1 / 27

Minimum Cost Scheduling of Stored Video in Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Networks

Minimum Cost Scheduling of Stored Video in Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Networks. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, Vol. 53, No. 2, MAY 2007. Myeong-jin Lee, Member, IEEE. Reporter ： M9756003 張益瑞. Outline. Introduction

cerise
Download Presentation

Minimum Cost Scheduling of Stored Video in Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Minimum Cost Scheduling of Stored Video in Dynamic BandwidthAllocation Networks IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, Vol. 53, No. 2, MAY 2007 Myeong-jin Lee, Member, IEEE Reporter：M9756003 張益瑞

  2. Outline • Introduction • Service Cost Minimization Framework for Stored Video Transmission • Problems in Conventional Optimal Video Streaming Algorithms • Proposed Algorithm for Minimum Cost Scheduling • Experimental Results • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Most current and future video applications will require the playback of stored video over a high-speed network. • Dynamic bandwidth allocation methods. • Renegotiated constant bit-rate (RCBR)

  4. Service Cost Minimization Framework for Stored Video Transmission • Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation for Video Streaming • Cost for RCBR Service of Stored Video

  5. Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation for Video Streaming • Compressed video sources show burstiness over multiple time-scales, periods of milliseconds to several seconds. • RCBR has the key advantage that the signaling cost and the network function for renegotiations are as simple as those of the constant bit-rate (CBR) service.

  6. Cost for RCBR Service of Stored Video S=segment R=transmission rate L=segment length C=cost S*=scheduled result α=bandwidth cost parameter β= renegotiation cost parameter N=the number of transmission segments in S*

  7. Problems in Conventional Optimal Video Streaming Algorithms • Cost Functions for Transmission Segments • The Need for Minimum Cost Scheduling for Video Streaming

  8. Cost Functions for Transmission Segments The transmission cost of a single isolated segment α=bandwidth cost parameter β= renegotiation cost parameter the transmission cost of a group of successive segments from Sk to Sk+n can be represented as follows.

  9. Cost Functions for Transmission Segments • To show the effect of short transmission segments on the cost, the cumulative cost ratio is defined as follows. • This represents the ratio of the transmission cost for short segments to the overall cost for the whole video sequence.

  10. The Need for Minimum Cost Scheduling for Video Streaming Cumulative number of renegotiations for video streaming under RCBR service.

  11. The Need for Minimum Cost Scheduling for Video Streaming Service cost for stored video under RCBR service

  12. Proposed Algorithm for Minimum Cost Scheduling • Segment Merging as a Tool for Cost Minimization • Relative Cost Flags for Segment Merging • Proposed Minimum Cost Scheduling Algorithm

  13. Segment Merging as a Tool for Cost Minimization We define ⊕ as the segment merging operator, the new segment after merging successive segments is represented by the algorithm. The new transmission rate should be the maximum between those two segments in order to satisfy the decoder buffer underflow constraint.

  14. Relative Cost Flags for Segment Merging To determine the segment merging, relative cost flags are defined for each segment. They are calculated using (7) and (8).

  15. Relative Cost Flags for Segment Merging There are three possible combinations of the left-hand and the right-hand relative cost flags. Merging of neighboring segments for minimum cost scheduling based on relative cost flags

  16. Relative Cost Flags for Segment Merging There are three cases of segment merging. 1.Not merged 2.merged into the left-hand segment. 3.merged into the right-hand segment. Merging of neighboring segments for minimum cost scheduling based on relative cost flags

  17. Proposed Minimum Cost Scheduling Algorithm Video traffic smoothing algorithm for the minimum service cost

  18. Experimental Results • Mpeg video • 40,000frame • GOP pattern is IBBPBBPBBPBB • We assumed that renegotiation requests are always accepted by networks.

  19. Experimental Results Service cost reduction during execution of the proposed minimum cost scheduling algorithm.

  20. Experimental Results Scheduled results of the proposed algorithm. Bond sequence

  21. Experimental Results Overall service cost of the proposed algorithm. Bond and news sequence.

  22. Experimental Results Overall service cost of the proposed algorithm. Bond and news sequence.

  23. Experimental Results Overall service cost of the proposed algorithm. Bond and news sequence.

  24. Experimental Results Characteristics of the scheduled traffic. Bond and news sequence.

  25. Experimental Results Characteristics of the scheduled traffic. Bond and news sequence.

  26. Experimental Results Characteristics of the scheduled traffic. Bond and news sequence.

  27. Conclusion • A minimum cost scheduling algorithm is proposed for high-quality video streaming in dynamic bandwidth allocation networks. • The proposed algorithm can be easily extended to other service environments with different service pricing models.

More Related