A High-Level Feature Model to Predict the Encoding Energy of a Hardware Video Encoder

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.12754
• Title: A High-Level Feature Model to Predict the Encoding Energy of a Hardware Video Encoder
• Authors: Diwakara Reddy, Christian Herglotz, André Kaup
• Classification: eess.IV (Electrical Engineering and Systems Science - Image and Video Processing), eess.SP (Signal Processing)
• Publication Date: 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.12754

Abstract

In contemporary society, real-time video streaming and user-generated content transmission from battery-powered devices has become ubiquitous. Real-time streaming requires real-time video encoding, for which hardware video encoders are well-suited. This paper introduces a high-level feature model using Gaussian Process Regression to predict the encoding energy consumption of hardware video encoders. In an evaluation setting limited to P-frames and a single keyframe, the model achieves encoding energy prediction with a mean absolute percentage error of approximately 9%. Furthermore, ablation studies demonstrate that spatial resolution is a critical high-level feature for predicting encoding energy consumption in hardware encoders. The practical application of this model enables a priori estimation of energy required for encoding video at different spatial resolutions, under different encoding standards and codec presets.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Problem Statement

This research addresses the challenge of predicting energy consumption in hardware video encoders. With the proliferation of real-time video streaming and user-generated content, particularly on battery-powered devices, accurate prediction of encoding energy consumption is significant for:

• Battery lifetime management
• Energy-aware encoding
• Reducing the carbon footprint of video streaming

2. Problem Significance

• Real-time Requirements: Real-time streaming demands real-time video encoding, where hardware encoders provide acceleration and energy-efficient encoding
• Energy Efficiency: Energy-aware video encoding is critical when creating user-generated content on battery-powered handheld devices
• Environmental Impact: Energy-conscious video encoding is important for reducing the carbon footprint of video streaming

3. Limitations of Existing Methods

Literature review reveals:

• More research exists on software encoder energy consumption prediction, but limited studies on hardware encoders
• Existing hardware decoder energy prediction models cannot be directly transferred to encoders (as features like bitstream size are unavailable before encoding)
• Lack of unified models capable of handling multiple encoding standards and presets

4. Research Motivation

Based on the above limitations, the research motivation includes:

• Extending high-level feature models from hardware decoders to hardware encoders
• Modifying feature models to include only pre-encoding available features
• Proposing a unified model considering multiple standards and encoder presets

Core Contributions

1. Model Extension: Extending the high-level feature model for hardware decoders proposed by Herglotz et al. to hardware encoders
2. Feature Model Optimization: Modifying the high-level feature model to include only pre-encoding available features, addressing the unavailability of bitstream size features in encoders
3. Unified Modeling Approach: Proposing a single model for predicting hardware encoder energy consumption, considering three different standards (H.264, H.265, AV1) and two encoder presets
4. High-Precision Prediction: Achieving encoding energy prediction with mean absolute percentage error of approximately 9.08%
5. Critical Feature Identification: Demonstrating through ablation studies that spatial resolution is the critical high-level feature for hardware encoder energy consumption prediction

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: High-level features of video sequences (resolution, frame count, encoding standard, preset, QP value, etc.) Output: Predicted encoding energy consumption of hardware video encoder Constraints: Using only pre-encoding available features, applicable to P-frame and single keyframe encoding scenarios

Model Architecture

1. Energy Consumption Measurement Method

Employing differential energy consumption measurement:

E_enc = E_dynamic - E_static

Where:

• E_dynamic: Dynamic energy consumption during encoding
• E_static: Static energy consumption in idle mode

2. High-Level Feature Definition

The model uses 9 high-level features (Table I):

3. Gaussian Process Regression Model

Employing Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) for modeling:

Linear Regression Model (with measurement noise):

Ê_enc = x^T w + ε

Gaussian Process Function Approximation:

f(x) ~ GP(m(x), Σ)

Zero-Mean Gaussian Process:

f(x) ~ b(x) + GP(0, Σ)

Covariance Kernel Function (exponential kernel):

k(x_p, x_q) = σ²_f exp(-|x_p - x_q|/l) + σ²_n · δ_st

Model Output:

Ê_enc = h(x)^T β + g(x)

Where g(x) ~ GP(0, Σ)

Technical Innovations

1. Feature Selection Innovation: Removing features obtainable only after encoding (such as bitstream size), ensuring model applicability for pre-encoding energy prediction
2. Unified Modeling Strategy: Unlike approaches building separate models for each standard, employing boolean features to uniformly handle multiple encoding standards and presets
3. Noise Handling Capability: GPR naturally possesses the capability to handle measurement noise, suitable for hardware energy consumption measurement scenarios
4. Confidence Interval Testing: Employing rigorous statistical methods to ensure measurement reliability

Experimental Setup

Dataset

• Video Sequences: Natural video sequences from AOM Common Test Conditions (CTC), categories A1-A5
• Resolution Range: 270p, 360p, 720p, 1080p, 2160p (4K)
• Bit Depth Processing: Converting 10-bit input sequences to 8-bit (hardware encoder limitation)
• Frame Count Setting: Randomly selecting 65-130 frames per sequence, single keyframe
• Encoding Configuration: P-frame encoding without B-frames

Evaluation Metrics

Employing Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE):

MAPE = (1/B) × Σ|E_true,i - E_est,i|/E_true,i × 100

Comparison Methods

• Primary Comparison: Linear Regression (LR) model
• Ablation Study: Feature-by-feature impact analysis

Implementation Details

• Hardware Platform: NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX development kit
• Encoding Standards: H.264, H.265, AV1
• Encoding Presets: ultrafast, slow
• QP Settings:
  • H.264/H.265: 22, 27, 32, 37
  • AV1: 108, 132, 160, 184
• Cross-Validation: 10-fold cross-validation to prevent overfitting
• Confidence Interval Parameters: α=0.99, β=0.02

Experimental Results

Main Results

• Overall Performance: GPR model achieves MAPE = 9.08%
• LR Comparison: Linear regression model MAPE = 72.98%, significantly inferior to GPR
• Training Efficiency: Training time 21.25 seconds, validation time 3.7 milliseconds

Ablation Study

Ablation study results (Table III) showing feature importance ranking:

Key Findings:

1. Spatial Resolution is the most important feature; removal causes MAPE to spike to 164.70%
2. Preset Information is secondary with significant impact
3. QP Information removal slightly improves accuracy, possibly due to inconsistent QP-energy relationships

Case Analysis

Through visualization analysis:

1. Resolution Clustering: Different resolutions form distinct energy consumption clusters
2. Standard Differences: 4K video shows notable energy consumption differences across encoding standards
3. Preset Impact: Slow preset exhibits more significant energy consumption variation across standards
4. QP Relationship: H.264/H.265 show monotonic relationships with QP; AV1 shows no clear correlation

Experimental Findings

1. Resolution Dominance: Encoding energy is highly correlated with video resolution
2. Frame Count Linearity: Encoding energy exhibits linear relationship with frame count
3. Standard Differences: Energy consumption differences across encoding standards are more pronounced at higher resolutions
4. GPR Advantages: GPR significantly outperforms linear regression, demonstrating non-linear characteristics of energy prediction

Related Work

Software Encoder Energy Prediction

• Most research focuses on software encoders (e.g., H.265, SVT-AV1)
• Existing models typically target specific encoding configurations or standards

Hardware Decoder Research

• Herglotz et al. proposed energy consumption prediction model for hardware H.265 decoders
• Kränzler extended to multi-standard hardware decoder models

Research Gap

Hardware encoder energy consumption prediction research is relatively limited; this paper addresses this gap.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Proposing the first high-level feature-based energy consumption prediction model for hardware video encoders
2. Achieving approximately 9% MAPE with practical value
3. Demonstrating spatial resolution as a critical feature for energy prediction
4. Validating significant advantages of GPR over linear regression

Limitations

1. Missing Content Features: Not considering video content-related features, which could further improve accuracy
2. Encoding Configuration Constraints: Considering only P-frame and single keyframe scenarios
3. Single Hardware Platform: Validation only on NVIDIA Jetson platform
4. Preset Selection: Considering only two presets (ultrafast, slow)

Future Directions

1. Content-Aware Modeling: Incorporating video content complexity and related features
2. Comprehensive Encoding Analysis: Extending to complete encoding scenarios including B-frames
3. Multi-Platform Validation: Verifying model generalizability across different hardware platforms
4. Hardware-Software Comparison: Comprehensive comparative analysis of hardware and software encoder energy consumption

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. High Practical Value: Addressing actual application requirements for energy consumption prediction
2. Scientific Methodology: Employing rigorous statistical testing to ensure measurement reliability
3. Comprehensive Analysis: Conducting in-depth feature contribution analysis through ablation studies
4. Strong Innovation: First unified multi-standard energy consumption prediction model for hardware encoders

Weaknesses

1. Feature Engineering: Could consider more video content-related features
2. Data Scale: Relatively limited test data; could be expanded to more video types
3. Theoretical Analysis: Lacking in-depth theoretical analysis of energy prediction mechanisms
4. Real-Time Validation: Insufficient verification of model performance in real-time scenarios

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Filling research gap in hardware encoder energy consumption prediction
2. Practical Value: Applicable to battery management in mobile devices and green video encoding
3. Reproducibility: Clear methodology description and detailed experimental setup

Applicable Scenarios

1. Mobile Devices: Energy consumption management in battery-powered devices
2. Edge Computing: Resource planning for edge video processing
3. Green Computing: Energy optimization for data center video encoding
4. Real-Time Applications: Real-time encoding scenarios such as live streaming and video conferencing

References

The paper cites 24 related references, primarily including:

• Video encoding energy efficiency research (Katsenou et al., 2022)
• HEVC software encoder energy modeling (Ramasubbu et al., 2022)
• Hardware decoder energy prediction (Herglotz & Kaup, 2018)
• Gaussian Process Regression theory (Rasmussen & Williams, 2006)

Overall Assessment: This paper addresses an important and relatively unexplored research domain in hardware video encoder energy consumption prediction, proposing an innovative solution. The methodology is scientifically rigorous, experimental design is reasonable, and results have practical value. While there remains room for improvement in feature engineering and theoretical analysis, the work establishes a solid foundation for subsequent research in this field.