2014 22nd Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/siu.2014.6830724
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Key indicators for monitoring of audiovisual quality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the models in ITU-T recommendations were validated on video databases that used one of the following hypotheses: frame freezes lasting up to 2 seconds; no degradation at the beginning or at the end of the video sequence; no skipped frames; clean video reference (no spatial or temporal distortions); minimum delay supported between video reference and video (sometimes with constant delay); and up or down-scaling operations not always taken into account [17].…”
Section: State-of-the-art Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Most of the models in ITU-T recommendations were validated on video databases that used one of the following hypotheses: frame freezes lasting up to 2 seconds; no degradation at the beginning or at the end of the video sequence; no skipped frames; clean video reference (no spatial or temporal distortions); minimum delay supported between video reference and video (sometimes with constant delay); and up or down-scaling operations not always taken into account [17].…”
Section: State-of-the-art Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other KPIs mentioned in MOAVI are usually not taken into account (exposure time distortion, noise, block loss, freezing, slicing, etc.) in predicting MOS [17].…”
Section: State-of-the-art Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations