MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116084082 · doi:10.1109/mue.2011.31

Impact of Frame Loss Position on Transmitted Video Quality: Models and Improvements

2011· article· en· W2116084082 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Vakili, Jean‐Charles Grégoire

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Coding and Compression Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReal-time computingPacket lossNetwork packetVideo compression picture typesFrame (networking)Video qualityFrame rateDistortion (music)Residual frameVideo processingVideo trackingComputer visionComputer networkReference frameBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the question of whether or not the specific packet/frame lost, and in particular, its relative position toward the I-frames influences the quality of transmitted compressed video. We focus on the QCIF size video frame, one of the most pervasive video formats across the Internet and cellular systems. Using the average Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR) of the received coded video to measure the amount of distortion, we demonstrate that the interval between the lost frame and the last I-frame does have a significant effect on the resulting quality. Further, after investigating the probability of different burst loss lengths in noisy environments, where the duration of data loss is almost constant, we propose a method to improve performance of video streaming over the noisy channels based on packet scheduling, without requiring an increase in the bit rate.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Coding and Compression TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207