1 / 16

Joint Source/Channel Coding

Joint Source/Channel Coding. Ketan Mayer-Patel. ALF. Make the network work within the terms of the applications. Can’t change installed technologies. Physical limits and design tradeoffs prevent this. Optimize the application for the network.

korbin
Download Presentation

Joint Source/Channel Coding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Joint Source/Channel Coding Ketan Mayer-Patel CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  2. ALF • Make the network work within the terms of the applications. • Can’t change installed technologies. • Physical limits and design tradeoffs prevent this. • Optimize the application for the network. • Requires that the network expose internal details. • Fundamental issue: the nature of abstraction. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  3. Source Coding • Old problem in signal processing. • Information source produces a string of symbols. • Symbols are drawn from a fixed alphabet. • Symbol distribution is not uniform. • Problem: • Encode symbols as codewords such that average codeword length is minimized. • AKA: Data Compression CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  4. Channel Coding • Opposite problem of source coding. • Noisy communication channel. • A set of source codes to transmit. • Problem: • Map source codes to channel codes such that probability of correct recovery is arbitrarily low. • Shannon shows that if you can characterize the channel noise, this is possible. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  5. Source Words Source Codes Channel Codes Source Coding Channel Coding Optimize Optimize Optimize Separation Principle • The really important result. • Shannon’s separation principle says that source and channel coding can be done independently. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  6. Consequences • Seminal work with long lasting consequences. • Separated source coding and channel coding as problems. • Resulting in two subfields and from there… • Data compression vs. Networking CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  7. Parallel Constructs • Layering of network stack is a parallel concept to the separation principle. • Why? What do I mean by this? • Different layers are like different codings. • Each layer provides a particular service. • As a whole, arguable provides as good a service as if a single protocol for everything. • Differences? • Protocols build on top of each other while source and channel coding are independent. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  8. Joint Source/Channel Coding • Separation principle only works in the limit. • Need arbitrarily large data set. • No bound on coding delay. • JS/CC can improve coding efficiency in more realistic, non-limit contexts. • Separation best in theory. • JS/CC often best in practice. • In other words: do source coding with channel coding in mind and vice versa. • Sound familiar? CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  9. ALF and JS/CC • ALF:Networking::JS/CC:Communication • ALF • Layers of networking need to be cognizant of each other (in particular the very top layer, the application). • JS/CC • Signal coding needs to be cognizant of transmission coding. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  10. Back to MM Networking • So how does all of this apply to Multimedia Networking? • What is the stream of source symbols? • Media data. • What is the source coding process? • Compression schemes (MPEG, MP3, etc.) • What is the channel coding process? • RTP packetization • Transport-level protocol CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  11. Putting it together. • So what should we do to use ALF and JS/CC in this context? • RTP packetization must be done in a media-aware manner. • ALF and JS/CC are not one-way concepts. • What’s the obvious other direction? • Media encoding should be done to accommodate packet-based communication. • McCanne thesis (Berkeley, 96) is a great resource for learning and thinking about this idea. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  12. Loss / Quality Tradeoff • Network-aware encoding is generally about dealing with loss. • Need to characterize loss in target environment • Packet or bit? • Bursty or independent? • Probability? • Need to characterize distortion induced by loss. • This can be extremely difficult to do. • Very non-linear. • Mayer-Patel, ACM Multimedia 2002 CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  13. Dealing with Loss • Principle #1 • Make transmission data units independently useful. • What’s the difference between TDU and ADU? • Techniques: • Checkpoint decoder state in each packet. • What would this mean for MPEG? • Choose granularity to minimize amount of decoder state required. • Provide bit offsets to avoid non-byte aligned shifts. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  14. Dealing with Loss • Principle #2 • Limit propogation of error. • Techniques: • Include redundant low-res impostor. • Or substitute past information as impostor. • Break long dependency chains. • Provide eventual consistency mechanism. • MPEG example: • Forced I-block in P and B frames. • Allocate some portion of bandwidth to this mechanism • Static allocation • Dynamic allocation CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  15. Dealing with Loss • Principle #3 • Decorrelate successive packets • Deals with bursty packet loss. • Techniques: • Interleave TDU’s from different ADU’s. • Spread out information from spatially nearby areas into separate TDU’s. • What’s the cost of this principle? CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

  16. The Art of ALF • Ideally: examine both sides simultaneously. • A lot like object-oriented design. • Bad design will hurt. • General guidelines: • ADU independence. • Minimum, coordinated state. • Eventual state coherence. CS294-9 :: Fall 2003

More Related