research-article

A Bayesian Quality-of-Experience Model for Adaptive Streaming Videos

Authors:

Zhengfang Duanmu,

Wen GaoAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications and Applications, Volume 18, Issue 3s

Article No.: 141, Pages 1 - 24

https://doi.org/10.1145/3491432

Published: 11 February 2023 Publication History

Abstract

The fundamental conflict between the enormous space of adaptive streaming videos and the limited capacity for subjective experiment casts significant challenges to objective Quality-of-Experience (QoE) prediction. Existing objective QoE models either employ pre-defined parametrization or exhibit complex functional form, achieving limited generalization capability in diverse streaming environments. In this study, we propose an objective QoE model, namely, the Bayesian streaming quality index (BSQI), to integrate prior knowledge on the human visual system and human annotated data in a principled way. By analyzing the subjective characteristics towards streaming videos from a corpus of subjective studies, we show that a family of QoE functions lies in a convex set. Using a variant of projected gradient descent, we optimize the objective QoE model over a database of training videos. The proposed BSQI demonstrates strong prediction accuracy in a broad range of streaming conditions, evident by state-of-the-art performance on four publicly available benchmark datasets and a novel analysis-by-synthesis visual experiment.

References

[1]

C. G. Bampis and A. C. Bovik. 2017. Learning to predict streaming video QoE: Distortions, rebuffering and memory. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1703.00633 (Mar.2017).

[2]

C. G Bampis, A. C. Bovik, and Z. Li. 2018. A simple prediction fusion improves data-driven full-reference video quality assessment models. In Picture Coding Symposium. IEEE, 298–302.

[3]

C. G. Bampis, Z. Li, and A. C. Bovik. 2017. Continuous prediction of streaming video QoE using dynamic networks. IEEE Sig. Process. Lett. 24, 7 (Jul.2017), 1083–1087.

[4]

C. G. Bampis, Z. Li, I. Katsavounidis, T. Y. Huang, C. Ekanadham, and A. C. Bovik. 2018. Towards perceptually optimized end-to-end adaptive video streaming. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1808.03898 (Aug.2018).

[5]

C. G. Bampis, Z. Li, A. K. Moorthy, I. Katsavounidis, A. Aaron, and A. C. Bovik. 2017. Study of temporal effects on subjective video quality of experience. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 26, 11 (Nov.2017), 5217–5231.

Digital Library

[6]

A. Bentaleb, A. C. Begen, and R. Zimmermann. 2016. SDNDASH: Improving QoE of HTTP adaptive streaming using software defined networking. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 1296–1305.

Digital Library

[7]

C. Bishop. 2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Digital Library

[8]

S. Boyd, N. Parikh, E. Chu, B. Peleato, and J. Eckstein. 2011. Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers. Found. Trends® Mach. Learn. 3, 1 (July2011), 1–122.

Digital Library

[9]

L. Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 1 (Oct.2001), 5–32.

Digital Library

[10]

Cisco Mobile VNI. 2017. Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2016–2021 White Paper. Retrieved from https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html.

[11]

J. De Cock, Z. Li, M. Manohara, and A. Aaron. 2016. Complexity-based consistent-quality encoding in the cloud. In IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.IEEE, 1484–1488.

[12]

F. Dobrian, V. Sekar, A. Awan, I. Stoica, D. Joseph, A. Ganjam, J. Zhan, and H. Zhang. 2011. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41, 4 (Aug.2011), 362–373.

Digital Library

[13]

Pedro Domingos. 2000. A unified bias-variance decomposition. In International Conference on Machine Learning. 231–238.

[14]

Z. Duanmu, D. Chen, Z. Li, W. Liu, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, and W. Gao. 2019. Waterloo Streaming Quality-of-Experience Database IV. Retrieved from http://ece.uwaterloo.ca/zduanmu/waterloosqoe4.

[15]

Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, D. Chen, Z. Li, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, and W. Gao. 2019. Pairwise Comparison of Objective QoE Models via Analysis-by-synthesis. Retrieved from http://ivc.uwaterloo.ca/research/KSQI/demo/.

[16]

Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, Z. Li, D. Chen, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, and W. Gao. 2020. Assessing the quality-of-experience of adaptive bitrate video streaming. arXiv preprint arXiv:2008.08804 (2020).

[17]

Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, Z. Wang, and Z. Wang. 2021. To Appear. Quantifying visual image quality: A Bayesian view. Ann. Rev. Vis. Sci. (Sep. 2021, To Appear).

[18]

Z. Duanmu, K. Ma, and Z. Wang. 2017. Quality-of-experience of adaptive video streaming: Exploring the space of adaptations. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 1752–1760.

Digital Library

[19]

Z. Duanmu, K. Ma, and Z. Wang. 2018. Quality-of-experience for adaptive streaming videos: An expectation confirmation theory motivated approach. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 27, 12 (Dec.2018), 6135–6146.

[20]

Z. Duanmu, A. Rehman, and Z. Wang. 2018. A quality-of-experience database for adaptive video streaming. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 64, 2 (June2018), 474–487.

[21]

Z. Duanmu, K. Zeng, K. Ma, A. Rehman, and Z. Wang. 2017. A quality-of-experience index for streaming video. IEEE J. Select. Topics Sig. Process. 11, 1 (Sep.2017), 154–166.

[22]

Tho Nguyen Duc, Chanh Minh Tran, Phan Xuan Tan, and Eiji Kamioka. 2019. Bidirectional LSTM for continuously predicting QoE in HTTP adaptive streaming. In International Conference on Information Science and Systems. 156–160.

Digital Library

[23]

Encoding.com. 2016. Microsoft Smooth Streaming. Retrieved from https://www.encoding.com/microsoft-smooth-streaming/.

[24]

N. Eswara, S. Ashique, A. Panchbhai, S. Chakraborty, H. P. Sethuram, K. Kuchi, A. Kumar, and S. S. Channappayya. 2020. Streaming video QoE modeling and prediction: A long short-term memory approach. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Video Technol. 30, 3 (Mar.2020), 661–673.

Digital Library

[25]

J. Gama, I. Žliobaitė, A. Bifet, M. Pechenizkiy, and A. Bouchachia. 2014. A survey on concept drift adaptation. ACM Comput. Surv. 46, 4 (Apr.2014), 1–37.

Digital Library

[26]

Deepti Ghadiyaram, Janice Pan, and A. C. Bovik. 2017. A subjective and objective study of stalling events in mobile streaming videos. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Video Technol. 29, 1 (2017), 183–197.

Digital Library

[27]

D. Ghadiyaram, J. Pan, and A. C. Bovik. 2018. Learning a continuous-time streaming video QoE model. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 27, 5 (May2018), 2257–2271.

[28]

M. Grafl and C. Timmerer. 2013. Representation switch smoothing for adaptive HTTP streaming. In IEEE International Workshop on Perceptual Quality of Systems. ISCA/DEGA, 178–183.

[29]

M. T. Hagan, H. B. Demuth, M. H. Beale, and R. De Jesús. 1996. Neural Network Design. Vol. 20. PWS Pub. Boston.

Digital Library

[30]

K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White. 1989. Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators. Neural Netw. 2, 5 (Jan.1989), 359–366.

[31]

T. Hoßfeld, R. Schatz, E. Biersack, and L. Plissonneau. 2013. Internet video delivery in YouTube: From traffic measurements to quality of experience. In Data Traffic Monitoring and Analysis. Springer, Berlin, 264–301.

[32]

T. Hoßfeld, M. Seufert, M. Hirth, T. Zinner, P. Tran-Gia, and R. Schatz. 2011. Quantification of YouTube QoE via crowdsourcing. In IEEE International Symosium on Multimedia. IEEE, 494–499.

[33]

T. Huang, C. Zhou, R. Zhang, C. Wu, X. Yao, and L. Sun. 2019. Comyco: Quality-aware adaptive video streaming via imitation learning. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 429–437.

Digital Library

[34]

T. Y. Huang, R. Johari, N. McKeown, M. Trunnell, and M. Watson. 2015. A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: Evidence from a large video streaming service. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44, 4 (Feb.2015), 187–198.

Digital Library

[35]

I. Ishii, T. Tatebe, Q. Gu, Y. Moriue, T. Takaki, and K. Tajima. 2010. 2000 fps real-time vision system with high-frame-rate video recording. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 1536–1541.

[36]

ITU-R BT.500-12. 1993. Recommendation: Methodology for the Subjective Assessment of the Quality of Television Pictures.

[37]

J. Jiang, V. Sekar, and H. Zhang. 2014. Improving fairness, efficiency, and stability in HTTP-based adaptive video streaming with FESTIVE. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 22, 1 (Feb.2014), 326–340.

[38]

S. B. Kang, M. Uyttendaele, S. Winder, and R. Szeliski. 2003. High dynamic range video. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3 (July2003), 319–325.

Digital Library

[39]

H. J. Kim, D. G. Yun, H. Kim, K. S. Cho, and S. G. Choi. 2012. QoE assessment model for video streaming service using QoS parameters in wired-wireless network. In IEEE International Conference on Advanced Communications Technology. 459–464.

[40]

J. Le Feuvre, C. Concolato, and J. Moissinac. 2007. GPAC: Open source multimedia framework. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 1009–1012.

Digital Library

[41]

S. Lederer. 2015. Optimal Adaptive Streaming Formats MPEG-DASH & HLS Segment Length. Retrieved from https://bitmovin.com/mpeg-dash-hls-segment-length/.

[42]

Z. Li, A. Aaron, L. Katsavounidis, A. Moorthy, and M. Manohara. 2016. Toward a Practical Perceptual Video Quality Metric. Retrieved from http://techblog.netflix.com/2016/06/toward-practical-perceptual-video.html.

[43]

Z. Li, Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, and Z. Wang. To Appear. AVC, HEVC, VP9, AVS2, or AV1? - A comparative study of state-of-the-art video encoders on 4K videos. In International Conference on Image Analysis and Recognition. AIMI.

[44]

Z. Li, X. Zhu, J. Gahm, R. Pan, H. Hu, A. C. Begen, and D. Oran. 2014. Probe and adapt: Rate adaptation for HTTP video streaming at scale. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 32, 4 (Apr.2014), 719–733.

[45]

W. Liu, Z. Duanmu, and Z. Wang. 2018. End-to-end blind quality assessment of compressed videos using deep neural networks. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 546–554.

Digital Library

[46]

X. Liu, F. Dobrian, H. Milner, J. Jiang, V. Sekar, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. 2012. A case for a coordinated internet video control plane. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 42, 4 (Sep.2012), 359–370.

Digital Library

[47]

Y. Liu, S. Dey, F. Ulupinar, M. Luby, and Y. Mao. 2015. Deriving and validating user experience model for DASH video streaming. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 61, 4 (Dec.2015), 651–665.

[48]

K. Ma, Z. Duanmu, Z. Wang, Q. Wu, W. Liu, H. Yong, H. Li, and L. Zhang. 2019. Group maximum differentiation competition: Model comparison with few samples. IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Mach. Intell. (2019), DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2889948

[49]

H. Mao, R. Netravali, and M. Alizadeh. 2017. Neural adaptive video streaming with pensieve. In ACM SIGCOMM. ACM, 197–210.

[50]

A. M. Mishra. 2001. Quality of Service in Communications Networks. Wiley.

[51]

R. K. Mok, X. Luo, E. W. Chan, and R. K. Chang. 2012. QDASH: A QoE-aware DASH system. In ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems. ACM, 11–22.

Digital Library

[52]

A. K. Moorthy, L. K. Choi, A. C. Bovik, and G. De Veciana. 2012. Video quality assessment on mobile devices: Subjective, behavioral and objective studies. IEEE J. Select. Topics Sig. Process. 6, 6 (Oct.2012), 652–671.

[53]

R. M. Nasiri, J. Wang, A. Rehman, S. Wang, and Z. Wang. 2015. Perceptual quality assessment of high frame rate video. In IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Signal Processing. IEEE, 1–6.

[54]

Netflix Inc.2015. Per-title Encode Optimization. Retrieved from http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/12/per-title-encode-optimization.html.

[55]

R. Ng, M. Levoy, M. Brédif, G. Duval, M. Horowitz, and P. Hanrahan. 2005. Light Field Photography with a Hand-held Plenoptic Camera. Computer Science Technical Report.

[56]

P. Ni, R. Eg, A. Eichhorn, C. Griwodz, and P. Halvorsen. 2011. Flicker effects in adaptive video streaming to handheld devices. In ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, 463–472.

Digital Library

[57]

J. Nightingale, Q. Wang, C. Grecos, and S. Goma. 2014. The impact of network impairment on quality of experience (QoE) in H.265/HEVC video streaming. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 60, 2 (2014), 242–250.

[58]

R. L. Oliver. 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. J. Market. Res. 17, 4 (Nov.1980), 460–469.

[59]

ITU-T P.1203. 2017. Parametric Bitstream-based Quality Assessment of Progressive Download and Adaptive Audiovisual Streaming Services Over Reliable Transport. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-P.1203-201710-I!!PDF-E&type=items.

[60]

R. Pastrana-Vidal, J. C. Gicquel, C. Colomes, and H. Cherifi. 2004. Sporadic frame dropping impact on quality perception. In Human Vision and Electronic Imaging IX. SPIE, 182–194.

[61]

P. Paudyal, F. Battisti, and M. Carli. 2016. Impact of video content and transmission impairments on Quality of Experience. Multim. Tools Applic. 75, 23 (2016), 16461–16485.

Digital Library

[62]

N. Ponomarenko, L. Jin, O. Ieremeiev, V. Lukin, K. Egiazarian, J. Astola, B. Vozel, K. Chehdi, M. Carli, and F. Battisti. 2015. Image database TID2013: Peculiarities, results and perspectives. Sig. Process.: Image Commun. 30 (Jan.2015), 57–77.

Digital Library

[63]

A. Rehman and Z. Wang. 2013. Perceptual experience of time-varying video quality. In IEEE International Workshop Quality of Multimedia Experience. IEEE, 218–223.

[64]

A. Rehman, K. Zeng, and Z. Wang. 2015. Display device-adapted video quality-of-experience assessment. In SPIE. SPIE, 939406.1–939406.11.

[65]

H. Riiser, P. Vigmostad, C. Griwodz, and P. Halvorsen. 2013. Commute path bandwidth traces from 3G networks: Analysis and applications. In ACM Conference on Multimedia Systems. ACM, 114–118.

Digital Library

[66]

D. Z. Rodríguez, Z. Wang, R. L. Rosa, and G. Bressan. 2014. The impact of video-quality-level switching on user quality of experience in dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2014, 1 (2014), 1–15.

[67]

H. R. Sheikh, M. F. Sabir, and A. C. Bovik. 2006. A statistical evaluation of recent full reference image quality assessment algorithms. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 15, 11 (Nov.2006), 3440–3451.

Digital Library

[68]

K. Singh, Y. Hadjadj-Aoul, and G. Rubino. 2012. Quality of experience estimation for adaptive HTTP/TCP video streaming using H.264/AVC. In IEEE Consumer Communications & Networking Conference. IEEE, 1–6.

[69]

K. Spiteri, R. Urgaonkar, and R. K. Sitaraman. 2016. BOLA: Near-optimal bitrate adaptation for online videos. In IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.IEEE, 1–9.

Digital Library

[70]

B. Stellato, G. Banjac, P. Goulart, A. Bemporad, and S. Boyd. 2017. OSQP: An operator splitting solver for quadratic programs. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1711.08013 (Nov.2017).

[71]

L. Toni, R. Aparicio-Pardo, K. Pires, W. Simon, A. Blanc, and P. Frossard. 2015. Optimal selection of adaptive streaming representations. ACM Trans. Multim. Comput., Commun., Applic. 11, 2s (Feb.2015), 1–43.

Digital Library

[72]

K. Tsukida and M. R. Gupta. 2011. How to Analyze Paired Comparison Data. University of Washington, Technical Report. UWEETR-2011-0004.

[73]

J. van der Hooft, S. Petrangeli, T. Wauters, R. Huysegems, P. R. Alface, T. Bostoen, and F. De Turck. 2016. HTTP/2-based adaptive streaming of HEVC video over 4G/LTE networks. IEEE Commun. Lett. 20, 11 (Aug.2016), 2177–2180.

[74]

VQEG. 2000. Final Report from the Video Quality Experts Group on the Validation of Objective Models of Video Quality Assessment. Technical Report. Retrieved from http://www.vqeg.org/.

[75]

Z. Wang. 2001. Internet QoS: Architectures and Mechanisms for Quality of Service. Morgan Kaufmann.

[76]

Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, H. R. Sheikh, and E. P. Simoncelli. 2004. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 13, 4 (Apr.2004), 600–612.

Digital Library

[77]

Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik. 2009. Mean squared error: Love it or leave it? A new look at signal fidelity measures. IEEE Sig. Process. Mag. 26, 1 (Jan.2009), 98–117.

[78]

Z. Wang, Z. Duanmu, A. Rehman, and K. Zeng. 2017. Method and system for automatic user quality-of-experience measurement of streaming video. US Patent WO/2017/152274.

[79]

Z. Wang and A. Rehman. 2017. Begin with the end in mind: A unified end-to-end quality-of-experience monitoring, optimization and management framework. In SMPTE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. SMPTE, 1–11.

[80]

Z. Wang and E. P. Simoncelli. 2008. Maximum differentiation (MAD) competition: A methodology for comparing computational models of perceptual quantities. J. Vis. 8, 12 (2008), 8–8.

[81]

Z. Wang, K. Zeng, and A. Rehman. 2016. Method and system for smart adaptive video streaming driven by perceptual quality-of-experience estimations. US Patent WO/2016/123721.

[82]

K. Watanabe, J. Okamoto, and T. Kurita. 2007. Objective video quality assessment method for evaluating effects of freeze distortion in arbitrary video scenes. In Image Quality and System Performance IV, Vol. 64940P. SPIE, 1–8.

[83]

J. Xue, D. Zhang, H. Yu, and C. W. Chen. 2014. Assessing quality of experience for adaptive HTTP video streaming. In IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshop. IEEE, 1–6.

[84]

X. Yin, A. Jindal, V. Sekar, and B. Sinopoli. 2015. A control-theoretic approach for dynamic adaptive video streaming over HTTP. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 45, 4 (Apr.2015), 325–338.

Digital Library

Cited By

Wang WWei XTao WZhou MJi C(2025)Quality of Experience-Oriented Cloud-Edge Dynamic Adaptive Streaming: Recent Advances, Challenges, and OpportunitiesSymmetry10.3390/sym1702019417:2(194)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17020194
Huang JKong GDuan XLong H(2025)Adaptive video streaming quality of experience assessment based on multi-layer feature perceptionSignal, Image and Video Processing10.1007/s11760-025-03906-119:4Online publication date: 24-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-025-03906-1
Jia ZMin XZhai G(2024)End-to-end Prediction of Streaming Video Quality of Experience: Dataset and Approach2024 IEEE International Conference on Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP)10.1109/VCIP63160.2024.10849855(1-5)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/VCIP63160.2024.10849855
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A Bayesian Quality-of-Experience Model for Adaptive Streaming Videos

Recommendations

Quality of Experience of adaptive video streaming

The usage of HTTP adaptive streaming (HAS) has become widely spread in multimedia services. Because it allows the service providers to improve the network resource utilization and user's Quality of Experience (QoE). Using this technology, the video ...
Quality-of-Experience of Adaptive Video Streaming: Exploring the Space of Adaptations
MM '17: Proceedings of the 25th ACM international conference on Multimedia

With the remarkable growth of adaptive streaming media applications, especially the wide usage of dynamic adaptive streaming schemes over HTTP (DASH), it becomes ever more important to understand the perceptual quality-of-experience (QoE) of end users, ...
Feedback control for adaptive live video streaming
MMSys '11: Proceedings of the second annual ACM conference on Multimedia systems

Multimedia content feeds an ever increasing fraction of the Internet traffic. Video streaming is one of the most important applications driving this trend. Adaptive video streaming is a relevant advancement with respect to classic progressive download ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications

ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications Volume 18, Issue 3s

October 2022

381 pages

ISSN:1551-6857

EISSN:1551-6865

DOI:10.1145/3567476

Editor:
Abdulmotaleb El Saddik
Mohamed Bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence, UAE and University of Ottawa, Canada

Issue’s Table of Contents

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: 11 February 2023

Online AM: 14 July 2022

Accepted: 13 October 2021

Revised: 11 September 2021

Received: 07 April 2021

Published in TOMM Volume 18, Issue 3s

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Refereed

Funding Sources

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada
Discovery Grant, Canada Research Chair program
Alexander Graham Bell Canada Graduate Scholarship program

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

11
Total Citations
View Citations
429
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)103
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

Reflects downloads up to 27 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wang WWei XTao WZhou MJi C(2025)Quality of Experience-Oriented Cloud-Edge Dynamic Adaptive Streaming: Recent Advances, Challenges, and OpportunitiesSymmetry10.3390/sym1702019417:2(194)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17020194
Huang JKong GDuan XLong H(2025)Adaptive video streaming quality of experience assessment based on multi-layer feature perceptionSignal, Image and Video Processing10.1007/s11760-025-03906-119:4Online publication date: 24-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-025-03906-1
Jia ZMin XZhai G(2024)End-to-end Prediction of Streaming Video Quality of Experience: Dataset and Approach2024 IEEE International Conference on Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP)10.1109/VCIP63160.2024.10849855(1-5)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/VCIP63160.2024.10849855
Jia ZMin XSun WZhai G(2024)Continuous and Overall Quality of Experience Evaluation for Streaming Video Based on Rich Features Exploration and Dual-Stage AttentionIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology10.1109/TCSVT.2024.341894134:11_Part_2(11709-11723)Online publication date: 25-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TCSVT.2024.3418941
Jia ZMin XZhai G(2024)DSA-QoE: Quality of Experience Evaluation for Streaming Video Based on Dual-Stage Attention2024 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS)10.1109/ISCAS58744.2024.10558538(1-5)Online publication date: 19-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS58744.2024.10558538
Pimenta IAquino CAlmeida YLima VGomes R(2024)Prediction of Multimedia Quality over 5G Networks in Urban Environments2024 20th International Conference on Distributed Computing in Smart Systems and the Internet of Things (DCOSS-IoT)10.1109/DCOSS-IoT61029.2024.00114(748-755)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/DCOSS-IoT61029.2024.00114
Peroni LGorinsky S(2024)Quality of Experience in Video Streaming: Status Quo, Pitfalls, and Guidelines2024 16th International Conference on COMmunication Systems & NETworkS (COMSNETS)10.1109/COMSNETS59351.2024.10427330(558-567)Online publication date: 3-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMSNETS59351.2024.10427330
Min XDuan HSun WZhu YZhai G(2024)Perceptual video quality assessment: a surveyScience China Information Sciences10.1007/s11432-024-4133-367:11Online publication date: 17-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-024-4133-3
Sun MChen HMa Z(2023)Quality-of-Experience Assessment for Ultra-Low Latency Live Streaming Videos2023 IEEE 25th International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP)10.1109/MMSP59012.2023.10337714(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/MMSP59012.2023.10337714
Begue JLabiod MMellouk A(2023)New Approach for an Affective Computing- Driven Quality of Experience (QoE) PredictionIEEE Communications Magazine10.1109/MCOM.002.220087061:10(54-60)Online publication date: 8-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/MCOM.002.2200870
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Figures

Tables

Media

View full text|Download PDF

View Issue’s Table of Contents