Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 67 references

Neural Stereo Video Compression with Hybrid Disparity Compensation

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A hybrid disparity compensation method that combines explicit pixel shifts with implicit cross-attention reports a 54.61% average bitrate reduction over MV-HEVC on driving benchmarks and a 15.07% saving on general multi-view sequences.

desk verdict A well-built hybrid disparity compensation module with genuinely clean ablations, but the headline SOTA numbers lean on other papers' baselines and need a common-protocol rerun before I'd trust them. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20383 v3 pith:AG773N5Z submitted 2025-04-29 cs.CV eess.IV

Shiyin Jiang , Zhenghao Chen , Minghao Han , Shuhang Gu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVeess.IV
keywords stereovideocompressionneuraldisparitycompensationcross-attentionentropymodelingrate-distortionoptimizationmulti-viewcodingautoregressive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to show that stereo video compression can be improved by hybridizing the two main ways of removing cross-view redundancy: explicit horizontal pixel shifts, which provide a cheap structural prior, and implicit cross-attention, which captures a wider range of matches. The proposed HDC strategy builds feature volumes by shifting each view horizontally, fuses them with a dot product to form a similarity map, normalizes that map into an attention score, and uses the score to warp one view toward the other. On autonomous-driving benchmarks the full system reports an average 54.61% bitrate reduction over MV-HEVC and a 26.81% reduction over the previous neural stereo method; on general multi-view sequences it reports a 15.07% bitrate saving over MV-HEVC. If these results hold, stereo and multi-view video could be stored or transmitted at a fraction of the current bitrate without sacrificing reconstruction quality.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the HDC module: a hybrid block that first shifts feature maps horizontally to build 4D cost volumes, then fuses the two volumes with an element-wise dot product into a similarity map $F = V^{L} \odot V^{R}$, normalizes $F$ into attention scores via Softplus and Tanh, and finally uses those scores to weight and 3D-convolve the opposite view's volume into a reference feature that is refined and added back to the original feature. Two instantiations carry the system: HDC-FER applies this block to intermediate encoder and decoder features in both the motion and context compression paths, and HDC-EM applies a simplified version to channel-wise slices of quantized latents inside an alternating left-right autoregressive entropy model. The explicit shift supplies the geometric prior that makes optimization easy, while the attention score supplies adaptive weighting that lets matching extend beyond the local shift window.

What would settle it

Re-run the previous neural stereo methods and this one on the same preprocessed frames with the same I-frame compression code and the same rate-distortion operating points, then recompute BD-rate; if the gap over the previous method falls well below 26.81% or reverses, the paper's central comparative claim is not supported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that one disparity compensation block can serve both cross-view feature extraction and reconstruction and cross-view entropy modeling, and that the block works best when it keeps the explicit shift as a prior rather than replacing it with pure attention. HDC forms disparity volumes $V^{L}$ and $V^{R}$ by horizontally shifting each view's features over a disparity range up to $D=192$, takes their element-wise product to obtain a similarity map, normalizes it with Softplus and Tanh to obtain attention scores, and performs a weighted soft-warp with a 3D convolution to align features across views. In the entropy model, the same idea is applied to channel-wise slices of quantized latents, with left and right views encoded in alternating order so that each new slice is predicted from all previously coded slices of both views. The paper reports that HDC-FER alone lowers BD-rate by 6.03% and HDC-EM alone by 26.59% on the driving benchmark, with the combination reaching 32.17%, indicating that most of the gain comes from better entropy modeling rather than from feature alignment alone.

Load-bearing premise

The comparison relies on numbers reported in other papers rather than re-running those methods under identical conditions, so if the test setups differ even slightly, part of the claimed bitrate advantage could come from that difference.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reported bitrate reductions hold, autonomous-driving and VR pipelines could transmit the same stereo quality at roughly half the bitrate of MV-HEVC, or higher quality at the same bitrate.
  • The alternating left-right sliced entropy coding means the decoder can condition on every previously decoded slice from both views, a pattern other stereo codecs could adopt independently of the alignment module.
  • The ablation places the larger gain in entropy modeling (26.59% alone) rather than feature alignment (6.03% alone), suggesting cross-view entropy priors are the highest-value target for further stereo compression research.
  • The system adds only a moderate amount of computation to its lightweight single-view backbone, so the approach stays in a practical complexity range for real-time or embedded use.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the protocol-mismatch concern is put aside, the ablation predicts that transplanting the cross-view entropy model into other neural stereo codecs could transfer most of the reported gain, which is a directly testable extension.
  • The framework assumes rectified stereo pairs because the explicit prior is a pure horizontal shift; extending HDC to non-rectified or multi-camera arrays would require replacing the fixed shift with a learned displacement or depth-based warp that the attention score could then refine.
  • A head-to-head re-run using the same I-frame codec, cropping, and rate-distortion operating points would settle whether the 26.81% advantage over the previous neural method is intrinsic to HDC or partly caused by evaluation differences.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a hybrid disparity compensation (HDC) strategy for neural stereo video compression, combining explicit horizontal feature shifting with an implicit cross-attention mechanism. HDC is instantiated in two modules: HDC-FER, used in the encoders/decoders of the motion and context compression branches to align and fuse cross-view features, and HDC-EM, used in the entropy model to condition slice-wise autoregressive coding on aligned cross-view priors. The framework is built on a lightweight variant of DCVC-TCM. Experiments on Cityscapes, KITTI 2012/2015, and two Nagoya sequences report average BD-rate savings of 54.61% over MV-HEVC and 26.81% over the prior neural method LLSS on driving datasets, with ablations isolating the contributions of the two modules and of the explicit/implicit components.

Significance. If the reported gains hold under a common evaluation protocol, the work is a solid engineering contribution: the HDC design is clearly specified, the ablations are well structured (HDC-EM alone, HDC-FER alone, removal of the attention score, removal of the shift, replacement with Stereo/Mutual Attention, and a second backbone), and the complexity overhead relative to the single-view backbone is moderate. The extension to general-scene multi-view data (Nagoya) is a useful addition to a literature that has focused on driving scenes. However, the headline claim of outperforming prior neural stereo codecs rests on numbers cited from the original LSVC/LLSS papers rather than on a common-protocol re-run, and the paper's own Table I contains a pattern that casts doubt on protocol compatibility. The central architecture appears sound, but the evaluation needs to be reworked before the state-of-the-art claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV-C, Table I; §IV-B] The core claim of surpassing the previous neural stereo SOTA (LLSS, LSVC) relies on BD-rate numbers cited from their original papers: the manuscript states in §IV-C, 'The results of LSVC [4] and LLSS [3] are reported from their original papers.' The present work uses the ELIC model of He et al. [58] for I-frames, a specific cropping protocol, a specific GOP, and a specific lambda schedule, and it is not demonstrated that the original LLSS/LSVC evaluations used the same conditions. A concrete red flag is Table I on KITTI 2012: the single-view backbone DCVC-TCM* already achieves -48.61% versus LLSS's -18.18%, a 30-point gap that is difficult to attribute to the stereo modules alone and suggests the LLSS numbers were obtained under a different test protocol (e.g., a different I-frame codec or color-space PSNR). Please re-run LSVC and LLSS under this paper's exact evaluation protocol, or provide a detailed, quantitative protocol-equivalence argument (I-frame codec, crop, GOP, lambda set, color space, and test frames).
  2. [§IV-C, Table I] The reported '26.81% average BD-rate reduction relative to LLSS' is computed as the simple arithmetic mean of the per-dataset differences in BD-rate percentage points: ((49.44-53.13) + (18.18-55.97) + (15.76-54.72))/3 = -26.81. This is not a standard relative BD-rate saving, because BD-rate is already a percentage relative to the MV-HEVC anchor. For example, on KITTI 2012 the actual relative saving of Ours over LLSS is (18.18 - 55.97)/(100 - 18.18) × 100 ≈ 46.2%, not 37.8 percentage points. Please report per-dataset relative BD-rate calculations using a standard formula, and recompute the average accordingly.
  3. [§IV-E, Fig. 8] The backbone ablation claims that integrating HDC into the FVC backbone yields 'superior performance over prior SOTA approaches under identical backbone settings.' However, the comparison in Fig. 8 is made against LSVC and LLSS using their originally reported numbers; it is not established that those methods share the FVC backbone used for the Ours(FVC) variant. The 'identical backbone' statement is therefore only valid for the FVC-to-Ours(FVC) comparison, not for the comparison to LSVC/LLSS. Please either provide a controlled comparison in which LSVC and LLSS are re-run on the same backbone (e.g., by removing the HDC modules), or rephrase the claim to avoid implying that the cited LSVC/LLSS numbers were produced with the FVC backbone.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§I] In the introduction, 'contexture coding' appears to be a typo for 'context coding' or 'contextual coding'; please correct it.
  2. [§III-C1] The text contains an orphan fragment 'K L2.' in the description of intermediate features; it should read 'K^L' or be removed.
  3. [Fig. 4 captions] The figure captions contain visible 'uni00A0' artifacts (e.g., 'KITTI/uni00A02012'), which appear to be a PDF/LaTeX conversion issue; please ensure the final version renders proper spaces.
  4. [Table I] LSVC and LLSS have no entries for Kendo and Balloons; the claim that the method outperforms neural SOTA on general scenes is therefore unsupported by a direct neural baseline on those sequences. Please add such baselines or soften the claim.
  5. [§IV-B] The maximum disparity D is set to 192 based on KITTI's reported maximum disparity, but the Nagoya sequences have different resolutions (1024×768) and camera baselines; the paper does not discuss whether D=192 is appropriate for those sequences. A brief sensitivity analysis or justification is requested.
  6. [§IV-C] Table I reports BD-rate in RGB color space, but the original LLSS/LSVC papers may report in YUV/PSNR or a different color space; please verify and state explicitly that the cited numbers were computed in the same color space as this work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: HDC is a soft-matching/attention construction, and the compression claims are anchored to external codecs and published baselines rather than to the method's own fitted values.

full rationale

No circularity found. The paper's derivation is architectural and empirical: HDC builds shifted correlation volumes via Eq. (1), computes a similarity map F = V_L ⊙ V_R in Eq. (2), normalizes it into an attention score F*, and forms reference features K_Ref = Conv3D(F* ⊙ V_R) in Eq. (3). The attention score is derived from the same shifted volumes it weights, but this is a standard soft-matching/attention construction, not a reduction of a target result to an input; no fitted value is later reported as a prediction. The compression claims are anchored to external benchmarks and codecs (MV-HEVC, HEVC, FVC) and to published NSVC baselines. The authors' own DCVC-TCM* is a backbone variant used for controlled ablations, not defined as the target result. The cross-paper nature of the LSVC and LLSS numbers is an explicit limitation (Section IV-C: 'The results of LSVC [4] and LLSS [3] are reported from their original papers.'), but that is a protocol-comparison and evidence-quality concern, not circular reasoning. No uniqueness theorem is imported, no ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation, and no equation reduces to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard engineering choices plus two dataset-dependent hyperparameters (D, N) and several implicit domain assumptions about rectified stereo, MSE as a quality proxy, and transfer from Cityscapes to other datasets. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Maximum disparity D = 192
    Set to the maximum disparity reported for KITTI; defines the shift range for the cost volumes in HDC-FER and HDC-EM, and is therefore a dataset-dependent hyperparameter rather than a derived quantity.
  • Number of entropy slices N = not stated in paper
    The channel-wise progressive entropy model partitions latents into N slices; N controls the autoregressive granularity and computational cost, but its value is unspecified, making the method incompletely specified.
  • Lagrange multiplier lambda = multiple values (not enumerated)
    Standard rate-distortion trade-off sweep; each RD point uses a different lambda. It is a tuning parameter, not a scientific claim, but it is a free parameter in the training objective.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Stereo frames are rectified so that disparity is a horizontal shift along the width dimension.
    The HDC cost volume construction in Eq. (1) shifts features only along the width axis. If views are not rectified, the explicit prior would be invalid.
  • domain assumption MSE-based rate-distortion optimization is a valid proxy for reconstruction quality.
    The training loss in Eq. (6) uses MSE as the distortion term; the evaluation also uses PSNR. This is standard in learned compression but is an assumption about perceptual relevance.
  • domain assumption Training on Vimeo-90K and Cityscapes transfers to KITTI and Nagoya.
    The model is pretrained on Vimeo-90K and fine-tuned only on Cityscapes, yet is evaluated on KITTI and Nagoya. The reported generalization is an empirical assumption.
  • domain assumption The backbone DCVC-TCM* is a valid representative of neural video compression.
    The paper builds on a lightweight variant of DCVC-TCM and treats it as the base framework; this is an architectural choice, not a proven premise.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Neural Stereo Video Compression with Hybrid Disparity Compensation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AG773N5Z

@misc{pith2026250420383,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Neural Stereo Video Compression with Hybrid Disparity Compensation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AG773N5Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20383}
}
read the original abstract

Disparity compensation represents the primary strategy in stereo video compression (SVC) for exploiting cross-view redundancy. These mechanisms can be broadly categorized into two types: one that employs explicit horizontal shifting, and another that utilizes an implicit cross-attention mechanism to reduce cross-view disparity redundancy. In this work, we propose a hybrid disparity compensation (HDC) strategy that leverages explicit pixel displacement as a robust prior feature to simplify optimization and perform implicit cross-attention mechanisms for subsequent warping operations, thereby capturing a broader range of disparity information. Specifically, HDC first computes a similarity map by fusing the horizontally shifted cross-view features to capture pixel displacement information. This similarity map is then normalized into an "explicit pixel-wise attention score" to perform the cross-attention mechanism, implicitly aligning features from one view to another. Building upon HDC, we introduce a novel end-to-end optimized neural stereo video compression framework, which integrates HDC-based modules into key coding operations, including cross-view feature extraction and reconstruction (HDC-FER) and cross-view entropy modeling (HDC-EM). Extensive experiments on SVC benchmarks, including KITTI 2012, KITTI 2015, and Nagoya, which cover both autonomous driving and general scenes, demonstrate that our framework outperforms both neural and traditional SVC methodologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20383 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Overview of our Neural Stereo Video Compression (NSVC) framework. At time step t, the input stereo frame pair {x L t , x R t } is compressed and reconstructed into {xˆ L t , xˆ R t } using five key coding components. This process is conditioned on the previously reconstructed frame pair {xˆ L t−1 , xˆ R t−1 } and the corresponding feature pair {F L t−1 , F R t−1 } from time step t − 1 as in established neural … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The proposed Hybrid Disparity Compensation Module for Feature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a). Overview of the Hybrid Disparity Compensation module for Entropy Modeling (HDC-EM). The input is the latent feature pair {y L, y R} produced by the encoder modules of the Motion and Context Compression components (see the middle part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Rate-distortion (RD) curves. The results are evaluated on the KITTI 2012, KITTI 2015 and Nagoya [21] datasets in terms of Bpp-PSNR. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Subjective quality comparison on KITTI 2012 dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Ablation study on rate-distortion (RD) performance by progressively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Ablation study on rate-distortion (RD) performance with various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [4]

    Lsvc: A learning- based stereo video compression framework,

    Z. Chen, G. Lu, Z. Hu, S. Liu, W. Jiang, and D. Xu, “Lsvc: A learning- based stereo video compression framework,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 6073–6082

    work page 2022

  2. [3]

    Low-latency neural stereo streaming,

    Q. Hou, F. Farhadzadeh, A. Said, G. Sautiere, and H. Le, “Low-latency neural stereo streaming,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 7974–7984

    2024

  3. [58]

    Elic: Efficient learned image compression with unevenly grouped space- channel contextual adaptive coding,

    D. He, Z. Yang, W. Peng, R. Ma, H. Qin, and Y . Wang, “Elic: Efficient learned image compression with unevenly grouped space- channel contextual adaptive coding,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 5718–5727

    2022

  4. [1]

    Overview of the stereo and multiview video coding extensions of the h. 264/mpeg-4 avc standard,

    A. Vetro, T. Wiegand, and G. J. Sullivan, “Overview of the stereo and multiview video coding extensions of the h. 264/mpeg-4 avc standard,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 626–642, 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [2]

    Overview of the multiview and 3d extensions of high efficiency video coding,

    G. Tech, Y . Chen, K. M ¨uller, J.-R. Ohm, A. Vetro, and Y .-K. Wang, “Overview of the multiview and 3d extensions of high efficiency video coding,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 35–49, 2015

    work page 2015

  6. [5]

    Pcw-net: Pyramid combination and warping cost volume for stereo matching,

    Z. Shen, Y . Dai, X. Song, Z. Rao, D. Zhou, and L. Zhang, “Pcw-net: Pyramid combination and warping cost volume for stereo matching,” in European conference on computer vision. Springer, 2022, pp. 280–297. SUBMITTED TO IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS FOR VIDEO TECHNOLOGY 11

    work page 2022

  7. [6]

    Group-wise corre- lation stereo network,

    X. Guo, K. Yang, W. Yang, X. Wang, and H. Li, “Group-wise corre- lation stereo network,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 3273–3282

    2019

  8. [7]

    End-to-end learning of geometry and context for deep stereo regression,

    A. Kendall, H. Martirosyan, S. Dasgupta, P. Henry, R. Kennedy, A. Bachrach, and A. Bry, “End-to-end learning of geometry and context for deep stereo regression,” inProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, 2017, pp. 66–75

    2017

Show all 67 references
  1. [8]

    Symmetric parallax attention for stereo image super-resolution,

    Y . Wang, X. Ying, L. Wang, J. Yang, W. An, and Y . Guo, “Symmetric parallax attention for stereo image super-resolution,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 766–775

    2021

  2. [9]

    Stereo image restoration via attention-guided correspondence learning,

    S. Zhang, W. Yu, F. Jiang, L. Nie, H. Yao, Q. Huang, and D. Tao, “Stereo image restoration via attention-guided correspondence learning,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 4850–4865, 2024

    2024

  3. [10]

    Learning parallax attention for stereo image super-resolution,

    L. Wang, Y . Wang, Z. Liang, Z. Lin, J. Yang, W. An, and Y . Guo, “Learning parallax attention for stereo image super-resolution,” inPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 12 250–12 259

    2019

  4. [11]

    Nafssr: Stereo image super-resolution using nafnet,

    X. Chu, L. Chen, and W. Yu, “Nafssr: Stereo image super-resolution using nafnet,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2022, pp. 1239–1248

    2022

  5. [12]

    Dsic: Deep stereo image compression,

    J. Liu, S. Wang, and R. Urtasun, “Dsic: Deep stereo image compression,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019, pp. 3136–3145

    2019

  6. [13]

    Sasic: Stereo image compression with latent shifts and stereo attention,

    M. W ¨odlinger, J. Kotera, J. Xu, and R. Sablatnig, “Sasic: Stereo image compression with latent shifts and stereo attention,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 661–670

    2022

  7. [14]

    Disparity-based stereo image compression with aligned cross-view priors,

    Y . Zhai, L. Tang, Y . Ma, R. Peng, and R. Wang, “Disparity-based stereo image compression with aligned cross-view priors,” inProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2022, pp. 2351– 2360

    2022

  8. [15]

    Deep homography for efficient stereo image compression,

    X. Deng, W. Yang, R. Yang, M. Xu, E. Liu, Q. Feng, and R. Timofte, “Deep homography for efficient stereo image compression,” inPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 1492–1501

    2021

  9. [16]

    Deep stereo image compression via bi-directional coding,

    J. Lei, X. Liu, B. Peng, D. Jin, W. Li, and J. Gu, “Deep stereo image compression via bi-directional coding,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 19 669–19 678

    2022

  10. [17]

    Ecsic: Epipolar cross attention for stereo image compression,

    M. W ¨odlinger, J. Kotera, M. Keglevic, J. Xu, and R. Sablatnig, “Ecsic: Epipolar cross attention for stereo image compression,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2024, pp. 3436–3445

    2024

  11. [18]

    Ldmic: Learning-based distributed multi-view image coding,

    X. Zhang, J. Shao, and J. Zhang, “Ldmic: Learning-based distributed multi-view image coding,” inInternational Conference on Learning Representations, 2023

    2023

  12. [19]

    Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite,

    A. Geiger, P. Lenz, and R. Urtasun, “Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite,” in2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. IEEE, 2012, pp. 3354–3361

    2012

  13. [20]

    Object scene flow for autonomous vehicles,

    M. Menze and A. Geiger, “Object scene flow for autonomous vehicles,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2015, pp. 3061–3070

    2015

  14. [21]

    Nagoya university sequences,

    “Nagoya university sequences,” https://www.fujii.nuee.nagoya-u.ac.jp/ multiview-data/, accessed: 2025-2-26

    2025

  15. [22]

    Overview of the h. 264/avc video coding standard,

    T. Wiegand, G. J. Sullivan, G. Bjontegaard, and A. Luthra, “Overview of the h. 264/avc video coding standard,”IEEE Transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 560–576, 2003

    2003

  16. [23]

    Overview of the high efficiency video coding (hevc) standard,

    G. J. Sullivan, J.-R. Ohm, W.-J. 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, pp. 1649– 1668, 2012

    2012

  17. [24]

    Overview of the versatile video coding (vvc) standard and its applications,

    B. Bross, Y .-K. Wang, Y . Ye, S. Liu, J. Chen, G. J. Sullivan, and J.- R. Ohm, “Overview of the versatile video coding (vvc) standard and its applications,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 3736–3764, 2021

    2021

  18. [25]

    Neu- ral inter-frame compression for video coding,

    A. Djelouah, J. Campos, S. Schaub-Meyer, and C. Schroers, “Neu- ral inter-frame compression for video coding,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 2019, pp. 6421– 6429

    2019

  19. [26]

    Scale-space flow for end-to-end optimized video compres- sion,

    E. Agustsson, D. Minnen, N. Johnston, J. Balle, S. J. Hwang, and G. Toderici, “Scale-space flow for end-to-end optimized video compres- sion,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 8503–8512

    2020

  20. [27]

    Fvc: A new framework towards deep video compression in feature space,

    Z. Hu, G. Lu, and D. Xu, “Fvc: A new framework towards deep video compression in feature space,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 1502–1511

    2021

  21. [28]

    Coarse-to- fine deep video coding with hyperprior-guided mode prediction,

    Z. Hu, G. Lu, J. Guo, S. Liu, W. Jiang, and D. Xu, “Coarse-to- fine deep video coding with hyperprior-guided mode prediction,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 5921–5930

    2022

  22. [29]

    An efficient adaptive compression method for human perception and machine vision tasks,

    L. Liu, Z. Chen, Z. Hu, and D. Xu, “An efficient adaptive compression method for human perception and machine vision tasks,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.04329, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Improving deep video compression by resolution-adaptive flow coding,

    Z. Hu, Z. Chen, D. Xu, G. Lu, W. Ouyang, and S. Gu, “Improving deep video compression by resolution-adaptive flow coding,” inComputer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 16. Springer, 2020, pp. 193–209

    2020

  24. [31]

    Neural video coding using multiscale motion compensation and spatiotemporal context model,

    H. Liu, M. Lu, Z. Ma, F. Wang, Z. Xie, X. Cao, and Y . Wang, “Neural video coding using multiscale motion compensation and spatiotemporal context model,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 3182–3196, 2020

    2020

  25. [32]

    Elf-vc: Efficient learned flexible-rate video coding,

    O. Rippel, A. G. Anderson, K. Tatwawadi, S. Nair, C. Lytle, and L. Bourdev, “Elf-vc: Efficient learned flexible-rate video coding,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 14 479–14 488

    2021

  26. [33]

    Learning for video compression with recurrent auto-encoder and recurrent probability model,

    R. Yang, F. Mentzer, L. Van Gool, and R. Timofte, “Learning for video compression with recurrent auto-encoder and recurrent probability model,”IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 388–401, 2020

    2020

  27. [34]

    Video compression through image interpolation,

    C.-Y . Wu, N. Singhal, and P. Krahenbuhl, “Video compression through image interpolation,” inProceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2018, pp. 416–431

    2018

  28. [35]

    Dmvc: Decomposed motion modeling for learned video compression,

    K. Lin, C. Jia, X. Zhang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Dmvc: Decomposed motion modeling for learned video compression,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 3502–3515, 2023

    2023

  29. [36]

    Advancing learned video compression with in-loop frame prediction,

    R. Yang, R. Timofte, and L. Van Gool, “Advancing learned video compression with in-loop frame prediction,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 2410– 2423, 2023

    2023

  30. [37]

    Deep contextual video compression,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Deep contextual video compression,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 18 114–18 125, 2021

    2021

  31. [38]

    Canf- vc: Conditional augmented normalizing flows for video compression,

    Y .-H. Ho, C.-P. Chang, P.-Y . Chen, A. Gnutti, and W.-H. Peng, “Canf- vc: Conditional augmented normalizing flows for video compression,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2022, pp. 207– 223

    2022

  32. [39]

    Hybrid spatial-temporal entropy modelling for neural video compression,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Hybrid spatial-temporal entropy modelling for neural video compression,” inProceedings of the 30th ACM Interna- tional Conference on Multimedia, 2022, pp. 1503–1511

    2022

  33. [40]

    Icmh-net: Neural image compres- sion towards both machine vision and human vision,

    L. Liu, Z. Hu, Z. Chen, and D. Xu, “Icmh-net: Neural image compres- sion towards both machine vision and human vision,” inProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2023, pp. 8047–8056

    2023

  34. [41]

    Neural video compression with diverse contexts,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Neural video compression with diverse contexts,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 22 616–22 626

    2023

  35. [42]

    Prediction and reference quality adaptation for learned video compression,

    X. Sheng, L. Li, D. Liu, and H. Li, “Prediction and reference quality adaptation for learned video compression,”IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2025

    2025

  36. [43]

    Neural video compression with feature modulation,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Neural video compression with feature modulation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 26 099–26 108

    2024

  37. [44]

    Cra5: Extreme com- pression of era5 for portable global climate and weather research via an efficient variational transformer,

    T. Han, Z. Chen, S. Guo, W. Xu, and L. Bai, “Cra5: Extreme com- pression of era5 for portable global climate and weather research via an efficient variational transformer,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03376, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Towards practical real-time neural video compression,

    Z. Jia, B. Li, J. Li, W. Xie, L. Qi, H. Li, and Y . Lu, “Towards practical real-time neural video compression,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.20762, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Exploiting intra-slice and inter-slice redundancy for learning-based lossless volumetric image compression,

    Z. Chen, S. Gu, G. Lu, and D. Xu, “Exploiting intra-slice and inter-slice redundancy for learning-based lossless volumetric image compression,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 31, pp. 1697–1707, 2022

    2022

  40. [47]

    Group-aware parameter-efficient updating for content-adaptive neural video compression,

    Z. Chen, L. Zhou, Z. Hu, and D. Xu, “Group-aware parameter-efficient updating for content-adaptive neural video compression,” inProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2024, pp. 11 022–11 031

    2024

  41. [48]

    Neural video compression with spatio-temporal cross- covariance transformers,

    Z. Chen, L. Relic, R. Azevedo, Y . Zhang, M. Gross, D. Xu, L. Zhou, and C. Schroers, “Neural video compression with spatio-temporal cross- covariance transformers,” inProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2023, pp. 8543–8551. SUBMITTED TO IEEE TRA...

    2023

  42. [49]

    Spatial decomposition and temporal fusion based inter prediction for learned video compression,

    X. Sheng, L. Li, D. Liu, and H. Li, “Spatial decomposition and temporal fusion based inter prediction for learned video compression,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 6460–6473, 2024

    2024

  43. [50]

    Temporal context min- ing for learned video compression,

    X. Sheng, J. Li, B. Li, L. Li, D. Liu, and Y . Lu, “Temporal context min- ing for learned video compression,”IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 25, pp. 7311–7322, 2022

    2022

  44. [51]

    Dvc: An end-to-end deep video compression framework,

    G. Lu, W. Ouyang, D. Xu, X. Zhang, C. Cai, and Z. Gao, “Dvc: An end-to-end deep video compression framework,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 11 006–11 015

    2019

  45. [52]

    Sparse optimiza- tion of non separable vector lifting scheme for stereo image coding,

    I. Bezzine, M. Kaaniche, S. Boudjit, and A. Beghdadi, “Sparse optimiza- tion of non separable vector lifting scheme for stereo image coding,” Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, vol. 57, pp. 283–293, 2018

    2018

  46. [53]

    Stereo image compression using wavelet coefficients morphology,

    J. Ellinas and M. S. Sangriotis, “Stereo image compression using wavelet coefficients morphology,”Image and Vision Computing, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 281–290, 2004

    2004

  47. [54]

    Joint disparity and variable size-block optimization algorithm for stereoscopic image compression,

    A. Kadaikar, G. Dauphin, and A. Mokraoui, “Joint disparity and variable size-block optimization algorithm for stereoscopic image compression,” Signal Processing: Image Communication, vol. 61, pp. 1–8, 2018

    2018

  48. [55]

    Masic: Deep mask stereo image compression,

    X. Deng, Y . Deng, R. Yang, W. Yang, R. Timofte, and M. Xu, “Masic: Deep mask stereo image compression,”IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 6026–6040, 2023

    2023

  49. [56]

    Mish: A self regularized non-monotonic activation function,

    D. Misra, “Mish: A self regularized non-monotonic activation function,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.08681, 2019

    1908 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Learned image com- pression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules,

    Z. Cheng, H. Sun, M. Takeuchi, and J. Katto, “Learned image com- pression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2020, pp. 7939–7948

    2020

  51. [59]

    Learned image compression with mixed transformer-cnn architectures,

    J. Liu, H. Sun, and J. Katto, “Learned image compression with mixed transformer-cnn architectures,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2023, pp. 14 388– 14 397

    2023

  52. [60]

    The cityscapes dataset for semantic urban scene understanding,

    M. Cordts, M. Omran, S. Ramos, T. Rehfeld, M. Enzweiler, R. Be- nenson, U. Franke, S. Roth, and B. Schiele, “The cityscapes dataset for semantic urban scene understanding,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 3213– 3223

    2016

  53. [61]

    Calculation of average psnr differences between rd- curves,

    G. Bjontegaard, “Calculation of average psnr differences between rd- curves,”ITU-T SG16 Q, vol. 6, 2001

    2001

  54. [62]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,

    D. P. Kingma, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Video enhance- ment with task-oriented flow,

    T. Xue, B. Chen, J. Wu, D. Wei, and W. T. Freeman, “Video enhance- ment with task-oriented flow,”International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 127, pp. 1106–1125, 2019

    2019

  56. [64]

    HEVC test model (hm),

    “HEVC test model (hm),” https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/, accessed: 2024-10-26

    2024

  57. [65]

    MV-HEVC test model (htm),

    “MV-HEVC test model (htm),” https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/, accessed: 2024-10-26

    2024

  58. [66]

    Raft: Recurrent all-pairs field transforms for op- tical flow,

    Z. Teed and J. Deng, “Raft: Recurrent all-pairs field transforms for op- tical flow,” inComputer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 16. Springer, 2020, pp. 402–419

    2020

  59. [67]

    Bidirectional stereo image compression with cross-dimensional entropy model,

    Z. Liu, X. Zhang, J. Shao, Z. Lin, and J. Zhang, “Bidirectional stereo image compression with cross-dimensional entropy model,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2025, pp. 480–496. Shiyin JiangHe received the B.E. degree in Com- munication Engineering from th...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.