Results 1 to 1 of 1

Thread: range coder fragility

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    3
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    range coder fragility

    was experimenting with a bitwise range coder backend for BTIC1H (one of my video codecs). it basically hangs out "behind" the normal bit read/write functions, and behind the Rice coding (the bits for the Rice coder are fed through the range coder). (ADD: basically, a similar idea to in VP8/VP9).

    in some offline frame-encoding tests, it nearly halves the bitrate, though results in actual video seem to be a bit more modest.

    I am mostly trying to fiddle with it to improve speed, as it is currently kind of slow and barely maintains 30fps for real-time 1080p encoding in this mode (a raw bitstream is closer to 50fps for 1080p encoding, for a single encoder thread on a 3.4GHz AMD Phenom II with PC3-10600 RAM). speed for the encoder sometimes dips below 30fps causing frames to be inserted during capture.


    one issue though I have noticed with range coding though is that it seems to be very brittle, as in the slightest tweak to the range-coder breaks ability to decode previous output (this can be noted is not an issue with a raw bitstream).

    I am not sure if anyone knows a good solution to making the range-coder less sensitive to slight changes (such as when/how re-normalization happens, ...)?

    also, noted, in most tests the branching versions of the logic seem to be faster than the branch-free versions (had been experimenting with making both the read/write bit and re-normalization be branch-free).

    ADD:
    I have since fiddled it enough so that the branch and branch-free versions are roughly break-even with the branched versions.
    a slight optimization was only re-normalizing every 4 bits (*), but this requires limiting the model weights slightly to avoid the range collapsing prior to re-normalization.
    current normalization may input/output up to 16 bits at a time.

    *: this depends on the number of bits being read/written at a time, which needs to match between encoder and decoder. if the number of bits is not a multiple of 4, it will re-normalize at the end of the sequence of bits.

    encoder-side I-frame Mpix/sec still falls slightly below what is needed for 1080p30.

    ADD2: partial defeat: need to normalize every bit or else can't get it to decode reliably.
    OTOH: testing encoding video to DVD or VCD specs (similar resolution and bitrate), gets pretty decent quality.

    ADD3: note that range-coding is optional and experimental, and a raw bitstream will likely remain as the primary format. the format is indicated partly via new TLV tags and a new small header just before the start of the encoded stream. this was chosen over trying to change the bitstream format mid-stream (as was done in BTLZA) as this is an ugly mess.

    ADD4: also half-imagining the possibility of trying something similar to an order-2 PPM with 4 bit symbols. this would need about 3kB of context per model. would be encoded using an adaptive coding similar to AdRice (but with symbols limited to 8 bits, and saving 1 bit for the longest prefix, using fixed lookup tables, would need ~1kB for LUT). sane?...


    thoughts?...
    Last edited by cr88192; 9th January 2016 at 20:27.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 2nd July 2018, 20:18
  2. On the Q Coder
    By thorfdbg in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 29th December 2016, 18:27
  3. Hashing a large range of integers to a smaller range
    By mtwaha in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11th April 2011, 23:27
  4. SSE(o2,o4) CM coder
    By Shelwien in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 4th February 2011, 13:50
  5. How fast should be a range coder ?
    By Cyan in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 16th November 2009, 17:02

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •