More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Cumulative Quality Modeling for HTTP Adaptive Streaming

Authors:

Huyen T. T. Tran,

Tobias Hoßfeld,

Michael Seufert,

Truong Cong ThangAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), Volume 17, Issue 1

Article No.: 22, Pages 1 - 24

https://doi.org/10.1145/3423421

Published: 16 April 2021 Publication History

Abstract

HTTP Adaptive Streaming has become the de facto choice for multimedia delivery. However, the quality of adaptive video streaming may fluctuate strongly during a session due to throughput fluctuations. So, it is important to evaluate the quality of a streaming session over time. In this article, we propose a model to estimate the cumulative quality for HTTP Adaptive Streaming. In the model, a sliding window of video segments is employed as the basic building block. Through statistical analysis using a subjective dataset, we identify four important components of the cumulative quality model, namely the minimum window quality, the last window quality, the maximum window quality, and the average window quality. Experiment results show that the proposed model achieves high prediction performance and outperforms related quality models. In addition, another advantage of the proposed model is its simplicity and effectiveness for deployment in real-time estimation. Our subjective dataset as well as the source code of the proposed model have been made publicly available at https://sites.google.com/site/huyenthithanhtran1191/cqmdatabase.

References

[1]

Anne Aaron, Zhi Li, Megha Manohara, Jan De Cock, and David Ronca. 2015. Per-title encode optimization. Retrieved from February 1, 2018 from https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/per-title-encode-optimization-7e99442b62a2.

[2]

C. G. Bampis, Z. Li, I. Katsavounidis, and A. C. Bovik. 2018. Recurrent and dynamic models for predicting streaming video quality of experience. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 27, 7 (Jul. 2018), 3316–3331.

[3]

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

[4]

N. Barman and M. G. Martini. 2019. QoE modeling for HTTP adaptive video streaming—A survey and open challenges. IEEE Access 7 (Mar. 2019), 30831–30859.

[5]

A. Bentaleb, B. Taani, A. C. Begen, C. Timmerer, and R. Zimmermann. 2019. A survey on bitrate adaptation schemes for streaming media over HTTP. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 21, 1 (Firstquarter 2019), 562–585.

[6]

Chao Chen, Lark Kwon Choi, Gustavo De Veciana, Constantine Caramanis, Robert W. Heath, and Alan C. Bovik. 2014. Modeling the time-varying subjective quality of HTTP video streams with rate adaptations. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23, 5 (May 2014), 2206–2221.

[7]

Giuseppe Cofano, Luca De Cicco, Thomas Zinner, Anh Nguyen-Ngoc, Phuoc Tran-Gia, and Saverio Mascolo. 2017. Design and performance evaluation of network-assisted control strategies for HTTP adaptive streaming. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 13, 3s, Article 42 (Jun. 2017), 24 pages.

Digital Library

[8]

Tom Dietterich. 1995. Overfitting and undercomputing in machine learning. Comput. Surv. 27, 3 (Sept. 1995), 326–327.

Digital Library

[9]

Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, D. Chen, Z. Li, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, and W. Gao. 2019. A knowledge-driven quality-of-experience model for adaptive streaming videos. arXiv:1911.07944 https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.07944.

[10]

Z. Duanmu, W. Liu, D. Chen, Z. Li, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, and W. Gao. 2019. A knowledge-driven quality-of-experience model for adaptive streaming videos. Retrieved June 1, 2020 from https://github.com/zduanmu/ksqi.

[11]

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.

[12]

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

[13]

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

[14]

N. Eswara, S. Ashique, A. Panchbhai, S. Chakraborty, H. P. Sethuram, K. Kuchi, A. Kumar, and S. S. Channappayya. 2019. Streaming video QoE modeling and prediction: A long short-term memory approach. Retrieved June 1, 2020 from https://github.com/lfovia/lstm_qoe.

[15]

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. Vid. Technol. 30, 3 (Mar. 2020), 661–673.

[16]

N. Eswara, K. Manasa, A. Kommineni, S. Chakraborty, H. P. Sethuram, K. Kuchi, A. Kumar, and S. S. Channappayya. 2018. A continuous qoe evaluation framework for video streaming over HTTP. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Vid. Technol. 28, 11 (Nov. 2018), 3236–3250.

Digital Library

[17]

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

[18]

D. Ghadiyaram, J. Pan, and A. C. Bovik. 2019. A subjective and objective study of stalling events in mobile streaming videos. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Vid. Technol. 29, 1 (Jan. 2019), 183–197.

[19]

Zhili Guo, Yao Wang, and Xiaoqing Zhu. 2015. Assessing the visual effect of non-periodic temporal variation of quantization stepsize in compressed video. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP’15). 3121–3125.

Digital Library

[20]

Tobias Hoßfeld, Raimund Schatz, Ernst Biersack, and Louis Plissonneau. 2013. Internet video delivery in YouTube: From traffic measurements to quality of experience. Data Traffic Monitor. Anal. 7754 (2013), 264–301.

[21]

Tobias Hoßfeld, Michael Seufert, Christian Sieber, and Thomas Zinner. 2014. Assessing effect sizes of influence factors towards a QoE model for HTTP adaptive streaming. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’14). 111–116.

[22]

T. Huang, C. Zhou, X. Yao, R. Zhang, C. Wu, and L. Sun. 2020. Quality-aware neural adaptive video streaming with lifelong imitation learning. IEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 38, 10 (2020), 2324--2342.

[23]

P. Juluri, V. Tamarapalli, and D. Medhi. 2016. Measurement of quality of experience of video-on-demand services: A survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 18, 1 (Feb. 2016), 401–418.

[24]

Daniel Kahneman, Barbara L. Fredrickson, Charles A. Schreiber, and Donald A. Redelmeier. 1993. When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychol. Sci. 4, 6 (Nov. 1993), 401–405.

[25]

Friedemann Köster, Gabriel Mittag, and Sebastian Möller. 2017. Modeling the overall quality of experience on the basis of underlying quality dimensions. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference Quality Multimedia Experience. 1–6.

[26]

Patrick Le Callet, Sebastian Möller, and Andrew Perkis (eds.). 2013. Qualinet White Paper on Definitions of Quality of Experience. Technical Report. Version 1.2.

[27]

Zhi Li, Christos Bampis, Julie Novak, Anne Aaron, Kyle Swanson, Anush Moorthy, and J. D. Cock. 2018. VMAF: The journey continues. Retrieved June 1, 2020 from https://netflixtechblog.com/vmaf-the-journey-continues-44b51ee9ed12.

[28]

Zhi Li, Christos Bampis, Julie Novak, Anne Aaron, Kyle Swanson, Anush Moorthy, and J. D. Cock. 2019. VMAF—Video multi-method assessment fusion. Retrieved June 1, 2020 from https://github.com/Netflix/vmaf.

[29]

David Lindegren, Werner Robitza, Marie-Neige Garcia, Steve Göring, Alexander Raake, Peter List, Bernhard Feiten, Ulf Wüstenhagen, Jörgen Gustafsson, Gunnar Heikkilä, Junaid Shaikh, and Simon Broom. 2018. ITU-T Rec. P.1203 Standalone Implementation. Retrieved July 1, 2020 from https://github.com/itu-p1203/itu-p1203/.

[30]

Yao Liu, Sujit Dey, Fatih Ulupinar, Michael Luby, and Yinian Mao. 2015. Deriving and validating user experience model for DASH video streaming. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 61, 4 (Dec. 2015), 651–665.

[31]

M. Hammad Mazhar and M. Zubair Shafiq. 2018. Real-time video quality of experience monitoring for HTTPS and QUIC. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’18). 1331–1339.

[32]

Christopher Müller, Stefan Lederer, and Christian Timmerer. 2012. An evaluation of dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP in vehicular environments. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Mobile Video. 37–42.

Digital Library

[33]

Hyunwoo Nam, Kyung-Hwa Kim, and Henning Schulzrinne. 2016. QoE matters more than QoS: Why people stop watching cat videos. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications. 1–9.

Digital Library

[34]

Y. Ou, Y. Xue, and Y. Wang. 2014. Q-STAR: A perceptual video quality model considering impact of spatial, temporal, and amplitude resolutions. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23, 6 (Jun. 2014), 2473–2486.

Digital Library

[35]

Lloyd Peterson and Margaret Jean Peterson. 1959. Short-term retention of individual verbal items.J. Exp. Psychol. 58, 3 (Sep. 1959), 193–198.

[36]

Stefano Petrangeli, Jeroen Famaey, Maxim Claeys, Steven Latré, and Filip De Turck. 2015. QoE-driven rate adaptation heuristic for fair adaptive video streaming. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 12, 2, Article 28 (Oct. 2015), 24 pages.

Digital Library

[37]

Alexander Raake, Marie-Neige Garcia, Werner Robitza, Peter List, Steve Göring, and Bernhard Feiten. 2017. A bitstream-based, scalable video-quality model for HTTP adaptive streaming: ITU-T P.1203.1. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’17). 1–6.

[38]

Recommendation ITU-R BT.500-13. 2012. Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. International Telecommunication Union (2012).

[39]

Recommendation ITU-T P.1203.1. 2017. Parametric bitstream-based quality assessment of progressive dowload and adaptive audiovisual streaming services over reliable transport-Video quality estimation module. International Telecommunication Union (2017).

[40]

Recommendation ITU-T P.1203.2. 2017. Parametric bitstream-based quality assessment of progressive download and adaptive audiovisual streaming services over reliable transport—Audio quality estimation module. International Telecommunication Union (2017).

[41]

Recommendation ITU-T P.1203.3. 2017. Parametric bitstream-based quality assessment of progressive download and adaptive audiovisual streaming services over reliable transport-Quality integration module. International Telecommunication Union (2017).

[42]

Recommendation ITU-T P.1401. 2012. Methods, metrics and procedures for statistical evaluation, qualification and comparison of objective quality prediction models. International Telecommunication Union (2012).

[43]

Recommendation ITU-T P.880. 2004. Methods for objective and subjective assessment of quality: Continous evaluation of time varying speech quality. International Telecommunication Union (2004).

[44]

Recommendation ITU-T P.913. 2014. Methods for the subjective assessment of video quality, audio quality and audiovisual quality of Internet video and distribution quality television in any environment. International Telecommunication Union (2014).

[45]

A. Rehman and Z. Wang. 2013. Perceptual experience of time-varying video quality. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’13). 218–223.

[46]

Russell Revlin. 2012. Cognition: Theory and Practice. Macmillan.

[47]

Werner Robitza, Marie-Neige Garcia, and Alexander Raake. 2017. A modular HTTP adaptive streaming QoE model-Candidate for ITU-T P. 1203 (“P. NATS”). In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’17). 1–6.

[48]

Werner Robitza, Steve Göring, Alexander Raake, David Lindegren, Gunnar Heikkilä, Jörgen Gustafsson, Peter List, Bernhard Feiten, Ulf Wüstenhagen, Marie-Neige Garcia, Kazuhisa Yamagishi, and Simon Broom. 2018. HTTP adaptive streaming QoE estimation with ITU-T Rec. P.1203—Open databases and software. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference. 466–471.

Digital Library

[49]

Demóstenes Zegarra Rodríguez, Renata Lopes Rosa, Eduardo Costa Alfaia, Julia Issy Abrahão, and Graça Bressan. 2016. Video quality metric for streaming service using DASH standard. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 62, 3 (Sept. 2016), 628–639.

[50]

K. Seshadrinathan and A. C. Bovik. 2011. Temporal hysteresis model of time varying subjective video quality. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP’11). 1153–1156.

[51]

K. Seshadrinathan, R. Soundararajan, A. C. Bovik, and L. K. Cormack. 2010. Study of subjective and objective quality assessment of video. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 19, 6 (Jun. 2010), 1427–1441.

Digital Library

[52]

M. Seufert, Pedro Casas, Nikolas Wehner, Gang Li, and Li Kuang. 2019. Stream-based machine learning for real-time QoE analysis of encrypted video streaming traffic. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Quality of Experience Management (QoE-Management’19). 76–81.

[53]

Michael Seufert, Sebastian Egger, Martin Slanina, Thomas Zinner, Tobias Hoßfeld, and Phuoc Tran-Gia. 2015. A survey on quality of experience of HTTP adaptive streaming. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 17, 1 (2015), 469–492.

Digital Library

[54]

M. Seufert, M. Slanina, S. Egger, and M. Kottkamp. 2013. “To pool or not to pool”: A comparison of temporal pooling methods for HTTP adaptive video streaming. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference Quality Multimedia Experience. 52–57.

[55]

Kamal Deep Singh, Yassine Hadjadj-Aoul, and Gerardo Rubino. 2012. Quality of experience estimation for adaptive HTTP/TCP video streaming using H. 264/AVC. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC’12). 127–131.

[56]

M. Takagi, H. Fujii, and A. Shimizu. 2014. Optimized spatial and temporal resolution based on subjective quality estimation without encoding. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Visual Communications and Image Processing Conference. 33–36.

[57]

Samira Tavakoli, Sebastian Egger, Michael Seufert, Raimund Schatz, Kjell Brunnström, and Narciso García. 2016. Perceptual quality of HTTP adaptive streaming strategies: Cross-experimental analysis of multi-laboratory and crowdsourced subjective studies. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 34, 8 (Aug. 2016), 2141–2153.

Digital Library

[58]

Truong Cong Thang, Hung T. Le, Hoc X Nguyen, Anh T. Pham, Jung Won Kang, and Yong Man Ro. 2013. Adaptive video streaming over HTTP with dynamic resource estimation. J. Commun. Netw. 15, 6 (Dec. 2013), 635–644.

[59]

H. T. T. Tran, Nam Pham Ngoc, Tobias Hoßfeld, and Truong Cong Thang. 2018. A cumulative quality model for HTTP adaptive streaming. In Proceedings of the 2018 Tenth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’18). 1–6.

[60]

H. T. T. Tran, Nam Pham Ngoc, Yong Ju Jung, Anh T. Pham, and Truong Cong Thang. 2017. A histogram-based quality model for HTTP adaptive streaming. IEICE Trans. Fundam. Electr. Commun. Comput. Sci. E100.A, 2 (Feb. 2017), 555–564.

[61]

H. T. T. Tran, N. P. Ngoc, A. T. Pham, and T. C. Thang. 2016. A multi-factor QoE model for adaptive streaming over mobile networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps’16). 1–6.

[62]

Huyen T. T. Tran, Nam Pham Ngoc, and Truong Cong Thang. 2020. A study on impacts of multiple factors on video qualify of experience. arxiv:2006.12697. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12697.

[63]

J. De Vriendt, D. De Vleeschauwer, and D. Robinson. 2013. Model for estimating QoE of video delivered using HTTP adaptive streaming. In Proceedings of the IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM’13). 1288–1293.

[64]

Chen Wang, Jianfeng Guan, Tongtong Feng, Neng Zhang, and Tengfei Cao. 2019. BitLat: Bitrate-adaptivity and latency-awareness algorithm for live video streaming. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 2642–2646.

Digital Library

[65]

S. Wassermann, M. Seufert, P. Casas, L. Gang, and K. Li. 2019. Let me decrypt your beauty: Real-time prediction of video resolution and bitrate for encrypted video streaming. In Proceedings of the Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA’19). 199–200.

[66]

M. Xu, C. Li, Z. Chen, Z. Wang, and Z. Guan. 2019. Assessing visual quality of omnidirectional videos. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Vid. Technol. 29, 12 (Dec. 2019), 3516–3530.

[67]

K. Yamagishi and T. Hayashi. 2017. Parametric quality-estimation model for adaptive-bitrate-streaming services. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 19, 7 (Jul. 2017), 1545–1557.

[68]

Hema Kumar Yarnagula, Parikshit Juluri, Sheyda Kiani Mehr, Venkatesh Tamarapalli, and Deep Medhi. 2019. QoE for mobile clients with segment-aware rate adaptation algorithm (SARA) for DASH video streaming. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 15, 2, Article 36 (Jun. 2019), 23 pages.

Digital Library

[69]

Xiaoqi Yin, Abhishek Jindal, Vyas Sekar, and Bruno Sinopoli. 2015. A control-theoretic approach for dynamic adaptive video streaming over HTTP. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 45, 4 (Aug. 2015), 325–338.

Digital Library

[70]

L. Yu, T. Tillo, and J. Xiao. 2017. QoE-driven dynamic adaptive video streaming strategy with future information. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 63, 3 (Sept. 2017), 523–534.

[71]

T. Zhao, Q. Liu, and C. W. Chen. 2017. QoE in video transmission: A user experience-driven strategy. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 19, 1 (Firstquarter 2017), 285–302.

Cited By

Wu HLi XWang GCheng GHu X(2022)Resolution Identification of Encrypted Video Streaming Based on HTTP/2 FeaturesACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/355189119:2(1-23)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3551891

Index Terms

Cumulative Quality Modeling for HTTP Adaptive Streaming
1. Information systems
  1. Information systems applications
    1. Multimedia information systems
      1. Multimedia streaming

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 ...
End-to-end Quality of Experience Evaluation for HTTP Adaptive Streaming
MM '21: Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia

Exponential growth in multimedia streaming traffic over the Internet motivates the research and further investigation of the user's perceived quality of such services. Enhancement of experienced quality by the users becomes more substantial when service ...
Comparative Evaluation of User Perceived Quality Assessment of Design Strategies for HTTP-based Adaptive Streaming

HTTP-based Adaptive Streaming (HAS) is the dominant Internet video streaming application. One specific HAS approach, Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH), is of particular interest, as it is a widely deployed, standardized implementation. Prior ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

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

ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications Volume 17, Issue 1

February 2021

392 pages

ISSN:1551-6857

EISSN:1551-6865

DOI:10.1145/3453992

Editor:
Alberto Del Bimbo
University of Firenze, Italy

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to 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 the author(s) 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: 16 April 2021

Accepted: 01 September 2020

Received: 01 August 2020

Published in TOMM Volume 17, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
196
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)19
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 22 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wu HLi XWang GCheng GHu X(2022)Resolution Identification of Encrypted Video Streaming Based on HTTP/2 FeaturesACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/355189119:2(1-23)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3551891

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.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents