Category Archives: YouTube Engineering and Developers Blog

What’s happening with engineering and developers at YouTube

Variable speed playback on mobile

Variable speed playback was launched on the web several years ago and is one of our most highly requested features on mobile. Now, it’s here! You can speed up or slow down videos in the YouTube app on iOS and on Android devices running Android 5.0+. Playback speed can be adjusted from 0.25x (quarter speed) to 2x (double speed) in the overflow menu of the player controls.

The most commonly used speed setting on the web is 1.25x, closely followed by 1.5x. Speed watching is the new speed listening which was the new speed reading, especially when consuming long lectures or interviews. But variable speed isn’t just useful for skimming through content to save time, it can also be an important tool for investigating finer details. For example, you might want to slow down a tutorial to learn some new choreography or figure out a guitar strumming pattern.

To speed up or slow down audio while retaining its comprehensibility, our main challenge was to efficiently change the duration of the audio signal without affecting the pitch or introducing distortion. This process is called time stretching. Without time stretching, an audio signal that was originally at 100 Hz becomes 200 Hz at double speed causing that chipmunk effect. Similarly, slowing down the speed will lower the pitch. Time stretching can be achieved using a phase vocoder, which transforms the signal into its frequency domain representation to make phase adjustments before producing a lengthened or shortened version. Time stretching can also be done in the time domain by carefully selecting windows from the original signal to be assembled into the new one. On Android, we used the Sonic library for our audio manipulation in ExoPlayer. Sonic uses PICOLA, a time domain based algorithm. On iOS, AVplayer has a built in playback rate feature with configurable time stretching. Here, we have chosen to use the spectral (frequency domain) algorithm.

To speed up or slow down video, we render the video frames in alignment with the modified audio timestamps. Video frames are not necessarily encoded chronologically, so for the video to stay in sync with the audio playback, the video decoder needs to work faster than the rate at which the video frames need to be rendered. This is especially pertinent at higher playback speeds. On mobile, there are also often more network and hardware constraints than on desktop that limit our ability to decode video as fast as necessary. For example, less reliable wireless links will affect how quickly and accurately we can download video data, and then battery, CPU speed, and memory size will limit the processing power we can spend on decoding it. To address these issues, we adapt the video quality to be only as high as we can download dependably. The video decoder can also skip forward to the next key frame if it has fallen behind the renderer, or the renderer can drop already decoded frames to catch up to the audio track.

If you want to check out the feature, try this: turn up your volume and play the classic dramatic chipmunk at 0.5x to see an EVEN MORE dramatic chipmunk. Enjoy!


Posted by Pallavi Powale, Software Engineer, recently watched “Dramatic Chipmunk” at 0.5x speed.

Blur select faces with the updated Blur Faces tool

In 2012 we launched face blurring as a visual anonymity feature, allowing creators to obscure all faces in their video. Last February we followed up with custom blurring to let creators blur any objects in their video, even as they move. Since then we’ve been hard at work improving our face blurring tool.

Today we’re launching a new and improved version of Blur Faces, allowing creators to easily and accurately blur specific faces in their videos. The tool now displays images of the faces in the video, and creators simply click an image to blur that individual throughout their video.

english_us_short (3).gif

To introduce this feature, we had to improve the accuracy of our face detection tools, allowing for recognition of the same person across an entire video. The tool is designed for a wide array of situations that we see in YouTube videos, including users wearing glasses, occlusion (the face being blocked, for example, by a hand), and people leaving the video and coming back later.

Instead of having to use video editing software to manually create feathered masks and motion tracks, our Blur Faces tool automatically handles motion and presents creators with a thumbnail that encapsulates all instances of that individual recognized by our technology. Creators can apply these blurring edits to already uploaded videos without losing views, likes, and comments by choosing to “Save” the edits in-place. Applying the effect using “Save As New” and deleting the original video will remove the original unblurred video from YouTube for an extra level of privacy. The blur applied to the published video cannot be practically reversed, but keep in mind that blurring does not guarantee absolute anonymity.

To get to Blur Faces, go to the Enhance tool for a video you own. This can be done from the Video Manager or watch page. The Blur Faces tool can be found under the “Blurring Effects” tab of Enhancements. The following image shows how to get there.

english_us_gettofeature.gif

When you open the Blur Faces tool on your video for the first time, we start processing your video for faces. During processing, we break your video up into chunks of frames, and start detecting faces on each frame individually. We use a high-quality face detection model to increase our accuracy, and at the same time, we look for scene changes and compute motion vectors throughout the video which we will use later.

english_us_short2.gif

Once we’ve detected the faces in each frame of your video, we start matching face detections within a single scene of the video, relying on both the visual characteristics of the face as well as the face’s motion. To compute motion, we use the same technology that powers our Custom Blurring feature. Face detections aren’t perfect, so we use a few techniques to help us hone in on edge cases such as tracking motion through occlusions (see the water bottle in the above GIF) and near the edge of the video frame. Finally, we compute visual similarity across what we found in each scene, pick the best face to show as a thumbnail, and present it to you.

Before publishing your changes, we encourage you to preview the video. As we cannot guarantee 100 percent accuracy in every video, you can use our Custom Blurring tool to further enhance the automated face blurring edits in the same interface.

Ryan Stevens, Software Engineer, recently watched 158,962,555,217,826,360,000 (Enigma Machine), and Ian Pudney, Software Engineer, recently watched Wood burning With Lightning. Lichtenberg Figures!

Visualizing Sound Effects

At YouTube, we understand the power of video to tell stories, move people, and leave a lasting impression. One part of storytelling that many people take for granted is sound, yet sound adds color to the world around us. Just imagine not being able to hear music, the joy of a baby laughing, or the roar of a crowd. But this is often a reality for the 360 million people around the world who are deaf and hard of hearing. Over the last decade, we have been working to change that.

The first step came over ten years ago with the launch of captions. And in an effort to scale this technology, automated captions came a few years later. The success of that effort has been astounding, and a few weeks ago we announced that the number of videos with automatic captions now exceeds 1 billion. Moreover, people watch videos with automatic captions more than 15 million times per day. And we have made meaningful improvements to quality, resulting in a 50 percent leap in accuracy for automatic captions in English, which is getting us closer and closer to human transcription error rates.

But there is more to sound and the enjoyment of a video than words. In a joint effort between YouTube, Sound Understanding, and Accessibility teams, we embarked on the task of developing the first ever automatic sound effect captioning system for YouTube. This means finding a way to identify and label all those other sounds in the video without manual input.

We started this project by taking on a wide variety of challenges, such as how to best design the sound effect recognition system and what sounds to prioritize. At the heart of the work was utilizing thousands of hours of videos to train a deep neural network model to achieve high quality recognition results. There are more details in a companion post here.

As a result, we can now automatically detect the existence of these sound effects in a video and transcribe it to appropriate classes or sound labels. With so many sounds to choose from, we started with [APPLAUSE], [MUSIC] and [LAUGHTER], since these were among the most frequent manually captioned sounds, and they can add meaningful context for viewers who are deaf and hard of hearing.

So what does this actually look like when you are watching a YouTube video? The sound effect is merged with the automatic speech recognition track and shown as part of standard automatic captions.


Click the CC button to see the sound effect captioning system in action

We are still in the early stages of this work, and we are aware that these captions are fairly simplistic. However, the infrastructural backend to this system will allow us to expand and easily apply this framework to other sound classes. Future challenges might include adding other common sound classes like ringing, barking and knocking, which present particular problems -- for example, with ringing we need to be able to decipher if this is an alarm clock, a door or a phone as described here.

Since the addition of sound effect captions presented a number of unique challenges on both the machine learning end as well as the user experience, we continue to work to better understand the effect of the captioning system on the viewing experience, how viewers use sound effect information, and how useful it is to them. From our initial user studies, two-thirds of participants said these sound effect captions really enhance the overall experience, especially when they added crucial “invisible” sound information that people cannot tell from the visual cues. Overall, users reported that their experience wouldn't be impacted by the system making occasional mistakes as long as it was able to provide good information more often than not.

We are excited to support automatic sound effect captioning on YouTube, and we hope this system helps us make information useful and accessible for everyone.

Noah Wang, software engineer, recently watched "The Expert (Short Comedy Sketch)."

Improving VR videos

At YouTube, we are focused on enabling the kind of immersive and interactive experiences that only VR can provide, making digital video as immersive as it can be. In March 2015, we launched support for 360-degree videos shortly followed by VR (3D 360) videos. In 2016 we brought 360 live streaming and spatial audio and a dedicated YouTube VR app to our users.

Now, in a joint effort between YouTube and Daydream, we're adding new ways to make 360 and VR videos look even more realistic.

360 videos need a large numbers of pixels per video frame to achieve a compelling immersive experience. In the ideal scenario, we would match human visual acuity which is 60 pixels per degree of immersive content. We are however limited by user internet connection speed and device capabilities. One way to bridge the gap between these limitations and the human visual acuity is to use better projection methods.

Better Projections

A Projection is the mapping used to fit a 360-degree world view onto a rectangular video surface. The world map is a good example of a spherical earth projected on a rectangular piece of paper. A commonly used projection is called equirectangular projection. Initially, we chose this projection when we launched 360 videos because it is easy to produce by camera software and easy to edit.

However, equirectangular projection has some drawbacks:

  • It has high quality at the poles (top and bottom of image) where people don’t look as much – typically, sky overhead and ground below are not that interesting to look at.
  • It has lower quality at the equator or horizon where there is typically more interesting content.
  • It has fewer vertical pixels for 3D content.
  • A straight line motion in the real world does not result in a straight line motion in equirectangular projection, making videos hard to compress.




Drawbacks of equirectangular (EQ) projection

These drawbacks made us look for better projection types for 360-degree videos. To compare different projection types we used saturation maps. A saturation map shows the ratio of video pixel density to display pixel density. The color coding goes from red (low) to orange, yellow, green and finally blue (high). Green indicates optimal pixel density of near 1:1. Yellow and orange indicate insufficient density (too few video pixels for the available display pixels) and blue indicates wasted resources (too many video pixels for the available display pixels). The ideal projection would lead to a saturation map that is uniform in color. At sufficient video resolution it would be uniformly green.

We investigated cubemaps as a potential candidate. Cubemaps have been used by computer games for a long time to display the skybox and other special effects.

eqr_saturation.png


Equirectangular projection saturation map

cubemap_saturation.png


Cubemap projection saturation map

In the equirectangular saturation map the poles are blue, indicating wasted pixels. The equator (horizon) is orange, indicating an insufficient number of pixels. In contrast, the cubemap has green (good) regions nearer to the equator, and the wasteful blue regions at the poles are gone entirely. However, the cubemap results in large orange regions (not good) at the equator because a cubemap samples more pixels at the corners than at the center of the faces.

We achieved a substantial improvement using an approach we call Equi-angular Cubemap or EAC. The EAC projection’s saturation is significantly more uniform than the previous two, while further improving quality at the equator:

eac_saturation.png


Equi-angular Cubemap - EAC

As opposed to traditional cubemap, which distributes equal pixels for equal distances on the cube surface, equi-angular cubemap distributes equal pixels for equal angular change.

The saturation maps seemed promising, but we wanted to see if people could tell the difference. So we asked people to rate the quality of each without telling them which projection they were viewing. People generally rated EAC as higher quality compared to other projections. Here is an example comparison:

EAC vs EQ


Creating Industry Standards

We’re just beginning to see innovative new projections for 360 video. We’ve worked with Equirectangular and Cube Map, and now EAC. We think a standardized way to represent arbitrary projections will help everyone innovate, so we’ve developed a Projection Independent Mesh.

A Projection Independent Mesh describes the projection by including a 3D mesh along with its texture mapping in the video container. The video rendering software simply renders this mesh as per the texture mapping specified and does not need to understand the details of the projection used. This gives us infinite possibilities. We published our mesh format draft standard on github inviting industry experts to comment and are hoping to turn this into a widely agreed upon industry standard.

Some 360-degree cameras do not capture the entire field of view. For example, they may not have a lens to capture the top and bottom or may only capture a 180-degree scene. Our proposal supports these cameras and allows replacing the uncaptured portions of the field of view by a static geometry and image. Our proposal allows compressing the mesh using deflate or other compression. We designed the mesh format with compression efficiency in mind and were able to fit EAC projection within a 4 KB payload.

The projection independent mesh allows us to continue improving on projections and deploy them with ease since our renderer is now projection independent.

Spherical video playback on Android now benefits from EAC projection streamed using a projection independent mesh and it will soon be available on IOS and desktop. Our ingestion format continues to be based on equirect projection as mentioned in our upload recommendations.

Anjali Wheeler, Software Engineer, recently watched "Disturbed - The Sound Of Silence."

Supercharge your YouTube live tools with the new Super Chat API

In December 2015, we launched an array of API services that let developers access a wealth of data about live streams, chat, and fan funding. Since then, we’ve seen thousands of creators use the tools listed on our Tools for Gaming Streamers page to enhance their streams by adding chatbots, overlays, polls and more.

Today, we announced a new live feature for fans and creators, Super Chat, which lets anybody watching a live stream stand out from the crowd and get a creator’s attention by purchasing highlighted chat messages. We’re also announcing a new API service for this feature: the Super Chat API, designed to allow developers to access real-time information about Super Chat purchases.

The launch of this new API service will be followed by the shutdown of our Fan Funding API. To that end, developers using the Fan Funding API need to move to the new Super Chat API as soon as possible.

On January 31, 2017, we’ll begin offering replacements for the two ways developers currently get information about Fan Funding:

  • LiveChatMessages.list will gain a new message type, superChatMessage, which will contain details about Super Chats purchased during an active live stream
  • A new endpoint, SuperChats.list, will be made available to list a channel’s Super Chat purchases

On February 28, 2017, we’ll be turning down the two existing Fan Funding methods:

  • LiveChatMessages.list will no longer return messages of type fanFundingEvent
  • FanFundingEvents.list will no longer return data

During the transition period between Super Chats and Fan Funding, SuperChats.list will provide information about both Super Chat events and Fan Funding events, so we encourage all developers to switch to the new API as soon as it becomes available. Keep your eye on the YouTube Data API v3 Revision History to get the documentation for this service as soon as we post it.

If you’ve got questions on this, please feel free to ask the community on our Stack Overflow tag or send us a tweet at @YouTubeDev and we’ll do our best to answer.

Marc Chambers, Developer Relations, recently watched "Show of the Week: New Games for 2017."

Download your ad revenue reports through the YouTube Reporting API service

With the launch of the YouTube Reporting API last year, we introduced a mechanism to download raw YouTube Analytics data. It generates a set of predefined reports in the form of CSV files that contain YouTube Analytics data for content owners. Once activated, reports are generated regularly, and each one contains data for a unique, 24-hour period. We heard that you also wanted more data to be accessible via the YouTube Reporting API service.

So today, we are making a set of system-managed ad revenue reports available to content owners. Previously, this data was only available via manually downloadable reports in Creator Studio. The system-managed reports released via the YouTube Reporting API maintain the same breakdowns as downloadable reports, but the schema is optimized to align to other reports available via this API.

These new reports are generated automatically for eligible YouTube Partners. Thus, if you are an eligible YouTube partner, you don't even need to create reporting jobs. Just follow the instructions below to find out whether the reports are available to you and to download the reports themselves.

We also want to let you know that more reports will be available via the YouTube Reporting API service in the coming weeks and months. Please keep an eye on the revision history to find out when additional reports become available.

How to start using the new reports

Check what new report types are available to you

  1. Get an OAuth token (authentication credentials)
  2. Call the reportTypes.list method with the includeSystemManaged parameter set to true.
  3. The response lists all report types available to you. As you can’t use the new report types to create reporting jobs yourself, their systemManaged property is set to true.

Check if system-managed jobs have been created for you

  1. Get an OAuth token (authentication credentials)
  2. Call the jobs.list method with the includeSystemManaged parameter set to true. This will return a list of the available reporting jobs. All jobs with the systemManaged property set to true are jobs for the new report types.
  3. Store the IDs of the jobs you want download reports for.

Download reports

  1. Get an OAuth token (authentication credentials)
  2. Call the reports.list method with the jobId parameter set to the ID found in the previous section to retrieve a list of downloadable reports created by that job.
  3. Choose a report from the list and download it using its downloadUrl.

Client libraries and sample code
Client libraries exist for many different programming languages to help you use the YouTube Reporting API. Our Java, PHP, and Python code samples will help you get started. The API Explorer lets you try out sample calls before writing any code.

Posted by Markus Lanthaler, Tech Lead YouTube Analytics APIs, recently watched “Crushing gummy bears with hydraulic press” and Mihir Kulkarni, Software Engineer, recently watched “The $21,000 first class airplane seat.”

Saying goodbye to the YouTube v2 Uploads API service

If you’re already using or migrated to the YouTube Data API v3, you can stop reading.

If you develop a tool, script, plugin, or any other code that uploads video to YouTube, we have an important update for you! On October 31, 2016, we’ll be shutting down the ability to upload videos through the old YouTube Data API (v2) service. This shutdown is in accordance with our prior deprecation announcements for the YouTube Data API (v2) service in 2014 and ClientLogin authentication in 2013.

If you’re using this service, unless changes are made to your API Client(s), your users will no longer be able to upload videos using your integration starting October 31, 2016.

We announced this deprecation over two years ago to give our developer community time to adjust. If you haven’t already updated, please update your integration as soon as possible. The supported method for programmatically uploading videos to YouTube is the YouTube Data API v3 service, with OAuth2 for authentication.

You can find a complete guide to uploading videos using this method, as well as sample Python code, on the Google Developers site.

Did you already update your integration to use the YouTube Data API v3 service and OAuth2? It’s possible there are users who may still be on old versions of your software. You may want to reach out to your users and let them know about this. We may also reach out to YouTube creators who are using these old versions and let them know about this as well.

If you have questions about this shutdown or about the YouTube Data API v3 service, please post them to our Stack Overflow tag. You can also send us a tweet at @YouTubeDev, and follow us for the latest updates.

Posted by Marc Chambers, YouTube Developer Relations

An updated Terms of Service and New Developer Policies for the YouTube API Services

Today we are announcing changes to the YouTube API Services Terms of Service and introducing new Developer Policies to guide their implementation. These updated Terms of Service and new Developer Policies will take effect in six months so that you have time to understand and implement them.

The YouTube API Services Terms of Service are developers’ rules of the road, and like any rules of the road, they need to be updated over time as usage evolves. As we've grown, so has an entire ecosystem of companies that support users, creators and advertisers, many of them built on top of YouTube’s API Services. We haven’t had major updates to our API Services Terms of Service in over four years, so during the past several months we've been speaking to developers and studying how our API Services are being used to make sure that our terms make sense for the YouTube of today. We updated the YouTube API Services Terms of Service to keep up with usage growth, strengthen user controls and protections even further, and address misuse. You can find the updated terms here.

In order to provide more guidance to developers, which has been a key ask, we are introducing new Developer Policies. They aim to provide operational guidelines for accessing and using our API Services, covering user privacy and data protection, data storage, interface changes, uploads, comments, and more. You can read the full Developer Policies here.

In addition to the new terms, we're also announcing the upcoming YouTube’s Measurement Program. This new certification program will help participants provide accurate, consistent, and relevant YouTube measurement data to their clients and users, thereby helping them make informed decisions about YouTube. We’ll launch the program with a few initial partners before scaling it more broadly. Please visit the YouTube’s Measurement Program website to learn more.

We developed these updates with a few core principles in mind:
  • Improving the YouTube experience for users and creators. Every month, we update our app and site with dozens of new features for users and creators. We want to make sure that every application or website takes advantage of the latest and greatest YouTube functionalities. That’s why we’re introducing a Requirement of Minimum Functionality, which is designed to ensure users have a set of basic functionality around core parts of their YouTube experience, like video playback, comment management, video upload, and other services.
  • Strengthening user data and privacy. We want to help foster innovative products while giving users even more control around data privacy and security. These updated terms serve to strengthen our existing user controls and protections even further. For example, we now require developers to have a privacy policy that clearly explains to users what user info is accessed, collected and stored.
  • Fostering a healthy YouTube ecosystem. While we want to continue to encourage growth of our ecosystem, we also need to make sure our terms limit misuse. As the YouTube developer ecosystem evolved, we saw some fantastic uses of our API Services. Sadly, with amazing uses, there have also been a handful of applications that have misused our API Services. These updated terms serve to further protect against misuse and protect users, creators, and advertisers.
It's been great to see all the ways developer websites and applications have integrated with YouTube. We are committed to the YouTube API Services and we continue to invest with new features that will improve the product, such as expanding the Reporting API service with Payment reports, and Custom reports, launching later this year.

While we understand these updated terms and new policies may require some adjustment by developers, we believe they’ll help ensure our ecosystem remains strong and poised for growth. Again, to ensure developers have sufficient time to understand and adapt to these changes, the updated YouTube API Services Terms of Service and the new Developer Policies will take effect six months from now, on February 10, 2017. Please do take the time to read and become familiar with them. If you have any questions please get in touch with us via yt-api-tos-questions@google.com.

Posted by Shalini GovilPai, Global Head of Technology Solutions

YouTube’s road to HTTPS

Today we added YouTube to Google's HTTPS transparency report. We're proud to announce that in the last two years, we steadily rolled out encryption using HTTPS to 97 percent of YouTube's traffic.



HTTPS provides critical security and data integrity for the web and for all web users. So what took us so long? As we gradually moved YouTube to HTTPS, we faced several unique challenges:

  • Lots of traffic! Our CDN, the Google Global Cache, serves a massive amount of video, and migrating it all to HTTPS is no small feat. Luckily, hardware acceleration for AES is widespread, so we were able to encrypt virtually all video serving without adding machines. (Yes, HTTPS is fast now.)
  • Lots of devices! You watch YouTube videos on everything from flip phones to smart TVs. We A/B tested HTTPS on every device to ensure that users would not be negatively impacted. We found that HTTPS improved quality of experience on most clients: by ensuring content integrity, we virtually eliminated many types of streaming errors.
  • Lots of requests! Mixed content—any insecure request made in a secure context—poses a challenge for any large website or app. We get an alert when an insecure request is made from any of our clients and will block all mixed content using Content Security Policy on the web, App Transport Security on iOS, and uses CleartextTraffic on Android. Ads on YouTube have used HTTPS since 2014.


We're also proud to be using HTTP Secure Transport Security (HSTS) on youtube.com to cut down on HTTP to HTTPS redirects. This improves both security and latency for end users. Our HSTS lifetime is one year, and we hope to preload this soon in web browsers.

97 percent is pretty good, but why isn't YouTube at 100 percent? In short, some devices do not fully support modern HTTPS. Over time, to keep YouTube users as safe as possible, we will gradually phase out insecure connections.

In the real world, we know that any non-secure HTTP traffic could be vulnerable to attackers. All websites and apps should be protected with HTTPS — if you’re a developer that hasn’t yet migrated, get started today.

Sean Watson, Software Engineer, recently watched "GoPro: Fire Vortex Cannon with the Backyard Scientist."
Jon Levine, Product Manager, recently watched "Sega Saturn CD - Cracked after 20 years."

Machine learning for video transcoding

At YouTube we care about the quality of the pixels we deliver to our users. With many millions of devices uploading to our servers every day, the content variability is so huge that delivering an acceptable audio and video quality in all playbacks is a considerable challenge. Nevertheless, our goal has been to continuously improve quality by reducing the amount of compression artifacts that our users see on each playback. While we could do this by increasing the bitrate for every file we create, that would quite easily exceed the capacity of many of the network connections available to you. Another approach is to optimize the parameters of our video processing algorithms to meet bitrate budgets and minimum quality standards. While Google’s compute and storage resources are huge, they are finite and so we must temper our algorithms to also fit within compute requirements. The hard problem then is to adapt our pipeline to create the best quality output for each clip you upload to us, within constraints of quality, bitrate and compute cycles.


This is a well known triad in the world of video compression and transcoding. The problem is usually solved by finding a sweet spot of transcoding parameters that seem to work well on average for a large number of clips. That sweet spot is sometimes found by trying every possible set of parameters until one is found that satisfies all the constraints. Recently, others have been using this “exhaustive search” idea to tune parameters on a per clip basis.


What we’d like to show you in this blog post is a new technology we have developed that adapts our parameter set for each clip automatically using Machine Learning. We’ve been using this over the last year for improving the quality of movies you see on YouTube and Google Play.


The good and bad about parallel processing



We ingest more than 400 hours of video per minute. Each file must be transcoded from the uploaded video format into a number of other video formats with different codecs so we can support playback on any device you might have. The only way we can keep up with that rate of ingest and quickly show you your transcoded video in YouTube is to break each file in pieces called “chunks,” and process these in parallel. Every chunk is processed independently and simultaneously by CPUs in our Google cloud infrastructure. The complexity involved in chunking and recombining the transcoded segments is significant. Quite aside from the mechanics of assembling the processed chunks, maintaining the quality of the video in each chunk is a challenge. This is because to have as speedy a pipeline as possible, our chunks don’t overlap, and are also very small; just a few seconds. So the good thing about parallel processing is increased speed and reduced latency. But the bad thing is that without the information about the video in the neighboring chunks, it’s now difficult to control chunk quality so that there is no visible difference between the chunks when we tape them back together. Small chunks don’t give the encoder much time to settle into a stable state hence each encoder treats each chunk slightly differently.

Smart parallel processing



You could say that we are shooting ourselves in the foot before starting the race. Clearly, if we communicate information about chunk complexity between the chunks, each encoder can adapt to what’s happening in the chunks after or before it. But inter-process communication increases overall system complexity and requires some extra iterations in processing each chunk.


Actually, OK, truth is we’re stubborn here in Engineering and we wondered how far we could push this idea of “don’t let the chunks talk to each other.”


The plot below shows an example of the PSNR in dB per frame over two chunks from a 720p video clip, using H.264 as the codec. A higher value of PSNR means better picture quality and a lower value means poorer quality. You can see that one problem is the quality at the start of a chunk is very different from that at the end of the chunk. Aside from the average quality level being worse than we would like, this variability in quality causes an annoying pulsing artifact.


Because of small chunk sizes, we would expect that each chunk behaves like the previous and next one, at least statistically. So we might expect the encoding process to converge to roughly the same result across consecutive chunks. While this is true much of the time, it is not true in this case. One immediate solution is to change the chunk boundaries so that they align with high activity video behaviour like fast motion, or a scene cut. Then we would expect that each chunk is relatively homogenous so the encoding result should be more uniform. It turns out that this does improve the situation, but not as much as we’d like, and the instability is still often there.


The key is to allow the encoder to process each chunk multiple times, learning on each iteration how to adjust its parameters in anticipation of what happens in across the entire chunk instead of just a small part of it. This results in the start and end of each chunk having similar quality, and because the chunks are short, it is now more likely that the differences across chunk boundaries are also reduced. But even then, we noticed that it can take quite a number of iterations for this to happen. We observed that the number of iterations is affected a great deal by the quantization related parameter (CRF) of the encoder on that first iteration. Even better, there is often a “best” CRF that allows us to hit our target bitrate at a desired quality with just one iteration. But this “best” setting is actually different for every clip. That’s the tricky bit. If only we could work out what that setting was for each clip, then we’d have a simple way of generating good looking clips without chunking artifacts.


The plot on the right shows the result of many experiments with our encoder at varying CRF (constant quality) settings, over the same 1080p clip. After each experiment we measured the bitrate of the output file and each point shows the CRF, bitrate pair for that experiment. There is a clear relationship between these two values. In fact it is very well modeled as an exponential fit with three3 parameters, and the plot shows just how good that modeled line is in fitting the observed data points. If we knew the parameters of the line for our clip, then we’d see that to create a 5 Mbps version of this clip (for example) we’d need a CRF of about 20.

Pinky and the Brain



What we needed was a way to predict our three3 curve fitting parameters from low complexity measurements about the video clip. This is a classic problem in machine learning, statistics and signal processing. The gory mathematical details of our solution are in technical papers that we published recently.1 You can see there how our thoughts evolved. Anyway, the idea is rather simple: predict the three3 parameters given things we know about the input video clip, and read off the CRF we need. This prediction is where the “Google Brain” comes in.


The “things we know about the input video clip” are called video “features.” In our case there are a vector of features containing measurements like input bit rate, motion vector bits in the input file, resolution of the video and frame rate. These measurements can also be made from a very fast low quality transcode of the input clip to make them more informative. However, the exact relationship between the features and the curve parameters for each clip is rather more complicated than an equation we could write down. So instead of trying to discover that explicitly ourselves, we turned to mMachine lLearning with Google Brain. We first took about 10,000 video clips and exhaustively tested every quality setting on each, measuring the resulting bitrate from each setting. This gave us 10,000 curves which in turn gave us 4 x 10,000 parameters measured from those curves.


The next step was to extract features from our video clips. Having generated the training data and the feature set, our Machine Learning system learned a “Brain” configuration that could predict the parameters from the features. Actually we used both a simple “regression” technique as well as the Brain. Both outperformed our existing strategy.  Although the process of training the Brain is relatively computationally heavy, the resulting system was actually quite simple and required only a few operations on our features. That meant that the compute load in production was small.


Does it work?

The plot on the right shows the performance of the various systems on 10,000 video clips. Each point (x,y) represents the percentage of clips (y-axis) in which the resulting bitrate after compression is within x% of the target bitrate. The blue line shows the best case scenario where we use exhaustive search to get the perfect CRF for each clip. Any system that gets close to that is a good one. As you can see at the 20% rate, our old system (green line) would hit the target bitrate 15% of the time. Now with our fancy Brain system we can hit it 65% of the time if we use features from your upload only (red line), and better than 80% of the time (dashed line) using some features from a very fast low quality transcode.
nn_wp_prediction.png


But does this actually look good? You may have noticed that we concentrated on our ability to hit a particular bitrate rather than specifically addressing picture quality. Our analysis of the problem showed that this was the root cause. Pictures are the proof of the pudding and you can see some frames from a 720p video clip below (shot from a racing car). The top row shows two frames at the start and end of a typical chunk and you can see that the quality in the first frame is way worse than the last. The bottom row shows the frames in the same chunk using our new automated clip adaptive system. In both cases the measured bitrate is the same at 2.8 Mbps. As you can see, the first frame is much improved and as a bonus the last frame looks better as well. So the temporal fluctuation in quality is gone and we also managed to improve the clip quality overall.




This concept has been used in production in our video infrastructure division for about a year. We are delighted to report it has helped us deliver very good quality streams for movies like "Titanic" and most recently "Spectre." We don’t expect anyone to notice, because they don’t know what it would look like otherwise.

But there is always more we can do to improve on video quality. We’re working on it. Stay tuned.

Anil Kokaram, Engineering Manager, AV Algorithms Team, recently watched "Tony Cozier speaking about the West Indies Cricket Heritage Centre," Yao Chung Lin, Software Engineer, Transcoder Team, recently watched "UNDER ARMOUR | RULE YOURSELF | MICHAEL PHELPS," Michelle Covell, Research Scientist, recently watched "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Scientific Studies (HBO)" and Sam John, Software Engineer, Transcoder Team, recently watched "Atlantis Found: The Clue in the Clay | History."



1Optimizing transcoder quality targets using a neural network with an embedded bitrate model, Michele Covell, Martin Arjovsky, Yao-Chung Lin and Anil Kokaram, Proceedings of the Conference on Visual Information Processing and Communications 2016, San Francisco
Multipass Encoding for reducing pulsing artefacts in cloud based video transcoding, Yao-Chung Lin, Anil Kokaram and Hugh Denman, IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, pp 907-911, Quebec 2015