Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The probability relationship between video’s instantaneous and average aggregate rates

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The growing demand for video applications and services has contributed substantially to the increase of video traffic on the Internet. Measurement-based admission control was proposed with the primary aim of eliminating or reducing the need of flow state information; also to control overhead for admission decision and maximize utilization at the potential cost of QoS degradation. Some of the admission algorithms depend on the instantaneous rate for its operation. On the other hand, the average aggregate rate has been proposed to better suit variable rate such as video traffic. In this paper, we investigate the probability relationship between the instantaneous and average aggregate rates for video traffic. A mathematical model has been developed to quantify the probability relationship between both rates and validated through extensive simulations using real video sequences. The average rate was found to be lower than instantaneous for a small number of flows, however there was no pronounced difference for a large number of flows. Furthermore, the difference between both rates increases for fast moving content such as sport or longer measurement time window.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (2007) Definition of Quality of Experience (QoE). ITU-T Document, FG IPTV-IL-0050

  2. (2014) Cisco visual networking index: Forecast and methodology 2013-2018. Cisco white paper

  3. Ammar D, Begin T, Guerin-Lassous I, Noirie L (2011) Evaluation and comparison of MBAC solutions. In: 2011 IEEE 36th conference on local computer networks (LCN), pp 215–218

  4. Ammar D, Begin T, Guerin-Lassous I, Noirie L (2012) KBAC: knowledge-based admission control. In: 2012 IEEE 37th conference on local computer networks (LCN), pp 537–544

  5. Auge J, Oueslati S, Roberts J (2011) Measurement-based admission control for flow-aware implicit service differentiation. In: 2011 23rd international teletraffic congress (ITC), pp 206–213

  6. Van der Auwera G, David P, Reisslein M (2008) Traffic and quality characterization of single-layer video streams encoded with the H.264/MPEG-4 advanced video coding standard and scalable video coding extension. IEEE Trans Broadcast 54 (3):698–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Blake S, Black D, Carlson M, Davies E, Wang Z, Weiss W (1998) An architecture for differentiated services

  8. Breslau L, Jamin S, Shenker S (2000) Comments on the performance of measurement-based admission control algorithms. In: INFOCOM 2000. Nineteenth annual joint conference of the ieee computer and communications societies. Proceedings IEEE, vol 3, pp 1233–1242

  9. Casetti C, Kurose J, Towsley D (1997) A new algorithm for measurement-based admission control in integrated services packet networks. In: Dabbous W, Diot C (eds) Protocols for high-speed networks V, IFIP the international federation for information processing. Springer, US, pp 13–28

  10. Chendeb Taher N, Ghamri Doudane Y, El Hassan B, Agoulmine N (2014) Towards voice/video application support in 802.11e WLANs: a model-based admission control algorithm. Comput Commun 39:41–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Eardley P E (2009) Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) architecture. RFC 5559, IETF

  12. Floyd S (1996) Comments on measurement-based admissions control for controlled-load services. Tech. rep., [Online] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.51.7387

  13. Frost V, Melamed B (1994) Traffic modeling for telecommunications networks. IEEE Commun Mag 32(3):70–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gibbens RJ, Kelly FP (1997) Measurement-based connection admission control. In: 15th international teletraffic congress proceedings

  15. Hamdaoui B, Ramanathan P (2007) A cross-layer admission control framework for wireless ad-hoc networks using multiple antennas. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun 6 (11):4014–4024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoeffding W (1963) Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables. J Amer Stat Assoc 58(301):13–30

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Jamin S, Danzig PB, Shenker SJ, Zhang L (1997a) A measurement-based admission control algorithm for integrated services packet networks. In: IEEE/ACM transactions on networking, pp 56–70

  18. Jamin S, Shenker S, Danzig P (1997b) Comparison of measurement-based admission control algorithms for controlled-load service. In: INFOCOM ’97. sixteenth annual joint conference of the ieee computer and communications societies. Driving the information revolution. Proceedings IEEE, vol 3, pp 973–980

  19. Jiang Y, Emstad P, Nevin A, Nicola V, Fidler M (2005) Measurement-based admission control for a flow-aware network. In: Next generation internet networks, vol 2005, pp 318–325

  20. Khalek A, Caramanis C, Heath R (2012) A cross-layer design for perceptual optimization of H.264/SVC with unequal error protection. IEEE J Selected Areas Commun 30(7):1157–1171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Latre S (2011) Autonomic QoE management of multimedia networks, PhD dissertation, Universiteit Gent

  22. Latré S, De Vleeschauwer B, Van De Meerssche W, De Schepper K, Hublet C, Van Leekwijck W, De Turck F (2011) PCN based admission control for autonomic video quality differentiation: design and evaluation. J Netw Syst Manag 19(1):32–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lima S, Carvalho P, Freitas V (2007) Admission control in multiservice IP networks: architectural issues and trends. Commun Mag IEEE 45(4):114–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Menth M, Lehrieder F, Briscoe B, Eardley P, Moncaster T, Babiarz J, Charny A, Zhang X, Taylor T, Chan KH, Satoh D, Geib R, Karagiannis G (2010) A survey of PCN-based admission control and flow termination. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 12(3):357–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Miller RG, Brown BW (1997) Beyond ANOVA: basics of applied statistics. Chapman & Hall

  26. Moore A W (2002) Measurement-based management of network resources, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge

  27. Nam S Y, Kim S, Sung D K (2008) Measurement-based admission control at edge routers. IEEE/ACM Trans Network 16(2):410–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nevin A (2010) The uncertainty of decisions in measurement based admission control, PhD thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

  29. Nevin A, Jiang Y, Emstad P (2008) Robustness study of MBAC algorithms. In: IEEE symposium on computers and communications, 2008. ISCC 2008, pp 1040–1046

  30. Politis I, Dounis L, Dagiuklas T (2012) H.264/SVC vs H.264/AVC video quality comparison under QoE-driven seamless handoff. Signal Process Image Commun 27(8):814–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Qadir S, Kist A (2013a) Quality of experience enhancement through adapting sender bit rate. In: 2013 IEEE TENCON spring conference, pp 490–494

  32. Qadir S, Kist AA (2013b) Video-aware measurement-based admission control. In: 2013 Australasian telecommunication networks and applications conference (ATNAC), pp 178–182

  33. Qiu J, Knightly E (2001) Measurement-based admission control with aggregate traffic envelopes. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 9(2):199–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rengaraju P, Lung CH, Yu F, Srinivasan A (2012) On QoE monitoring and E2E service assurance in 4G wireless networks. IEEE Wireless Commun 19(4):89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Seeling P, Reisslein M, Kulapala B (2004) Network performance evaluation using frame size and quality traces of single-layer and two-layer video: a tutorial. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 6(3):58–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Weller D, Woodcock B (2013) Bandwidth bottleneck [data flow]. IEEE Spectrum 50(1):80–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wojcik R, Domzal J, Jajszczvk A (2013) Enhanced measurement-based admission control for flow-aware networks. In: 2013 international conference on computing, networking and communications (ICNC), pp 922–926

  38. Wright S (2007) Admission control in multi-service IP networks: a tutorial. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 9(2):72–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Xu Y, Deng J, Nowostawski M (2013) Quality of service for video streaming over multi-hop wireless networks: admission control approach based on analytical capacity estimation. In: 2013 IEEE eighth international conference on intelligent sensors, sensor networks and information processing, pp 345–350

  40. Yerima SY (2013) Implementation and evaluation of measurement-based admission control schemes within a converged networks QoS management framework. CoRR abs/1311.1435

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

    Qahhar Muhammad Qadir

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, Salahaddin University, Hawler, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

    Qahhar Muhammad Qadir

  3. School of Agricultural, Computational and Environmental Sciences, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

    Alexander A. Kist

  4. Faculty of Health, Engineering and Science, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

    Zhongwei Zhang

Authors
  1. Qahhar Muhammad Qadir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander A. Kist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhongwei Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qahhar Muhammad Qadir.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Qadir, Q.M., Kist, A.A. & Zhang, Z. The probability relationship between video’s instantaneous and average aggregate rates. Multimed Tools Appl 75, 6909–6924 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2617-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2617-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation