Opened 17 months ago
Closed 17 months ago
#1184 closed defect (fixed)
Mismatch between spec and SW in MV rounding for affine AMVR with 1/16 precision
Reported by: | chhuanb | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | VVC D10 |
Component: | spec | Version: | |
Keywords: | Cc: | ksuehring, bbross, XiangLi, fbossen, jvet@… |
Description
The MV rounding process 8.5.2.14 is invoked during affine AMVP list construction (8.5.5.7 Derivation process for luma affine control point motion vector predictors) as following:
– The rounding process for motion vectors as specified in clause 8.5.2.14 is invoked with mvX set equal to cpMvpLX[ cpIdx ], rightShift set equal to AmvrShift, and leftShift set equal to AmvrShift as inputs and the rounded cpMvpLX[ cpIdx ] with cpIdx = 0 .. numCpMv − 1 as output.
In case the CPMV precision for affine is 1/16, AmvrShift is set to 0 as Table 16.
Then the input rightShift and leftShift to 8.5.2.14 are both 0.
According to 8.5.2.14, in such case if mv >=0, the output mv will become mv-1 :
offset = ( rightShift = = 0 ) ? 0 : ( 1 << ( rightShift − 1 ) ) (599)
mvX[ 0 ] = ( ( mvX[ 0 ] + offset − ( mvX[ 0 ] >= 0 ) ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift (600)
mvX[ 1 ] = ( ( mvX[ 1 ] + offset − ( mvX[ 1 ] >= 0 ) ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift (601)
However, the mv is unchanged in SW.
Suggest align spec to SW as following:
8.5.2.14 Rounding process for motion vectors
Inputs to this process are
– the motion vector mvX,
– the right shift parameter rightShift for rounding,
– the left shift parameter leftShift for resolution increase.
Output of this process is the rounded motion vector mvX.
For the rounding of mvX, the following applies:
If rightShift == 0:
mvX[ 0 ] = mvX[ 0 ] << leftShift
mvX[ 1 ] = mvX[ 1 ] << leftShift
else:
offset = ( 1 << ( rightShift − 1 ) ) (599)
mvX[ 0 ] = ( ( mvX[ 0 ] + offset − ( mvX[ 0 ] >= 0 ) ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift (600)
mvX[ 1 ] = ( ( mvX[ 1 ] + offset − ( mvX[ 1 ] >= 0 ) ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift (601)
Change history (3)
comment:1 follow-up: ↓ 2 Changed 17 months ago by fbossen
comment:2 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 17 months ago by chhuanb
Replying to fbossen:
The text should indeed be fixed.
Alternatively it could be expressed as:
offset = ( rightShift = = 0 ) ? 0 : ( 1 << ( rightShift − 1 ) ) − 1 (599)
mvX[ 0 ] = sign( mvX[ 0 ] ) * ( ( ( abs( mvX[ 0 ] ) + offset ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift ) (600)
mvX[ 1 ] = sign( mvX[ 1 ] ) * ( ( ( abs( mvX[ 1 ] ) + offset ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift ) (601)
This expression is more concise, and sign and abs should be repalced by Sign and Abs according to clause 5.8 Mathematical functions.
comment:3 Changed 17 months ago by jlchen
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Thank to Huanbang for reporting the issue and Frank to confirm and suggest the solution. The fix will be included in JVET-S2001-vD release.
The text should indeed be fixed.
Alternatively it could be expressed as:
offset = ( rightShift = = 0 ) ? 0 : ( 1 << ( rightShift − 1 ) ) − 1 (599)
mvX[ 0 ] = sign( mvX[ 0 ] ) * ( ( ( abs( mvX[ 0 ] ) + offset ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift ) (600)
mvX[ 1 ] = sign( mvX[ 1 ] ) * ( ( ( abs( mvX[ 1 ] ) + offset ) >> rightShift ) << leftShift ) (601)