MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134445612 · doi:10.1109/comst.2021.3065237

A Survey on Multi-Access Edge Computing Applied to Video Streaming: Some Research Issues and Challenges

2021· article· en· W3134445612 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiantao Jiang, F. Richard Yu, Tian Song, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton University
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceQuality of experienceMultimediaQuality of serviceBandwidth (computing)Video streamingLow latency (capital markets)Edge computingComputer networkVideo qualityEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionTelecommunicationsMetric (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driven by the quality of experience (QoE) requirement of video streaming applications in the smart city, smart education, immersive service, and connected vehicle scenarios, the existing network poses significant challenges, including ultra-high bandwidth, ultra-large storage, and ultra-low latency requirements, etc. Multi-access edge computing (MEC) is a potential technology, which can provide computation-intensive and caching-intensive services for video streaming applications to satisfy the requirement of QoE. Thus, focusing on video streaming schemes, a comprehensive summary of the state of the art applying MEC to video streaming is surveyed. Firstly, the related overview and background knowledge are reviewed. Secondly, resource allocation issues have been discussed. Thirdly, the enabling technologies for video streaming are summarized by taking account of caching, computing, and networking. Then, a taxonomy of MEC enabled video streaming applications is classified. Finally, challenges and future research directions are given.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.472
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.022 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations193
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications Surveys & TutorialsSame topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207