Bjøntegaard Delta (BD)：该指标的教程概述、演进、挑战与建议
Bjøntegaard Delta (BD): A Tutorial Overview of the Metric, Evolution, Challenges, and Recommendations
AI总结：
本文详细介绍了Bjøntegaard Delta (BD)方法的演进历史、应用挑战与失效情况，系统评估了不同质量指标下的BD方法及开源实现，并提出了使用建议与未来探索见解。
摘要：
2001年提出的Bjøntegaard Delta (BD)方法已成为比较视频编解码器压缩效率的流行工具。它最初被提出是为了使用PSNR作为失真指标，计算两条率失真曲线之间的比特率和质量差异。多年来，许多研究使用其他客观质量指标（如SSIM、VMAF），在某些情况下甚至使用主观评分（平均意见分，MOS）来计算和报告BD结果。然而，缺乏解释该指标、其多年演进以及在不同测试条件下对其进行系统评估的综合性文献，可能导致对由此获得的BD结果产生错误解读。为此，本文提供了一个详细的教程，描述了BD方法以及该指标可能失效的示例情况。我们还提供了其演进的详细历史，包括对过去20年中提出的各种改进和变体的讨论。此外，我们评估了各种BD方法及其开源实现，考虑了不同的客观质量指标和主观评分，并兼顾了不同的RD特性。基于我们的结果，我们提出了一套关于使用现有BD指标的建议，以及为开发更有效的编解码器压缩效率评估和比较工具而进行可能探索的各种见解。
英文摘要：
The Bjøntegaard Delta (BD) method proposed in 2001 has become a popular tool for comparing video codec compression efficiency. It was initially proposed to compute bitrate and quality differences between two Rate-Distortion curves using PSNR as a distortion metric. Over the years, many works have calculated and reported BD results using other objective quality metrics such as SSIM, VMAF and, in some cases, even subjective ratings (mean opinion scores). However, the lack of consolidated literature explaining the metric, its evolution over the years, and a systematic evaluation of the same under different test conditions can result in a wrong interpretation of the BD results thus obtained. Towards this end, this paper presents a detailed tutorial describing the BD method and example cases where the metric might fail. We also provide a detailed history of its evolution, including a discussion of various proposed improvements and variations over the last 20 years. In addition, we evaluate the various BD methods and their open-source implementations, considering different objective quality metrics and subjective ratings taking into account different RD characteristics. Based on our results, we present a set of recommendations on using existing BD metrics and various insights for possible exploration towards developing more effective tools for codec compression efficiency evaluation and comparison.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
