skip to main content
research-article

QoE-Based SVC Layer Dropping in LTE Networks Using Content-Aware Layer Priorities

Published:24 August 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The increasing popularity of mobile video streaming applications has led to a high volume of video traffic in mobile networks. As the base station, for instance, the eNB in LTE networks, has limited physical resources, it can be overloaded by this traffic. This problem can be addressed by using Scalable Video Coding (SVC), which allows the eNB to drop layers of the video streams to dynamically adapt the bitrate. The impact of bitrate adaptation on the Quality of Experience (QoE) for the users depends on the content characteristics of videos. As the current mobile network architectures do not support the eNB in obtaining video content information, QoE optimization schemes with explicit signaling of content information have been proposed. These schemes, however, require the eNB or a specific optimization module to process the video content on the fly in order to extract the required information. This increases the computation and signaling overhead significantly, raising the OPEX for mobile operators. To address this issue, in this article, a content-aware (CA) priority marking and layer dropping scheme is proposed. The CA priority indicates a transmission order for the layers of all transmitted videos across all users, resulting from a comparison of their utility versus rate characteristics. The CA priority values can be determined at the P-GW on the fly, allowing mobile operators to control the priority marking process. Alternatively, they can be determined offline at the video servers, avoiding real-time computation in the core network. The eNB can perform content-aware SVC layer dropping using only the priority values. No additional content processing is required. The proposed scheme is lightweight both in terms of architecture and computation. The improvement in QoE is substantial and very close to the performance obtained with the computation and signaling-intensive QoE optimization schemes.

References

  1. 3GPP. 2014a. Study on system enhancements for user plane congestion management, TR 23.705. (Aug. 2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 3GPP. 2014b. User Plane Congestion management (UPCON), TD SP-140153. (March 2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Florence Agboma and Antonio Liotta. 2007. Addressing user expectations in mobile content delivery. Mobile Inf. Syst. 3, 3--4, 153--164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sabina Barakovi and Lea Skorin-Kapov. 2013. Survey and challenges of QoE management issues in wireless networks. J. Comput. Networks Commun.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Daniel S. Baum, Jan Hansen, and Jari Salo. 2005. An interim channel model for beyond-3G systems: Extending the 3GPP spatial channel model (SCM). In Proceedings of the IEEE 61st Vehicular Technology Conference. Vol. 5, IEEE, 3132--3136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Jacob Chakareski and Pascal Frossard. 2006. Rate-distortion optimized distributed packet scheduling of multiple video streams over shared communication resources. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 8, 218. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Erik Dahlman, Stefan Parkvall, Johan Skold, and Per Beming. 2010. 3G Evolution: HSPA and LTE for Mobile Broadband. Academic Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Attilio Fiandrotti, Dario Gallucci, Enrico Masala, and Enrico Magli. 2008. Traffic prioritization of H.264/SVC video over 802.11 e ad hoc wireless networks. In Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks. IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bo Fu, Dirk Staehle, Gerald Kunzmann, Eckehard Steinbach, and Wolfgang Kellerer. 2013. QoE-aware priority marking and traffic management for H. 264/SVC-based mobile video delivery. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Workshop on Performance Monitoring and Measurement of Heterogeneous Wireless and Wired Networks. ACM, 173--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. ITU-R. 2012. Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. Recommendation BT.500-13, International Telecommunication Union.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. ITU-T. 2008. Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. Recommendation P.910, International Telecommunication Union.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. JSVM. 2011. Joint scalable video model (9.19.12). http://www.hhi.fraunhofer.de/de/kompetenzfelder/image-processing/research-groups/image-video-coding/svc-extension-of-h264avc/jsvm-reference-software.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Nabeel Khan, Maria G. Martini, and Dirk Staehle. 2013. Opportunistic proportional fair downlink scheduling for scalable video transmission over lte systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE 78th Vehicular Technology Conference. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Shoaib Khan, Svetoslav Duhovnikov, Eckehard Steinbach, and Wolfgang Kellerer. 2007. MOS-based multiuser multiapplication cross-layer optimization for mobile multimedia communication. Advances in Multimedia 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Shoaib Khan, Yang Peng, Eckehard Steinbach, Marco Sgroi, and Wolfgang Kellerer. 2006. Application-driven cross-layer optimization for video streaming over wireless networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 44, 1, 122--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ehsan Maani, Peshala V. Pahalawatta, Randall Berry, Thrasyvoulos N. Pappas, and Aggelos K. Katsaggelos. 2008. Resource allocation for downlink multiuser video transmission over wireless lossy networks. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 17, 9, 1663--1671. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Magnus Olsson, Stefan Rommer, Catherine Mulligan, Shabnam Sultana, and Lars Frid. 2009. SAE and the Evolved Packet Core: Driving the Mobile Broadband Revolution. Academic Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Peshala V. Pahalawatta and Aggelos K. Katsaggelos. 2007. Review of content-aware resource allocation schemes for video streaming over wireless networks. Wirel. Commun. Mobile Comput. 7, 2, 131--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Margaret H. Pinson and Stephen Wolf. 2004. A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 50, 3, 312--322.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Heiko Schwarz, Detlev Marpe, and Thomas Wiegand. 2007. Overview of the scalable video coding extension of the H.264/AVC standard. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. 1103--1120. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Sudhir Kumar Srinivasan, Jonathan Vahabzadeh-Hagh, and Martin Reisslein. 2010. The effects of priority levels and buffering on the statistical multiplexing of single-layer H. 264/AVC and SVC encoded video streams. IEEE Trans. Broadcas. 56, 3, 281--287.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Nicolas Staelens, Stefaan Moens, Wendy Van den Broeck, Ilse Marien, Brecht Vermeulen, Peter Lambert, Rik Van de Walle, and Piet Demeester. 2010. Assessing quality of experience of IPTV and video on demand services in real-life environments. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 56, 4, 458--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Srisakul Thakolsri, Shoaib Khan, Eckehard Steinbach, and Wolfgang Kellerer. 2009. QoE-driven cross-layer optimization for high speed downlink packet access. J. Commun. 4, 9, 669--680.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. VQEG. 2003. Final report from the Video Quality Experts Group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment, phase II. Tech. Rep.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhou Wang, Ligang Lu, and Alan C. Bovik. 2004. Video quality assessment based on structural distortion measurement. Signal Process. Image Commun. 19, 2, 121--132.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Xiph.org. 2014. Video Test Media. http://media.xiph.org/video/derf/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. QoE-Based SVC Layer Dropping in LTE Networks Using Content-Aware Layer Priorities

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications
      ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications  Volume 12, Issue 1
      August 2015
      220 pages
      ISSN:1551-6857
      EISSN:1551-6865
      DOI:10.1145/2816987
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 24 August 2015
      • Accepted: 1 March 2015
      • Revised: 1 October 2014
      • Received: 1 May 2014
      Published in tomm Volume 12, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader