Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
QoE based comparison of H.264/AVC and WebM/VP8 in an error-prone wireless network
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Technology and Aesthetics.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Technology and Aesthetics.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Technology and Aesthetics.
2017 (English)In: Proceedings of the IM 2017 - 2017 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network and Service Management / [ed] Chemouil P.,Simoes P.,Madeira E.,Secci S.,Monteiro E.,Gaspary L.P.,dos Santos C.R.P.,Charalambides M., Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2017, 1005-1010 p.Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Quality of Experience (QoE) management is a prime topic of research community nowadays as video streaming, online gaming and security applications are completely reliant on the network service quality. Moreover, there are no standard models to map Quality of Service (QoS) into QoE. HTTP media streaming is primarily used for such applications due to its coherence with the Internet and simplified management. The most common video codecs used for video streaming are H.264/AVC and Google's VP8. In this paper, we have analyzed the performance of these two codecs from the perspective of QoE. The most common end-user medium for accessing video content is via home based wireless networks. We have emulated an error-prone wireless network with different scenarios involving packet loss, packet delay and delay variation. The focus of this paper is evaluating the end user satisfaction with the multimedia content by subjective assessment using Mean Opinion Score (MOS). We have observed the overall superiority of H.264/AVC but the VP8 codec strongly gains ground in highly error-prone networks in terms of user satisfaction. © 2017 IFIP.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2017. 1005-1010 p.
Keyword [en]
H.264/AVC, Multimedia communication, QoE management, Quality of Experience, WebM(VP8), Errors, HTTP, Human computer interaction, Media streaming, Motion Picture Experts Group standards, Multimedia systems, Packet networks, Video signal processing, Video streaming, Wireless networks, Multi-media communications, Qoe managements, Quality of experience (QoE), Quality of service
National Category
Communication Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-15217DOI: 10.23919/INM.2017.7987426Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85029430735ISBN: 9783901882890 OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-15217DiVA: diva2:1145539
Conference
15th IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network and Service Management, IM 2017, Lisbon
Available from: 2017-09-29 Created: 2017-09-29 Last updated: 2017-09-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nawaz, OmerMinhas, Tahir NawazFiedler, Markus
By organisation
Department of Technology and Aesthetics
Communication Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf