Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 97 references

CANeRV: Content Adaptive Neural Representation for Video Compression

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read CANeRV makes neural video representation adapt to content, and for the first time an INR codec reports beating H.266/VVC on standard test sets.

desk verdict A real advance in INR video compression, but the headline claim of beating H.266/VVC is only as solid as the x266 anchor it was measured against. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06181 v2 pith:XVIU5QZX submitted 2025-02-10 cs.CV

Lv Tang , Jun Zhu , Xinfeng Zhang , Li Zhang , Siwei Ma , Qingming Huang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords videocompressionimplicitneuralrepresentationcontentadaptivenetworkrate-distortionoptimizationH.266/VVClow-rankadaptationstructuresupervisionscreencoding
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

CANeRV is an implicit neural representation (INR) video compressor that changes its own network architecture to fit the content it is compressing. The paper argues that fixed, one-size-fits-all INR networks waste capacity on easy sequences and under-represent hard frames, and that adapting the network at the sequence, frame, and spatial-structure levels fixes both problems. With three mechanisms, dynamic sequence-level adjustment, dynamic frame-level adjustment, and hierarchical structural adaptation, CANeRV reports bit-rate savings over H.266/VVC (x266) of 9.82% on HEVC ClassB and 28.65% on UVG in PSNR, and says this is the first time an INR-based method has beaten VVC on those sets. The paper also reports larger gains on surveillance, conference, and screen-content video, where the content is more static and structured.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the network architecture itself, treated as a searchable and frame-adaptive parameter set. DSA (dynamic sequence-level adjustment) defines a small search space over network depth, evaluates candidate depths by their rate-distortion cost via Eqn. 5, and picks the best with a binary search (Algorithm 1). DFA (dynamic frame-level adjustment) adds a layer-specific low-rank correction $\Delta W^t_l = \sum_{r=1}^R \alpha^t_r \Phi_r$ per frame, so temporal variation is captured by a few scalar coefficients on shared basis matrices rather than by full per-frame weight copies. HSA (hierarchical structural adaptation) appends a small branch that predicts Canny first-order and Laplacian second-order edge maps from the final feature map and adds the refined feature back, forcing the network to keep edge structure. These three mechanisms are what carry the reported rate-distortion gains over fixed INR architectures and over VVC.

What would settle it

Encode the same HEVC ClassB and UVG sequences with the official H.266/VVC reference encoder using a much longer intra period (for example, only one intra frame) and measure BDBR against CANeRV; if the BDBR becomes positive or close to zero, the central claim that an INR method outperforms VVC is not supported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that making the INR network content-adaptive, rather than only more expressive, is what lets a sequence-level neural representation outperform a modern hybrid codec. DSA searches over five possible depths for the whole network and selects the one with the best rate-distortion cost using a binary search; DFA adds per-frame low-rank weight updates, written as a sum of shared basis matrices weighted by frame-specific coefficients, so that each frame gets its own adaptation at negligible parameter cost; and HSA supervises the decoder's last feature map with Canny and Laplacian edge maps, forcing the network to preserve first- and second-order structure. On HEVC ClassB and UVG the method reports BDBR gains of -9.82% and -28.65% against x266, and on surveillance, conference and SCC sets it reports -55.44%, -45.27% and -77.20%, with still larger MS-SSIM gains. The authors take this as evidence that INR methods can be competitive with, and in some regimes beat, the latest video coding standard.

Load-bearing premise

The reported win over VVC rests on x266 with IntraPeriod=10, medium preset, and Passes=1 being a fair representative of H.266/VVC performance; with a stronger VVC configuration, such as the reference encoder or a much longer intra period, the margin could narrow or reverse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An INR-based codec can now be the rate-distortion winner over a modern hybrid standard on standard test sets, not just on niche content.
  • The same network can decode any single frame independently, giving true random access without waiting for an I-frame.
  • Content-adaptivity at sequence level means the same codec can shift its structure between simple and complex videos, so a single framework can serve diverse content types.
  • For static-background and screen-content video, the INR approach is reported to beat both the VVC anchor and large-scale-learned deep codecs, suggesting these content types are a natural deployment niche.
  • The transfer ablations on HNeRV and Boosting-NeRV imply the three modules are portable add-ons to other INR video codecs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported margin is measured against x266 with IntraPeriod=10, medium preset, and Passes=1; a stronger H.266/VVC configuration, such as the reference encoder or a much longer intra period, would provide a different anchor and is not tested in the paper.
  • DSA only varies layer depth, not width or kernel choices, so the content-adaptivity claim concerns depth allocation; richer search spaces might yield further gains but also higher encoding cost.
  • The per-frame low-rank DFA updates suggest a natural extension to adaptive rank selection per frame or per shot, where still frames use R=0 and high-motion frames use larger R.
  • The strong screen-content results hint that INR compressors could be tuned for text and graphics by emphasizing the HSA structural losses, a direction the paper does not explore.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes CANeRV, an INR-based video compression method that adapts the network structure at three levels: DSA selects the network depth per video sequence, DFA adds low-rank frame-specific weight updates, and HSA supervises reconstruction with first- and second-order structural maps. The authors report BDBR gains over an H.266/VVC (x266) anchor and over INR baselines on HEVC ClassB, UVG, surveillance, conference, and SCC datasets, and they claim that CANeRV is the first INR-based method to outperform H.266/VVC (x266).

Significance. The idea of adapting INR capacity and structure to video content is interesting and the paper provides a modular ablation on a diverse set of video types. The three mechanisms are clearly described, and the results show consistent improvement over the two recent INR baselines (HiNeRV and Boosting-NeRV). However, the headline claim of surpassing H.266/VVC is not established because the anchor is configured with a weak, non-standard setting and because the paper's own Table 1 contradicts the 'first time' statement: HiNeRV already reports -22.01% BDBR on UVG. The contribution is potentially useful, but the experimental support for the central claim needs substantial strengthening.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5.3, Table 1] The claim that CANeRV marks 'the first time an INR-based approach has outperformed H.266/VVC (x266)' is contradicted by the reported numbers: HiNeRV achieves -22.01% BDBR on UVG, which is a bitrate saving relative to the same x266 anchor. The novelty claim should be revised to a more defensible statement, such as being the first INR method to show consistent gains across all evaluated datasets, or should be verified against a stronger baseline.
  2. [Sec. 5.2] The VVC anchor is configured with IntraPeriod=10, preset medium, and Passes=1, which is not a representative random-access configuration; standard VVC evaluations use IntraPeriod of 32 or 64 and typically the VTM reference software. The reported BDBR savings (e.g., -9.82% on ClassB, -28.65% on UVG, -77.20% on SCC) are therefore relative to a weak anchor. Please include a VTM comparison or a sensitivity analysis with longer GOP sizes to support the claim of outperforming H.266/VVC.
  3. [Sec. 4.2, Algorithm 1] DSA selects the per-sequence network depth by directly minimizing the RD cost on the test sequence itself (Eq. 6). While this is a legitimate encoder-side optimization, the comparison with fixed-architecture baselines is not apple-to-apple unless the computational overhead and the bits needed to signal the selected depth are fully accounted for. The paper should report the per-sequence chosen depths, the additional compute required, and an ablation with a fixed depth to isolate the benefit of the adaptation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 5.2] The x266 command line contains a typo: 'DecodeingRefreshType' should be 'DecodingRefreshType'.
  2. [Sec. 4.4] The statement that the 1x1 convolution parameters 'do not need to be compressed' is confusing; clarify whether these branches are used only for auxiliary supervision during training and are discarded at inference, or explain how they are reconstructed at decode time.
  3. [Tables 1 and 2] Only dataset-averaged BDBR values are reported; providing per-sequence results or standard deviations would help assess the consistency of the gains and the influence of outlier sequences.
  4. [Sec. 7] The statement 'there is no generalization problem for INR based video compression' is trivially true because the method trains a separate network per sequence; rephrase to avoid overclaiming and compare with methods that use a shared pretrained model.
  5. [Algorithm 1] The binary search assumes the RD cost as a function of depth is unimodal; if it is not, the search may return a suboptimal depth. State this assumption explicitly or add a note on robustness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: DSA's per-sequence network-depth search minimizes the same rate-distortion objective that any encoder must optimize, and the reported BDBR is an empirical outcome rather than an identity; the weak x266 anchor is a benchmark-fairness issue, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

CANeRV's DSA (Sec. 4.2, Eq. 5-6, Algo. 1) selects a network depth from {0,...,4} for each test sequence by evaluating the RD cost lambda*D + R on that sequence. This is not circular: the test video is the encoder's input, and choosing encoding parameters (including architecture depth) by minimizing rate-distortion on the source is the normal operation of a lossy codec; the selected depth still changes the bitrate-distortion tradeoff in a nontrivial way, and the BDBR is measured after compression with that selected architecture. Similarly, DFA (Eq. 8-9) and HSA (Sec. 4.4) are trainable modules optimized on the target sequence; training an INR on the content being encoded is the method's premise, not a backdoor. The only self-citations (e.g., [19], [55], [94]) are related-work and dataset references and carry no load-bearing mathematical premise. The ablation-based choices of HSA layer placement and DFA rank R are made on HEVC ClassB and then reported on HEVC ClassB, which is a test-set-model-selection concern for external validity, but it is not a derivation that reduces one equation to another by construction; it does not make the reported numbers true by definition. Concerns about the x266 anchor (Sec. 5.2, IntraPeriod=10, Passes=1, no VTM comparison) concern whether the baseline represents standard H.266/VVC, i.e., a correctness-risk issue, not circularity. Accordingly, no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on several hyperparameters (depth, rank, layers) that are selected on the evaluation data itself, plus a specific VVC anchor configuration. No new physical or mathematical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • DSA depth per sequence = Not reported per sequence; chosen from {0,1,2,3,4}
    The optimal depth is selected by binary search using the RD cost on the same sequence that is then reported in the results (Sec 4.2, Algo 1), making the evaluation in-sample.
  • DFA rank R = 3
    Ablation on HEVC ClassB (Table 6) selected R=3; this value is used for all experiments.
  • DFA insertion layer = Layer4
    Ablation on HEVC ClassB (Table 5) selected the last layer for DFA.
  • HSA insertion layers = Layer3-4
    Ablation on HEVC ClassB (Table 4) showed similar performance for Layer4 and Layer3-4; the paper's implementation appears to use Layer3-4 (stated as optimal near the output).
  • HSA supervision maps = Canny and Laplacian
    First and second order structural ground truths are computed with Canny and Laplacian operators (Sec 4.4); this choice is a design decision not derived from theory.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption x266 with the specified settings is a valid stand-in for H.266/VVC
    The central claim of outperforming H.266/VVC is measured against a single x266 configuration (IntraPeriod=10, preset medium), as described in Sec 5.2. No comparison with VTM reference software is provided.
  • domain assumption Canny and Laplacian operators capture structural information relevant to perceptual quality
    HSA uses these operators to generate ground truth structural maps (Sec 4.4); the choice is not validated against other structural loss functions.
  • standard math Arithmetic coding achieves near-entropy bitrates for quantized network parameters
    The encoding stage relies on arithmetic coding of quantized parameters to form the final bitstream (Sec 4.5). This is standard and not called into question.
  • domain assumption The baseline INR block design is identical to HiNeRV
    Sec 5.5 states the INR block is the same as HiNeRV, ensuring fair comparison, but this is not verifiable without code.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CANeRV: Content Adaptive Neural Representation for Video Compression." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XVIU5QZX

@misc{pith2026250206181,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CANeRV: Content Adaptive Neural Representation for Video Compression},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XVIU5QZX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06181}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advances in video compression introduce implicit neural representation (INR) based methods, which effectively capture global dependencies and characteristics of entire video sequences. Unlike traditional and deep learning based approaches, INR-based methods optimize network parameters from a global perspective, resulting in superior compression potential. However, most current INR methods utilize a fixed and uniform network architecture across all frames, limiting their adaptability to dynamic variations within and between video sequences. This often leads to suboptimal compression outcomes as these methods struggle to capture the distinct nuances and transitions in video content. To overcome these challenges, we propose Content Adaptive Neural Representation for Video Compression (CANeRV), an innovative INR-based video compression network that adaptively conducts structure optimisation based on the specific content of each video sequence. To better capture dynamic information across video sequences, we propose a dynamic sequence-level adjustment (DSA). Furthermore, to enhance the capture of dynamics between frames within a sequence, we implement a dynamic frame-level adjustment (DFA). {Finally, to effectively capture spatial structural information within video frames, thereby enhancing the detail restoration capabilities of CANeRV, we devise a structure level hierarchical structural adaptation (HSA).} Experimental results demonstrate that CANeRV can outperform both H.266/VVC and state-of-the-art INR-based video compression techniques across diverse video datasets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06181 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The architecture of existing frame-by-frame style and INR-Based [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) shows that existing INR-based video compression methods use a uniform and fixed architecture configuration to process different videos. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) shows the typical architecture of existing video INR network. (b) is the architecture of our proposed novel CANeRV. For DSA, we briefly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visual comparison between CANeRV using DFA and not using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visual comparison between CANeRV using HSA and not using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The encoding stage and the decoding stage of our proposed CANeRV. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: RD curves of our proposed method and other methods on HEVC ClassB and UVG datasets in terms of PSNR and MS-SSIM. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: RD curves of our proposed method and other methods on surveillance, conference and SCC videos in terms of PSNR and MS-SSIM. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The visual comparison results of our proposed CANeRV with other methods. Across various sequences, our proposed CANeRV consistently [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Ablation studies on the full architecture demonstrate improved [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Overview of the H.264/A VC video coding standard,

    T. Wiegand, G. J. Sullivan, G. Bjøntegaard, and A. Luthra, “Overview of the H.264/A VC video coding standard,”IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 560–576, 2003

    2003

  2. [2]

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

    G. J. Sullivan, J. Ohm, W. Han, and T. Wiegand, “Overview of the high efficiency video coding (HEVC) standard,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1649–1668, 2012

    2012

  3. [3]

    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 Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. , vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 3736–3764, 2021

    2021

  4. [4]

    Convolutional neural networks based intra prediction for HEVC,

    W. Cui, T. Zhang, S. Zhang, F. Jiang, W. Zuo, Z. Wan, and D. Zhao, “Convolutional neural networks based intra prediction for HEVC,” in Data Compression Conference, 2017, p. 436

    2017

  5. [5]

    An end- to-end learning framework for video compression,

    G. Lu, X. Zhang, W. Ouyang, L. Chen, Z. Gao, and D. Xu, “An end- to-end learning framework for video compression,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 3292–3308, 2021

    2021

  6. [6]

    Convolutional neu- ral network-based fractional-pixel motion compensation,

    N. Yan, D. Liu, H. Li, B. Li, L. Li, and F. Wu, “Convolutional neu- ral network-based fractional-pixel motion compensation,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 840–853, 2019

    2019

  7. [7]

    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,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2019, pp. 11 006–11 015

    2019

  8. [8]

    M-LVC: multiple frames prediction for learned video compression,

    J. Lin, D. Liu, H. Li, and F. Wu, “M-LVC: multiple frames prediction for learned video compression,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. , 2020, pp. 3543–3551

    2020

Show all 97 references
  1. [9]

    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,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2021, pp. 1502–1511

    2021

  2. [10]

    Deep contextual video compression,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Deep contextual video compression,” in Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Syst. , 2021, pp. 18 114–18 125

    2021

  3. [11]

    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,” in Eur . Conf. Comput. Vis. Springer, 2022, pp. 207–223

    2022

  4. [12]

    Neural video compression with feature modula- tion,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Neural video compression with feature modula- tion,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , June 2024, pp. 26 099–26 108

    2024

  5. [13]

    Temporal context mining for learned video compression,

    X. Sheng, J. Li, B. Li, L. Li, D. Liu, and Y . Lu, “Temporal context mining for learned video compression,” IEEE Trans. Multim. , vol. 25, pp. 7311–7322, 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    Neural video compression with diverse contexts,

    J. Li, B. Li, and Y . Lu, “Neural video compression with diverse contexts,” in CVPR. IEEE, 2023, pp. 22 616–22 626

    2023

  7. [15]

    FVC: an end-to- end framework towards deep video compression in feature space,

    Z. Hu, D. Xu, G. Lu, W. Jiang, W. Wang, and S. Liu, “FVC: an end-to- end framework towards deep video compression in feature space,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 4569–4585, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    An improved framework of affine motion compensation in video coding,

    K. Zhang, Y .-W. Chen, L. Zhang, W.-J. Chien, and M. Karczewicz, “An improved framework of affine motion compensation in video coding,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 1456–1469, 2018

    2018

  9. [17]

    Three-zone segmentation-based motion compensation for video compression,

    Z. Wang, S. Wang, X. Zhang, S. Wang, and S. Ma, “Three-zone segmentation-based motion compensation for video compression,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 5091–5104, 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    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,” in ACM Multimedia. ACM, 2022, pp. 1503– 1511

    2022

  11. [19]

    Scene matters: Model-based deep video compression,

    L. Tang, X. Zhang, G. Zhang, and X. Ma, “Scene matters: Model-based deep video compression,” in ICCV. IEEE, 2023, pp. 12 447–12 457

    2023

  12. [20]

    Hinerv: Video compression with hierarchical encoding-based neural representation,

    H. M. Kwan, G. Gao, F. Zhang, A. Gower, and D. Bull, “Hinerv: Video compression with hierarchical encoding-based neural representation,” in NeurIPS, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    Hnerv: A hybrid neural representation for videos,

    H. Chen, M. Gwilliam, S. Lim, and A. Shrivastava, “Hnerv: A hybrid neural representation for videos,” in CVPR. IEEE, 2023, pp. 10 270– 10 279

    2023

  14. [22]

    Towards scalable neural representation for diverse videos,

    B. He, X. Yang, H. Wang, Z. Wu, H. Chen, S. Huang, Y . Ren, S. Lim, and A. Shrivastava, “Towards scalable neural representation for diverse videos,” in CVPR. IEEE, 2023, pp. 6132–6142

    2023

  15. [23]

    Nerv: Neural representations for videos,

    H. Chen, B. He, H. Wang, Y . Ren, S. Lim, and A. Shrivastava, “Nerv: Neural representations for videos,” in NeurIPS, 2021, pp. 21 557–21 568

    2021

  16. [24]

    E-nerv: Expedite neural video representation with disentangled spatial-temporal context,

    Z. Li, M. Wang, H. Pi, K. Xu, J. Mei, and Y . Liu, “E-nerv: Expedite neural video representation with disentangled spatial-temporal context,” in ECCV, vol. 13695. Springer, 2022, pp. 267–284

    2022

  17. [25]

    Boosting neural representations for videos with a conditional decoder,

    X. Zhang, R. Yang, D. He, X. Ge, T. Xu, Y . Wang, H. Qin, and J. Zhang, “Boosting neural representations for videos with a conditional decoder,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 2556–2566

    2024

  18. [26]

    Short distance intra coding scheme for high efficiency video coding,

    X. Cao, C. Lai, Y . Wang, L. Liu, J. Zheng, and Y . He, “Short distance intra coding scheme for high efficiency video coding,”IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 790–801, 2012

    2012

  19. [27]

    An intra subpartition coding mode for VVC,

    S. De-Lux ´an-Hern´andez, V . George, J. Ma, T. Nguyen, H. Schwarz, D. Marpe, and T. Wiegand, “An intra subpartition coding mode for VVC,” in ICIP. IEEE, 2019, pp. 1203–1207

    2019

  20. [28]

    Decoder-side motion vector refinement in VVC: algorithm and hardware implementa- tion considerations,

    H. Gao, X. Chen, S. Esenlik, J. Chen, and E. G. Steinbach, “Decoder-side motion vector refinement in VVC: algorithm and hardware implementa- tion considerations,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. , vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 3197–3211, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Affine direct/skip mode with motion vector differences in video coding,

    T. Fu, K. Zhang, H. Liu, L. Zhang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Affine direct/skip mode with motion vector differences in video coding,” in ICME Workshops. IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  22. [30]

    An improved framework of affine motion compensation in video coding,

    K. Zhang, Y . Chen, L. Zhang, W. Chien, and M. Karczewicz, “An improved framework of affine motion compensation in video coding,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 1456–1469, 2019

    2019

  23. [31]

    Joint sep- arable and non-separable transforms for next-generation video coding,

    X. Zhao, J. Chen, M. Karczewicz, A. Said, and V . Seregin, “Joint sep- arable and non-separable transforms for next-generation video coding,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 2514–2525, 2018

    2018

  24. [32]

    Implicit-selected transform in video coding,

    Y . Zhang, K. Zhang, L. Zhang, H. Liu, Y . Wang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Implicit-selected transform in video coding,” in ICME Workshops. IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  25. [33]

    Hybrid video coding with trellis-coded quantization,

    H. Schwarz, T. Nguyen, D. Marpe, and T. Wiegand, “Hybrid video coding with trellis-coded quantization,” in DCC. IEEE, 2019, pp. 182– 191

    2019

  26. [34]

    Adaptive loop filtering for video coding,

    C. Tsai, C. Chen, T. Yamakage, I. S. Chong, Y . Huang, C. Fu, T. Itoh, T. Watanabe, T. Chujoh, M. Karczewicz, and S. Lei, “Adaptive loop filtering for video coding,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. , vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 934–945, 2013

    2013

  27. [35]

    Low-rank-based nonlocal adaptive loop filter for high-efficiency video compression,

    X. Zhang, R. Xiong, W. Lin, J. Zhang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Low-rank-based nonlocal adaptive loop filter for high-efficiency video compression,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 2177–2188, 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    Adaptive motion vector resolution for affine-inter mode coding,

    H. Liu, L. Zhang, K. Zhang, J. Xu, Y . Wang, J. Luo, and Y . He, “Adaptive motion vector resolution for affine-inter mode coding,” in PCS. IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–4

    2019

  29. [37]

    History based block vector predictor for intra block copy,

    W. Yin, J. Xu, L. Zhang, K. Zhang, H. Liu, and X. Fan, “History based block vector predictor for intra block copy,” inICME Workshops. IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  30. [38]

    Recent advances on HEVC inter-frame coding: From optimization to implemen- 14 tation and beyond,

    Y . Zhang, C. Zhang, R. Fan, S. Ma, Z. Chen, and C. J. Kuo, “Recent advances on HEVC inter-frame coding: From optimization to implemen- 14 tation and beyond,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. , vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 4321–4339, 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Deep learning-based video coding: A review and a case study,

    D. Liu, Y . Li, J. Lin, H. Li, and F. Wu, “Deep learning-based video coding: A review and a case study,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 11:1–11:35, 2020

    2020

  32. [40]

    Image and video compression with neural networks: A review,

    S. Ma, X. Zhang, C. Jia, Z. Zhao, S. Wang, and S. Wang, “Image and video compression with neural networks: A review,”IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1683–1698, 2020

    2020

  33. [41]

    Deepcoder: A deep neural network based video compression,

    T. Chen, H. Liu, Q. Shen, T. Yue, X. Cao, and Z. Ma, “Deepcoder: A deep neural network based video compression,” inVisual Communications and Image Processing, 2017, pp. 1–4

    2017

  34. [42]

    CU partition mode decision for HEVC hardwired intra encoder using convolution neural network,

    Z. Liu, X. Yu, Y . Gao, S. Chen, X. Ji, and D. Wang, “CU partition mode decision for HEVC hardwired intra encoder using convolution neural network,” IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 5088–5103, 2016

    2016

  35. [43]

    Neural network-based arithmetic coding of intra prediction modes in HEVC,

    R. Song, D. Liu, H. Li, and F. Wu, “Neural network-based arithmetic coding of intra prediction modes in HEVC,” in Visual Communications and Image Processing, 2017, pp. 1–4

    2017

  36. [44]

    Deep kalman filtering network for video compression artifact reduction,

    G. Lu, W. Ouyang, D. Xu, X. Zhang, Z. Gao, and M. Sun, “Deep kalman filtering network for video compression artifact reduction,” in Eur . Conf. Comput. Vis., 2018, pp. 591–608

    2018

  37. [45]

    Multi-frame quality enhancement for compressed video,

    R. Yang, M. Xu, Z. Wang, and T. Li, “Multi-frame quality enhancement for compressed video,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2018, pp. 6664–6673

    2018

  38. [46]

    Enhanced motion-compensated video coding with deep virtual reference frame generation,

    L. Zhao, S. Wang, X. Zhang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Enhanced motion-compensated video coding with deep virtual reference frame generation,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 4832–4844, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Video compression through image interpolation,

    C. Wu, N. Singhal, and P. Kr ¨ahenb¨uhl, “Video compression through image interpolation,” in Eur . Conf. Comput. Vis., 2018, pp. 425–440

    2018

  40. [48]

    Neural inter-frame compression for video coding,

    A. Djelouah, J. Campos, S. Schaub-Meyer, and C. Schroers, “Neural inter-frame compression for video coding,” in Int. Conf. Comput. Vis. , 2019, pp. 6420–6428

    2019

  41. [49]

    End-to-end learning of video compression using spatio-temporal autoencoders,

    J. Pessoa, H. Aidos, P. Tom ´as, and M. A. T. Figueiredo, “End-to-end learning of video compression using spatio-temporal autoencoders,” in SiPS, 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  42. [50]

    Deepsdf: Learning continuous signed distance functions for shape representation,

    J. J. Park, P. Florence, J. Straub, R. A. Newcombe, and S. Lovegrove, “Deepsdf: Learning continuous signed distance functions for shape representation,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. , 2019, pp. 165–174

    2019

  43. [51]

    Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space,

    L. M. Mescheder, M. Oechsle, M. Niemeyer, S. Nowozin, and A. Geiger, “Occupancy networks: Learning 3d reconstruction in function space,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. Computer Vision Foundation / IEEE, 2019, pp. 4460–4470

    2019

  44. [52]

    Implicit neural representations for image compression,

    Y . Str¨umpler, J. Postels, R. Yang, L. V . Gool, and F. Tombari, “Implicit neural representations for image compression,” in Eur . Conf. Comput. Vis., 2022

    2022

  45. [53]

    COIN: COmpression with implicit neural representations,

    E. Dupont, A. Golinski, M. Alizadeh, Y . W. Teh, and A. Doucet, “COIN: COmpression with implicit neural representations,” in Neural Compression: From Information Theory to Applications – Workshop @ Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. , 2021

    2021

  46. [54]

    COIN++: data agnostic neural compression,

    E. Dupont, H. Loya, M. Alizadeh, A. Golinski, Y . W. Teh, and A. Doucet, “COIN++: data agnostic neural compression,” CoRR, vol. abs/2201.12904, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Enhanced quantified local implicit neural representation for image compression,

    G. Zhang, X. Zhang, and L. Tang, “Enhanced quantified local implicit neural representation for image compression,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 30, pp. 1742–1746, 2023

    2023

  48. [56]

    COOL-CHIC: coordinate-based low complexity hierarchical image codec,

    T. Ladune, P. Philippe, F. Henry, G. Clare, and T. Leguay, “COOL-CHIC: coordinate-based low complexity hierarchical image codec,” in ICCV. IEEE, 2023, pp. 13 469–13 476

    2023

  49. [57]

    The JPEG still picture compression standard,

    G. K. Wallace, “The JPEG still picture compression standard,” Commun. ACM, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 30–44, 1991

    1991

  50. [58]

    Variable rate image com- pression with recurrent neural networks,

    G. Toderici, S. M. O’Malley, S. J. Hwang, D. Vincent, D. Minnen, S. Baluja, M. Covell, and R. Sukthankar, “Variable rate image com- pression with recurrent neural networks,” in Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2016

    2016

  51. [59]

    End-to-end optimized image compression,

    J. Ball ´e, V . Laparra, and E. P. Simoncelli, “End-to-end optimized image compression,” in Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. , 2017

    2017

  52. [60]

    Soft-to-hard vector quantization for end- to-end learning compressible representations,

    E. Agustsson, F. Mentzer, M. Tschannen, L. Cavigelli, R. Timofte, L. Benini, and L. V . Gool, “Soft-to-hard vector quantization for end- to-end learning compressible representations,” in Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Syst., 2017, pp. 1141–1151

    2017

  53. [61]

    Varia- tional image compression with a scale hyperprior,

    J. Ball ´e, D. Minnen, S. Singh, S. J. Hwang, and N. Johnston, “Varia- tional image compression with a scale hyperprior,” in Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2018

    2018

  54. [62]

    Lossy image com- pression with compressive autoencoders,

    L. Theis, W. Shi, A. Cunningham, and F. Husz ´ar, “Lossy image com- pression with compressive autoencoders,” inInt. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2017

    2017

  55. [63]

    Real-time adaptive image compression,

    O. Rippel and L. D. Bourdev, “Real-time adaptive image compression,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Machin. Learn. , vol. 70, 2017, pp. 2922–2930

    2017

  56. [64]

    Generative adversarial networks for extreme learned image compres- sion,

    E. Agustsson, M. Tschannen, F. Mentzer, R. Timofte, and L. V . Gool, “Generative adversarial networks for extreme learned image compres- sion,” in Int. Conf. Comput. Vis. , 2019, pp. 221–231

    2019

  57. [65]

    Conditional probability models for deep image compression,

    F. Mentzer, E. Agustsson, M. Tschannen, R. Timofte, and L. V . Gool, “Conditional probability models for deep image compression,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. , 2018, pp. 4394–4402

    2018

  58. [66]

    Joint autoregressive and hierar- chical priors for learned image compression,

    D. Minnen, J. Ball ´e, and G. Toderici, “Joint autoregressive and hierar- chical priors for learned image compression,” in Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Syst., 2018, pp. 10 794–10 803

    2018

  59. [67]

    Context-adaptive entropy model for end- to-end optimized image compression,

    J. Lee, S. Cho, and S. Beack, “Context-adaptive entropy model for end- to-end optimized image compression,” in Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. , 2019

    2019

  60. [68]

    Rethinking lossy compression: The rate- distortion-perception tradeoff,

    Y . Blau and T. Michaeli, “Rethinking lossy compression: The rate- distortion-perception tradeoff,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Machin. Learn. , 2019, pp. 675–685

    2019

  61. [69]

    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,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. , 2020, pp. 7936– 7945

    2020

  62. [70]

    Perceptual image compression using relativistic average least squares gans,

    Z. Cheng, T. Fu, J. Hu, L. Guo, S. Wang, X. Zhao, D. Zhou, and Y . Song, “Perceptual image compression using relativistic average least squares gans,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog. , 2021, pp. 1895–1900

    2021

  63. [71]

    End-to- end learnt image compression via non-local attention optimization and improved context modeling,

    T. Chen, H. Liu, Z. Ma, Q. Shen, X. Cao, and Y . Wang, “End-to- end learnt image compression via non-local attention optimization and improved context modeling,” IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 30, pp. 3179–3191, 2021

    2021

  64. [72]

    Semantic perceptual image compression with a laplacian pyramid of convolutional networks,

    J. Wang, Y . Duan, X. Tao, M. Xu, and J. Lu, “Semantic perceptual image compression with a laplacian pyramid of convolutional networks,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 30, pp. 4225–4237, 2021

    2021

  65. [73]

    End-to-end optimized versatile image compression with wavelet-like transform,

    H. Ma, D. Liu, N. Yan, H. Li, and F. Wu, “End-to-end optimized versatile image compression with wavelet-like transform,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 1247–1263, 2022

    2022

  66. [74]

    Checkerboard context model for efficient learned image compression,

    D. He, Y . Zheng, B. Sun, Y . Wang, and H. Qin, “Checkerboard context model for efficient learned image compression,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2021, pp. 14 771–14 780

    2021

  67. [75]

    Enhanced invertible encoding for learned image compression,

    Y . Xie, K. L. Cheng, and Q. Chen, “Enhanced invertible encoding for learned image compression,” in ACM Multimedia . ACM, 2021, pp. 162–170

    2021

  68. [76]

    Generative latent coding for ultra-low bitrate image compression,

    Z. Jia, J. Li, B. Li, H. Li, and Y . Lu, “Generative latent coding for ultra-low bitrate image compression,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , June 2024, pp. 26 088–26 098

    2024

  69. [77]

    Learned lossless image compression based on bit plane slicing,

    Z. Zhang, H. Wang, Z. Chen, and S. Liu, “Learned lossless image compression based on bit plane slicing,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , June 2024, pp. 27 579–27 588

    2024

  70. [78]

    Computationally-efficient neural image compres- sion with shallow decoders,

    Y . Yang and S. Mandt, “Computationally-efficient neural image compres- sion with shallow decoders,” in ICCV. IEEE, 2023, pp. 530–540

    2023

  71. [79]

    COMPASS: high-efficiency deep image compression with arbitrary-scale spatial scalability,

    J. Park, J. Lee, and M. Kim, “COMPASS: high-efficiency deep image compression with arbitrary-scale spatial scalability,” in ICCV. IEEE, 2023, pp. 12 780–12 789

    2023

  72. [80]

    DPICT: deep progressive image compression using trit-planes,

    J. Lee, S. Jeon, K. P. Choi, Y . Park, and C. Kim, “DPICT: deep progressive image compression using trit-planes,” inCVPR. IEEE, 2022, pp. 16 092–16 101

    2022

  73. [81]

    QARV: quantization-aware resnet V AE for lossy image compression,

    Z. Duan, M. Lu, J. Ma, Y . Huang, Z. Ma, and F. Zhu, “QARV: quantization-aware resnet V AE for lossy image compression,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 436–450, 2024

    2024

  74. [82]

    Learning end-to-end lossy image compression: A benchmark,

    Y . Hu, W. Yang, Z. Ma, and J. Liu, “Learning end-to-end lossy image compression: A benchmark,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 4194–4211, 2022

    2022

  75. [83]

    Learning content-weighted deep image compression,

    M. Li, W. Zuo, S. Gu, J. You, and D. Zhang, “Learning content-weighted deep image compression,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. , vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 3446–3461, 2021

    2021

  76. [84]

    Implicit neural video compression,

    Y . Zhang, T. van Rozendaal, J. Brehmer, M. Nagel, and T. Cohen, “Implicit neural video compression,” CoRR, vol. abs/2112.11312, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  77. [85]

    NIRV ANA: neural implicit representations of videos with adaptive networks and autoregressive patch-wise model- ing,

    S. R. Maiya, S. Girish, M. Ehrlich, H. Wang, K. S. Lee, P. Poirson, P. Wu, C. Wang, and A. Shrivastava, “NIRV ANA: neural implicit representations of videos with adaptive networks and autoregressive patch-wise model- ing,” in CVPR. IEEE, 2023, pp. 14 378–14 387

    2023

  78. [86]

    Ps-nerv: Patch-wise stylized neural representations for videos,

    Y . Bai, C. Dong, C. Wang, and C. Yuan, “Ps-nerv: Patch-wise stylized neural representations for videos,” in ICIP. IEEE, 2023, pp. 41–45. 15

    2023

  79. [87]

    Dnerv: Modeling inherent dynamics via difference neural representation for videos,

    Q. Zhao, M. S. Asif, and Z. Ma, “Dnerv: Modeling inherent dynamics via difference neural representation for videos,” in CVPR. IEEE, 2023, pp. 2031–2040

    2023

  80. [88]

    Ffnerv: Flow-guided frame- wise neural representations for videos,

    J. C. Lee, D. Rho, J. H. Ko, and E. Park, “Ffnerv: Flow-guided frame- wise neural representations for videos,” in ACM Multimedia . ACM, 2023, pp. 7859–7870

    2023

  81. [89]

    Neural architecture search: Insights from 1000 papers,

    C. White, M. Safari, R. Sukthanker, B. Ru, T. Elsken, A. Zela, D. Dey, and F. Hutter, “Neural architecture search: Insights from 1000 papers,” CoRR, vol. abs/2301.08727, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” in Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. , 2015

    2015

  83. [91]

    SGDR: stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts,

    I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter, “SGDR: stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts,” in ICLR (Poster). OpenReview.net, 2017

    2017

  84. [92]

    UVG dataset: 50/120fps 4k sequences for video codec analysis and development,

    A. Mercat, M. Viitanen, and J. Vanne, “UVG dataset: 50/120fps 4k sequences for video codec analysis and development,” inMMSys. ACM, 2020, pp. 297–302

    2020

  85. [93]

    Ieee audio video coding working group (1857wg),

    S. Ma, C. Reader, T. Huang, F. Wu, and W. Gao, “Ieee audio video coding working group (1857wg),” in IEEE https://sagroups.ieee.org/1857/

  86. [94]

    Enhanced surveillance video compression with dual reference frames generation,

    L. Zhao, S. Wang, S. Wang, Y . Ye, S. Ma, and W. Gao, “Enhanced surveillance video compression with dual reference frames generation,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1592–1606, 2022

    2022

  87. [95]

    Calculation of average psnr differences between rd- curves,

    G. Bjontegaard, “Calculation of average psnr differences between rd- curves,” VCEG-M33, 2001

    2001

  88. [96]

    Neural video compression with diverse contexts,

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

    2023

  89. [97]

    Neural video compression with feature modulation,

    ——, “Neural video compression with feature modulation,” in Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 26 099–26 108. Lv Tang (Student Member, IEEE) received the BSc degree from the School of Information Sci- ence and Technolo...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.