Influence of Gender and Viewing Frequency on Quality of Experience

Nawaz, Omer; Fiedler, Markus; Moor, Katrien De; Khatibi, Siamak

doi:10.1109/qomex48832.2020.9123106

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Apart from video quality, numerous human and system influence factors may affect user ratings [62,63]. We used the input from the users towards their delight for the shown content on a binary and ordinal scale, as described in Section 2.…”

Section: Impact Of Delight Of Shown Video Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

QoE-Based Performance Comparison of AVC, HEVC, and VP9 on Mobile Devices with Additional Influencing Factors

Nawaz,

Fiedler,

Khatibi

2024

Electronics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While current video quality assessment research predominantly revolves around resolutions of 4 K and beyond, targeted at ultra high-definition (UHD) displays, effective video quality for mobile video streaming remains primarily within the range of 480 p to 1080 p. In this study, we conducted a comparative analysis of the quality of experience (QoE) for widely implemented video codecs on mobile devices, specifically Advanced Video Coding (AVC), its successor High-Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), and Google’s VP9. Our choice of 720 p video sequences from a newly developed database, all with identical bitrates, aimed to maintain a manageable subjective assessment duration, capped at 35–40 min. To mimic real-time network conditions, we generated stimuli by streaming original video clips over a controlled emulated setup, subjecting them to eight different packet-loss scenarios. We evaluated the quality and structural similarity of the distorted video clips using objective metrics, including the Video Quality Metric (VQM), Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR), Video Multi-Method Assessment Fusion (VMAF), and Multi-Scale Structural Similarity Index (MS-SSIM). Subsequently, we collected subjective ratings through a custom mobile application developed for Android devices. Our findings revealed that VMAF accurately represented the degradation in video quality compared to other metrics. Moreover, in most cases, HEVC exhibited an advantage over both AVC and VP9 under low packet-loss scenarios. However, it is noteworthy that in our test cases, AVC outperformed HEVC and VP9 in scenarios with high packet loss, based on both subjective and objective assessments. Our observations further indicate that user preferences for the presented content contributed to video quality ratings, emphasizing the importance of additional factors that influence the perceived video quality of end users.

show abstract

Section: Impact Of Delight Of Shown Video Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

QoE-Based Performance Comparison of AVC, HEVC, and VP9 on Mobile Devices with Additional Influencing Factors

Nawaz,

Fiedler,

Khatibi

2024

Electronics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A QoE model for mobile gaming in presence of communication channel errors and delays appears in [24], whereas network latency is addressed in [25]. XR service QoE evaluation is also challenging since the perceived quality depends on the content, the user gender, the daily exposure time, at least at medium to high delivery quality (low delay) [19]. The subjective video quality affects QoE relevant factors as sensory immersion and simulator sickness scores, measured by EEG user activity [18], whereas the augmented reality quality accounts for text features (e.g.…”

Section: Xr Services: a Glimpse On Quality Of Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

The EXtended Reality Quality Riddle: A Technological and Sociological Survey

Panarese,

Baiocchi,

Colonnese

2023

2023 International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis (ISPA)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This position paper surveys recent research on the latest findings regarding the Quality of Experience in XR from two distinct angles. Firstly, we present recent technical outcomes concerning media quality. Secondly, we extend our investigation to user experiences from a sociological perspective. This innovative multidisciplinary approach establishes a connection between various methodologies, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of XR quality and it opens up new possibilities for XR services design and performance measurements.

show abstract

“…In remote learning, it is necessary to perform the group synchronization control [15] [16] [17] [18] [19], which tries to output each MU simultaneously at all the different terminals in multicast communication. If the control is not carried out, the MU cannot be outputted at the same time at the terminals; that is, the group synchronization error occurs.…”

Section: Group Synchronization In Remote Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Perception of Group Synchronization Error in Remote Learning: Dependencies of Voice and Video Contents in One-Way Communication

Lwin¹,

Ishibashi²,

Mya³

2022

IJCNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines dependencies of voice and video contents on human perception of group (or inter-destination) synchronization error in remote learning by Quality of Experience (QoE) assessment. In our assessment, we use two videos and three voices (two voices for one video and one voice for the other video). We also investigate influences of silence periods in the voices and temporal relations between the voices and videos (called the tightlycoupled and loosely-coupled contents here). The voices are spoken by a teacher according to the videos. Each subject as a student assesses the group synchronization quality by watching each lecture video and the corresponding explanation voice, and then the subject answers whether he/she perceives the group synchronization error or not. As a result, assessment results illustrate that silence periods mitigate the perception rate of the error, and we can also find that we can more easily perceive the error for tightly-coupled contents than loosely-coupled ones.

show abstract

Influence of Gender and Viewing Frequency on Quality of Experience

Cited by 4 publications

References 8 publications

QoE-Based Performance Comparison of AVC, HEVC, and VP9 on Mobile Devices with Additional Influencing Factors

QoE-Based Performance Comparison of AVC, HEVC, and VP9 on Mobile Devices with Additional Influencing Factors

The EXtended Reality Quality Riddle: A Technological and Sociological Survey

Human Perception of Group Synchronization Error in Remote Learning: Dependencies of Voice and Video Contents in One-Way Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About