Cited by 21Image and Video Quality AssessmentCaching and Content DeliveryNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control

Can context monitoring improve QoE? A case study of video flash crowds in the internet of services

Hoßfeld, Tobias, Skorin-Kapov, Lea, Haddad, Yoram, Pocta, Peter, Siris, Vasilios A., Zgank, Andrej, Melvin, Hugh·2015·2015 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM)

Abstract

Over the last decade or so, significant research has focused on defining Quality of Experience (QoE) of Multimedia Systems and identifying the key factors that collectively determine it. Some consensus thus exists as to the role of System Factors, Human Factors and Context Factors. In this paper, the notion of context is broadened to include information gleaned from simultaneous out-of-band channels, such as social network trend analytics, that can be used if interpreted in a timely manner, to help further optimise QoE. A case study involving simulation of HTTP adaptive streaming (HAS) and load balancing in a content distribution network (CDN) in a flash crowd scenario is presented with encouraging results.

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/inm.2015.7140480

Cites

15 of 15 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoßfeld, T., Skorin-Kapov, L., Haddad, Y., Pocta, P., Siris, V. A., Zgank, A., & Melvin, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
  • University of Zagreb, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Jerusalem College of Technology (IL)
  • Dept. of Telecommunications and Multimedia, FEE, University of Zilina, Zilina, Slovakia
  • Athens University of Economics and Business (GR)
  • Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
  • Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
Venue
2015 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-05
Volume
7754
Pages
1274-1277
OpenAlex
W2138319404
Cited by
21
References
15
Citations by year
2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2
FWCI
2.46
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Caching and Content Delivery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
Keywords
quality of experience, context monitoring, HTTP adaptive streaming, load balancing, content delivery networks, multimedia systems, Internet of Services

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