# Data Embedding in SHVC Video Using Threshold-Controlled Block Splitting
## 4 Experimental Results  
### Variation in Bit Rate  
Let \(\tau_{0}\), \(\tau_{5}\) and \(\tau_{10}\) refer to the setting when \(\tau=0\), \(5\) and \(10\%\), respectively. Table 1 records the bit rate before and after data embedding by using the proposed techniques.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sequence**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**QP**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**LDP**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**AI**} \\  & & \(\tau_{0}\) & \(\tau_{5}\) & \(\tau_{10}\) & \(\tau_{0}\) & \(\tau_{5}\) & \(\tau_{10}\) \\ \hline _RushHour_ & 22 & 0.4 & 6.5 & 21.0 & 0.3 & 3.3 & 8.1 \\ @30 Hz & 26 & 0.1 & 3.9 & 16.5 & 0.1 & 2.6 & 6.8 \\ BL(\(960\times 540\)) & 30 & 0.1 & 3.7 & 13.4 & 0.0 & 2.1 & 5.9 \\ EL(\(1280\times 720\)) & 34 & 0.0 & 4.6 & 13.0 & 0.0 & 2.1 & 5.7 \\  & Average & 0.1 & 4.3 & 15.2 & 0.1 & 2.4 & 6.3 \\ \hline _FourPeople_ & 22 & 1.3 & 8.9 & 16.3 & 1.2 & 3.7 & 6.7 \\ @60 Hz & 26 & 1.5 & 7.3 & 13.9 & 1.2 & 3.6 & 6.5 \\ BL(\(640\times 360\)) & 30 & 1.5 & 6.4 & 121 & 1.0 & 3.3 & 6.5 \\ EL(\(1280\times 720\)) & 34 & 0.3 & 6.0 & 13.3 & 0.5 & 3.1 & 6.6 \\  & Average & 1.2 & 6.8 & 13.3 & 1.0 & 3.5 & 6.6 \\ \hline _BlueSky_ & 22 & 0.5 & 4.6 & 8.0 & 0.6 & 3.3 & 6.2 \\ @24 Hz & 26 & 0.7 & 5.5 & 10.1 & 0.6 & 3.5 & 6.6 \\ BL(\(640\times 360\)) & 30 & 0.8 & 6.0 & 11.4 & 0.4 & 3.8 & 7.5 \\ EL(\(1280\times 720\)) & 34 & 0.5 & 7.2 & 15.2 & 0.0 & 4.3 & 9.0 \\  & Average & 0.7 & 6.0 & 11.6 & 0.4 & 3.8 & 7.6 \\ \hline _BasketballDrill_ & 22 & 0.8 & 7.0 & 13.2 & 1.1 & 3.9 & 7.1 \\ @50 Hz & 26 & 0.9 & 7.4 & 15.1 & 1.0 & 3.7 & 7.0 \\ BL(\(416\times 240\)) & 30 & 0.9 & 7.9 & 16.4 & 1.0 & 3.7 & 7.2 \\ EL(\(832\times 480\)) & 34 & 0.6 & 8.9 & 18.1 & 0.8 & 3.5 & 7.5 \\  & Average & 0.8 & 7.8 & 15.9 & 0.9 & 3.6 & 7.1 \\ \hline _PartyScene_ & 22 & 0.7 & 4.3 & 7.0 & 0.9 & 4.1 & 2.9 \\ @50 Hz & 26 & 1.1 & 5.7 & 9.7 & 1.1 & 3.4 & 4.9 \\ BL(\(416\times 240\)) & 30 & 1.2 & 7.2 & 13.4 & 1.2 & 3.9 & 5.9 \\ EL(\(832\times 480\)) & 34 & 0.6 & 9.9 & 19.1 & 0.9 & 4.6 & 7.6 \\  & Average & 1.0 & 7.2 & 13.3 & 1.0 & 4.0 & 6.0 \\ \hline _RaceHorses_ & 22 & 0.4 & 4.3 & 8.7 & 0.2 & 5.0 & 7.8 \\ @30 Hz & 26 & 0.5 & 5.3 & 11.1 & 0.3 & 4.9 & 8.3 \\ BL(\(416\times 240\)) & 30 & 0.5 & 6.5 & 14.9 & 0.3 & 5.2 & 9.5 \\ EL(\(832\times 480\)) & 34 & 0.4 & 9.8 & 20.7 & 0.0 & 5.9 & 11.6 \\  & Average & 0.5 & 6.8 & 14.8 & 0.3 & 5.2 & 9.6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Bit rate overhead (%) for the processed video.  
Figure 5: Video test sequences considered for experiments in this work.  
Results suggest that, for both LDP and AI configurations, the bit rate increases as \(\tau\) increases. This is an expected result because larger \(\tau\) permits more split blocks to be coded (hence increasing embedding capacity) instead of larger blocks which are more cost effective. The lowest average bit variation is observed in _BlueSky_ for the LDP configuration and _PartyScene_ for the AI configuration. A reason for such outcome is that these sequences are originally coded with 80\(\sim\)90% of small blocks at partitioning depth level \(d_{3}\) in both layers. On the other hand, the largest average bit variation is observed in _BasketballDrill_ for the LDP configuration and _RaceHorses_ for the AI configuration. A reason for such outcome is due to large homogeneous regions in both video sequences. These smooth regions can be effectively coded by using larger blocks, but instead they are partitioned into smaller blocks for increasing the embedding capacity. Based on these observations, we conclude that: (a) a video sequence with textured scene offers higher embedding capacity and; (b) the total number of the smallest sized PB to be coded can be controlled by using \(\tau\) so that barely sufficient capacity is offered to accommodate the data, without over-supplying, which leads to a higher bit rate overhead.