Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
3D Research
Erschienen in: 3D Research 3/2018

01.09.2018 | 3DR Express

Impact of Video File Format on Quality of Experience (QoE) of Multimedia Content

verfasst von: Asif Ali Laghari, Hui He, Asiya Khan, Sajida Karim

Erschienen in: 3D Research | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Video file formats are used to record, play and store videos according to heterogeneous platforms; devices and online streaming on networks vary by speed. Video formats are different codecs and resolution from each other and also vary in display quality and storage size which also differentiate the quality of experience (QoE) of users. This paper presents the subjective QoE of end user’s for different video file format varied according to resolution quality and bitrate. Videos of most popular formats which are used for online streaming was downloaded from YouTube and stored on the local system for play for subjects to perceive the video quality. Subjective QoE experiments were conducted by questionnaires given to subjects to perceive video quality and assign ratings. Results show high ratings for FLV 240P and WebM 360P for low resolution videos where high ratings for the MP4 video for 720P and 2160P high resolutions.

Graphical Abstract

Vorheriger Artikel Asymmetric Optical Image Triple Masking Encryption Based on Gyrator and Fresnel Transforms to Remove Silhouette Problem
Nächster Artikel Symmetric Cryptosystem Based on Chaos Structured Phase Masks and Equal Modulus Decomposition Using Fractional Fourier Transform

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
1.
Networking Index, C.V., (2016). Forecast and methodology, 2016-2021, white paper. San Jose, CA, USA, 1.
2.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., Zardari, S., & Shafiq, M. (2017). Systematic analysis of quality of experience (QoE) frameworks for multimedia services. IJCSNS, 17(5), 121.
3.
Xiao, Y., Kalyanaraman, R. S. & Yla-Jaaski, A. (2008). Energy consumption of mobile youtube: Quantitative measurement and analysis. In The second international conference on next generation mobile applications, services and technologies, 2008. NGMAST’08 (pp. 61–69).
4.
Mustafa, M. A., Elahi, M. M., Hossain, M. A. & Islam, M. M. (2010). Comparative performance analysis of MPEG4, FLV and 3GP multimedia file formats using wireless network parameters. In 2010 13th international conference on computer and information technology (ICCIT), (pp. 306-311).
5.
Gloe, T., Fischer, A., & Kirchner, M. (2014). Forensic analysis of video file formats. Digital Investigation, 11, S68–S76.CrossRef
6.
Amon, P., Rathgen, T., & Singer, D. (2007). File format for scalable video coding. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 17(9), 1174–1185.CrossRef
7.
Varsa, V. & Curcio, I. (2003). Transparent end-to-end packet switched streaming service (pss); rtp usage model (release 5). 3GPP TR 26.937 V1. 4.0.
8.
McNamee, R., Evans, G. & Frederick, M. R., ROGER B & Ann K Mcnamee Trust U/t/a/d. (2017). Systems and methods for communicating events to users. U.S. Patent 9,788,035.
9.
Tian, L., Wang, H., Zhou, Y., & Peng, C. (2018). Video big data in smart city: Background construction and optimization for surveillance video processing. Future Generation Computer Systems, 86, 1371–1382.CrossRef
10.
Kalampogia, A., & Koutsakis, P. (2018). H. 264 and H. 265 video bandwidth prediction. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 20(1), 171–182.CrossRef
11.
Zaidi, S., Bitam, S., & Mellouk, A. (2018). Hybrid error recovery protocol for video streaming in vehicle ad hoc networks. Vehicular Communications, 12, 110–126.CrossRef
12.
Rajan, R., Sekhon, N. K., Kaur, J., & Tiwari, M. (2017). Mobile computing and android support: A review. World Journal of Technology, Engineering and Research, 1(1), 104–126.
13.
14.
Kromer, R. (2017). Matroska and FFV1: One file format for film and video archiving? Journal of Film Preservation, 96, 41.
15.
Lopes Goncalves Magalhaes, F. (2017). Intelligent Security System connected to IoT.
16.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., Halepoto, I. A., Memon, M. S., & Parveen, S. (2017). Analysis of quality of experience frameworks for cloud computing. IJCSNS, 17(12), 228.
17.
Laghari, A. A., Laghari, K. U. R., Channa, M. I. & Falk, T. H. (2012). QON: Quality of experience (QoE) framework for network services. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on software technology and engineering (ICSTE’12).
18.
Le Callet, P., Möller, S. & Perkis, A. (2013). Qualinet White Paper on Definitions of Quality of Experience (2012). European Network on Quality of Experience in Multimedia Systems and Services (COST Action IC 1003). Version 1.2. Mar-2013.
19.
Laghari, A. A., Sadhayo, I. H., & Channa, M. I. (2015). Enhanced autonomic networking management architecture (Enama). Engineering, Science & Technology, 14(1), 9–13.
20.
Gohil, R., & Pandya, V. (2015). A comparative study of different video compression. International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and Management Studies, 3(6), 39–43.
21.
Rogge, B., Bekaert, J., & Van de Walle, R. (2004). Timing issues in multimedia formats: Review of the principles and comparison of existing formats. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 6(6), 910–924.CrossRef
22.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M. & Khan, A., (2016). Assessing effect of Cloud distance on end user’s Quality of Experience (QoE). In 2016 2nd IEEE international conference on computer and communications (ICCC), (pp. 500–505).
23.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., Karim, S., Shah, H. A., & Karn, N. K. (2017). Quality of experience assessment of video quality in social clouds. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2017, 1–10.CrossRef
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
UIT, U., 500-11 Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. (2002). International Telecommunication Union.
32.
ITU-T RECOMMENDATION, P. (1999) Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications.
33.
Youn, S., Baek, S., Jeong, T., & Lee, C. (2018). Perceptual video quality comparison of various 3D video formats and displays. Displays, 52, 21–29.CrossRef
34.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., & Channa, M. I. (2018). Measuring effect of packet reordering on quality of experience (QoE) in video streaming. 3D Research, 9(3), 30.CrossRef
35.
Laghari, A. A., He, H., Shafiq, M., & Khan, A. (2018). Assessment of quality of experience (QoE) of image compression in social cloud computing. Multiagent and Grid Systems, 14(2), 125–143.CrossRef
36.
37.
Solera, M., Toril, M., Palomo, I., Gomez, G., & Poncela, J. (2018). A testbed for evaluating video streaming services in LTE. Wireless Personal Communications, 98(3), 2753–2773.CrossRef
38.
39.
40.
Hoque, M. A., Siekkinen, M., Nurminen, J. K., Aalto, M., & Tarkoma, S. (2015). Mobile multimedia streaming techniques: QoE and energy saving perspective. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 16, 96–114.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Impact of Video File Format on Quality of Experience (QoE) of Multimedia Content
verfasst von
Asif Ali Laghari
Hui He
Asiya Khan
Sajida Karim
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2018
Verlag
3D Display Research Center
Erschienen in
3D Research / Ausgabe 3/2018
Elektronische ISSN: 2092-6731
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13319-018-0191-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

3D Research 3/2018 Zur Ausgabe

3DR Express

Mixed Finite Element Approximation for Bivariate Perona–Malik Model Arising in 2D and 3D Image Denoising

3DR Express

Pixel Overlapping Image Steganography Using PVD and Modulus Function

3DR Express

An Efficient Stereo Matching Algorithm Based on Four-Moded Census Transform for High-Resolution Images

3DR Express

Improvement of Large-Vehicle Detection and Monitoring on CPEC Route

3DR Express

Construction Algorithm of 3D Location Fingerprint Database

3DR Express

Asymmetric Optical Image Triple Masking Encryption Based on Gyrator and Fresnel Transforms to Remove Silhouette Problem

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise