Lenka Smatanova

Lenka Smatanova


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2024 in Electronics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MUMiroslav Uhrina
Miroslav Uhrina
Lukas SevcikLukas Sevcik
Lukas Sevcik
JBJuraj Bienik
Juraj Bienik
LSLenka Smatanova
Lenka Smatanova
Over the years, there has been growing interest in multimedia services, especially in the video domain, where firms and subscribers require higher resolutions, framerates, and sampling precision. This results in a huge amount of data that needs to be processed, stored, and transmitted. As a result, researchers face the challenge of developing new compression standards that can reduce the amount of data while maintaining the same quality. In this paper, the compression performance of the latest and most commonly used video codecs, namely H.266/VVC, AV1, H265/HEVC, and H.264/AVC was examined. The test set included seven sequences of various content at 8K, Ultra HD (UHD), and Full HD (FHD) resolutions, encoded to bitrates ranging from 1 to 15 Mbps for FHD and UHD resolutions and from 5 to 50 Mbps for 8K resolution. Objective quality metrics, such as peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), the structural similarity index (SSIM), and video multi-method assessment fusion (VMAF) were used to measure codec performance. The results showed that H.266/VVC outperformed all other codecs, namely H.264/AVC, H.265/HEVC, and AV1, in terms of the Bjøntegaard delta (BD) model. The average bitrate savings were approximately 78% for H.266/VVC, 63% for AV1, and 53% for H.265/HEVC relative to H.264/AVC, 59% for H.266/VVC and 22% for AV1 compared to H.264/AVC, and 46% for H.266/VVC relative to AV1 (all for 8K resolution). The results also showed that codec performance varied depending on resolution, with higher resolutions showing greater efficiency for newly developed codecs, such as H.266/VVC and AV1. This confirms the fact that the H.266/VVC and AV1 codecs were primarily developed for videos at high resolutions, such as 8K and/or UHD.

16 February 2024 in Preprints.org
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
MUMiroslav Uhrina
Miroslav Uhrina
LSLukas Sevcik
Lukas Sevcik
JBJuraj Bienik
Juraj Bienik
LSLenka Smatanova
Lenka Smatanova
In recent years, an interest in multimedia services has grown expeditiously where the main part is comprised of video. Firms as well as subscribers require higher resolutions, framerates and sampling precision which results to higher amount of data need for processing, storing and transmitting. Therefore, a big challenge arises for researchers to develop new compression standards which should reduce the huge amount of data and keep quality at the same level. This paper examines compression performance of the latest and currently most used video codecs, namely H.266/VVC, AV1, H265/HEVC and H.264/AVC. The test set consists of seven sequences with various content at 8K, Ultra HD and Full HD resolution and encoded to bitrates from 1 to 15 Mbps for Full HD and Ultra HD resolutions and from 5 to 50 Mbps for 8K resolution, respectively. Codec performance was measured using PSNR, SSIM and VMAF objective quality metrics. In terms of the Bjøntegaard-Delta (BD) model, the results showed that H.266/VVC outperforms all other codecs, namely H.264/AVC,H.265/HEVC and AV1, respectively. Averaged bitrate savings were approximately 78\% for H.266/VVC, 63\% for AV1 and 53\% for H.265/HEVC relative to H.264/AVC, 59\% for H.266/VVC, 22\% for AV1 compared to H.264/AVC and 46\% for H.266/VVC relative to AV1, all for 8K resolution. The results also showed that the performance varies depending on resolution – with higher resolution, the efficiency of newly developed codecs such as H.266/VVC and AV1 is greater, which confirmed the fact that the H.266/VVC and AV1 codecs have been primarily developed for videos at high resolutions as 8K and/or UHD.