Quality of experience (QOE) content aware hybrid lean predictive models for medical video transmission over Internet of things (IOT) networks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Lavanya ◽  
K. Vimala Devi ◽  
M. Subramaniam
Keyword(s):  
Internet Of Things ◽  
Predictive Models ◽  
Video Transmission ◽  
Quality Of Experience ◽  
Content Aware

Quality of Experience vs. QoS in Video Transmission

2010 ◽  
pp. 352-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
André F. Marquet ◽  
Jânio M. Monteiro ◽  
Nuno J. Martins ◽  
Mario S. Nunes
Keyword(s):  
Communication Networks ◽  
Video Transmission ◽  
Quality Of Experience ◽  
Video Quality ◽  
Subjective Assessment ◽  
Ip Networks ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Qos Parameters ◽  
Quality Video

In legacy television services, user centric metrics have been used for more than twenty years to evaluate video quality. These subjective assessment metrics are usually obtained using a panel of human evaluators in standard defined methods to measure the impairments caused by a diversity of factors of the Human Visual System (HVS), constituting what is also called Quality of Experience (QoE) metrics. As video services move to IP networks, the supporting distribution platforms and the type of receiving terminals is getting more heterogeneous, when compared with classical video distributions. The flexibility introduced by these new architectures is, at the same time, enabling an increment of the transmitted video quality to higher definitions and is supporting the transmission of video to lower capability terminals, like mobile terminals. In IP Networks, while Quality of Service (QoS) metrics have been consistently used for evaluating the quality of a transmission and provide an objective way to measure the reliability of communication networks for various purposes, QoE metrics are emerging as a solution to address the limitations of conventional QoS measuring when evaluating quality from the service and user point of view. In terms of media, compressed video usually constitutes a very interdependent structure degrading in a non-graceful manner when exposed to Binary Erasure Channels (BEC), like the Internet or wireless networks. Accordingly, not only the type of encoder and its major encoding parameters (e.g. transmission rate, image definition or frame rate) contribute to the quality of a received video, but also QoS parameters are usually a cause for different types of decoding artifacts. As a result of this, several worldwide standard entities have been evaluating new metrics for the subjective assessment of video transmission over IP networks. In this chapter we are especially interested in explaining some of the best practices available to monitor, evaluate and assure good levels of QoE in packet oriented networks for rich media applications like high quality video streaming. For such applications, service requirements are relatively loose or difficult to quantify and therefore specific techniques have to be clearly understood and evaluated. By the mid of the chapter the reader should have understood why even networks with excellent QoS parameters might have QoE issues, as QoE is a systemic approach that does not relate solely to QoS but to the ensemble of components composing the communication system.

scholarly journals Architecture and Protocol to Optimize Videoconference in Wireless Networks

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Jose M. Jimenez ◽  
José Luis García-Navas ◽  
Jaime Lloret ◽  
Oscar Romero
Keyword(s):  
Video Transmission ◽  
Quality Of Experience ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Medical Assistance ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Internet Connection ◽  
The Past ◽  
Business Meetings

In the past years, videoconferencing (VC) has become an essential means of communications. VC allows people to communicate face to face regardless of their location, and it can be used for different purposes such as business meetings, medical assistance, commercial meetings, and military operations. There are a lot of factors in real-time video transmission that can affect to the quality of service (QoS) and the quality of experience (QoE). The application that is used (Adobe Connect, Cisco Webex, and Skype), the internet connection, or the network used for the communication can affect to the QoE. Users want communication to be as good as possible in terms of QoE. In this paper, we propose an architecture for videoconferencing that provides better quality of experience than other existing applications such as Adobe Connect, Cisco Webex, and Skype. We will test how these three applications work in terms of bandwidth, packets per second, and delay using WiFi and 3G/4G connections. Finally, these applications are compared to our prototype in the same scenarios as they were tested, and also in an SDN, in order to improve the advantages of the prototype.

Correlating Quality of Experience and Quality of Service for Network Applications

2010 ◽  
pp. 326-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihai Ivanovici ◽  
Razvan Beuran
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Service ◽  
Video Transmission ◽  
Quality Of Experience ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
File Transfer ◽  
Application Performance ◽  
Network Applications ◽  
Network Application ◽  
The One

There is a significant difference between what a network application experiences as quality at network level, and what the user perceives as quality at application level. From the network point of view, applications require certain delay, bandwidth and packet loss bounds to be met – ideally zero delay and zero loss. However, users should not be directly concerned with network conditions, and furthermore they are usually neither able to measure nor predict them. Users only expect good application performance, i.e., a fast and reliable file transfer, high quality for voice or video transmission, and so on, depending on the application being used. This is true both in wired as well as wireless networks. In order to understand network application behavior, as well as the interaction between the application and the network, one must perform a delicate task – the one of correlating the Quality of Service (QoS), i.e., the degradation induced at network level (as a measure of what the application experiences), with the Quality of Experience (QoE), i.e., the degradation perceived by the user at application level (as a measure of the user-perceived quality) (Ivanovici, 2006). This is done by simultaneously measuring the QoS degradation and the application QoE on an end-to-end basis. These measures must be then correlated by taking into account their temporal relationship. Assessing the correlation between QoE and QoS makes it possible to predict application performance given a known QoS degradation level, and to determine the QoS bounds that are required in order to attain a desired QoE level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document