalainen, and A. Hallpuro, Comparative Rate-Distortion-Complexity Analysis of HEVC and AVC Video Codecs, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, Vol. 22, No. 12, pp. 1885-1898, Dec. 2012. [13] JCT-VC, Encoder improvement of unified intra prediction, Document JCTVC-C207, Guangzhou, OCT. 2010. [14] D. Gwon, S. Lee, and H. Choi, HEVC Intra Prediciton Performance Analysis and Complexity Reduction Method, Proceeding of the Korean Society of Broadcast Engineer Conference, Vol. 2012, No. 11, pp. 176-179, Nov. 2012. [15] I. Kim, K. McCann, K. Sugimoto, B. Bross, and W. Han, High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Test Model 12 (HM 12) Encoder Description, JCTVC-M1002, 13th JCT-VC Meeting, April 2013.

- 2010 2 : - 2012 8 : - 2012 9 ~ : - :,, - 1996 2 : KAIST - 1998 2 : KAIST - 2002 8 : KAIST - 2002 8 ~ 2005 2 : LG - 2012 9 ~2013 8 : Courtesy Professor, Univ. of Florida, USA - 2005 3 ~ : - :,,,