2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnca.2006.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new technique for minimizing network loss from users’ perspective

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(10 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The ReLate2 metric is defined by the product of the average data packet latency and the percent loss that the transport protocol provides + 1 (to account for 0% loss) which implies an order of magnitude increase for 9% loss. Based on previous research which evaluated percent data loss for multimedia applications (Bai, 2006(Bai, , 2007Ngatman, 2008), this adjustment is relevant for multimedia data such as the high-resolution 3-D health data in our SCAAL example. For example, if for a given protocol the average packet latency is 1,000 μs and the percent loss is 0 (i.e., no packets lost) then the ReLate2 value is 1,000.…”
Section: Composite Qos Metrics For Reliability and Timelinessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ReLate2 metric is defined by the product of the average data packet latency and the percent loss that the transport protocol provides + 1 (to account for 0% loss) which implies an order of magnitude increase for 9% loss. Based on previous research which evaluated percent data loss for multimedia applications (Bai, 2006(Bai, , 2007Ngatman, 2008), this adjustment is relevant for multimedia data such as the high-resolution 3-D health data in our SCAAL example. For example, if for a given protocol the average packet latency is 1,000 μs and the percent loss is 0 (i.e., no packets lost) then the ReLate2 value is 1,000.…”
Section: Composite Qos Metrics For Reliability and Timelinessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bai and Ito [1] limit acceptable MPEG video loss at 6% while stating that a packet loss rate of more than 5% is unacceptable for Voice over IP (VoIP) users [2]. Ngatman et al [14] define consistent packet loss above 2% as unacceptable for videoconferencing.…”
Section: Evaluation Metric For Reliability and Latencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in real world applications, the available bandwidth is limited which may result in packet loss or due to communications congestion (Bai and Ito, 2007). Also because of the distributed nature of the devices, wireless communications technology is more likely to be used and is more prone to transmission errors (Lee et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%