2013 Australasian Telecommunication Networks and Applications Conference (ATNAC) 2013
DOI: 10.1109/atnac.2013.6705382
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of the rating performance of ITU-T recommended video quality metrics in the context of video freezes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The video freeze-and-jump has an adverse impact on the user QoE [15,16,29]. In case of a video jump, users may feel to be deprived for missing video content of an important moment, e.g., a goal or an attempt for goal in a soccer match, and this may degrade the user QoE.…”
Section: Live Video Streamingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The video freeze-and-jump has an adverse impact on the user QoE [15,16,29]. In case of a video jump, users may feel to be deprived for missing video content of an important moment, e.g., a goal or an attempt for goal in a soccer match, and this may degrade the user QoE.…”
Section: Live Video Streamingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where τ s > τ j (16) Data Loss (L): If τ o > τ s , then the data loss on the sender side equals the difference between the data sent during the network outage and data saved in the sender buffer:…”
Section: Sender Buffer Is Larger Than Jitter Buffermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In [4], the author uses mathematical methods to combine features such as video motion attributes to form a video quality metric to measure the impact of video buffering issues on user QoE. In [5], the author compared MOS with the results of two measurement methods, Perceptual Evaluation of Video Quality (PEVQ) and Temporal Quality Metric (TQM), and summarized the pros and cons of different methods in measuring the visual quality changes caused by video buffering problems. However, most of them use objective parameters and do not evaluate video quality from the user's perspective.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both artifacts might trigger completely different user reactions, ranging from annoyance to abundance. Realizing that even well-reputed QoE evaluation tools are having issues with temporal disturbances [10], models that capture the dynamics of the disturbance processes, such as proposed in [11][12][13][14][15][16][17], keep emerging. Context factors, natural visual characteristics [14], visual attention [18] and short-and long-term pooling [19] have also been taken into account, and standards keep emanating [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%