QualityCrowd &amp;#x2014; A framework for crowd-based quality evaluation

Keimel, Christian; Habigt, Julian; Horch, Clemens; Diepold, Klaus

doi:10.1109/pcs.2012.6213338

Cited by 82 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, even the objective methods with state-of-the-art performance are not considered as an optimal replacement of subjective assessment. Crowdsourcing based subjective experiments have gained attention to replace needs of laboratory based tests and these experiments offer promising correlation with the latter [19]. The procedure of crowdsourcing mainly involves collecting subjective assessment of quality through ubiquitous streaming via the Internet.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On subjective quality assessment of adaptive video streaming via crowdsourcing and laboratory based experiments

Sogaard

Shahid

Pokhrel

et al. 2016

Multimed Tools Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Video streaming services are offered over the Internet and since the service providers do not have full control over the network conditions all the way to the end user, streaming technologies have been developed to maintain the quality of service in these varying network conditions i.e. so called adaptive video streaming. In order to cater for users' Quality of Experience (QoE) requirements, HTTP based adaptive streaming solutions of video services have become popular. However, the keys to ensure the users a good QoE with this technology is still not completely understood. User QoE feedback is therefore instrumental in improving this understanding. Controlled laboratory based perceptual quality experiments that involve a panel of human viewers are considered to be the most valid method of the assessment of QoE. Besides laboratory based subjective experiments, crowdsourcing based subjective assessment of video quality is gaining popularity as an alternative

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On subjective quality assessment of adaptive video streaming via crowdsourcing and laboratory based experiments

Sogaard

Shahid

Pokhrel

et al. 2016

Multimed Tools Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To perform the tests, the QualityCrowd 2 framework [13] was used. However, it should be noted that all the participants performed the tests in the same environment at the same time, with equal lighting conditions, using the same display model and the same screen resolution.…”

Section: Passive Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of interactivity on the assessment of quality of experience for light field content

Viola

Řeřábek

Ebrahimi

2017

2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The recent advances in light field imaging are changing the way in which visual content is captured, processed and consumed. Storage and delivery systems for light field images rely on efficient compression algorithms. Such algorithms must additionally take into account the feature-rich rendering for light field content. Therefore, a proper evaluation of visual quality is essential to design and improve coding solutions for light field content. Consequently, the design of subjective tests should also reflect the light field rendering process. This paper aims at presenting and comparing two methodologies to assess the quality of experience in light field imaging. The first methodology uses an interactive approach, allowing subjects to engage with the light field content when assessing it. The second, on the other hand, is completely passive to ensure all the subjects will have the same experience. Advantages and drawbacks of each approach are compared by relying on statistical analysis of results and conclusions are drawn. The obtained results provide useful insights for future design of evaluation techniques for light field content.

show abstract

“…To display the video sequences and collect individual scores, a slightly modified version of the QualityCrowd 2 framework [16] was used. QualityCrowd 2 uses a simple scripting language that allows for the creation of test campaigns with high flexibility, e.g., specific pages for instructions, mixing different methodologies, etc.…”

Section: B Test Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality evaluation of HEVC and VP9 video compression in real-time applications

Řeřábek

Hanhart

Korshunov

et al. 2015

2015 Seventh International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Video consumption over Internet has increased significantly over the recent years and occupies the majority of the overall data traffic. To decrease the load on the Internet infrastructure and reduce bandwidth taken by video, higher efficiency video codecs, such as H.265/HEVC and VP9, have been developed. The availability of these two new competing video coding formats raises the question of which is more efficient in terms of rate-distortion and by how much they outperform the current state-of-the-art coding standard, H.264/AVC. This paper provides an answer to this difficult question for low-delay video applications, e.g., real-time video streaming/conferencing or video surveillance. The benchmarking of HEVC and VP9 video compression was conducted by means of subjective evaluations, assuming web browser playback, an uncontrolled environment, and HD video content. Considering a wide range of bit rates from very low to high bit rates, corresponding to low quality up to transparent quality (when compared to the original video), results show a clear advantage of HEVC with average bit rate savings of 59.5% when compared to AVC and 42.4% when compared to VP9.

show abstract

QualityCrowd — A framework for crowd-based quality evaluation

Cited by 82 publications

References 10 publications

On subjective quality assessment of adaptive video streaming via crowdsourcing and laboratory based experiments

On subjective quality assessment of adaptive video streaming via crowdsourcing and laboratory based experiments

Impact of interactivity on the assessment of quality of experience for light field content

Quality evaluation of HEVC and VP9 video compression in real-time applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About