Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flowchart of the proposed system.

Onboard image compression comprises three stages: saliency detection by CNN generating a pixel-wise saliency map, CTU-level adaptive QP adjustment, and HEVC intra-coding.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Rate-distortion performance of HEVC, JPEG, JPEG2000, WebP, VP9, and AVC codec over Kodak dataset.

Kodak datasets consist of 25 lossless, true color (24 bits per pixel) PNG images of 768 × 512 pixels.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Two types of building blocks in ResNet50: (a) convolutional block; (b) identity block.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

The architecture of deep convolutional layers in ResNet50.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Architecture of proposed neural network for salient region detection.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

QP distribution map.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Examples of saliency maps over the test images: Original images and corresponding saliency map masks.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 1.

Quantitative comparison of our proposed modified residual architecture with 9 traditional bottom-up saliency methods.

Text in bold denotes the best results.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Quantitative comparison of our proposed modified residual architecture with 8 state-of-the-art methods for saliency map extraction.

The best and the second-best results are highlighted in bold.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 8.

Performance comparison with eight classic bottom-up saliency methods.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Performance comparison of the proposed method with the latest state-of-the-art methods.

(left to right: original image, Ground Truth, ResNet, SKNet, ResNeXt, Res2Net, ResNeSt, ShuffleNet_v2, MobileNet_v3, EfficientNet_b0, and GhostNet).

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Table 3.

Performance metrics of proposed algorithm versus the standard HEVC codec under different initial QPs.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 10.

RD curves for the proposed algorithm and the standard HEVC codec for 50 images of the planet Mars under different initial QPs: (a)PSNR (b)PSNR-HVS (c)PSNR-HVS-M (d)SSIM (e)MS-SSIM (f)VIFP.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Subjective quality comparison between the standard HEVC codec and the proposed adaptive quantization algorithm at different QP setting.

Details are magnified by bilinear interpolation for comparison.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

The figure displays qualitative results comparison at three groups of images when QP is set to 41.

For ease of comparison, details are magnified by bilinear interpolation.

More »

Fig 12 Expand