Flicker effects in adaptive video streaming to handheld devices

Streaming video over the Internet requires mechanisms that limit the streams' bandwidth consumption within its fair share. TCP streaming guarantees this and provides lossless streaming as a side-effect. Adaptation by packet drop does not occur in the network, and excessive startup latency and stalling must be prevented by adapting the bandwidth consumption of the video itself. However, when the adaptation is performed during an ongoing session, it may influence the perceived quality of the entire video and result in improved or reduced visual quality of experience. We have investigated visual artifacts that are caused by adaptive layer switching -- we call them flicker effects -- and present our results for handheld devices in this paper. We considered three types of flicker, namely noise, blur and motion flicker. The perceptual impact of flicker is explored through subjective assessments. We vary both the intensity of quality changes (amplitude) and the number of quality changes per second (frequency). Users' ability to detect and their acceptance of variations in the amplitudes and frequencies of the quality changes are explored across four content types. Our results indicate that multiple factors influence the acceptance of different quality variations. Amplitude plays the dominant role in delivering satisfactory video quality, while frequency can also be adjusted to relieve the annoyance of flicker artifacts.

[1]  Ralf Steinmetz,et al.  Subjective impression of variations in layer encoded videos , 2003, IWQoS'03.

[2]  Margaret H. Pinson,et al.  A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting.

[3]  Yong Man Ro,et al.  Measuring Video Quality on Full Scalability of H.264/AVC Scalable Video Coding , 2008, IEICE Trans. Commun..

[4]  D. C. Howell Statistical methods for psychology, 3rd ed. , 1992 .

[5]  Jie Huang,et al.  Adaptive live video streaming by priority drop , 2003, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, 2003..

[6]  Itu-T and Iso Iec Jtc Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services , 2010 .

[7]  T. Perneger What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments , 1998, BMJ.

[8]  Heiko Schwarz,et al.  Overview of the Scalable Video Coding Extension of the H.264/AVC Standard , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology.

[9]  W. Schweigert,et al.  Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology , 2023 .

[10]  M. Sheldon,et al.  The use and interpretation of the Friedman test in the analysis of ordinal-scale data in repeated measures designs. , 1996, Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy.

[11]  Vivek K. Goyal,et al.  Multiple description coding: compression meets the network , 2001, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[12]  ITU-T Rec. P.910 (04/2008) Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications , 2009 .

[13]  D. C. Howell Statistical Methods for Psychology , 1987 .

[14]  Carsten Griwodz,et al.  Frequent layer switching for perceived quality improvements of coarse-grained scalable video , 2010, Multimedia Systems.

[15]  Carsten Griwodz,et al.  Fine-grained scalable streaming from coarse-grained videos , 2009, NOSSDAV '09.

[16]  David C. Hoaglin,et al.  Some Implementations of the Boxplot , 1989 .

[17]  M. Angela Sasse,et al.  Sharp or smooth?: comparing the effects of quantization vs. frame rate for streamed video , 2004, CHI '04.