skip to main content
10.1145/3423328.3423500acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

VMP360: Adaptive 360° Video Streaming Based on Optical Flow Estimated QoE

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 October 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Containing full panoramic content in a single frame and providing immersive experience for users, 360° video has attracted great attention in industry and academia. Viewport-driven tiling schemes have been introduced in 360° video processing to provide high-quality video streaming. However, treating viewport as traditional streaming screen results in frequently rebuffer or quality distortion, leading to poor Quality of Experience (QoE) of schemes. In this paper, we propose Viewpoint Movement Perception 360° Video Streaming (VMP360), an adaptive 360° video streaming system that utilizes unique factors of 360° video perception quality of users to improve the overall QoE. By studying the relative moving speed and depth difference between the viewpoint and other content, the system evaluates the perceived quality distortion based on optical flow estimation. Taking QoE into account, a novel 360° video quality evaluation metric is defined as Optical-flow-based Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (OPSNR). Appling OPSNR to tiling process, VMP360 proposes a versatile-size tiling scheme, and further Reinforcement Learning (RL) is used to realize the Adaptive Bit Rate (ABR) selection of tiles. VMP360 is evaluated through the client-server streaming system with two prior schemes Pano and Plato. Statistics show that the proposed scheme can improve the quality of 360° video by 10.1% while maintaining same rebuffer ratio compared with the Pano and Plato, which confirms that VMP360 can provide a promising high QoE for 360° video streaming. The code of a prototype can be found in https://github.com/buptexplorers/OFB-VR.

References

  1. V. Petrock. Virtual and augmented reality users 2019, March 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Leire Amezua Hormaza, Wael M. Mohammed, Borja Ramis Ferrer, Ronal Bejarano, and Jose L. Martinez Lastra. On-line training and monitoring of robot tasks through virtual reality. In 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. T. Hatchard, F. Azmat, M. Al-Amin, Z. Rihawi, B. Ahmed, and A. Alsebae. Examining student response to virtual reality in education and training. In 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), volume 1, pages 1145--1149, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Simone Mangiante, Guenter Klas, Amit Navon, Zhuang GuanHua, Ju Ran, and Marco Dias Silva. Vr is on the edge: How to deliver 360 videos in mobile networks. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network, pages 30--35, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Fanyi Duanmu, Eymen Kurdoglu, S Amir Hosseini, Yong Liu, and Yao Wang. Prioritized buffer control in two-tier 360 video streaming. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network, pages 13--18, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chao Zhou, Mengbai Xiao, and Yao Liu. Clustile: Toward minimizing bandwidth in 360-degree video streaming. In IEEE INFOCOM 2018-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pages 962--970. IEEE, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Bo Han, Vijay Gopalakrishnan, Zhengye Liu, and Feng Qian. Priority-based tile transmission system and method for panoramic video streaming, March 5 2020. US Patent App. 16/122,584.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Xiaolan Jiang, Yi-Han Chiang, Yang Zhao, and Yusheng Ji. Plato: Learning-based adaptive streaming of 360-degree videos. In 2018 IEEE 43rd Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN), pages 393--400. IEEE, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Eddy Ilg, Nikolaus Mayer, Tonmoy Saikia, Margret Keuper, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Thomas Brox. Flownet 2.0: Evolution of optical flow estimation with deep networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 2462--2470, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Xavier Corbillon, Gwendal Simon, Alisa Devlic, and Jacob Chakareski. Viewportadaptive navigable 360-degree video delivery. In 2017 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC), pages 1--7. IEEE, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Yixuan Ban, Lan Xie, Zhimin Xu, Xinggong Zhang, Zongming Guo, and Yue Wang. Cub360: Exploiting cross-users behaviors for viewport prediction in 360 video adaptive streaming. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), pages 1--6. IEEE, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ching-Ling Fan, Jean Lee, Wen-Chih Lo, Chun-Ying Huang, Kuan-Ta Chen, and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. Fixation prediction for 360 video streaming in head-mounted virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 27th Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video, pages 67--72, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Liyang Sun, Yixiang Mao, Tongyu Zong, Yong Liu, and Yao Wang. Flocking-based live streaming of 360-degree video. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference, MMSys '20, page 26--37, New York, NY, USA, 2020. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. X. Zhang, G. Cheung, P. Le Callet, and J. Z. G. Tan. Sparse directed graph learning for head movement prediction in 360 video streaming. In ICASSP 2020 - 2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 2678--2682, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Shu Shi, Varun Gupta, and Rittwik Jana. Freedom: Fast recovery enhanced vr delivery over mobile networks. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, pages 130--141, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Vamsidhar Reddy Gaddam, Michael Riegler, Ragnhild Eg, Carsten Griwodz, and Pål Halvorsen. Tiling in interactive panoramic video: Approaches and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 18(9):1819--1831, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jian He, Mubashir Adnan Qureshi, Lili Qiu, Jin Li, Feng Li, and Lei Han. Rubiks: Practical 360-degree streaming for smartphones. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, pages 482-- 494, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Yuanxing Zhang, Yushuo Guan, Kaigui Bian, Yunxin Liu, Hu Tuo, Lingyang Song, and Xiaoming Li. Epass360: Qoe-aware 360-degree video streaming over mobile devices. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Yu Guan, Chengyuan Zheng, Xinggong Zhang, Zongming Guo, and Junchen Jiang. Pano: Optimizing 360 video streaming with a better understanding of quality perception. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication, pages 394--407. 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Zesong Fei, Fei Wang, Jing Wang, and Xiang Xie. Qoe evaluation methods for 360- degree vr video transmission. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 14(1):78--88, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Chengjun Guo, Ying Cui, and Zhi Liu. Optimal multicast of tiled 360 vr video. IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, 8(1):145--148, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Kaixuan Long, Ying Cui, Chencheng Ye, and Zhi Liu. Optimal transmission of multi-quality tiled 360 vr video by exploiting multicast opportunities. In 2019 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), pages 1--6. IEEE, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Mingzhe Chen, Omid Semiari, Walid Saad, Xuanlin Liu, and Changchuan Yin. Federated deep learning for immersive virtual reality over wireless networks. In 2019 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), pages 1--6. IEEE, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Nikil Jayant, James Johnston, and Robert Safranek. Signal compression based on models of human perception. Proceedings of the IEEE, 81(10):1385--1422, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Yin Zhao, Lu Yu, Zhenzhong Chen, and Ce Zhu. Video quality assessment based on measuring perceptual noise from spatial and temporal perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 21(12):1890--1902, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Rakesh Agrawal, Johannes Gehrke, Dimitrios Gunopulos, and Prabhakar Raghavan. Automatic subspace clustering of high dimensional data for data mining applications. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pages 94--105, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Volodymyr Mnih, Adria Puigdomenech Badia, Mehdi Mirza, Alex Graves, Timothy Lillicrap, Tim Harley, David Silver, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Asynchronous methods for deep reinforcement learning. In International conference on machine learning, pages 1928--1937, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. RS Sutton. anda. g. barto,'reinforcement learningan introduction?, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Feng Qian, Bo Han, Qingyang Xiao, and Vijay Gopalakrishnan. Flare: Practical viewport-adaptive 360-degree video streaming for mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pages 99--114, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Xiaoqi Yin, Abhishek Jindal, Vyas Sekar, and Bruno Sinopoli. A control-theoretic approach for dynamic adaptive video streaming over http. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Special Interest Group on Data Communication, pages 325--338, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Chenglei Wu, Zhihao Tan, Zhi Wang, and Shiqiang Yang. A dataset for exploring user behaviors in vr spherical video streaming. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference, pages 193--198, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Jeroen Van Der Hooft, Stefano Petrangeli, Tim Wauters, Rafael Huysegems, Patrice Rondao Alface, Tom Bostoen, and Filip De Turck. Http/2-based adaptive streaming of hevc video over 4g/lte networks. IEEE Communications Letters, 20(11):2177--2180, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. VMP360: Adaptive 360° Video Streaming Based on Optical Flow Estimated QoE

    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
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      QoEVMA'20: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Quality of Experience (QoE) in Visual Multimedia Applications
      October 2020
      60 pages
      ISBN:9781450381581
      DOI:10.1145/3423328

      Copyright © 2020 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: 15 October 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate8of14submissions,57%

      Upcoming Conference

      MM '24
      MM '24: The 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia
      October 28 - November 1, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader