Cited by 121Image and Video Quality AssessmentNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlCaching and Content Delivery

Adaptive Bitrate Selection: A Survey

Sani, Yusuf, Mauthe, Andreas, Edwards, Christopher·2017·IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials

Abstract

HTTP adaptive streaming (HAS) is the most recent attempt regarding video quality adaptation. It enables cheap and easy to implement streaming technology without the need for a dedicated infrastructure. By using a combination of TCP and HTTP it has the advantage of reusing all the existing technologies designed for ordinary web. Equally important is that HAS traffic passes through firewalls and works well when NAT is deployed. The rate adaptation controller of HAS, commonly called adaptive bitrate selection (ABR), is currently receiving a lot of attention from both industry and academia. However, most of the research efforts concentrate on a specific aspect or a particular methodology without considering the overall context. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the most significant research activities in the area of client-side HTTP-based adaptive video streaming. It starts by decomposing the ABR module into three subcomponents, namely: resource estimation function, chunk request scheduling, and adaptation module. Each subcomponent encapsulates a particular function that is vital to the operation of an ABR scheme. A review of each of the subcomponents and how they interact with each other is presented. Furthermore, those external factors that are known to have a direct impact on the performance of an ABR module, such as content nature, CDN, and context, are discussed. In conclusion, this paper provides an extensive reference for further research in the field.

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.2017.2725241

Cites

197 of 197 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?

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

2 of the 199 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sani, Y., Mauthe, A., & Edwards, C.
Affiliations
Lancaster University (GB)
Venue
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials
Published
2017
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
2985-3014
ISSN
1553-877X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2735173535
Cited by
121
References
199
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Petroleum Technology Development Fund, Nigeria
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
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Caching and Content Delivery
Keywords
HTTP adaptive streaming, video quality adaptation, resource estimation, content delivery networks, network context

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