Had You Looked Where I'm Looking: Cross-user Similarities in Viewing Behavior for 360$^{\circ}$ Video and Caching Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The demand and usage of 360$^{\circ}$ video services are expected to increase. However, despite these services being highly bandwidth intensive, not much is known about the potential value that basic bandwidth saving techniques such as server or edge-network on-demand caching (e.g., in a CDN) could have when used for delivery of such services. This problem is both important and complicated as client-side solutions have been developed that split the full 360$^{\circ}$ view into multiple tiles, and adapt the quality of the downloaded tiles based on the user's expected viewing direction and bandwidth conditions. To better understand the potential bandwidth savings that caching-based techniques may offer for this context, this paper presents the first characterization of the similarities in the viewing directions of users watching the same 360$^{\circ}$ video, the overlap in viewports of these users (the area of the full 360$^{\circ}$ view they actually see), and the potential cache hit rates for different video categories, network conditions, and accuracy levels in the prediction of future viewing direction when prefetching. The results provide substantial insight into the conditions under which overlap can be considerable and caching effective, and can inform the design of new caching system policies tailored for 360$^{\circ}$ video.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".