Objective video presentation QoE predictor for smart adaptive video streaming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How to deliver videos to consumers over the network for optimal quality-of-experience (QoE) has been the central goal of modern video delivery services. Surprisingly, regardless of the large volume of videos being delivered everyday through various systems attempting to improve visual QoE, the actual QoE of end consumers is not properly assessed, not to say using QoE as the key factor in making critical decisions at the video hosting, network and receiving sites. Real-world video streaming systems typically use bitrate as the main video presentation quality indicator, but using the same bitrate to encode different video content could result in drastically different visual QoE, which is further affected by the display device and viewing condition of each individual consumer who receives the video. To correct this, we have to put QoE back to the driver's seat and redesign the video delivery systems. To achieve this goal, a major challenge is to find an objective video presentation QoE predictor that is accurate, fast, easy-to-use, display device adaptive, and provides meaningful QoE predictions across resolution and content. We propose to use the newly developed SSIMplus index (https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~z70wang/research/ssimplus/) for this role. We demonstrate that based on SSIMplus, one can develop a smart adaptive video streaming strategy that leads to much smoother visual QoE impossible to achieve using existing adaptive bitrate video streaming approaches. Furthermore, SSIMplus finds many more applications, in live and file-based quality monitoring, in benchmarking video encoders and transcoders, and in guiding network resource allocations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".