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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-10, 12-14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naser et al. (WO 2024079185 A1), hereinafter referred to as Naser, in view of Li et al. (US 2022/0201281 A1), hereinafter referred to as Li
Regarding claim XXX, Naser discloses intra prediction method (See ¶¶ [0198]- [0201] disclosing video decoding that derives a directional intra prediction mode from reconstructed sample information), comprising:
obtaining an intra prediction mode corresponding to a reconstructed block (See ¶ [0006] disclosing that the directional mode is derived based on reconstructed samples in the prediction block; see also ¶¶ [0199]- [0201] disclosing determining block directionality from samples and deriving the intra mode from that directionality);
wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block is determined according to a reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block (See ¶¶ [0006]- [0007] disclosing derivation of a directional mode for a processed block and storage of that mode to generate a most probable mode (MPM) list for a neighboring prediction block), and
the reconstructed block is an encoded block or a decoded block (See ¶ [0106] explaining that “reconstructed” and “decoded” may be used interchangeably; ¶ [0116], disclosing that the decoder combines the decoded prediction residuals and predicted block such that “an image block is reconstructed” and stored for subsequent use; and ¶ [0208], disclosing a derived directional intra prediction mode associated with a previously regular intra-coded block)
Naser does not explicitly disclose deriving an intra prediction mode of a current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block.
The Examiner notes that Naser discloses, in ¶ [0155], that a primary derived intra mode of an intra mode derivation (DIMD) block may be stored with the block and used for MPM list construction of neighboring blocks. However, Naser does not expressly disclose deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block from the MPM list.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block from an MPM list (See ¶¶ [0190]- [0191] disclosing selecting an intra prediction mode from the MPM list and predicting the current block using the selected intra prediction mode).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings disclosed by Naser to add the teachings of Li as above, in order to further extend the potential of DIMD and contribute to coding efficiency improvement (Li, [0048]).
Regarding claim 2, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block being determined according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block comprises: taking the reconstructed block as a whole, and determining an intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block; or partitioning the reconstructed block into multiple sub-blocks, and determining an intra prediction mode corresponding to each of the multiple sub-blocks respectively according to reconstructed samples of the multiple sub-blocks (See ¶¶[0201]- [0203] disclosing analysis of the entire prediction unit, wherein the directionality of the prediction block is determined based on samples in the prediction block and the intra prediction mode is derived based on the determined directionality).
Regarding claim 4, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block is an angular mode (See ¶¶ [0148]- [0149], [0197]- [0201], disclosing angular intra prediction modes corresponding to directional prediction modes and derivation of a directional intra prediction mode corresponding to the block).
Regarding claim 5, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 4, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Naser does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 4, wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block being determined according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block comprises: determining horizontal gradients and vertical gradients of multiple samples in the reconstructed block according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block;
determining an angular mode to which each of the multiple samples matches according to the horizontal gradients and the vertical gradients of the multiple samples; and
using an angular mode with a largest number of matches or an angular mode with a largest accumulated amplitude as an intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block;
wherein an accumulated amplitude of an angular mode is obtained by accumulating absolute values of the horizontal gradients and absolute values of the vertical gradients of all samples matching the angular mode in the reconstructed block.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block being determined according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block comprises: determining horizontal gradients and vertical gradients of multiple samples in the reconstructed block according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block (See ¶¶ [0034]- [0035] disclosing gradient calculation on reconstructed sample of neighboring blocks and deriving horizontal and vertical gradients Gx and Gy for every 3×3 window formed by the set of neighboring pixel);
determining an angular mode to which each of the multiple samples matches according to the horizontal gradients and the vertical gradients of the multiple samples (See ¶¶ [0036]- [0039] deriving an orientation from Gx and Gy and mapping the orientation to a prediction direction); and
using an angular mode with a largest number of matches or an angular mode with a largest accumulated amplitude as an intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block
wherein an accumulated amplitude of an angular mode is obtained by accumulating absolute values of the horizontal gradients and absolute values of the vertical gradients of all samples matching the angular mode in the reconstructed block (See ¶ [0036] defining gradient intensity as |Gx| + |Gy|, and ¶ [0040] accumulating intensity by orientation and selecting the direction having the highest accumulated sum).
The motivation for combining Naser and Li has been discussed in connection with claim 1, above.
Regarding claim 6, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 4, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block being determined according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block comprises: partitioning the reconstructed block into multiple sub-blocks, and determining an intra prediction mode corresponding to each of the multiple sub-blocks respectively (See ¶¶[0215]-[0217] disclosing a CU split into multiple TUs and performing equivalent directional intra mode derivation on every TU).
Naser does not explicitly disclose determining horizontal gradients and vertical gradients of samples in a sub-block according to a reconstructed sample of the sub-block;
determining an angular mode matched to each sample according to a horizontal gradient and a vertical gradient of the sample; and
using an angular mode with a largest number of matches or an angular mode with a largest accumulated amplitude as an intra prediction mode corresponding to the sub-block; wherein an accumulated amplitude of an angular mode is obtained by accumulating absolute values of the horizontal gradients and absolute values of the vertical gradients of all samples matching the angular mode in the sub-block.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses determining horizontal gradients and vertical gradients of samples in a sub-block according to a reconstructed sample of the sub-block (See ¶¶ [0034]- [0035] disclosing calculation of horizontal and vertical gradients Gx and Gy from reconstructed-sample windows);
determining an angular mode matched to each sample according to a horizontal gradient and a vertical gradient of the sample (See ¶¶ [0036]- [0039] mapping horizontal and vertical gradient values to an orientation and then to a prediction direction); and
using an angular mode with a largest number of matches or an angular mode with a largest accumulated amplitude as an intra prediction mode corresponding to the sub-block; wherein an accumulated amplitude of an angular mode is obtained by accumulating absolute values of the horizontal gradients and absolute values of the vertical gradients of all samples matching the angular mode in the sub-block (See ¶[0036] defining intensity as |Gx| + |Gy|, and ¶[0040] accumulating intensity by orientation and selecting the direction having the highest accumulated sum).
The motivation for combining Naser and Li has been discussed in connection with claim 1, above.
Regarding claim 7, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block comprises: obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block from a constructed intra prediction mode list, wherein the intra prediction mode list is configured to store an intra prediction mode corresponding to a reconstructed block according to a position of the reconstructed block; or determining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block according to the reconstructed sample of the reconstructed block (See ¶¶[0006] and [0199]- [0201 deriving the directional mode based on reconstructed samples).
Regarding claim 8, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Naser does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein after deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block, the method further comprises: performing intra prediction on the current block according to the intra prediction mode used for the current block determined by deriving the intra prediction mode.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein after deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block, the method further comprises: performing intra prediction on the current block according to the intra prediction mode used for the current block determined by deriving the intra prediction mode (See ¶ [0191] disclosing generation of the current block prediction using the selected intra mode from the MPM list).
The motivation for combining Naser and Li has been discussed in connection with claim 1, above.
Regarding claim 9, Naser discloses a video decoding method, comprising (See ¶¶ [0198]- [0201] and [0221] disclosing a video-decoding process that derives a directional intra prediction mode from reconstructed-sample information):
determining that an intra prediction mode of a current block needs to be derived based on a reconstructed sample (See ¶¶ [0198]- [0201] disclosing identification of a block condition for which a directional mode is derived and derivation of that mode from reconstructed-sample information);
obtaining an intra prediction mode corresponding to a reconstructed block based on the method according to claim 1, and deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block (See ¶¶ [0199]- [0201] deriving the block’s directional intra prediction mode from reconstructed samples, and ¶ [0155] using the stored derived mode for neighboring-block MPM-list construction);
Naser does not explicitly disclose performing intra prediction on the current block according to the intra prediction mode used for the current block determined by deriving the intra prediction mode.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses performing intra prediction on the current block according to the intra prediction mode used for the current block determined by deriving the intra prediction mode (See ¶ [0191], disclosing prediction of the current block using the intra prediction mode selected from the MPM list).
The motivation for combining Naser and Li has been discussed in connection with claim 1, above.
Regarding claim 10, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 9, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein
determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample comprises: obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block and deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block comprises: obtaining, according to a neighboring position coordinate of the current block, an intra prediction mode corresponding to a reconstructed block where the neighboring position coordinate is located or an intra prediction mode corresponding to a sub-block into which the reconstructed block where the neighboring position coordinate is located is partitioned (See Naser ¶¶ [0193]- [0194] identifying specific spatial neighbor positions and retrieving/storing an intra mode in a position-indexed buffer);
constructing an MPM list according to the obtained intra prediction mode (See Naser ¶ [0155] disclosing use of a stored derived DIMD mode for neighboring-block MPM-list construction, and ¶¶ [0193]- [0194], disclosing spatial-neighbor modes and position-resolved mode information used in MPM construction).
Naser does not explicitly disclose the in a case of determining that a most probable mode (MPM) is used for the current block, determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample; and
determining the intra prediction mode used for the current block according to an MPM index obtained by decoding and the MPM list.
However, Li from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the in a case of determining that a most probable mode (MPM) is used for the current block, determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample (See ¶¶ [0046]- [0050] disclosing DIMD derivation and insertion of derived modes into the MPM list); and
determining the intra prediction mode used for the current block according to an MPM index obtained by decoding and the MPM list (See ¶ [0190] disclosing decoding the MPM index; and ¶ [0191] disclosing predicting with the selected MPM candidate).
The motivation for combining Naser and Li has been discussed in connection with claim 1, above.
Regarding claim 12, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 9, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Naser discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein before obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block, the method further comprises: determining an intra prediction mode used for the reconstructed block (See Naser ¶¶ [0196]- [0198] disclosing identifying a prediction mode used for a block, including a non-directional prediction mode and then deriving an equivalent directional intra mode); and
obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block in a case where the prediction mode used for the reconstructed block is any one or more of following modes: an inter prediction mode, a matrix weighted intra prediction (MIP) mode, an intra template matching prediction (IntraTmp) mode, a template-based intra mode derivation (TIMD) mode, a decoder-side intra mode derivation (DIMD) mode, a geometric partitioning mode (GPM) mode, an angular weighted prediction (AWP) mode, an intra block copy (IBC) mode, an intra prediction filter (IPF) mode, or a multiple intra prediction filter (MIPF) mode (See ¶[0196] identifying inter prediction as one of the prediction mode applicable to the block; and ¶¶ [0197]- [0203] disclosing deriving an equivalent directional intra prediction mode for a block employing such a non-directional prediction mode).
Regarding claims 13, 14 and 16, these claims are rejected based on the same art and evidentiary limitations applied to the video decoding method of claims 9, 10 and 12, since they claim analogous subject matter in the form of a video encoding method for performing the same or equivalent functionality.
The Examiner notes that it is well-known in the art that video compression involves a complementary pair of systems: an encoder and a decoder. The encoder converts the source data into a compressed form, occupying a reduced number of bits prior to transmission or storage, while the decoder converts the compressed form back into a representation of the original video data by performing a reciprocal process to that of the encoder, decoding the encoded video data from the bitstream.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, these claims are rejected based on the same art and evidentiary limitations applied to the video decoding method of claims 9 and 10, since they claim analogous subject matter in the form of a video decoding apparatus for performing the same or equivalent functionality.
Furthermore, Naser discloses a video decoding apparatus, comprising a processor and a memory storing a computer program -(See ¶ [0119]).
Regarding claim 20, this claim is rejected based on the same art and evidentiary limitations applied to the video encoding method of claim 13, since it claims analogous subject matter in the form of a video encoding apparatus for performing the same or equivalent functionality.
Furthermore, Naser discloses a video encoding apparatus, comprising a processor and a memory storing a computer program -(See ¶ [0119]).
Claims 3, 11, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naser, in view of Li, and further, in view of Xiu (US 20190166370 A1), hereinafter referred to as Xiu.
Regarding claim 3, Naser and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 2, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Naser does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 2, wherein
partitioning the reconstructed block into the multiple sub-blocks comprises: in a case where a size of the reconstructed block is N times of 4×4, partitioning the reconstructed block into multiple sub-blocks of size 4×4, wherein N≥2.
However, Xiu from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein partitioning the reconstructed block into the multiple sub- blocks comprises: in a case where a size of the reconstructed block is N times of 4×4, partitioning the reconstructed block into multiple sub-blocks of size 4×4, wherein N≥2 (See ¶ [0046] disclosing PART_NxN in which an intra-coded CU is split into four equal-size prediction units, each having its own intra prediction mode; and ¶[0049] disclosing intra prediction transform-unit sizes including 4×4 to 32x32).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings disclosed by Naser and Li to add the teachings of Xiu as above, in order to reduce intra prediction parameter signaling overhead by harnessing computational capacity of the decode (Xiu, [0004]).
Regarding claim 11, Naser, Li and Xiu disclose all the limitations of claim 9, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Naser does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 9, wherein
determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample comprises: in a case of determining that the current block is a chroma block for which a direct mode (DM) is used, determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample; and
obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block and deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block comprises: obtaining an intra prediction mode corresponding to a luma block at a corresponding position of the current block or an intra prediction mode corresponding to a sub-block into which the luma block is partitioned, and determining the obtained intra prediction mode as the intra prediction mode used for the current block.
However, Li or Xiu from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample comprises: in a case of determining that the current block is a chroma block for which a direct mode (DM) is used, determining that the intra prediction mode of the current block needs to be derived based on the reconstructed sample (See ¶ [0141] describing a current chroma block in DM whose mode depends on the corresponding luma block, including the case where the luma block is DIMD and its mode is derived after reconstruction); and
obtaining the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block and deriving the intra prediction mode of the current block based on the intra prediction mode corresponding to the reconstructed block comprises: obtaining an intra prediction mode corresponding to a luma block at a corresponding position of the current block or an intra prediction mode corresponding to a sub-block into which the luma block is partitioned (See Xiu ¶[0141] disclosing that chroma DM uses the same intra prediction mode of the corresponding luma block.), and determining the obtained intra prediction mode as the intra prediction mode used for the current block (See ¶ [0141] disclosing directly assigning the corresponding luma intra mode to the chroma DM block).
The motivation for combining Naser, Li and Xiu has been discussed in connection with claim 3, above.
Regarding claim 15, this claim is rejected based on the same art and evidentiary limitations applied to the video decoding method of claim 11, since it claims analogous subject matter in the form of a video encoding method for performing the same or equivalent functionality.
The Examiner notes that it is well-known in the art that video compression involves a complementary pair of systems: an encoder and a decoder. The encoder converts the source data into a compressed form, occupying a reduced number of bits prior to transmission or storage, while the decoder converts the compressed form back into a representation of the original video data by performing a reciprocal process to that of the encoder, decoding the encoded video data from the bitstream.
Regarding claim 19, this claim is rejected based on the same art and evidentiary limitations applied to the video decoding method of claim 11, since it claims analogous subject matter in the form of a video decoding apparatus for performing the same or equivalent functionality.
Furthermore, Naser discloses a video encoding apparatus, comprising a processor and a memory storing a computer program -(See ¶ [0119]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for additional references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABIO S LIMA whose telephone number is (571)270-0625. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM (EST).
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FABIO S LIMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights