Establishing Waiting Time Thresholds in Interactive Web Mapping Applications for Network QoE Management

Customer expectations will continue to drive communication service developers to optimise their use of network resources based on user satisfaction. Thus, network platforms need to be remodelled from Quality of Service (QoS) centric to Quality of Experience (QoE) aware platforms. The perceived QoE for interactive web applications such as Google maps or Openstreetmaps is dominated by waiting time, i.e. the perceived time to render the page and map. Studies have explored waiting time estimation for Web QoE applications (e.g. email, downloads, web pages). Perceived waiting time for web mapping applications have been less comprehensively explored. The relationship between perceived waiting time and network QoS is a key QoE management factor to enable QoE aware networks. In this paper, we review the principle of network QoE management and the perception of waiting times. We present experimental design and methodology that facilitate the identification of waiting time thresholds for web applications, using web maps as a use case. We outline our results along with a statistical analysis and discussion interpreting the results and their applications. Finally, we discuss follow-up experiments and how they could be developed and applied in the network QoE management.

[1]  Christian Timmerer,et al.  Challenges of QoE management for cloud applications , 2012, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[2]  Peter Reichl,et al.  The Logarithmic Nature of QoE and the Role of the Weber-Fechner Law in QoE Assessment , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Communications.

[3]  Lea Skorin-Kapov,et al.  Modelling the relationship between design/performance factors and perceptual features contributing to Quality of Experience for mobile Web browsing , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[4]  Raimund Schatz,et al.  Quantifying the impact of network bandwidth fluctuations and outages on Web QoE , 2015, 2015 Seventh International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX).

[5]  Markus Fiedler,et al.  The memory effect and its implications on Web QoE modeling , 2011, 2011 23rd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC).

[6]  Andrew Hines,et al.  Towards Application-Aware Networking: ML-Based End-to-End Application KPI/QoE Metrics Characterization in SDN , 2018, 2018 Tenth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN).

[7]  Scott W. Brown Attentional resources in timing: Interference effects in concurrent temporal and nontemporal working memory tasks , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Warren H Meck,et al.  Time perception: the bad news and the good , 2014, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[9]  John Woods,et al.  Survey on QoE\QoS Correlation Models For Multimedia Services , 2013, ArXiv.

[10]  Markus Fiedler,et al.  A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service , 2010, IEEE Network.

[11]  Markus Fiedler,et al.  Waiting times in quality of experience for web based services , 2012, 2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience.

[12]  Dario Rossi,et al.  Narrowing the Gap Between QoS Metrics and Web QoE Using Above-the-fold Metrics , 2018, PAM.

[13]  W. Meck,et al.  Temporal cognition: Connecting subjective time to perception, attention, and memory. , 2016, Psychological bulletin.

[14]  Konstantina Papagiannaki,et al.  EYEORG: A Platform For Crowdsourcing Web Quality Of Experience Measurements , 2016, CoNEXT.

[15]  S. S. Stevens On the psychophysical law. , 1957, Psychological review.

[16]  Hamed Z. Jahromi,et al.  An Application Awareness Framework Based on SDN and Machine Learning: Defining the Roadmap and Challenges , 2018, 2018 10th International Conference on Communication Software and Networks (ICCSN).