MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictive and Robust Field-of-View Selection for Virtual Reality Video Streaming

2023· article· en· W4388079792 on OpenAlexaff
Zhixuan Huang, Peng Yang, Wen Wu, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Science Foundation of Hubei ProvincePeng Cheng Laboratory
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual realitySelection (genetic algorithm)Video streamingField (mathematics)MultimediaHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality technology is rapidly evolving towards providing immersive user experience. By predicting user’s field-of-view (FoV) in advance, only transmitting content viewed by the user can help to meet the stringent requirements of delivering enhanced video quality. In this paper, a predictive and robust FoV selection algorithm is devised to dynamically identify a subset of video tiles, guided by the prediction error due to user’s stochastic head movement. Considering that the required data size to cover actual FoV is positively correlated with the prediction error, we construct a context space represented by the prediction error. A partition method of context space is exploited to discretize continuous context, where the prediction errors are classified effectively, and adaptive tile selection can be carried out. Then, a padding strategy is proposed by estimating the transmission gain of each tile in different prediction context, which improves the coverage of transmitted content around the true FoV at less bandwidth cost. Experimental results based on a real-world dataset demonstrate that the proposed algorithm can achieve dynamic FoV adjustment, and effectively improve user’s quality of experience.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207