Dong Liu
ABSTRACT
As a typical 5G service, VR service quality has become the focus of attention of the network operators. Both 5G and Gigabit home broadband have the characteristics of high bandwidth and low latency, and could theoretically provide a good network support to the VR video playback, especially to 360-degree panoramic videos. In the current study, we explored the VR video playback quality and users’ viewing feelings under 5G and Gigabit home broadband network in a home environment. Our findings indicated that the video playback quality under 5G network was significantly lower than that under Gigabit home broadband network. In addition, we found that users were more sensitive to stalling frequency during watching, which considered to be highly related to the value of the network downlink rate. Our findings implied that the stability of 5G network performance should be further improved to better support the applications that require the network with high bandwidth and low latency.
- Pi, Z., Choi, J., & Heath, R. (2016). Millimeter-wave gigabit broadband evolution toward 5G: Fixed access and backhaul. IEEE Communications Magazine, 54, 4 (April 2016), 138–144.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- SG12, I. (2007). Definition of quality of experience. TD 109rev2 (PLEN/12), Geneva, Switzerland, 16–25.Google Scholar
- Redi, J. A., Zhu, Y., De Ridder, H., & Heynderickx, I. 2015. Visual signal quality assessment: quality of experience (QoE). Springer. Berlin,Germany.Google Scholar
- Fiedler, M., Hossfeld, T., & Tran-Gia, P. (2010). A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Network, 24, 2 (March 2010), 36–41.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hemami, S. S., & Reibman, A. R. (2010). No-reference image and video quality estimation: Applications and human-motivated design. Signal Processing: Image Communication, 25,7(August 2010).469–481.Google Scholar
- Choe, J.-H., Jeong, T.-U., Choi, H.-S., Lee, E.-J., Lee, S.-W., & Lee, C.-H. (2007). Comparison of subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. Journal of Broadcast Engineering, 12, 2 (Mar 2007), 177–184.Google ScholarCross Ref
- ITU-T RECOMMENDATION, P. (1999). Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. International Telecommunication Union.Google Scholar
- Dobrian, F., Sekar, V., Awan, A., Stoica, I., Joseph, D., Ganjam, A., Zhan, J., & Zhang, H. (2011). Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 41, 4 (August 2011), 362–373.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fei, Z., Wang, F., Wang, J., & Xie, X. (2019). Qoe evaluation methods for 360-degree vr video transmission. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 14, 1 (November 2019), 78–88.Google Scholar
- Singla, A., Göring, S., Raake, A., Meixner, B., Koenen, R., & Buchholz, T. (2019). Subjective quality evaluation of tile-based streaming for omnidirectional videos. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, Amherst Massachusetts, USA, 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1145/3304109.3306218Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spachos, P., Li, W., Chignell, M., Leon-Garcia, A., Zucherman, L., & Jiang, J. (2015). Acceptability and quality of experience in over the top video. In Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC). IEEE, London, UK, 1693–1698.Google ScholarCross Ref
- TT Tran, H., Ngoc, N. P., Pham, C. T., Jung, Y. J., & Thang, T. C. (2019). A subjective study on user perception aspects in virtual reality. Applied Sciences, 9, 16 (August 2019), 3384. DOI:10.3390/app9163384Google Scholar
- Zhu, Y., Heynderickx, I., & Redi, J. A. (2015). Understanding the role of social context and user factors in video quality of experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 49 (August 2015), 412–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.054Google ScholarDigital Library
- Le Callet, P., Möller, S., & Perkis, A. (2012). Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience. European Network on Quality of Experience in Multimedia Systems and Services (COST Action IC 1003), 3(2012).Google Scholar
- Reiter, U., Brunnström, K., De Moor, K., Larabi, M.-C., Pereira, M., Pinheiro, A., You, J., & Zgank, A. 2014. Quality of experience. Springer.Google Scholar
- 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. 252–263.Google Scholar
- Casas, P., Schatz, R., Wamser, F., Seufert, M., & Irmer, R. (2015). Exploring QoE in cellular networks: How much bandwidth do you need for popular smartphone apps? In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on All Things Cellular: Operations, Applications and Challenges. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA, 13–18.Google ScholarDigital Library
- MacMillan, K., Mangla, T., Saxon, J., & Feamster, N. (2021). Measuring the Performance and Network Utilization of Popular Video Conferencing Applications. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2105.13478.Google Scholar
- Anwar, M. S., Wang, J., Ullah, A., Khan, W., Ahmad, S., & Li, Z. (2019). Impact of stalling on QoE for 360-degree virtual reality videos. In Proceedings of 2019 IEEE International Conference on Signal, Information and Data Processing (ICSIDP) , IEEE, Chongqing,China, 1–6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Seufert, M., Wamser, F., Casas, P., Irmer, R., Tran-Gia, P., & Schatz, R. (2015). YouTube QoE on mobile devices: Subjective analysis of classical vs. Adaptive video streaming. In Proceedings of 6th International Workshop on Traffic Analysis and Characterization (TRAC). Association for Computing Machinery, Caen, France, 43–48.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hoßfeld, T., Seufert, M., Hirth, M., Zinner, T., Tran-Gia, P., & Schatz, R. (2011). Quantification of YouTube QoE via crowdsourcing. In Proceedings of 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia. IEEE, California, USA, 494–499.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hoßfeld, T., Egger, S., Schatz, R., Fiedler, M., Masuch, K., & Lorentzen, C. (2012). Initial delay vs. Interruptions: Between the devil and the deep blue sea. In Proceedings of 2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience. IEEE, Yarra Valley, Australia, 1–6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mok, R. K., Chan, E. W., Luo, X., & Chang, R. K. (2011). Inferring the QoE of HTTP video streaming from user-viewing activities. 31–36.Google Scholar
- Schatz, R., Sackl, A., Timmerer, C., & Gardlo, B. (2017). Towards subjective quality of experience assessment for omnidirectional video streaming. In Proceedings of 2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX 2017). IEEE, Erfurt, Germany,1–6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Garcia, M.-N., Dytko, D., & Raake, A. (2014). Quality impact due to initial loading, stalling, and video bitrate in progressive download video services. In Proceedings of 2014 Sixth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX). IEEE, Singapore,129–134.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Li, M., Jianbin, S., & Hui, L. (2017). A Determining Method of Frame Rate and Resolution to Boost the Video Live QoE. In Proceedings of 2017 2nd International Conference on Multimedia and Image Processing (ICMIP). IEEE, Wuhan, China, 206–209.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Singla, A., Fremerey, S., Robitza, W., Lebreton, P., & Raake, A. (2017). Comparison of subjective quality evaluation for HEVC encoded omnidirectional videos at different bit-rates for UHD and FHD resolution. In Proceedings of the on Thematic Workshops of ACM Multimedia 2017, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 511–519. https://doi.org/10.1145/3126686.3126768Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vučić, D., Skorin-Kapov, L., & Sužnjević, M. (2016). The impact of bandwidth limitations and video resolution size on QoE for WebRTC-based mobile multi-party video conferencing. In Proceedings of 5th ISCA/DEGA Workshop on Perceptual Quality of Systems. PQS 2016, Berlin, Germany, 59-63.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rodríguez, D. Z., Rosa, R. L., Costa, E. A., Abrahão, J., & Bressan, G. (2014). Video quality assessment in video streaming services considering user preference for video content. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 60, 3 (November 2014), 436–444.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zhu, Y., Heynderickx, I., & Redi, J. A. (2015). Understanding the role of social context and user factors in video quality of experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 49 (August 2015), 412–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.054Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott, M. J., Guntuku, S. C., Lin, W., & Ghinea, G. (2016). Do personality and culture influence perceived video quality and enjoyment? IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 18, 9 (September 2016), 1796–1807.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christensen, J. V., Mathiesen, M., Poulsen, J. H., Ustrup, E. E., & Kraus, M. (2018). Player experience in a VR and non-VR multiplayer game. VRIC '18: Proceedings of the Virtual Reality International Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, Laval,France, 1–4.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lin, C. X., Lee, C., Lally, D., & Coughlin, J. F. (2018). Impact of virtual reality (VR) experience on older adults’ well-being. In Proceedings of International Conference on Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. HCI International 2018, Las Vegas, USA, 89–100.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Curran, N. 2018. Factors of Immersion. The Wiley Handbook of Human Computer Interaction.Google Scholar
- Huynh-Thu, Q., & Ghanbari, M. (2008). Temporal aspect of perceived quality in mobile video broadcasting. IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, 54,3(July 2008), 641–651.Google Scholar
- Cheng, K., & Cairns, P. A. (2005). Behaviour, realism and immersion in games. CHI 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, 1272–1275.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hosseini, M., & Swaminathan, V. (2016). Adaptive 360 VR video streaming: Divide and conquer. In Proceedings of 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM). IEEE, San Jose, Calilfornia, 107–110.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fei, Z., Wang, F., Wang, J., & Xie, X. (2019). Qoe evaluation methods for 360-degree vr video transmission. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 14, 1 (November 2019), 78–88.Google Scholar
- Geerts, D., De Moor, K., Ketyko, I., Jacobs, A., Van den Bergh, J., Joseph, W., Martens, L., & De Marez, L. (2010). Linking an integrated framework with appropriate methods for measuring QoE. In Proceedings of the 2010 Second International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX 2010). IEEE, Trondheim, Norway, 158–163.Google ScholarCross Ref
Recommendations
Estimating VR Sickness and user experience using different HMD technologies: An evaluation study
AbstractThis paper presents results of a user study of the effects of virtual reality technology on VR Sickness and User Experience. In our study the participants watched two different panoramic (360) videos, one with relaxing content (beach ...
Highlights- Assessing VR Sickness discomfort levels using the SSQ and Questionnaire.
- User ...
Rapid Prototyping for AR/VR Experiences
CHI EA '20: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThis course will provide an introduction to techniques for rapid prototyping for Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) experiences. With the rise of consumer head mounted displays and powerful mobile phones, AR and VR are becoming increasingly ...
Effects on User Experience in an Edutainment Virtual Environment: Comparison Between CAVE and HMD
ECCE '17: Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive ErgonomicsThe user experience in immersive virtual environment can be broadly defined by the feeling of presence and immersion in a virtual environment. The propensity of feeling "there" and "enveloped by" in the virtual environment seems to be essential in ...
Comments