DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 10/08/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-27 are pending in this application.
Claims 1, 8, and 21 have been amended. Claims 2-3, 5- 6, 15- 20, 22- 23, and 26 are cancelled. Claim 27 is new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Argument A (pages 7- 8) under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103:
The Applicant contends that the shared motion vector difference in Seethal is between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block; however, claim 1 teaches that each of the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points has the same single motion vector difference. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Seethal teaches using one (shared) motion vector difference value for more than one control points, where fewer motion vector difference are signaled than the control points and that the same single motion vector difference applies to the respective control points. Seethal further teaches deriving the control point motion vectors by adding the motion vector difference to the motion vector predictor (Seethal [447]). Seethal applies the same (shared) motion vector difference to multiple control points and derives the corresponding control point motion vectors using the single motion vector difference.
Argument B (page 9) under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103:
Applicant contends that although independent claim 21 is different is scope, that it has been amended to include the features discusses in Argument A under Independent Claim 1. See response to argument under Argument A as stated above.
Argument C (page 9) under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103:
Applicant contends that claim 10 depend on claim 1 and therefor follow the same rational as independent claim 1. See response to argument under Argument A as stated above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4, 7- 9, 11- 14, 21, 24- 25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiancong Luo (US 20220150505 A1) (hereinafter Luo) in view of Seunghwan Kim (US 20210105481 A1)(hereinafter Kim) further in view of Paluri Seethal (WO 2020009446 A1) (hereinafter (Seethal):
Regarding Claim 1, Luo teaches a method of video decoding (“video decoder” [0096]), comprising:
receiving, from a coded video bitstream, a first flag for a current block in a current picture that is coded with an affine mode using a first affine model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction” [0107]; Fig, 3 bitstream (302), decoder (308)), the first flag and the first affine model being associated with a first reference picture, the first flag indicating whether one or more motion vector differences are signaled for the first affine model (“If an SMVD indication indicates SMVD is used for the motion vector coding for the current coding block, the coding device may receive a first motion vector coding information associated with a first reference picture list” [0006]; “ if the SMVD indication indicates SMVD is used for the motion vector coding for the current coding block, the coding device may parse a first MVD associated with a first reference picture list in a bitstream.” [0007]),
wherein
when the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is a translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]),
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches decoding the one or more motion vector differences from the coded video bitstream when the first flag indicates that the one or more motion vector differences are signaled for the first affine model (“When the MVDxGR_N and/or MVDyGR_N value is 0, the decoder decodes (or parses) an MVD value in each direction” [0416]; “The decoder checks whether the adaptive affine MVD precision mode is applied based on an MVD precision flag value (S4408). If the adaptive affine MVD precision mode is applied, the decoder derives an MVD for two control points with the another precision other than the default precision” [0396]; “If, as a result of the check, the affine prediction is applied, the decoder obtains at least one syntax element indicative of resolution of a motion vector difference (or precision or accuracy) used for the affine prediction (S4802).” [0440]; “The decoder derives a control point motion vector of the current block based on the at least one syntax element (S4803)” [0441]; “ The input to the MVD coding stage at the decoder is just the coded MVD bins that have been parsed for decoding. The inputs to the MVD coding stage at the encoder are the actual MVD values and additionally a flag (“imv” flag) that indicates the resolution for the MVD encoding. The flag is used to decide if the MVD should be expressed as 1-pel (or pixel), 4-pel or as quarter-pel.” [0353])
reconstructing the current block based on the first control point motion vectors and the first reference picture (“The decoder derives a control point motion vector of the current block based on the at least one syntax element (S4803)” [0441]; Fig. 2 decoder 210 determines the control point motion vector and the reconstrued image is outputted).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Kim does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Seethal teaches a number of the one or more motion vector differences signaled in the coded video bitstream being smaller than a number of first control points in the first affine model that is applied to the current block (“Affine prediction requires coding of MVDs for a plurality of control points according to the affine motion model. That is, when affine prediction is applied, MVD information for each control point determined according to the affine motion model is signaled from the encoder to the decoder. “ [0006]; “the affine motion model using four parameters is applied, that is, the case where the upper left and right upper control points are used for affine motion prediction” [0442]; “The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453])
determining first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points in the first affine model according to the one or more motion vector differences (“The decoder derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points by using the shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0476]; “The decoder derives the motion vectors of the control points by adding the motion vector difference to the motion vector predictor (S5003).” [0480])
,…the one or more motion vector differences is a single motion vector difference that is signaled and decoded, and the single motion vector difference is combined with a first control point motion vector predictor to determine a motion vector value for the first control point motion vectors each of the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points having the same motion vector value and the same single motion vector difference (“The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453]; “The decoder derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points by using the shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0476]; “The decoder derives the motion vectors of the control points by adding the motion vector difference to the motion vector predictor (S5003).” [0480]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo in view of Kim to further add the teachings of Seethal as disclosed above to improve the compression efficiency over encoding the motion vector. (Seethal [0352]).
Regarding Claim 4, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is not the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]),
the one or more motion vector differences are two or more motion vector differences (“the MVs of the control points, whose MVDs are not signaled, may be derived as shown in Eq. 31.” [0160]; “ MVDs of control points associated with reference picture list 1 may be derived based on the symmetric property. The MVDs of control points associated with reference picture list 1 may not be signaled.” [0154]); and
the determining the first control point motion vectors includes combining the two or more motion vector differences with corresponding control point motion vector predictors to determine the first control point motion vectors for the first reference picture (“The control point MVs associated with reference picture lists may be derived. The control point MVs for control point 0 (top-left) of reference picture list 0 and reference picture list 1, may be derived, for example, using Eq. 28.”[0154]; (mvx0,0,mvy0,0)=(mvpx0,0+mvdx0,0,mvpy0,0+mvdy0,0).
Regarding Claim 7, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the current block is in an affine uni- prediction mode or an affine bi-prediction mode, and the first reference picture is in one of a reference picture list 0 or in a reference picture list 1 (“SMVD may be available for bi-prediction in the case that: reference picture list 0 includes a forward reference picture and reference picture list 1 includes a backward reference picture; or reference picture list 0 includes a backward reference picture and reference picture list 1 includes a forward reference picture” [0124]; “ the MVD of a first reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 1) may be symmetric to the MVD of a second reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 0). The motion vector coding information (e.g., MVD) of one reference picture list may be signaled, and the motion vector information of another reference picture list may not be signaled. The motion vector information of another reference picture list may be determined, for example, based on the signaled motion vector information and that the motion vector information of the reference pictures lists is symmetric. In an example, the MVD of reference picture list 0 may be signaled and the MVD of List 1 may not be signaled. The MV coded with this mode may be calculated using Eq. 24A” [0122]).
Regarding Claim 8, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1.Luo further teaches the current block is in an affine bi-prediction mode (“Some configurations of weight values w0 and w1 may indicate prediction such as uni-prediction and/or bi-prediction. For example, (w0, w1)=(1, 0) may be used in associated with uni-prediction with reference list L0. (w0, w1)=(0,1) may be used in association with uni-prediction with reference list L1. (w0, w1)=(0.5, 0.5) may be used in association with the bi-prediction with two reference lists (e.g., L1 and L2).” [0088]),
the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]), and
the method further comprises: inferring a second flag associated with a second reference picture, the second flag indicating that a second affine model associated with the second reference picture is not the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]; “The motion at the top-left control point may be related to a translational motion. The motion at the top-right control point may be related to rotation and zoom motions in the horizontal direction” [0116]).
decoding a plurality of second motion vector differences from the coded video bitstream (“if the SMVD indication indicates SMVD … the first MVD and the second MVD are symmetric to each other.” [0007]; “Table 6 shows example syntax that may be used for signaling the information related to SMVD mode in combination with affine mode.” [0161] ); and
determining second control point motion vectors associated with the second reference picture according to the plurality of second motion vector differences (“The MVDs of the control points in a reference picture list … whose MVDs are not signaled, may be derived as shown in Eq. 31.” [0160]).
Regarding Claim 9, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1.Luo further teaches the current block is in an affine bi-prediction mode (“Some configurations of weight values w0 and w1 may indicate prediction such as uni-prediction and/or bi-prediction. For example, (w0, w1)=(1, 0) may be used in associated with uni-prediction with reference list L0. (w0, w1)=(0,1) may be used in association with uni-prediction with reference list L1. (w0, w1)=(0.5, 0.5) may be used in association with the bi-prediction with two reference lists (e.g., L1 and L2).” [0088]),
the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is not the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]), and
the method further comprises: decoding, from the coded video bitstream, a second flag associated with a second reference picture, the second flag indicating whether a second affine model associated with the second reference picture is the translational motion model ( A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction. If the affine motion model is applied, a second flag may be sent to indicate whether the model is four-parameter or six-parameter” [0107]).
Regarding Claim 11, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is not the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]);
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches the number of the one or more motion vector differences is two (“And when the CU is coded as affine inter mode, a model flag is signalled for specifying whether 4-parameter or 6-parameter affine model is used for this CU. If the model flag is true, AF_6_INTER mode (6-parameter affine model) is applied and 3 MVDs will be parsed; otherwise, AF_6_INTER mode (4-parameter affine model) is applied and 2 MVDs will be parsed.” [0296]),
decoding a first motion vector difference and a second motion vector difference from the coded video bitstream (“And when the CU is coded as affine inter mode, a model flag is signalled for specifying whether 4-parameter or 6-parameter affine model is used for this CU. If the model flag is true, AF_6_INTER mode (6-parameter affine model) is applied and 3 MVDs will be parsed; otherwise, AF_6_INTER mode (4-parameter affine model) is applied and 2 MVDs will be parsed.” [0296]),; and
the determining the first control point motion vectors includes determining three control point motion vectors associated with the first reference picture according to the first motion vector difference and the second motion vector difference (“In Equation 2, v_0 indicates a motion vector CPMV0 at a top left control point 2310 of a current block 2300. v_1 indicates a motion vector CPMV1 at the top right control point 2311 of the current block 2300. v_2 indicates a motion vector CPMV2 at the bottom left control point 2312 of the current block” [0263]; “affine coding may use two control points or three control points depending on a motion model used. Accordingly, two or three motion vector differences (MVD) may be present. In other words, if two control points are used depending on a motion model, an MVD for at least one of top left (LT) and/or top right (RT) control points may be coded. If three control points are used, an MVD for at least one of top left (LT), top right (RT) and/or bottom right (LB) control point s may be coded” [0380]; Note, when using either two or three control points, then up to two or three MVDs are respectively used, including just one for one control point and either one or two for three control points).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Regarding Claim 12, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion model, and the method comprises (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]).
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Seethal teaches enabling a refinement feature associated with the translational motion model; or
disabling the refinement feature associated with the translational motion model (“In the proposed pattern-matched motion vector refinement (PMVR), the concepts of template matching and bilateral matching in PMVD in JEM are adopted. One PMVR_flag is signaled when the skip mode or merge mode is selected to indicate whether the PMVR is available or not.” [0328])
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo in view of Kim to further add the teachings of Seethal as disclosed above to improve the compression efficiency over encoding the motion vector. (Seethal [0352]).
Regarding Claim 13, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches wherein the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]), …
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches a precision of the single motion vector difference is determined according to a set of motion vector precisions associated with an affine adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR) ( “a method of processing a video signal using an affine prediction may include checking whether the affine prediction is applied to a current block, obtaining at least one syntax element indicative of resolution of a motion vector difference used in the affine prediction “ [0009]; “Preferably, obtaining the at least one syntax element may include obtaining a first syntax element indicating whether the resolution of the motion vector difference is preset default resolution, and obtaining a second syntax element indicative of the resolution of the motion vector difference among pieces of remaining resolution except the default resolution when the resolution of the motion vector difference is not the default resolution. “ [0010]; “. A decoder side motion vector refinement (DMVR) mode, an adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR) mode, etc., may be further used as an ancillary mode. “ [0187]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Regarding Claim 14, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]), … .
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches a precision of the single motion vector difference is determined according to a set of motion vector precisions associated with adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR) for translational motion vector ( “a method of processing a video signal using an affine prediction may include checking whether the affine prediction is applied to a current block, obtaining at least one syntax element indicative of resolution of a motion vector difference used in the affine prediction “ [0009]; “Preferably, obtaining the at least one syntax element may include obtaining a first syntax element indicating whether the resolution of the motion vector difference is preset default resolution, and obtaining a second syntax element indicative of the resolution of the motion vector difference among pieces of remaining resolution except the default resolution when the resolution of the motion vector difference is not the default resolution. “ [0010]; “. A decoder side motion vector refinement (DMVR) mode, an adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR) mode, etc., may be further used as an ancillary mode. “ [0187]; “if the affine prediction is applied to the current block, the decoder parses an MVD precision flag (S4407). In this case, the MVD precision flag (or affine MVD precision flag) indicates whether an adaptive affine MVD precision mode is applied. In an embodiment, if the adaptive affine MVD precision mode is applied, an affine MVD may be derived with another precision other than predefined default (or basic) precision. If the adaptive affine MVD precision mode is applied, the affine MVD may be derived with the predefined default precision. In an embodiment, the predefined default precision may be ¼ pel precision. Another precision other than the predefined default precision may include at least one of integer pel, 4 pel, ⅛ pel and/or 1/16 pel precisions.” [0395]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Regarding Claim 21, Luo teaches a method of video encoding (“video encoder “ [0094]), comprising:
encoding a first flag associated with the first reference picture indicating that the one or more motion vector differences are signaled in the video bitstream (“ The motion vector coding information (e.g., MVD) of one reference picture list may be signaled” [0122]; “An indication, such as a top left MVD only flag, may indicate whether only the MVD of the top-left control point in a reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 0) is signaled, or whether the MVDs of the control points in the reference picture list are signaled. This indication may be signaled at the CU level. Table 7 shows example syntax that may be used for signaling the information related to SMVD mode in combination with affine mode.” [0162]),… , wherein
when the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is a translational motion model, the first flag indicates that the first affine model is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]),
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches encoding one or more motion vector differences of a current block in a current picture (“The inputs to the MVD coding stage at the encoder are the actual MVD values and additionally a flag (“imv” flag) that indicates the resolution for the MVD encoding. “ [0353]; “two or three motion vector differences (MVD) may be present.” [0380]; ), the current block being encoded with an affine mode using a first affine model associated with a first reference picture, the encoded one or more motion vector differences being included in a video bitstream (“The encoding apparatus may output the encoded image information in the form of a bitstream. The prediction information may include information on prediction mode information (e.g., skip flag, merge flag or mode index, etc.) and information on motion information as information related to the prediction procedure. The information on the motion information may include candidate selection information (e.g., merge index, mvp flag or mvp index) which is information for deriving the motion vector. Further, the information on the motion information may include the information on the MVD and/or the reference picture index information.” [0170]; “an affine flag in CU level is signalled in the bitstream to indicate whether affine inter mode is used. And when the CU is coded as affine inter mode, a model flag is signalled for specifying whether 4-parameter or 6-parameter affine model is used for this CU. If the model flag is true, AF_6_INTER mode (6-parameter affine model) is applied and 3 MVDs will be parsed; otherwise, AF_6_INTER mode (4-parameter affine model) is applied and 2 MVDs will be parsed.” [0296]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Kim does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Seethal teaches a number of the one or more motion vector differences being smaller than a number of first control points in the first affine model, the encoded first flag being included in the video bitstream (“Affine prediction requires coding of MVDs for a plurality of control points according to the affine motion model. That is, when affine prediction is applied, MVD information for each control point determined according to the affine motion model is signaled from the encoder to the decoder. “ [0006]; “the affine motion model using four parameters is applied, that is, the case where the upper left and right upper control points are used for affine motion prediction” [0442]; “The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453])
,…the one or more motion vector differences is a single motion vector difference, and the single motion vector difference is combined with a first control point motion vector predictor in first control point motion vectors to determine a motion vector value for the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points in the first affine model each of the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points having the same motion vector value and the same single motion vector difference. (“The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453]; “The decoder derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points by using the shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0476]; “The decoder derives the motion vectors of the control points by adding the motion vector difference to the motion vector predictor (S5003).” [0480]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo in view of Kim to further add the teachings of Seethal as disclosed above to improve the compression efficiency over encoding the motion vector. (Seethal [0352]).
Regarding Claim 24, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 21. Luo further teaches the current block is in an affine uni-prediction mode or an affine bi-prediction mode (“Some configurations of weight values w0 and w1 may indicate prediction such as uni-prediction and/or bi-prediction. For example, (w0, w1)=(1, 0) may be used in associated with uni-prediction with reference list L0. (w0, w1)=(0,1) may be used in association with uni-prediction with reference list L1. (w0, w1)=(0.5, 0.5) may be used in association with the bi-prediction with two reference lists (e.g., L1 and L2).” [0088]), and the first reference picture is in one of a reference picture list 0 or in a reference picture list 1 (“SMVD may be available for bi-prediction in the case that: reference picture list 0 includes a forward reference picture and reference picture list 1 includes a backward reference picture; or reference picture list 0 includes a backward reference picture and reference picture list 1 includes a forward reference picture” [0124]; “ the MVD of a first reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 1) may be symmetric to the MVD of a second reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 0). The motion vector coding information (e.g., MVD) of one reference picture list may be signaled, and the motion vector information of another reference picture list may not be signaled. The motion vector information of another reference picture list may be determined, for example, based on the signaled motion vector information and that the motion vector information of the reference pictures lists is symmetric. In an example, the MVD of reference picture list 0 may be signaled and the MVD of List 1 may not be signaled. The MV coded with this mode may be calculated using Eq. 24A” [0122]).
Regarding Claim 25, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 21. Luo further teaches the current block is in an affine bi-prediction mode (“Some configurations of weight values w0 and w1 may indicate prediction such as uni-prediction and/or bi-prediction. For example, (w0, w1)=(1, 0) may be used in associated with uni-prediction with reference list L0. (w0, w1)=(0,1) may be used in association with uni-prediction with reference list L1. (w0, w1)=(0.5, 0.5) may be used in association with the bi-prediction with two reference lists (e.g., L1 and L2).” [0088]) …;
the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion
model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction … a second flag may be sent to indicate whether the model is four-parameter or six-parameter” [0107]).
the first flag indicates that the first affine model is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]) and
the second affine model is not the translational motion model ( A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction. If the affine motion model is applied, a second flag may be sent to indicate whether the model is four-parameter or six-parameter” [0107]).
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches block is encoded with the first affine model associated with the first reference picture and a second affine model associated with a second reference picture (“Up to two different affine MV predictor sets are derived from affine motion of the neighbor blocks. Neighboring blocks A0, A1, B0, B1, and B2 as shown in FIG. 25 are checked. If the neighbor block is coded using affine motion model and its reference frame is same as the reference frame of the current block, MVs at two (for 4-parameter affine model) or three (for 6-parameter affine model) control points of the current block are derived from the affine model of this neighbor.” [0281]; “FIGS. 8 and 9 are diagrams illustrating an inter prediction based video/image encoding method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure and an inter prediction unit in an encoding apparatus according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.” [0034]; “The prediction unit of the encoding apparatus/decoding apparatus may derive the predicted sample by performing the inter prediction in units of the block. The inter prediction may represent prediction derived by a method dependent to the data elements (e.g., sample values or motion information) of a picture(s) other than the current picture. When the inter prediction is applied to the current block, a predicted block (prediction sample array) for the current block may be derived based on a reference block (reference sample array) specified by the motion vector on the reference picture indicated by the reference picture index.” [0158]).;
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Regarding Claim 27, Luo teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions which when executed by a processor (“firmware incorporated in a computer-readable medium for execution by a computer or processor” [0182]) cause the processor to perform an encoding method (“video encoder “ [0094]), comprising:
encoding a first flag associated with the first reference picture indicating that the one or more motion vector differences are signaled in the video bitstream (“ The motion vector coding information (e.g., MVD) of one reference picture list may be signaled” [0122]; “An indication, such as a top left MVD only flag, may indicate whether only the MVD of the top-left control point in a reference picture list (e.g., reference picture list 0) is signaled, or whether the MVDs of the control points in the reference picture list are signaled. This indication may be signaled at the CU level. Table 7 shows example syntax that may be used for signaling the information related to SMVD mode in combination with affine mode.” [0162]),… , wherein
when the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is a translational motion model, the first flag indicates that the first affine model is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]),
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Kim teaches encoding one or more motion vector differences of a current block in a current picture (“The inputs to the MVD coding stage at the encoder are the actual MVD values and additionally a flag (“imv” flag) that indicates the resolution for the MVD encoding. “ [0353]; “two or three motion vector differences (MVD) may be present.” [0380]; ), the current block being encoded with an affine mode using a first affine model associated with a first reference picture, the encoded one or more motion vector differences being included in a video bitstream (“The encoding apparatus may output the encoded image information in the form of a bitstream. The prediction information may include information on prediction mode information (e.g., skip flag, merge flag or mode index, etc.) and information on motion information as information related to the prediction procedure. The information on the motion information may include candidate selection information (e.g., merge index, mvp flag or mvp index) which is information for deriving the motion vector. Further, the information on the motion information may include the information on the MVD and/or the reference picture index information.” [0170]; “an affine flag in CU level is signalled in the bitstream to indicate whether affine inter mode is used. And when the CU is coded as affine inter mode, a model flag is signalled for specifying whether 4-parameter or 6-parameter affine model is used for this CU. If the model flag is true, AF_6_INTER mode (6-parameter affine model) is applied and 3 MVDs will be parsed; otherwise, AF_6_INTER mode (4-parameter affine model) is applied and 2 MVDs will be parsed.” [0296]);
transmitting the video bitstream (“An output bitstream may be stored in a (digital) storage medium and transferred to the decoding apparatus or transferred to the decoding apparatus via the network.” [0172]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo to add the teachings of Kim as disclosed above to improve the accuracy of the affine prediction. (Kim [0006]).
Kim does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Seethal teaches a number of the one or more motion vector differences being smaller than a number of first control points in the first affine model, the encoded first flag being included in the video bitstream (“Affine prediction requires coding of MVDs for a plurality of control points according to the affine motion model. That is, when affine prediction is applied, MVD information for each control point determined according to the affine motion model is signaled from the encoder to the decoder. “ [0006]; “the affine motion model using four parameters is applied, that is, the case where the upper left and right upper control points are used for affine motion prediction” [0442]; “The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453])
,…the one or more motion vector differences is a single motion vector difference, and the single motion vector difference is combined with a first control point motion vector predictor in first control point motion vectors to determine a motion vector value for the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points in the first affine model each of the first control point motion vectors for the respective first control points having the same motion vector value and the same single motion vector difference. (“The motion vector difference induction unit 5102 derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points using a shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0493]; “the motion vector difference between the upper left and right upper control points of the current block may be determined as the shared motion vector difference.” [0494]; “the decoder may determine the shared MVD as the MVDs of the upper left and right upper control points. The shared MVD may be calculated, for example, as an average value of the MVDs of the upper left and upper right control points. In this case, the decoder may use the same MVD as the shared MVD at both the upper left and the upper right control points.” [0453]; “The decoder derives the motion vector difference of each of the control points by using the shared motion vector difference for the control points” [0476]; “The decoder derives the motion vectors of the control points by adding the motion vector difference to the motion vector predictor (S5003).” [0480]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo in view of Kim to further add the teachings of Seethal as disclosed above to improve the compression efficiency over encoding the motion vector. (Seethal [0352]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiancong Luo (US 20220150505 A1) (hereinafter Luo) in view of Seunghwan Kim (US 20210105481 A1)(hereinafter Kim) further in view of Paluri Seethal (WO 2020009446 A1) (hereinafter (Seethal) further in view of Han Huang (hereinafter Huang)(US 20230217012 A1):
Regarding Claim 10, Luo in view of Kim and Seethal teach the method of claim 1. Luo further teaches the first flag indicates that the first affine model associated with the first reference picture is the translational motion model (“A first flag for (e.g., each) inter coded CU may be signaled to indicate whether the translational motion model or the affine motion model is applied for inter prediction.” [0107]).
Luo does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Huang teaches an MVD sign prediction for coding the single motion vector difference is disabled (“video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may be configured to disable MVD sign prediction for bi-prediction modes. A certain condition may be set for the disabling.” [0115]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the motion vector difference coding in affine motion models as disclosed by Luo in view of Kim and Seethal to further add the teachings of Huang as disclosed above to improve overall coding performance. (Huang [0079]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA whose telephone number is (703)756-1694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jamie Atala can be reached at (571) 272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA/Examiner, Art Unit 2486
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights