457491.fig.004a
(a) QCIF@128 kbps
457491.fig.004b
(b) QCIF@256 kbps
457491.fig.004c
(c) QCIF@324 kbps
457491.fig.004d
(d) CIF@324 kbps
457491.fig.004e
(e) CIF@512 kbps
457491.fig.004f
(f) @512 kbps
457491.fig.004g
(g) @768 kbps
457491.fig.004h
(h) QCIF, IPBBP coding structure
457491.fig.004i
(i) CIF, IPBBP coding structure
457491.fig.004j
(j) , IPBBP coding structure
Figure 4: Box plots depicting the PSNR ratings for the five videos parting the examined dataset and the two investigated scenarios. Figures 4(a)4(g) illustrate the objective scores for all coding structures, resolutions, and bitrates described in the experimental setup, while Figures 4(h)4(j) summarize the results for the best performing IPBBP coding structure. Removal of temporal mismatch in the received video in scenario 2, using the VFD algorithm, results in high PSNR ratings, compared to that of scenario 1, and in accordance with the clinical evaluation (see Table 6).