ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)

Power Line Telecommunications; Powerline recommendations for very high bitrate services

DTR/PLT-00041

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 18-Dec-2014
• Technical Committee: PLT - Powerline Telecommunications
• Current Stage: 12 - Completion
• Due Date: 02-Jan-2015
• Completion Date: 19-Dec-2014

Standards Content (Sample)

TECHNICAL REPORT
Power Line Telecommunications;
Powerline recommendations for very high bitrate services

2 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)

Reference
DTR/PLT-00041
Keywords
MIMO, powerline, video
ETSI
650 Route des Lucioles
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE

Tel.: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la
Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88

Important notice
The present document can be downloaded from:
http://www.etsi.org
The present document may be made available in electronic versions and/or in print. The content of any electronic and/or
print versions of the present document shall not be modified without the prior written authorization of ETSI. In case of any
existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions and/or in print, the only prevailing document is the
print of the Portable Document Format (PDF) version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat.
Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status.
Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at
http://portal.etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp
If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services:
http://portal.etsi.org/chaircor/ETSI_support.asp
Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying
and microfilm except as authorized by written permission of ETSI.
The content of the PDF version shall not be modified without the written authorization of ETSI.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.

© European Telecommunications Standards Institute 2014.
All rights reserved.
TM TM TM
DECT , PLUGTESTS , UMTS and the ETSI logo are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members.
TM
3GPP and LTE™ are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the 3GPP Organizational Partners. ®
GSM and the GSM logo are Trade Marks registered and owned by the GSM Association.
ETSI
3 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
Contents
Intellectual Property Rights . 9
Foreword . 9
Modal verbs terminology . 9
Introduction . 9
1 Scope . 11
2 References . 11
2.1 Normative references . 11
2.2 Informative references . 11
3 Abbreviations . 12
4 HD and UHD video specifications . 13
5 MPEG4-AVC VERSUS HEVC for Video Compression . 14
5.1 Introduction to video codecs MPEG4-AVC and HEVC . 14
5.2 Description of the main coding profiles . 14
5.2.1 The H.265 (MPEG4-AVC) profiles . 14
5.2.2 The H.265 (HEVC) profiles . 14
5.3 Critical coding parameters for the study . 15
5.3.1 Choice of the codecs . 15
5.3.2 Choice of the global parameters . 15
5.4 Performance study . 16
5.4.1 Quality criteria . 16
5.4.1.1 General case (without transmission) . 16
5.4.1.2 Case with transmissions . 17
5.4.2 Test sequences . 18
5.4.2.1 Comparison strategy. 18
5.4.2.2 Choice of the test video sequences . 18
5.4.3 Coding at fixed bit-rate or fixed Quality . 19
5.5 Tuning of the parameters . 21
5.5.1 Parameterization of the codecs . 21
5.5.2 Limiting the size of the slices . 26
5.6 Coding of a "real life" video . 27
5.7 Conclusion . 28
6 UHD video over Powerline Networks SISO versus MIMO . 28
6.1 Selected Approach for the Test Campaign . 28
6.1.1 Complexity Analysis. 28
6.1.2 Test Methodology . 30
6.1.3 Reference sequences . 30
6.2 Introduction to Broadband Powerline Technologies . 31 ®
6.2.1 HomePlug AV (SISO only) . 32 ®
6.2.2 HomePlug AV2 (SISO & MIMO) . 32
6.3 Laboratory Test Campaign . 33
6.3.1 Introduction. 33
6.3.1.1 Objectives and Goals. 33
6.3.1.2 Selected Approach . 33
6.3.2 Results analysis . 33
6.3.2.1 NAL Unit size impact . 34
6.3.2.2 I frame period impact . 36
6.3.2.3 Coding strategy impact . 40
6.3.2.4 H.264 vs H.265 with HD sequences . 43
6.3.2.5 H.264 vs H.265 with UHD sequences . 45
6.3.2.6 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO Raw PLC performance . 47
6.3.2.7 Video Streaming over AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO performance . 48
ETSI
4 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
6.3.3 Laboratory Test Campaign Conclusions . 49
6.4 Field Test Campaign . 50
6.4.1 Introduction. 50
6.4.2 Field Tests Detailed Results. 50
6.4.2.1 Home #2 . 51
6.4.2.1.1 Overall Home Statistics . 51
6.4.2.1.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 51
6.4.2.1.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 51
6.4.2.2 Home #3 . 52
6.4.2.2.1 Overall Home Statistics . 52
6.4.2.2.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 52
6.4.2.2.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 52
6.4.2.3 Home #4 . 53
6.4.2.3.1 Overall Home Statistics . 53
6.4.2.3.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 53
6.4.2.3.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 53
6.4.2.4 Home #5 . 53
6.4.2.4.1 Overall Home Statistics . 53
6.4.2.4.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 54
6.4.2.4.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 54
6.4.2.5 Home #6 . 54
6.4.2.5.1 Overall Home Statistics . 54
6.4.2.5.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 54
6.4.2.5.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 55
6.4.2.6 Home #7 . 55
6.4.2.6.1 Overall Home Statistics . 55
6.4.2.6.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 55
6.4.2.6.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 55
6.4.2.7 Home #8 . 56
6.4.2.7.1 Overall Home Statistics . 56
6.4.2.7.2 H.264 vs H.265 . 56
6.4.2.7.3 AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO . 56
6.4.2.8 Prongs location analysis . 57
6.4.2.8.1 Overall statistical prongs location results . 57
6.4.3 Field Test Campaign Conclusions . 57
7 Conclusion . 59
Annex A: Coding parameters collection . 61
Annex B: Laboratory Test Campaign Description . 63
B.1 Test Bench Presentation . 63
B.1.1 PLC Transmission Test Bench . 63
B.1.2 Traffic Generation and Measurement Test Bench . 65
B.1.3 Video Diffusion Test Bench . 67
B.1.3.1 Software configuration . 67
B.1.3.2 Protocol stack for video streaming . 67
B.1.4 Video processing test bench. 68
B.1.4.1 Presentation . 68
B.1.4.2 Results collection . 69
B.2 Test Plan . 70
B.2.1 Raw PLC Performances on AWGN Channel . 70
B.2.2 Video Streaming Performance over PLC on AWGN Channel . 72
Annex C: Field Test Campaign Description . 75
C.1 Introduction . 75
C.1.1 Objectives and Goals . 75
C.1.2 Selected Approach . 75
C.2 Description of selected locations . 75
ETSI
5 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
C.3 Test Methodology . 76
C.3.1 Test Pairs Selection . 76
C.3.2 Test Plan . 76
C.3.3 Results collection . 77
Annex D: General principle of HEVC . 78
D.1 Introduction . 78
D.2 HEVC - What is new compared to MPEG4-AVC? . 78
D.2.1 Principal similarities . 78
D.2.2 Principal dissimilarities . 78
Annex E: Bibliography . 79
History . 80

ETSI
6 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
List of Figures
Figure 1: General Principles of tests and video quality measurements .10
Figure 2: Number of Pixels of UHDTV [i.4] versus HDTV .13
Figure 3: Comparison between PSNR and SSIM .17
Figure 4: Effect of block loss .17
Figure 5: Effects of packets loss .18
Figure 6: Choice of a relevant 4K-sequence for the tests. The considered Gop size is equal to 10 .19
Figure 7: Frame extracted from "Park Joy" video .19
Figure 8: PSNR in function of the frame for a constant bit-rate constraint .20
Figure 9: PSNR in function of the frame for a constant quality constraint .20
Figure 10: Bit-rate in function of the frame for a constant quality constraint .21
Figure 11: Reduction of bit-rate between x265 and x264 .22
Figure 12: Comparison of IPPP… and IBBB… .22
Figure 13: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x264 .23
Figure 14: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x265 .23
Figure 15: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x264 .24
Figure 16: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x265 .24
Figure 17: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x264 .25
Figure 18: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x265 .25
Figure 19: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x264 .26
Figure 20: Comparison of the sensitivity on the GOP size for x265 .26
Figure 21: Overload due to limiting the size of the slice .27
Figure 22: x264 vs x265: Quality comparison .27
Figure 23: Bit-rate reduction from H.264 to H.265 .28
Figure 24: MIMO modes explored in STF410 .31
Figure 25: Impact of NAL unit size on decoding performances - % of frames decoded .35
Figure 26: Impact of NAL unit size on decoding performances - SSIM .35
Figure 27: Impact of NAL unit size on decoding performances - PSNR .36
Figure 28: Video diffusion bitrate behaviour .36
Figure 29: I period / GOP size impact - H.264 - % of frames decoded .37
Figure 30: I period / GOP size impact - H.264 - SSIM .38
Figure 31: I period / GOP size impact - H.264 - PSNR .38
Figure 32: I period / GOP size impact - H.265 - % of frames decoded .39
Figure 33: I period / GOP size impact - H.265 - SSIM .39
ETSI
7 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
Figure 34: I period / GOP size impact - H.265 - PSNR .40
Figure 35: Alea vs LowDelay - H.264 - % of frames decoded .41
Figure 36: Alea vs LowDelay - H.264 - SSIM .41
Figure 37: Alea vs LowDelay - H.264 - PSNR .42
Figure 38: Alea vs LowDelay - H.265 - % of frames decoded .42
Figure 39: Alea vs LowDelay - H.265 - SSIM .43
Figure 40: Alea vs LowDelay - H.265 - PSNR .43
Figure 41: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM - % of frames decoded .44
Figure 42: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM - SSIM .44
Figure 43: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM - PSNR .45
Figure 44: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM (UHD) - % of frames decoded .45
Figure 45: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM (UHD) - SSIM .46
Figure 46: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM (UHD) - PSNR .46
Figure 47: H.264 w/x264 vs H.265 w/HM (UHD) - QoE .47
Figure 48: HPAV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO Raw PLC performance.47
Figure 49: HP AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO - % of frames decoded .48
Figure 50: HP AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO - SSIM .48
Figure 51: HP AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO - PSNR .49
Figure 52: HP AV vs AV2 SISO vs AV2 MIMO - QoE.49
Figure 53: Cumulative SSIM scores.58
Figure B.1: PLC Test Bench synoptic .64
Figure B.2: PLC Test Bench .64
Figure B.3: Synoptic of the PLC Test Bench configuration for signal power measurement.65
Figure B.4: Protocol stack used for video streaming .68
Figure B.5: Folder tree .70

ETSI
8 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
List of Tables
Table 1: Reference Sequences .31 ®
Table 2: Comparison between HomePlug AV, AV2 SISO & AV2 MIMO powerline technologies .33
Table B.1: Emitter PC software configuration .67
Table B.2: Receiver PC software configuration .67
Table B.3: Parameters set for the evaluation of each parameter .74

ETSI
9 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
Intellectual Property Rights
IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found
in ETSI SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in
respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web
server (http://ipr.etsi.org).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web
server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.
Foreword
This Technical Report (TR) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee Powerline Telecommunications (PLT).
Modal verbs terminology
In the present document "shall", "shall not", "should", "should not", "may", "may not", "need", "need not", "will",
"will not", "can" and "cannot" are to be interpreted as described in clause 3.2 of the ETSI Drafting Rules (Verbal forms
for the expression of provisions).
"must" and "must not" are NOT allowed in ETSI deliverables except when used in direct citation.
Introduction
Already back in 2012, the ETSI STF410 studied the feasibility to increase the transmission capacity of the PLT modems
by using the existing ground wiring in houses, in addition to the Phase and Neutral wiring being used by the SISO-PLT
modems. The PLT industry today takes benefit of this technology to launch MIMO-PLT modems on the market. These
new generation MIMO-PLT modems offer a throughput above 1Gbits allowing Gigabit Home Networking for high
internet services developments as UHD/4K video services distribution in a house.
The present document addresses the transportation of very high bitrate services like UHD/4K in phase over
MIMO-PLT. The present analysis carried out by the ETSI STF468 is taking place at the crossroad of three major
technologies for video distribution in a house using existing electrical grids:
• MIMO-PLT offering a throughput up to the double compared to SISO-PLT;
• HEVC/H.265 reducing the bit-rate by a factor of 2 compared to existing AVC/H.264; and
• emergence of UHD/4K increasing the number of pixels by four compared to the HD (High Definition) video.
Therefore the actual phase 1 of the present study, explore the benefits of each component of the emerging technologies.
The STF establishes performances of video transportation over powerline by validation of the combination of
MIMO-PLT and UHD/4K video based on visual criteria. For this purpose a visual quality criteria recognized by e.g.
ITU and MPEG groups video experts is used in this study for evaluation of video after transmission on electrical grids
as well as throughput and robustness of the PLT links is measured.
For UHD/4K and HD video sequences used in this work, definitions given by EBU [i.2], [i.3] and specifications
published by DVB group in an ETSI standard [i.1] were referred to.
The present document, first, present the phase 1 of UHD specifications [i.1] from DVB is now published as a technical
standard from ITU, EBU and DVB to avoid confusion with 4K from Digital Cinema as 4K is referring to quad HD
resolutions encoded in AVC/H.265.
ETSI
10 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
The specification includes an HEVC Profile for DVB broadcasting services that draws, from the options available with
HEVC, those that will match the requirements for delivery of UHDTV Phase 1 and other formats [i.1].
The present document studies the video transportation of HD and UHD video sequences encoded in H.264/AVC and
HEVC/H.265 over Powerline technologies based on SISO and MIMO in referring to measurements based on PSNR and
SSIM as described by figure 1.

V
D
I
I
D
POWERLINE
S
E SISO/MIMO
P
HEVC/H.265 HEVC/H.265
O
NETWORKS
L
S
H.264/AV H.264/AV
A
Y
ENCODER DECODER
PSNR/ SSIM
STATISTICS
COMPUTATIONS
SCORES/CURVE
LAB1 LAB2
SS
COORDINATION AND FEEDBACK REPORTING

Figure 1: General Principles of tests and video quality measurements
ETSI
11 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
1 Scope
The scope of the present document is to investigate the increased capacity of MIMO-PLT for Gigabit Home
Networking based on forthcoming UHD/4K SVOD and streaming services distribution from Residential Home
Gateway (VDSL2/G.Fast) to Set-Top-Box & Network-Top-Box, Media Servers for Tablets & Smart Phones.
The present phase 1 of the work is focusing on validation of the performances of MIMO versus SISO PLT channels in
laboratory tests and in real houses using video sequences.
These video sequences consist of reference sequences of HD and UHD/UHD (used by experts from ITU, EBU and
MPEG experts) and from real world sequences encoded by H.265/AVC and H.265/HEVC codecs are used for
comparison of performances SISO-PLT versus MIMO-PLT.
2 References
References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or
non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
Referenced documents which are not found to be publicly available in the expected location might be found at
http://docbox.etsi.org/Reference.
NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication ETSI cannot guarantee
their long term validity.
2.1 Normative references
The following referenced documents are necessary for the application of the present document.
Not applicable.
2.2 Informative references
The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist the
user with regard to a particular subject area.
[i.1] ETSI TS 101 154: "Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Specification for the use of Video and
Audio Coding in Broadcasting Applications based on the MPEG-2 Transport Stream".
[i.2] EBU: "Beyond HD update" (H.HOFFMAN).
[i.3] MPEG: "HEVC: Targeting streaming and mobile applications and higher resolution".
[i.4] Recommendation ITU-R BT.2020: "Parameter values for ultra-high definition television systems
for production and international programme exchange".
[i.5] IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine July 2012: "The new gold standard for video compression".
[i.6] RWTH Aachen University, March 2014, J.R. Ohm: "Overview of High Efficiency Video Coding
(HEVC)".
[i.7] DVB: "CM- UHDTV and DVB TM-AVC is looking into HEVC".
[i.8] CEA: "4K" Working Group, define 4K technology, discuss 4K content options, and educate
consumers about the newest era in high-definition television (HDTV). Nomenclature: "Ultra HD".
[i.9] EBU: "Ultra High Definition Television in Europe".
ETSI
12 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
[i.10] Recommendation ITU-R BT.709: " Parameter values for the HDTV standards for production and
international programme exchange".
[i.11] ITU-T SG16-Q6: "Mutlimedia".
[i.12] ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11: "Coding of moving pictures and audio".
3 Abbreviations
For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:
AC Alternating Current
AV Audio and Video
AVC Advanced Video Coding (H.265)
AWGN Additive White Gaussian Noise
BPSK Binary Phase Shift Keying
CEA Consumer Electronic Association
CSMA/CA Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance
DCT Discrete Cosine Transform
DSSIM structural dissimilarity derived from SSIM
DVB Digital Video Broadcasting
EBU European Broadcasting Union
EMC Electromagnetic Compatibility
FEC Forward Error Correction
GB Giga Byte
GOP Group Of Pictures
HD High Definition
HD High Definition (720p, 1080i/p)
HDR High Dynamic Range
HEVC High Efficient Video Coding (H.265)
HFR High Frame Rate
HM HEVC test Model
HPAV HomePlug AV
IBBB Sequence of a Intra frame (I) followed by Interpolated frames (B)
IP Internet Protocol
IPPP Sequence of a Intra frame (I) followed by Predicted frames (P)
IPTV Internet Protocol TeleVision
ITU International Telecommunication Union
JM Joint Model
KTA Key Technical Area
LISN Line Impedance Stabilizing Network
MAC Media Access Control
MB Mega Byte
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
MKV Matroska Video container
MPEG Motion Picture Expert Group
MSE Mean Square Error
MTU Maximum Transfer Unit
NAL Network Adaptation Layer
OFDM Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplex
OSI Open System Interconnection
PC Personal Computer
PHY PHYsical
PLC Powerline Communication
PLT Power Line Telecommunications
PSNR Peak Signal to Noise Ratio
QAM Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
QoE Quality of Experience
RTP Real Time Protocol
RTSP Real Time Streaming Protocol
ETSI
13 ETSI TR 103 234 23 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
SC Sub Committee
SISO Single Input Single Ouuttpput
SNR Signal to Noise Ratio
SSIM Structural SIMilarity
SSIM Structural Similarity InInddex Measurement
TCC Turbo Convolutional CCoode
TCP Transmission Control PProtr ocol
UDP User Defined Protocol
UHD Ultra High Definition
UHD Ultra High Definition (U(UHD1 for UHD and UHD2 for 8K)
UHDTV Ultra High Definition TTeeleVision
VCEG Video Coding Expertss GGroup
VLC VLC media Player
WG Working Group
YUV A colour space format
4 HD and UHD v vidideo specifications
With more than eight million pixels of resolluuttion UHD (Ultra High Definition) video, also called 4KK or Quad HD in the
past, is the next generation of video technollooggy and contents to distribute in the whole home using PPLLT modems,
connecting Home Gateway to Set-top-Box aannd Media Servers.

Figure 2: Numbber of Pixels of UHDTV [i.4] versus HDTV
In 2012, the usage of 4K introduce consumererss confusion on devices on the market as TV sets and concontents as UHD is
not only more pixels but better pixels as deffiinned by EBU experts.
During the year 2013, the industry has deveeloped a comlo mon understanding with respect to a two-statagge introduction of
Ultra HD based on EBU, DVB and CEA sttanandards.
Phase 1 is intended to provide a short-term mmarket entry (2014/2015) based on the current available e UltrU a HD displays
and limited compared to Full HD (1 920 x 1 1 0080) mainly due to a four times the number of pixels (3 (3 840 x 2 160).
The DVB specification for UHD Phase 1 waass published in July 2014 adopted by the DVB Steering g BBoard.
DVB-UHDTV contains a HEVC profile for r DDVB Broadcasting Services and renewed ETSI TS 101 1 1154 [i.1].
In addition to the four times the resolution ooff the system allows frame rates up to 50/60 Hz and alsoo ssets bit at a bit
depth of 10. For 2160p content level of 5.1 HHEVC Main is 10 profile provided HD services with up p tto 1080p are
supported by Level 4.1.
As UHD video specifications are still evolvviinng in standardization processes by ITU, EBU DVB, CEAEA, the same
definitions and parameters as described by DDVBV were used:
The main elements of UHD are:
• HEVC Main 10 profile encoding
ETSI
14 ETSI TR 103 234 V1.1.1 (2014-12)
• 4:2:0 video at resolutions up to 3 840 x 2 160
• Frame rates up to 50/60fps, including 100/120 variants of the 50/60 fps family
• Inclusion of hooks for forward compatibility with UHD Phase 2 signals at higher frame rates
• Bit depth of 8 and 10 bits
• Signalling of BT.709 [i.10] and BT.2020 [i.4] (non-constant luminance) colour space.
In the following, the definitions and specifications for HD and UHD video streams were adopted to be used for the tests
and measurements performed by Lab1 for video encoding simulations and Lab2 for PLT technologies testing.
5 MPEG4-AVC VERSUS HEVC for Video
Compression
5.1 Introduction to video codecs MPEG4-AVC and HEVC
Significant compression gain, compared to former video coding standards, has been achieved by the
ITU-T SG16- Q6 [i.11] H.264 standard of the Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG), also known as ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC
29/WG 11 MPEG- 4 [i.12] AVC of the Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) (for technical details: see annex D).
This gain results from the improvement of existing tools and the inclusion of new ones. These improvements concern
the motion estimation and the information coding with Context Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding (CABAC), and
above all the addition of several Intra and Inter modes with many encoding methods, which need the transmission of
competition signalization indices.
The goal was to reach a video coding standard that provides a bit-rate reduction of 50 % at the same subjective quality,
with a complexity increased by a factor 2 or 3 at most. Several improvements are already known and gathered in the JM
KTA software (Key Technical Area) or in the HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding) Test Model.
5.2 Description of the main coding profiles
Profiles (and levels) are a compact method to describe a bunch of codec parameters, which leads to an estimation of the
complexity in coding or decoding.
The AVC /H.265 and HEVC/ H.265 profiles are different.
5.2.1 The H.265 (MPEG4-AVC) profiles
The present document defines several profiles, most of them dealing with the 4:2:0 colour format. Below are listed
those profiles which were considered the most relevant:
• Baseline: the simplest (= constrained baseline). For low-cost applications that require additional data loss
robustness, this profile is used in some videoconferencing and mobile applications.
• Main Profile declined in favor of High Profile. Standard-definition digital
...