MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TYLE: Tile-based Dynamic Quality Enhancement for 360-degree Video Streaming

2024· article· en· W4406858758 on OpenAlexaff
Shalini Naik, Mea Wang, Diwakar Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTileComputer scienceDegree (music)Quality (philosophy)Video streamingReal-time computingGeographyPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, live streaming of 360° videos has increased in popularity due to the emergence of virtual and mixed reality (VR/MR) applications. The high quality and bird-eye view characteristics of VR/MR pose real-time challenges for 360° video streaming. The tile-based 360° video streaming has been created based on Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH), mainly focusing on adaptation algorithms but ignoring the impact of coding properties and variations in video content on streaming quality. In this paper, we take on the challenge in a new direction through the exploration of the potential of CRF rate control. Our deep quality inspection of CRF transcoded videos lead to the proposal of a dynamic quality ladder for a more continuous quality provisioning in contrast to the conventional discrete quality levels. Our quality selection is based on visual quality and CRF rate control rather than just the resolution and bitrate in conventional DASH. We propose TYLE, a Tile-based dynamic quality enhancement for 360° video streaming. Without increasing the bandwidth demand, TYLE serves the content in the Field-of-View (FoV) at the highest quality level and content in the near-FoV region with improved visual quality compare to conventional DASH. TYLE maintains smoother and stabler playback, especially under the condition challenged by bandwidth under-provisioning and high motion-activity videos.

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)0.001
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 score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207