Advertisement

Optimal Mapping Function for Predictions of the Subjective Quality Evaluation Using Artificial Intelligence

  • Lukas SevcikEmail author
  • Miroslav Uhrina
  • Juraj Bienik
  • Miroslav Voznak
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1069)

Abstract

With the growth of QoE interest, IPTV providers need a method to control QoE. The paper describes the correlation between the results of objective and subjective methods in video quality assessment. The authors proposed the optimal mapping function for predictions of the subjective quality evaluation based on the objective evaluation to determine the perception of the video quality by the human brain. Our model using artificial intelligence, it is based on a neural network which can simulate and predicts the subjective quality of the scene. It also can predict subjective or objective video quality for video sequences defined by spatial, temporal information, which is the critical and key variable of a given scene, and by the qualitative parameters of the scene. The results from the model are verified by comparing predicted video quality using the proposed classifier with the required value. The two most common statistical parameters related to express performance are Pearson’s correlation coefficient and Root Mean Square Error.

Keywords

Neural network Objective quality evaluation QoE Spatial information Subjective quality evaluation Temporal information Video quality assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports from the Large Infrastructures for Research, Experimental Development and Innovations project “IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center – LM2015070” and partially received a financial support from grant No. SGS SP2019/41 conducted at VSB Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic.

References

  1. 1.
    Le Callet, P., Möller, S., Perkis, A.: Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience. In: European Network on Quality of Experience in Multimedia Systems and Services (COST), version 1.2, pp. 1–17 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Recommendation ITU-T P.10/G.100 Amendment 2: New definitions for inclusion in Recommendation ITU-T P.10/G.100. Vocabulary for performance and quality of service (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    You, J., Reiter, U., Hannuksela, M.M., Gabbouj, M., Perkis, A.: Perceptual-based quality assessment for audio–visual services: a survey. Signal Process. Image Commun. 25(7), 482–501 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yang, F., Wan, S., Xie, Q., Wu, H.R.: No-reference quality assessment for networked video via primary analysis of bit stream. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Video Technol. 20(11), 1544–1554 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de la Cruz Ramos, P., Vidal, F.G., Leal, R.P.: Perceived video quality estimation from spatial and temporal information contents and network performance parameters in IPTV. In: Proceedings of 2010 Fifth International Conference on Digital Telecommunications, pp. 128–131 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Romaniak, P., Janowski, L., Leszczuk, M., Papir, Z.: Perceptual quality assessment for H.264/AVC compression. In: Proceedings of 2012 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC), pp. 597–602 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moldovan, A.-N., Ghergulescu, I., Muntean, C.H.: VQAMap: a novel mechanism for mapping objective video quality metrics to subjective MOS scale. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 62(3), 610–627 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sevcik, L., Tomala, K., Frnda, J., Voznak, M.: QoS of triple play services in LTE networks. Intell. Data Anal. Appl. 2, 25–33 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sevcik, L., Frnda, J., Voznak, M.: Degrading effect analysis, packet loss and out of order data on various tips and video resolution. In: Proceedings of Networking and Electronic Commerce Research Conference (NAEC 2008), pp. 130–138 (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Frnda, J., Sevcik, L., Uhrina, M., Voznak, M.: Network degradation effects on different codec types and characteristics of video streaming. Adv. Electr. Electron. Eng. 12(4), 377–383 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sevcik, L., Voznak, M., Frnda, J.: QoE prediction model for multimedia services in IP network applying queuing policy. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (SPECTS 2014), pp. 593–598 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frnda, J., Voznak, M., Sevcik, L.: Network performance QoS prediction. In: Intelligent Data analysis and its Applications, vol. 1, pp. 165–174 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frnda, J., Voznak, M., Sevcik, L., Fazio, P.: Prediction model of triple play services for QoS assessment in IP based networks. J. Netw. 10(4), 232–239 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frnda, J., Voznak, M., Rozhon, J., Mehic, M.: Prediction model of QoS for triple play services. In: 21st Telecommunications Forum Telfor, TELFOR 2013 - Proceedings of Papers, art. no. 6716334, pp. 733–736 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sevcik, L., Behan, L., Frnda, J., Uhrina, M., Bienik, J., Voznak, M.: Prediction of subjective video quality based on objective assessment. In: 26th Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR) (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Recommendation ITU-T P.910. Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Recommendation ITU-R BT.500–13. Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    SJTU Media Lab: Database of the test sequences (2013). http://medialab.sjtu.edu.cn/web4k/index.html
  19. 19.
    Ultra Video Group: Database of the test sequences. http://ultravideo.cs.tut.fi/#testsequences
  20. 20.
    FFmpeg. A complete, cross-platform solution to record, convert and stream audio and video. https://www.ffmpeg.org/
  21. 21.
    Fröhlich, P., Egger, S., Schatz, R., Mühlegger, M., Masuch, K., Gardlo, B.: QoE in 10 seconds: are short video clip lengths sufficient for quality of experience assessment? In: Proceedings of Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience, pp. 242–247 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Romaniak, P., Janowski, L., Leszczuk, M., Papir, Z.: Perceptual quality assessment for H.264/AVC compression. In: IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC), pp. 597–602 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bech, S., Zacharov, N.: Perceptual Audio Evaluation_Theory, Method and Application (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    MitsuTool, Video Quality Indicators. http://vq.kt.agh.edu.pl/metrics.html
  25. 25.
    MSU Video Quality Measurement Tool. Program for objective video quality assessment. http://www.compression.ru/video/quality_measure/video_measurement_tool.html

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lukas Sevcik
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miroslav Uhrina
    • 2
  • Juraj Bienik
    • 2
  • Miroslav Voznak
    • 1
  1. 1.IT4Innovations, VSB - Technical University of OstravaOstrava - PorubaCzech Republic
  2. 2.University of ZilinaZilinaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations