Skip to main content
Log in

A practical model for ensemble estimation of QoS and QoE in VoIP services via fuzzy inference systems and fuzzy evidence theory

  • Published:
Telecommunication Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, there is an increasing number of Voices over IP (VoIP) services offered in telecommunication networks with specific quality requirements. Such requirements impact upon both the objective quality of service (QoS) of the end-to end connection as well as the subjective quality of experience (QoE) as perceived by the end user. In this study, we have proposed an integrated QoS and QoE evaluation system based on the combination of fuzzy inference systems and fuzzy evidence theory. For quality criteria, we have used QoS as a technical source from the viewpoint of service provider and QoE as the end user approach in front of service. We have divided the positive and negative variables of QoE into two distinct systems. At the same time, a parameter has been proposed as quality, which is the total quality of a service according to the objective and subjective viewpoints. To calculate the parameters mentioned above, a fuzzy inference system has been utilized. In addition, to obtain all data sources as an evidence of quality, Dempster–Shafer evidence theory has been employed. Finally, the proposed approach evaluated through the quality of VoIP services in three real cases and the results are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Transparency Market Research. (2014). VoIP Services Market (Corporate Consumers and Individual Consumers)—Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast, 2014–2020. Retrieved December 25, 2014 from https://www.reportbuyer.com/product/2362889/.

  2. Cano, M.-D., & Cerdan, F. (2012). Subjective QoE analysis of VoIP applications in a wireless campus environment. Telecommunication Systems, 49(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. ITU-T (1994) Recommendation E.800: Terms and definitions related to quality of service and network performance including dependability. http://www.itu.int/. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  4. Takahashi, A., Hands, D., & Barriac, V. (2008). Standardization activities in the ITU for a QoE assessment of IPTV. IEEE Communications Magazine, 46(2), 78–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alben, L. (1996). Defining the criteria for effective interaction design. Interactions, 3(3), 11–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rifai, H., Mohammed, S., Mellouk, A. (2011). A brief synthesis of QoS-QoE methodologies. In 10th IEEE International Symposium on Programming and Systems (ISPS) (pp. 32–38).

  7. ITU-T (2006) Recommendation P.800.1. Mean opinion score terminology. http://www.itu.int/. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  8. ITU-T (1996) Recommendation P.800. Methods for subjective determination of transmission quality. http://www.itu.int/. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  9. ITU-T (1999) Recommendation P.910. Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. http://www.itu.int/. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  10. ITU-T (2000) Recommendation P.920. Interactive test methods for audiovisual communications. http://www.itu.int/. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  11. Shafer, G. (1976). A mathematical theory of evidence (Vol. 1). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Khirman, S., Henriksen, P. (2002). Relationship between quality-of-service and quality-of-experience for public internet service. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Passive and Active Measurement.

  13. Sánchez-Macián, A., López, D., López de Vergara, J., Pastor, E. (2006). A framework for the automatic calculation of quality of experience in telematic services. In Proceedings of the 13th HP-OVUA Workshop, Côte d’Azur, France.

  14. Wang, H.-C., Lee, C.-S., & Ho, T.-H. (2007). Combining subjective and objective QoS factors for personalized web service selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kilkki, K. (2008). Quality of experience in communications ecosystem. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 14(5), 615–624.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hoßfeld, T., & Binzenhöfer, A. (2008). Analysis of skype VoIP traffic in UMTS: End-to-end QoS and QoE measurements. Computer Networks, 52(3), 650–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Salcedo, O.J., Sierra, F., Hernandez, C. (2009). An approach to quality of service evaluation using computational intelligence. In IEEE International Conference on New Trends in Information and Service Science, NISS’09. (pp 580–585).

  18. Serral-Gracià, R., Cerqueira, E., Curado, M., Yannuzzi, M., Monteiro, E., Masip-Bruin, X. (2010). An overview of quality of experience measurement challenges for video applications in IP networks. In Wired/Wireless Internet Communications. Springer, (pp 252–263).

  19. Fiedler, M., Hossfeld, T., & Tran-Gia, P. (2010). A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Network, 24(2), 36–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Coverdale, P., Möller, S., Raake, A., & Takahashi, A. (2011). Multimedia quality assessment standards in ITU-T SG 12. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 28(6), 91–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dogman, A., Saatchi, R., & Al-Khayatt, S. (2011). Quality of service evaluation using a combination of fuzzy C-means and regression model. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 7(1), 198–205.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Li, F., He, Y., Hu, W., Wu, L., & Wen, P. (2011). Web service selection based on fuzzy QoS attributes. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 7(1), 198–205.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Day, J., Deters, R. (2004). Selecting the best web service. In Proceedings of the conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative research. IBM Press, (pp 293–307).

  24. Maximilien, E. M., & Singh, M. P. (2004). A framework and ontology for dynamic web services selection. IEEE Internet Computing, 8(5), 84–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Menascé, D. A. (2003). Automatic qos control. IEEE Internet Computing, 7(1), 92–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ran, S. (2003). A model for web services discovery with QoS. ACM Sigecom Exchanges, 4(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zadeh, L. (2005). Toward a generalized theory of uncertainty (GTU)-an outline. Information Sciences, 172(1–2), 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kulak, O., & Kahraman, C. (2005). Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic hierarchy process. Information Sciences, 170(2–4), 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Leung, L., & Cao, D. (2000). On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 124(1), 102–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zadeh, L. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kahraman, C., Ruan, D., & Doan, I. (2003). Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection. Information Sciences, 157, 135–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Moalagh, M., & Ravasan, A. Z. (2013). Developing a practical framework for assessing ERP post-implementation success using fuzzy analytic network process. International Journal of Production Research, 51(4), 1236–1257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Liang, G., & Wang, M. (1993). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for robot selection. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 10(4), 267–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ding, J., & Liang, G. (2005). Using fuzzy MCDM to select partners of strategic alliances for liner shipping. Information Sciences, 173(1–3), 197–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mamdani, E. H., & Assilian, S. (1975). An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. International journal of Man-Machine Studies, 7(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sugeno, M. (1985). Industrial applications of fuzzy control. New York: Elsevier Science Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Dempster, A. P. (1967). Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 38(2), 325–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sevastianov, P., Dymova, L., & Bartosiewicz, P. (2012). A framework for rule-base evidential reasoning in the interval setting applied to diagnosing type 2 diabetes. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(4), 4190–4200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Guan, J. W., & Bell, D. A. (1992). Evidence theory and its applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Altınçay, H., & Demirekler, M. (2003). Speaker identification by combining multiple classifiers using Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence. Speech Communication, 41(4), 531–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Milisavljević, N., Bloch, I., van den Broek, S., & Acheroy, M. (2003). Improving mine recognition through processing and Dempster–Shafer fusion of ground-penetrating radar data. Pattern Recognition, 36(5), 1233–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hayatle, O., Youssef, A., & Otrok, H. (2012). Dempster–Shafer evidence combining for (Anti)-Honeypot technologies. Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective, 21(6), 306–316.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lee, C.-S., & Pan, C.-Y. (2004). An intelligent fuzzy agent for meeting scheduling decision support system. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 142(3), 467–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahad Zare Ravasan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mansouri, T., Nabavi, A., Zare Ravasan, A. et al. A practical model for ensemble estimation of QoS and QoE in VoIP services via fuzzy inference systems and fuzzy evidence theory. Telecommun Syst 61, 861–873 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-015-0041-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-015-0041-6

Keywords

Navigation