The IRMA Community
Newsletters
Research IRM
Click a keyword to search titles using our InfoSci-OnDemand powered search:
|
Quality of Experience vs. QoS in Video Transmission
|
|
Author(s): André F. Marquet (WIT-Software, Portugal), Jânio M. Monteiro (University of Algarve/ INESC-ID, Portugal), Nuno J. Martins (Nokia Siemens Networks, Portugal)and Mario S. Nunes (IST/INESC-ID, Portugal)
Copyright: 2010
Pages: 25
Source title:
Quality of Service Architectures for Wireless Networks: Performance Metrics and Management
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Sasan Adibi (University of Waterloo, Canada), Raj Jain (Washington University in St. Louis, USA), Shyam Parekh (Alcatel-Lucent, USA)and Mostafa Tofighbakhsh (AT&T Labs, USA)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-680-3.ch016
Purchase
|
Abstract
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.
Related Content
|
J. Mangaiyarkkarasi, J. Shanthalakshmi Revathy.
© 2024.
34 pages.
|
|
Gummadi Surya Prakash, W. Chandra, Shilpa Mehta, Rupesh Kumar.
© 2024.
22 pages.
|
|
Duygu Nazan Gençoğlan.
© 2024.
35 pages.
|
|
Smrity Dwivedi.
© 2024.
20 pages.
|
|
Pallavi Sapkale, Shilpa Mehta.
© 2024.
21 pages.
|
|
Pardhu Thottempudi, Vijay Kumar.
© 2024.
43 pages.
|
|
Sathish Kumar Danasegaran, Elizabeth Caroline Britto, S. Dhanasekaran, G. Rajalakshmi, S. Lalithakumari, A. Sivasangari, G. Sathish Kumar.
© 2024.
18 pages.
|
|
|