English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We analyze the performance of feedforward vs. recurrent neural network (RNN) architectures and associated training methods for learned frame prediction. To this effect, we trained a residual fully convolutional neural network (FCNN), a convolutional RNN (CRNN), and a convolutional long short-term memory (CLSTM) network for next frame prediction using the mean square loss. We performed both stateless and stateful training for recurrent networks. Experimental results show that the residual FCNN architecture performs the best in terms of peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR) at the expense of higher training and test (inference) computational complexity. The CRNN can be trained stably and very efficiently using the stateful truncated backpropagation through time procedure, and it requires an order of magnitude less inference runtime to achieve near real-time frame prediction with an acceptable performance.

Effect of Architectures and Training Methods on the Performance of Learned Video Frame Prediction