Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

A Subjective Dataset for Multi-Screen Video Streaming Applications

Published 4 May 2023 in cs.MM | (2305.03138v2)

Abstract: In modern-era video streaming systems, videos are streamed and displayed on a wide range of devices. Such devices vary from large-screen UHD and HDTVs to medium-screen Desktop PCs and Laptops to smaller-screen devices such as mobile phones and tablets. It is well known that a video is perceived differently when displayed on different devices. The viewing experience for a particular video on smaller screen devices such as smartphones and tablets, which have high pixel density, will be different with respect to the case where the same video is played on a large screen device such as a TV or PC monitor. Being able to model such relative differences in perception effectively can help in the design of better quality metrics and in the design of more efficient and optimized encoding profiles, leading to lower storage, encoding, and transmission costs. This paper presents a new, open-source dataset consisting of subjective ratings for various encoded video sequences of different resolutions and bitrates (quality) when viewed on three devices of varying screen sizes: TV, Tablet, and Mobile. Along with the subjective scores, an evaluation of some of the most famous and commonly used open-source objective quality metrics is also presented. It is observed that the performance of the metrics varies a lot across different device types, with the recently standardized ITU-T P.1204.3 Model, on average, outperforming their full-reference counterparts. The dataset consisting of the videos, along with their subjective and objective scores, is available freely on Github at https://github.com/NabajeetBarman/Multiscreen-Dataset.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (29)
  1. “Optimizing Mass-Scale Multi-Screen Video Delivery” In SMPTE Motion Imaging Journal 129.3, 2020, pp. 26–38 DOI: 10.5594/JMI.2020.2973561
  2. “HTTP live streaming, RFC 8216”, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8216, 2019
  3. “ISO/IEC 23009-1:2019 Information technology — Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) — Part 1: Media presentation description and segment formats”, https://www.iso.org/standard/79329.html, 2019
  4. Yuriy A. Reznik, Karl O. Lillevold and Rahul Vanam “Perceptually Optimized ABR Ladder Generation for Web Streaming” In Electronic Imaging 2021.3, 2021, pp. 75-1-75–11 DOI: doi:10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2021.3.MOBMU-075
  5. Yuriy Reznik, Nabajeet Barman and Rahul Vanam “Parametric Quality Models for Multiscreen Video Systems” In 10th European Workshop on Visual Information Processing (EUVIP), 2022, pp. 1–6
  6. L.C. Jesty “The relation between picture size, viewing distance and picture quality” In Proceedings of the IEE - Part B: Radio and Electronic Engineering 105, 1958, pp. 425–439(14)
  7. Joyce H.D.M. Westerink and Jacques A.J. Roufs “Subjective Image Quality as a Function of Viewing Distance, Resolution, and Picture Size” In SMPTE Journal 98.2, 1989, pp. 113–119 DOI: 10.5594/J02825
  8. Arnold M. Lund “The Influence of Video Image Size and Resolution on Viewing-Distance Preferences” In SMPTE Journal 102.5, 1993, pp. 406–415 DOI: 10.5594/J15915
  9. P.G.J. Barten “The effects of picture size and definition on perceived image quality” In IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 36.9, 1989, pp. 1865–1869 DOI: 10.1109/16.34260
  10. “Impact of mobile devices and usage location on perceived multimedia quality” In 2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience, 2012, pp. 39–44 DOI: 10.1109/QoMEX.2012.6263834
  11. ITU-T SG 12 (Study Period 2017) Temporary Document 1612-GEN “Output - Draft New Recommendation J.op-tr ”Methods for Optimizing Bitrates and Transmission Resolution by Considering Display Characteristics and Available” https://www.itu.int/md/T17-SG12-211012-TD-GEN-1612, 2021
  12. “Modeling Perceived Quality on 8K VVC Video Under Various Screen Sizes and Viewing Distances” In IEEE Access 10, 2022, pp. 97237–97247
  13. “ITU-T Recommendation H.266 : Versatile video coding”, https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.266, 2022
  14. “Image Quality Assessment: From Error Visibility to Structural Similarity” In IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 13.4, 2004, pp. 600–612
  15. Netflix “VMAF - Video Multi-Method Assessment Fusion” [Accessed 02-May-2023], https://github.com/Netflix/vmaf
  16. “Bitstream-based Model Standard for 4K/UHD: ITU-T P.1204.3 – Model Details, Evaluation, Analysis and Open Source Implementation” In 2020 Twelfth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), 2020
  17. Jessie Lin, Neil Birkbeck and Balu Adsumilli “Translation of Perceived Video Quality Across Displays” In 2020 IEEE 22nd International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP), 2020, pp. 1–6 DOI: 10.1109/MMSP48831.2020.9287143
  18. Wenjie Zou, Jiarun Song and Fuzheng Yang “Perceived Image Quality on Mobile Phones with Different Screen Resolution” In Mobile Information Systems 1574.017X, 2016 DOI: 10.1155/2016/9621925
  19. “BVI-CC: A Dataset for Research on Video Compression and Quality Assessment” In Frontiers in Signal Processing 2, 2022
  20. Nabajeet Barman, Nabeel Khan and Maria G. Martini “Analysis of Spatial and Temporal Information Variation for 10-Bit and 8-Bit Video Sequences” In 2019 IEEE 24th International Workshop on Computer Aided Modeling and Design of Communication Links and Networks (CAMAD), 2019, pp. 1–6
  21. Brightcove “Zencoder: Video Encoding Platform”, https://www.brightcove.com/en/products/zencoder/, 2023
  22. Brightcove “Overview of Context Aware Encoding (CAE)”, https://zencoder.support.brightcove.com/general-information/overview-context-aware-encoding.html, 2023
  23. “ITU-T Rec. BT.500: Methodologies for the subjective assessment of the quality of television images ” https://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.500-14-201910-I/en, 2019
  24. “ITU-T Rec. 913: Methods for the subjective assessment of video quality, audio quality and audiovisual quality of Internet video and distribution quality television in any environment” https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-P.913-202106-I, 2021
  25. “On the Impact of Viewing Distance on Perceived Video Quality” In 2021 International Conference on Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP), 2021, pp. 1–5 DOI: 10.1109/VCIP53242.2021.9675431
  26. Amélie Lachat, Jean-Charles Gicquel and Jérôme Fournier “How perception of ultra-high definition is modified by viewing distance and screen size” In Image Quality and System Performance XII 9396 SPIE, 2015, pp. 306–313
  27. “A Subjective Quality Assessment Database for Mobile Video Coding” In 2020 IEEE Conference on Multimedia Information Processing and Retrieval (MIPR), 2020, pp. 225–228 DOI: 10.1109/MIPR49039.2020.00053
  28. “An Evaluation of Video Quality Assessment Metrics for Passive Gaming Video Streaming” In Proceedings of the 23rd Packet Video Workshop, PV ’18 Association for Computing Machinery, 2018, pp. 7–12
  29. “Image information and visual quality” In IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 15.2, 2006, pp. 430–444 DOI: 10.1109/TIP.2005.859378
Citations (8)

Summary

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.