|
This page describes the experiments on which the conclusions about BMAs are based. Experimental Method ![]() Garden was a sequence of 99 images and was different from the other two in that the motion between frames was due to camera movement rather than motion of objects within the scene. As the camera tracked from right to left, a tree in the foreground appeared to move from left to right and in doing so occluded some areas and uncovered other areas of the background. Otherwise the scene was, for the most part, motionless. The Garden sequence also differed from the other two in that the image content was very detailed. ![]() Tennis was a sequence of 39 images from a Table Tennis match. The sequence showed the arm and paddle of one player as the ball bounced off the paddle. There was relatively little motion, except for the movement of the ball in the air, and very little new data entered the scene from frame to frame. For the latter third of the sequence the camera zoomed out slowly. ![]() Football was a sequence of 60 frames from an American football game in which the University of California at Berkeley played Washington State University (I think!). There was considerable motion in the sequence. Several players entered the scene from both sides and fell over each other. Individual frames exhibited some blurring where there was fast movement. Sequence Coding To quantitatively assess the block matching algorithms, each frame of the sequences (except the first frame) was reconstructed using only blocks that were copied from its immediate predecessor. Although coding of frames in this manner, known as pure block matching, is rarely used in practice, it is very useful for evaluating block matching algorithms since an algorithms performance can be examined in isolation from other factors. This technique was also used by other researchers. The number of times the performance criteria (e.g. MSD, MAD, PDC) was evaluated was recorded and used as a measure of complexity. Analysis of Output Each of the approximated frames was compared to the original frame in order to evaluate the quality of the approximation. There are a number of quantitative comparison criteria including Mean Square Error (MSE) and Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR). For these experiments MSE was used to evaluate the quality of the output The MSE for a pair of images (F and G) of width p and height q pixels is defined as
where F[a,b] is the value of the pixel in the ath column and bth row of frame F. Thus the results provided a comparison of computational complexity versus quality. |