Cited by 284Image and Video Quality AssessmentNetwork Traffic and Congestion ControlHuman auditory perception and evaluation

The Logarithmic Nature of QoE and the Role of the Weber-Fechner Law in QoE Assessment

Reichl, P., Egger, S., Schatz, R., D'Alconzo, A.·2010·2010 IEEE International Conference on Communications

Abstract

The Weber-Fechner Law (WFL) is an important principle in psychophysics which describes the relationship be- tween the magnitude of a physical stimulus and its perceived intensity. With the sensory system of the human body, in many cases this dependency turns out to be of logarithmic nature. Re- cent quantitative QoE research shows that in several different scenarios a similar logarithmic relationship can be observed be- tween the size of a certain QoS parameter of the communication system and the resulting QoE on the user side as observed during appropriate user trials. In this paper, we discuss this surprising link in more detail. After a brief survey on the background of the WFL, we review its basic implications with respect to related work on QoE assessment for VoIP, most notably the recently published IQX hypothesis, before we present results of our own trials on QoE assessment for mobile broadband scenarios which confirm this dependency also for data services. Finally, we point out some conclusions and directions for further research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icc.2010.5501894

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In the literature, simple-regression models with a single feature are most dominant, although the collective impact of different QoS parameters was also considered.

    “In the literature, simple-regression models with a single feature are most dominant [145, 240, 383, 408], although the collective impact of different QoS parameters was also considered [23,132].”
  • Some works find it sufficient to correlate QoE to a single network QoS parameter, while others argue that multiple QoS parameters impact QoE and need to be considered in tandem.

    “While some find it sufficient to correlate the QoE to a single network QoS parameter [145, 240, 383, 408], e.g.delay or throughput, others argue that multiple QoS parameters impact the QoE and need to be considered in tandem as features in a QoE/QoS correlation model [89,102,114,235,287,328,432].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 12 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reichl, P., Egger, S., Schatz, R., & D'Alconzo, A.
Affiliations
Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien (AT)
Venue
2010 IEEE International Conference on Communications
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2010-05
Pages
1-5
ISSN
1550-3607 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978421850
Cited by
284
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 21
FWCI
12.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on Communications (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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Human auditory perception and evaluation
Keywords
quality of experience, Weber-Fechner law, psychophysics, VoIP, mobile broadband, data services, user testing, QoS parameters

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