DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-8 and 10-20 are pending for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 05/23/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 10-14, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al, US 20200099956 A1 (Han), in view of Yu et al, US 20130272385 A1 (Yu).
Regarding Claim 1, Han discloses a rate-distortion optimized quantization method, comprising (Han ¶ [0114]– During the quantization process, such as described with respect to the quantization stage 406 of FIG. 4, a rate distortion optimized quantization (RDOQ) process determines…): determining a plurality of mapping groups in a superblock (Han ¶ [0079]– FIG. 7 includes...a non-zero map 706, a level-1 map 707, a level-2 map 709, an end-of-block map 726, a sign map 732, and a coefficient residual map 734.), wherein each mapping group comprises a context (Han ¶ [0074]– A context model based on the binary values of any number of previously coded neighbors can be determined. The context model can fully utilize information from all these neighbors. The previously coded neighbors can be neighbors in the same...map or a preceding...map) and an initial quantization level (Han ¶ [0115]– the RDOQ may initially provide a quantized transform coefficient Q(x)), the superblock is a coding block unit in a to-be-coded video frame (Han Fig. 3; ¶ [0059]– the frame 306 may be further subdivided into blocks 310), the superblock comprises a plurality of elements (Han Fig. 7– transform block 704 and transform coefficients 720, 739, 708), and the context is used to represent correlation information (Han ¶ [0156]– FIGS. 10A-10B is a diagram of examples 1000 of templates for determining a coding context according to implementations of this disclosure; Han ¶ [0161]– When a 1D vertical transform type is applied, the to-be-coded value 1032 is more correlated with vertical neighbor values than with horizontal neighbor values) between an element associated with a corresponding mapping group and a plurality of adjacent elements (Han ¶ [0101]– FIG. 8 is a diagram of previously coded neighbors in a non-zero map 800; Han Fig. 8– current value 802 is an element associated with non-zero map 800 which includes ten coded text neighbors);
and determining a target quantization level of each element in the superblock (Han ¶ [0115]– RDOQ considers the rate (e.g., a number of bits) of coding the quantized transform coefficient Q(x) in addition to the distortion, the RDOQ may obtain another quantized transform coefficient Q′(x) that provides a better overall rate distortion cost) of each mapping group (Han ¶ [0079]– FIG. 7 includes...a non-zero map 706, a level-1 map 707, a level-2 map 709, an end-of-block map 726, a sign map 732, and a coefficient residual map 734).
However, Han does not explicitly disclose determining a coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group; wherein the coded bit quantity difference is a difference between a coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level in the corresponding mapping group and a coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level minus one in the corresponding mapping group; based on the coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group.
Yu teaches determining a coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group (Yu ¶ [0209]– Rlevel is the number of bits estimated to encode a quantized level; Yu ¶ [0210]– The multiplication table may specify a value of λ· Rlevel for each combination of a context and a quantized level value);
wherein the coded bit quantity difference is a difference between a coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level in the corresponding mapping group and a coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level minus one in the corresponding mapping group (Yu ¶ [102]– video encoder 20 may determine rate-distortion costs of quantizing the coefficient to be the initial quantized level and the initial quantized level minus one; Yu ¶[209]– Rlevel is the number of bits estimated to encode a quantized level);
based on the coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group (Yu ¶ [0209]– Rlevel is the number of bits estimated to encode a quantized level; Yu ¶ [0210]– The multiplication table may specify a value of λ· Rlevel for each combination of a context and a quantized level value).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Han to incorporate determining a coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group as taught by Yu.
One would be motivated to combine Yu’s determining a coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group to reduce complexity (Yu ¶ [0025]– The techniques of this disclosure may reduce the complexity of the RDOQ technique).
Regarding Claim 3, Han in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the superblock corresponds to a plurality of transform units (Han Fig. 7– transform block 704 and transform coefficients 720, 739, 708);
and the determining a target quantization level of each element in the superblock based on the coded bit quantity difference of each mapping group comprises: determining a context of each element in a transform unit (Han FIG. 8– a diagram of previously coded context neighbors);
and scanning the transform unit in a preset sequence, and performing following operations when a current element in the transform unit is scanned (Han [0079]– FIG. 7 includes the zigzag forward scan order 702): obtaining an initial quantization level and a target context of the current element in response to the initial quantization level of the current element being a non-zero value (Han ¶ [0115]– For example, in response to receiving a transform coefficient value x, the RDOQ may initially provide a quantized transform coefficient Q(x)...the RDOQ may obtain another quantized transform coefficient Q′(x) that provides a better overall rate distortion cost.; Han ¶ [0110]– nz[i] indicates that the transform coefficient at scan position i is non-zero (e.g., nz[i]=1)), wherein the current element is an element in the transform unit (Han ¶ [0041]– a current transform coefficient of a transform block);
querying a target mapping group from the mapping group based on the initial quantization level and the target context of the current element (Han ¶ [0191]– The context index ctx can be used to select a context for coding the current transform coefficient);
and determining a target quantization level of the current element (Han ¶ [0115]– RDOQ considers the rate (e.g., a number of bits) of coding the quantized transform coefficient Q(x) in addition to the distortion, the RDOQ may obtain another quantized transform coefficient Q′(x) that provides a better overall rate distortion cost) in the target mapping group (Han Fig. 8– non-zero map 800).
However, Han does not explicitly disclose based on a target coded bit quantity difference.
Yu teaches based on a target coded bit quantity difference (Yu [0209]– Rlevel is the number of bits estimated to encode a quantized level).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Han to incorporate based on a target coded bit quantity difference as taught by Yu.
One would be motivated to combine Yu’s target coded bit quantity difference in order to reduce complexity. Please see motivation of Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 4, Han in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 3, further comprising: storing a mapping relationship between a position of each element and a context of each element in a context array (Han ¶ [0039]– The available context models in a codec may be available as a list, an array, a file, or some other suitable data structure...a respective context index can be associated with each context model);
and the obtaining an initial quantization level and a target context of the current element in response to the initial quantization level of the current element being a non-zero value comprises: querying the target context from the context array based on a position of the current element (Han ¶ [0039]– The context index is then used to select (e.g., retrieve, access, etc.) the corresponding context model; Han [0098]– The coding context of a to-be-coded value at a current position … can also be based on the position of the to-be-coded value within the non-zero map).
Regarding Claim 5, Han and Yu teach the method of Claim 3, as outlined above.
In addition, Han in view of Yu teaches wherein the determining a target quantization level of the current element based on a target coded bit quantity difference in the target mapping group comprises: determining the initial quantization level of the current element as the target quantization level of the current element (Yu Fig. 6– 306: Determine rate-distortion costs of quantizing the coefficient to be the initial quantized level for the coefficient);
being not greater than a reference threshold (Yu Fig. 6– 305: Initial quantized level is less than 3);
and determining the initial quantization level minus one of the current element as the target quantization level of the current element (Yu Fig. 6– 308: Determine rate-distortion costs of quantizing the coefficient to be... the initial quantized level minus 1);
being greater than the reference threshold (Yu Fig. 6– 305: Initial quantized level is [not] less than 3).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Han to incorporate a threshold-based selection between the initial quantization level and the initial quantization level minus one as taught by Yu.
One would be motivated to combine Yu’s threshold-based selection to provide a decision criterion for selecting between the initial quantization level and the initial quantization level minus one (Yu Fig 6– 305 (yes/no); 306; 308).
Regarding Claim 8, Han in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level in the corresponding mapping group is obtained based on the context (Han ¶ [0039]– The context index is then used to select (e.g., retrieve, access, etc.) the corresponding context model) and the initial quantization level in the corresponding mapping group (Han ¶ [0079]– FIG. 7 includes...a non-zero map 706, a level-1 map 707, a level-2 map 709, an end-of-block map 726, a sign map 732, and a coefficient residual map 734);
and the coded bit quantity of the initial quantization level minus one in the corresponding mapping group is obtained based on the context (Han ¶ [0039]– The context index is then used to select (e.g., retrieve, access, etc.) the corresponding context model) and the initial quantization level minus one in the corresponding mapping group (Han ¶ [0087]– For a level-k map, the preceding level map is the level-(k−1) map corresponding to the preceding map level (k−1). That is, for k=2, the preceding level map is the level-1 map. For k=1, the preceding level map is the level-0 map...).
With regard to Claim 10, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 1 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 1 is applied to Claim 10. Furthermore, Han discloses a computer device (Han ¶ [0052]– computing device 200), comprising a memory (Han ¶ [0053]– A memory 204), a processor (Han Fig. 2– Processor 202), and computer-readable instructions (Han ¶ [0060]– The computer software program can include machine instructions) that are stored in the memory and that are capable of running on the processor, wherein when executing the computer-readable instructions, the processor is configured to implement the following steps (Han ¶ [0060]– when executed by a processor such as the CPU 202, cause the transmitting station 102 to).
With regard to Claim 11, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 2 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 11 is applied to Claim 2.
With regard to Claim 12, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 3 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 3 is applied to Claim 12.
With regard to Claim 13, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 4 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 4 is applied to Claim 13.
With regard to Claim 14, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 5 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 5 is applied to Claim 14.
With regard to Claim 17, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 8 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 8 is applied to Claim 17.
With regard to Claim 18, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 1 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 1 is applied to Claim 18. Furthermore, Han discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Han ¶ [0268]– a tangible computer-usable or computer-readable medium. The medium can be, for example, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, or a semiconductor device), storing computer-readable instructions (Han ¶ [0268]– a computer program product accessible from, for example, a tangible computer-usable or computer-readable medium. A computer-usable or computer-readable medium can be any device that can… store… the program for use by or in connection with any processor), wherein the computer-readable instructions are capable of being executed by at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform the following steps (Han ¶ [0268]– a computer program product accessible from, for example, a tangible computer-usable or computer-readable medium. A computer-usable or computer-readable medium can be any device that can… store… the program for use by or in connection with any processor).
With regard to Claim 20, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 3 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 3 is applied to Claim 20.
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han, in view of Yu, and further in view of Kuusela et al, US 20200021855 A1 (Kuusela).
Regarding Claim 2, Han in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising: storing a mapping relationship between each mapping group, in a array (Han ¶ [0039]– The available context models in a codec may be available as a list, an array, a file, or some other suitable data structure...a respective context index can be associated with each context model),
However, Han does not explicitly disclose wherein the bit quantity difference array comprises a first bit quantity difference array and a second bit quantity difference array, wherein the first bit quantity difference array corresponds to an initial quantization level lower than a first preset value; and the second bit quantity difference array corresponds to an initial quantization level between a second preset value and a third preset value.
Kuusela teaches wherein the bit quantity difference array comprises a first bit quantity difference array and a second bit quantity difference array (Kuusela ¶ [0101]– In some implementations, the register sets include at least a first register array that has a first size (e.g., for storing a first number of values) and a second register array that has a second size (e.g., for storing a second number of values)…), wherein the first bit quantity difference array corresponds to an initial quantization level lower than a first preset value (Kuusela [0326]– the register arrays equal to the value BL[i] … as long as the value BL[i] is less than the maximum value for BL[i] (e.g., 3));
and the second bit quantity difference array corresponds to an initial quantization level between a second preset value and a third preset value (Kuusela [0087]– for each quantized transform coefficient having an absolute value for its magnitude greater than two (e.g., BL(i)=3), the value BR[i] denotes the magnitude of the quantized transform coefficient at scan position i, and is equal to the magnitude value of the quantized transform coefficient for scan position i minus three; Kuusela [0090]– BR(i) may take any of the values from 0 to 12).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Han to incorporate first and second register arrays as taught by Kuusela.
One would be motivated to combine Kuusela’s use of first and second register arrays to reduce reliance on base information and increase efficiency and avoid performance issues (Kussela ¶ [0137]– This implementation reduces reliance on base information, which can increase efficiency and avoid performance issues).
With regard to Claim 19, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 2 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 2 is applied to Claim 19.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han, in view of Yu, and further in view of Fang et al, US 20130215970 A1 (Fang).
Regarding Claim 7, Han and Yu teach the method of Claim 3 as outlined above.
However, Han in view of Yu does not explicitly disclose further comprising: skipping the current element in response to the initial quantization level of the current element being zero, and scanning a next element of the current element.
Fang teaches further comprising: skipping the current element in response to the initial quantization level of the current element being zero, and scanning a next element of the current element (Fang ¶ [0182]– The coefficients 1802 of each subblock are scanned and encoded following a coefficient scan pattern 2002; Fang ¶ [0183]– the zero-valued coefficients of the subblock 1832A are not encoded during this process, but the non-zero coefficients are coded; Fang ¶ [0191]– the coefficients that follow…in the coefficient scan pattern are…zeros and…can be skipped).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Han to incorporate skipping a current element if its quantization level is zero as taught by Fang.
One would be motivated to combine Fang’s skipping a current element if its quantization level is zero to save processing and bits (Fang ¶ [0191]– Consequently, the encoding of these coefficients can be skipped to save processing and bits).
With regard to Claim 16, the claim limitations are essentially the same as Claim 7 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 7 is applied to Claim 16.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
the prior art alone or in combination does not teach determining a reference threshold for rate-distortion optimized quantization by mathematically combining a quantization step, an initial quantization level, and a transform coefficient of a current element.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTIAN P MCFALL whose telephone number is (571)270-0773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
/C.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/JOSEPH G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights