Viewer response to time-varying video quality:
Abstract
Over the past several years we have investigated viewer response to temporal fluctuations in the quality of digital television pictures, which occur when video is coded into relatively low bit rates. Three phenomena of interest have been identified: (1) a forgiveness effect, (2) a recency effect, and (3) a negative-peak (duration-neglect); these are described and discussed in the paper. In collaboration with our partners in European projects MOSAIC and TAPESTRIES, we have developed a three-stage method of measuring time-variant quality, which has been accepted by the ITU-R. The first stage is a Single Stimulus Continuous Quality Evaluation (SSCQE) of instantaneous quality; the second a calibration stage to link SSCQE with conventional DSCQS, and the third stage a numerical procedure for relating continuous and overall quality. Some of the factors we have identified as being important in producing good overall quality judgements have relevance to the design of optimal coding strategies for digital television.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Subjective assessment of video quality is time-varying, and this temporal variation can strongly influence overall quality ratings.
“Furthermore, it is known that the subjective assessment of video quality is time-varying,14 and this temporal variation can strongly influence the overall quality ratings.15,16”
From ViS3: an algorithm for video quality assessment via analysis of spatial and spatiotemporal slices (2014) · cites this paper as [15]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 43
- Authors
- Pearson, D. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Essex (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pearson, Don E.
- Venue
- SPIE Proceedings
- Publisher
- SPIE
- Published
- 1998-07-17
- Volume
- 3299
- Pages
- 16-25
- ISSN
- 0277-786X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1978328954
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.17
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Video Coding and Compression Technologies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Speech and Audio Processing
- Keywords
- viewer response, digital television, low bit rate video coding, recency effect, quality measurement
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
