MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807766934 · doi:10.1109/icdcs.2018.00140

Mobile-Friendly HTTP Middleware with Screen Scrolling

2018· article· en· W2807766934 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Zhang, Feng Wang, Jiangchuan Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewportComputer scienceScrollingUploadThe InternetMultimediaDownloadMobile deviceAndroid (operating system)Mobile WebWorld Wide WebMobile computingHTML5Internet accessOperating systemMobile technologyComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pervasive penetration of mobile smart devices has significantly enriched Internet applications and undoubtedly reshaped the way that users access Internet services. Different from traditional desktop applications, mobile Internet applications require users to input via touch screens and view outputs on the displays with considerably limited size. The significant conflict between the limited-size of touch screens and the richness of online media contents requires the mobile Internet applications to download contents way beyond the user's viewing region (referred as viewport). In this paper, we present a Mobile-Friendly HTTP middleware (MF-HTTP), which interprets user touch screen inputs and optimize the HTTP downloading of media objects to improve quality of experience (QoE) and cost efficiency. We first demystify screen scrolling in mobile operating systems and precisely break down the viewport moving process. We identify the key influential factors for media object downloading and develop an optimal download scheme. Towards building a practical middleware, we further discuss and address the implementation issues in detail. We implement a MF-HTTP prototype based on Android platforms and evaluate the performance of MF-HTTP by conducting concrete case studies on two representative applications, namely, web browsing and 360-degree video streaming.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207