Cited by 229Image and Video Quality AssessmentNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlMultimedia Communication and Technology

Measurement of Quality of Experience of Video-on-Demand Services: A Survey

Juluri, Parikshit, Tamarapalli, Venkatesh, Medhi, Deep·2016·IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials

Abstract

Video-on-demand streaming services have gained popularity over the past few years. An increase in the speed of the access networks has also led to a larger number of users watching videos online. Online video streaming traffic is estimated to further increase from the current value of 57% to 69% by 2017, Cisco, 2014. In order to retain the existing users and attract new users, service providers attempt to satisfy the user's expectations and provide a satisfactory viewing experience. The first step toward providing a satisfactory service is to be able to quantify the users' perception of the current service level. Quality of experience (QoE) is a quality metric that provides a holistic measure of the users' perception of the quality. In this survey, we first present a tutorial overview of the popular video streaming techniques deployed for stored videos, followed by identifying various metrics that could be used to quantify the QoE for video streaming services; finally, we present a comprehensive survey of the literature on various tools and measurement methodologies that have been proposed to measure or predict the QoE of online video streaming services.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/comst.2015.2401424

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Collected network-level Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and user-level Key Quality Indicators (KQIs) provide inputs for QoE estimation models.

    “The collected network-level Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), e.g., throughput, packet loss, delay or user-level service/application specific Key Quality Indicators (KQIs), e.g., frame rate, video resolution, service usability, and reliability, provide inputs for QoE estimation models [48], [61].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Juluri, P., Tamarapalli, V., & Medhi, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
  • Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati (IN)
Venue
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials
Published
2016
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
401-418
ISSN
1553-877X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2009005141
Cited by
229
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 4
FWCI
21.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Multimedia Communication and Technology
Keywords
quality of experience, video on demand, video streaming, QoE measurement, QoE prediction, user perception, QoE metrics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review