MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512774260 · doi:10.1109/icme.2016.7552859

Quality-of-experience prediction for streaming video

2016· article· en· W2512774260 on OpenAlexaff
Zhengfang Duanmu, Abdul Rehman, Kai Zeng, Zhou Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of experiencePresentation (obstetrics)Video qualityQuality (philosophy)Real-time computingMultimediaPerceptionENCODEImperfectComputer networkQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid growth of streaming media applications, there has been a strong demand of objective models that can predict end users' quality-of-experience (QoE) when watching the video being streamed to their display devices. Existing methods typically use bitrate and global statistics of stalling events as the QoE indicators. This is problematic for two reasons. First, using the same bitrate to encode different video content could result in drastically different presentation QoE. Second, the interactions between presentation visual quality and playback stalling are not accounted for. Here we propose a novel QoE prediction approach that takes into consideration the instantaneous quality degradation due to perceptual video presentation impairment, the playback stalling events caused by imperfect network delivery, and the instantaneous interactions between presentation quality and playback stalling. The proposed algorithm demonstrates strong promise when tested using a subject-rated video streaming QoE database.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207