1 / 16

On Combining Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling for Streaming MPEG

This study focuses on a novel approach combining Temporal Scaling (TS) and Quality Scaling (QS) for streaming video to maximize perceived quality within network constraints. The research introduces algorithms and experiments to compare scaling methods and Forward Error Correction techniques. Findings show that Quality Scaling is generally superior but may benefit from combining with Temporal Scaling in low bandwidth, high loss scenarios with motion content. Adjusting FEC levels significantly enhances video streaming quality.

machiko
Download Presentation

On Combining Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling for Streaming MPEG

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. On Combining Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling for Streaming MPEG Huahui Wu, Mark Claypool, Robert Kinicki Computer Science, Worcester Polytechnic Institute

  2. Introduction • Streaming video • Bitrate > Network capacity • Media Scaling • Temporal Scaling (TS) or Quality Scaling (QS) • Packet loss • Forward Error Correction (FEC) • Operations Research algorithm • To satisfy capacity constraint • To maximize perceived quality • Previous research • Temporal Scaling [TOMCCAP 05] • Quality Scaling [NOSSDAV 05] • This work • Combines Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling NOSSDAV06

  3. Outline • Introduction • Model  • Streaming Bitrate (cost) • Video Quality (benefit) • Algorithm • Experiments • Conclusions NOSSDAV06

  4. System Layers and Parameters NOSSDAV06

  5. Streaming Bitrate • Total streaming bitrate, including video packets and FEC packets: where G is the constant GOP rate NPD and NBD are the numbers of transmitting P and B frames depending on Temporal Scaling level lTS NOSSDAV06

  6. Video Quality - Overview • Two distortion factors • Frame Loss • Caused by Temporal Scaling and network packet loss • Appears jerky in the video playout • Measured by Playable Frame Rate • Quantization Distortion • Caused by a high quantization value with Quality Scaling • Appears visually as coarse granularity in every frame • Measured by ITS-VQM • Overall Quality • Distorted Playable Frame Rate [Wu+ 05 TOMCCAP] [Pinson+ 04] NOSSDAV06

  7. Playable Frame Rate (R) • Frame Successful Transmission Probability • Where Frame Size • Frame Dependencies • Total Playable Frame Rate NOSSDAV06

  8. Distorted Playable Frame Rate (RD ) • Quality scaling distortion varies exponentially with the quantization level • Distorted Playable Frame Rate [Frossard+ 01] NOSSDAV06

  9. Algorithm • For each Repair and Scaling combination • Estimate video frame sizes (SI, SP, SB) • Compute streaming bitrate B and make sure it’s under capacity constraint T • Use frame sizes and FEC amount to get successfully frame transmission rate (qI, qP, qB) • Compute playable frame rate (R) • Estimate quality scaling distortion (D) • Compute distorted playable frame rate (RD) • Exhaustively search all FEC and Scaling combination and look for the optimal quality NOSSDAV06

  10. Outline • Introduction • Model • Algorithm • Experiments  • Conclusions NOSSDAV06

  11. Methodology • Built a function RD() • Returns the distorted playable frame rate • Built an optimization program • TCP-Friendly Bitrate Constraint (T) • Searches repair and scaling levels for the highest RD • Compared three scaling choices with Adjusted FEC • Temporal Scaling • Quality Scaling • Temporal Scaling + Quality Scaling • Compared four FEC choices with the combination of Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling • Non-FEC • Small Fixed FEC • Large Fixed FEC • Adjusted FEC NOSSDAV06

  12. System Setting • GOP: IBBPBBPBBPBBPBB NOSSDAV06

  13. Scaling Comparison with Adjusted FEC Low Motion High Motion NOSSDAV06

  14. FEC Comparison with TS+QS NOSSDAV06

  15. Conclusions • Summary • Derives analytical models for streaming video with Temporal plus Quality Scaling and FEC • Uses OR algorithm to optimize the quality • Compares scaling methods and FEC methods • Conclusions • Quality Scaling is more effective than Temporal Scaling • But when bandwidth is low and network loss is high, Quality Scaling should be used with Temporal Scaling • Motion matters • Adjusting FEC improves video streaming quality significantly • Better than fixed FEC and non-FEC NOSSDAV06

  16. On Combining Temporal Scaling and Quality Scaling for Streaming MPEG Huahui Wu, Mark Claypool, Robert Kinicki Computer Science, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Questions?

More Related