Benchmark of Bitrate Adaptation in Video Streaming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The HTTP adaptive streaming technique opened the door to cope with the fluctuating network conditions during the streaming process by dynamically adjusting the volume of the future chunks to be downloaded. The bitrate selection in this adjustment inevitably involves the task of predicting the future throughput of a video session, owing to which various heuristic solutions have been explored. The ultimate goal of the present work is to explore the theoretical upper bounds of the QoE that any ABR algorithm can possibly reach, therefore providing an essential step to benchmarking the performance evaluation of ABR algorithms. In our setting, the QoE is defined in terms of a linear combination of the average perceptual quality and the buffering ratio. The optimization problem is proven to be NP-hard when the perceptual quality is defined by chunk size and conditions are given under which the problem becomes polynomially solvable. Enriched by a global lower bound, a pseudo-polynomial time algorithm along the dynamic programming approach is presented. When the minimum buffering is given higher priority over higher perceptual quality, the problem is shown to be also NP-hard, and the above algorithm is simplified and enhanced by a sequence of lower bounds on the completion time of chunk downloading, which, according to our experiment, brings a 36.0% performance improvement in terms of computation time. To handle large amounts of data more efficiently, a polynomial-time algorithm is also introduced to approximate the optimal values when minimum buffering is prioritized. Besides its performance guarantee, this algorithm is shown to reach 99.938% close to the optimal results, while taking only 0.024% of the computation time compared to the exact algorithm in dynamic programming.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".