Efficient QoE-Aware Scheme for Video Quality Switching Operations in Dynamic Adaptive Streaming

Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH) is a popular over-the-top video content distribution technique that adapts the streaming session according to the user's network condition typically in terms of downlink bandwidth. This video quality adaptation can be achieved by scaling the frame quality, spatial resolution or frame rate. Despite the flexibility on the video quality scaling methods, each of these quality scaling dimensions has varying effects on the Quality of Experience (QoE) for end users. Furthermore, in video streaming, the changes in motion over time along with the scaling method employed have an influence on QoE, hence the need to carefully tailor scaling methods to suit streaming applications and content type. In this work, we investigate an intelligent DASH approach for the latest video coding standard H.265 and propose a heuristic QoE-aware cost-efficient adaptation scheme that does not switch unnecessarily to the highest quality level but rather stays temporarily at an intermediate quality level in certain streaming scenarios. Such an approach achieves a comparable and consistent level of quality under impaired network conditions as commonly found in Internet and mobile networks while reducing bandwidth requirements and quality switching overhead. The rationale is based on our empirical experiments, which show that an increase in bitrate does not necessarily mean noticeable improvement in QoE. Furthermore, our work demonstrates that the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) and the spatial resolution scalability types are the best fit for our proposed algorithm. Finally, we demonstrate an innovative interaction between quality scaling methods and the polarity of switching operations. The proposed QoE-aware scheme is implemented and empirical results show that it is able to reduce bandwidth requirements by up to 41% whilst achieving equivalent QoE compared with a representative DASH reference implementation.

[1]  Christian Timmerer,et al.  Representation Switch Smoothing for Adaptive HTTP Streaming , 2013 .

[2]  Ali C. Begen,et al.  Probe and Adapt: Rate Adaptation for HTTP Video Streaming At Scale , 2013, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[3]  Jim Martin,et al.  Characterizing Netflix bandwidth consumption , 2013, 2013 IEEE 10th Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC).

[4]  Is-Haka Mkwawa,et al.  Power-driven VoIP quality adaptation over WLAN in mobile devices , 2012, 2012 IEEE Globecom Workshops.

[5]  Ralf Steinmetz,et al.  Layer-encoded video in scalable adaptive streaming , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[6]  Kjell Brunnström,et al.  Subjective quality assessment of an adaptive video streaming model , 2014, Electronic Imaging.

[7]  Iraj Sodagar,et al.  The MPEG-DASH Standard for Multimedia Streaming Over the Internet , 2011, IEEE MultiMedia.

[8]  Mohammed Ghanbari,et al.  Temporal Aspect of Perceived Quality in Mobile Video Broadcasting , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting.

[9]  Moncef Gabbouj,et al.  Rate adaptation for adaptive HTTP streaming , 2011, MMSys.

[10]  Filip De Turck,et al.  HTTP/2-Based Adaptive Streaming of HEVC Video Over 4G/LTE Networks , 2016, IEEE Communications Letters.

[11]  Filip De Turck,et al.  HTTP/2-Based Methods to Improve the Live Experience of Adaptive Streaming , 2015, ACM Multimedia.

[12]  Narciso García,et al.  Perceptual Quality of HTTP Adaptive Streaming Strategies: Cross-Experimental Analysis of Multi-Laboratory and Crowdsourced Subjective Studies , 2016, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[13]  Luca De Cicco,et al.  HTTP over UDP: an experimental investigation of QUIC , 2015, SAC.

[14]  Ragnhild Eg,et al.  Flicker effects in adaptive video streaming to handheld devices , 2011, ACM Multimedia.

[15]  Michael Seufert,et al.  Assessing effect sizes of influence factors towards a QoE model for HTTP adaptive streaming , 2014, 2014 Sixth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX).

[16]  Liam Murphy,et al.  User perception of adapting video quality , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[17]  Markus Fiedler,et al.  Initial delay vs. interruptions: Between the devil and the deep blue sea , 2012, 2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience.

[18]  William May,et al.  HTTP Live Streaming , 2017, RFC.

[19]  David C. Robinson,et al.  Subjective video quality assessment of HTTP adaptive streaming technologies , 2012, Bell Labs Technical Journal.

[20]  Ali C. Begen,et al.  An experimental evaluation of rate-adaptive video players over HTTP , 2012, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[21]  Ramesh K. Sitaraman,et al.  Video Stream Quality Impacts Viewer Behavior: Inferring Causality Using Quasi-Experimental Designs , 2012, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[22]  Christof Faller,et al.  MAXIMIZING AUDIOVISUAL QUALITY AT LOW BITRATES , 2005 .

[23]  Jing Liu,et al.  A study on Quality of Experience for adaptive streaming service , 2013, ICC Workshops.

[24]  Nail Akar,et al.  A simple and effective mechanism for stored video streaming with TCP transport and server-side adaptive frame discard , 2005, Comput. Networks.

[25]  Mohammed Ghanbari,et al.  Scope of validity of PSNR in image/video quality assessment , 2008 .

[26]  Zhou Wang,et al.  The impact of video-quality-level switching on user quality of experience in dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP , 2014, EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw..

[27]  Perspectives on Vertical Industries and Implications for 5G , 2016 .

[28]  Te-Yuan Huang,et al.  A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: evidence from a large video streaming service , 2015, SIGCOMM 2015.

[29]  Rik Van de Walle,et al.  Subjective Quality Assessment of Longer Duration Video Sequences Delivered Over HTTP Adaptive Streaming to Tablet Devices , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting.

[30]  Filip De Turck,et al.  On the impact of video stalling and video quality in the case of camera switching during adaptive streaming of sports content , 2015, 2015 Seventh International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX).

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

[32]  M. Ghanbari,et al.  IMPACT OF JITTER AND JERKINESS ON PERCEIVED VIDEO QUALITY , 2006 .

[33]  K. R. Rao,et al.  High efficiency video coding , 2016, 2016 Signal Processing: Algorithms, Architectures, Arrangements, and Applications (SPA).

[34]  Sugato Chakravarty,et al.  Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures , 1995 .