Skip to main content

Packet level video quality evaluation of extensive H.264/AVC and SVC transmission simulation

Abstract

Video transmission over error prone channels as present in most of today’s communication channels, such as Mobile TV or some IPTV systems, is constantly subject to research. Simulation is an important instrument to evaluate performance of the overall video transmission system, but the multitude of parameters often requires large and time-consuming simulation sets. In this paper, we present a packet level mechanism for fast evaluation of error-prone H.264/AVC and SVC video transmission with application layer video quality metrics, such as PSNR. Our approach significantly reduces the overall simulation time by eliminating redundancy in the evaluation phase and utilizing the prediction structure of the video codec. The benefit of the presented packet level video quality evaluation is evaluated with an exemplary simulation setup of an IPTV service with link congestion.

References

  1. 1.

    Wiegand T, Sullivan G, Bjontegaard G, Luthra A (2003) Overview of the H. 264/AVC video coding standard. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 13:560–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Schwarz H, Marpe D, Wiegand T (2007) Overview of the scalable video coding extension of the H. 264/AVC standard. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 17:1103–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Klaue J, Rathke B, Wolisz A (2003) EvalVid—a framework for video transmission and quality evaluation. In: Computer performance. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2794. Springer, Berlin, pp 255–272. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45232-4_16

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Ke C-H, Lin C-H, Shieh C-K, Hwang W-S (2006) A novel realistic simulation tool for video transmission over wireless network. In: International conference on sensor networks, ubiquitous, and trustworthy computing, vol 1, pp 275–283

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Lie A, Klaue J (2008) EvalVid-RA: trace driven simulation of rate adaptive MPEG-4 VBR video. Multimed Syst 14:33–50. doi:10.1007/s00530-007-0110-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ke C, Shieh C, Hwang W, Ziviani A (2008) An evaluation framework for more realistic simulations of MPEG video transmission. J Inf Sci Eng 24:425–440

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Le TA, Nguyen H, Zhang H (2010) EvalSVC—an evaluation platform for scalable video coding transmission. In: 14th international symposium on consumer electronics, Braunschweig, Germany, June 2010

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Migliorini D, Mingozzi E, Vallati C (2010) QoE-oriented performance evaluation of video streaming over WiMAX. In: Wired/wireless Internet communications, pp 240–251

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kondrad L, Bouazizi I, Vadakital V, Hannuksela M, Gabbouj M (2009) Cross-layer optimized transmission of h.264/SVC streams over dvb-t2 broadcast system. In: IEEE international symposium on broadband multimedia systems and broadcasting. BMSB’09, May 2009, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Reibman A, Vaishampayan V, Sermadevi Y (2004) Quality monitoring of video over a packet network. IEEE Trans Multimed 6:327–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Tao S, Apostolopoulos J, Guerin R (2008) Real-time monitoring of video quality in IP networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw, 16:1052–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Liang Y, Apostolopoulos J, Girod B (2003) Analysis of packet loss for compressed video: does burst-length matter. In: IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing. Proceedings (ICASSP’03), April. vol 5, pp V–684–7

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Stuhlmüller K, Farber N, Link M, Girod B (2000) Analysis of video transmission over lossy channels. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 18:1012–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Li Z, Chakareski J, Niu X, Zhang Y, Gu W (2009) Modeling and analysis of distortion caused by Markov-model burst packet losses in video transmission. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 19:917–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Skupin R, Hellge C, Schierl T, Wiegand T (2010) Fast application-level video quality evaluation for extensive error-prone channel simulations. In: 15th IEEE international workshop on computer aided modeling, analysis and design of communication links and networks (CAMAD), Dec 2010, pp 6–10

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Liebl G, Tappayuthpijarn K, Grüneberg K, Schierl T, Keip C, Stadali H (2010) Simulation platform for multimedia broadcast over DVB-sh. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international ICST conference on simulation tools and techniques, SIMUTools’10, ICST, Brussels, Belgium, pp 84:1–84:10.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Hellge C, Gómez-Barquero D, Schierl T, Wiegand T (2010) Intra-burst layer aware FEC for scalable video coding delivery in DVB-h. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME), July 2010, pp 498–503

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Schwarz H, Marpe D, Wiegand T (2006) Analysis of hierarchical b pictures and MCTF. In: IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo, July 2006, pp 1929–1932

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Hong D, Horowitz M, Eleftheriadis A, Wiegand T (2010) H.264 hierarchical p coding in the context of ultra-low delay, low complexity applications. In: Picture coding symposium (PCS), Dec 2010, pp 146–149

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Wang Z, Bovik A, Lu L (2002) Why is image quality assessment so difficult. In: IEEE international conference on acoustics speech and signal processing, vol 4. Springer, Berlin, pp 3313–3316. IEEE, New York 1999

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Girod B (1993) What’s wrong with mean-squared error. In: Digital images and human vision. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 207–220

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    ITU-T (2008) International Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland, Recommendation J.247—objective perceptual multimedia video quality measurement in the presence of a full reference.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Brunnstrom K, Hands D, Speranza F, Webster A (2009) VQeg validation and ITU standardization of objective perceptual video quality metrics [Standards in a Nutshell]. IEEE Signal Process Mag 26:96–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Winkler S (2010) Video quality measurement standards—Current status and trends. In: 7th international conference on information, communications and signal processing. ICICS 2009. IEEE, New York, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Engelke U, Zepernick H (2007) Perceptual-based quality metrics for image and video services: a survey. In: 3rd EuroNGI conference on next generation Internet networks. IEEE, New York, pp 190–197

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Opticom P (2005) Advanced perceptual evaluation of video quality.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Wang Z, Lu L, Bovik AC (2004) Video quality assessment based on structural distortion measurement. Signal Process Image Commun 19:121–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    ITU-T International Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland (2008) Recommendation G.826—End-to-end error performance parameters and objectives for international, constant bit rate digital paths and connections

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    DVB, Digital Video Broadcasting (2010) DVB-SH Implementation Guidelines Issue 2, DVB Document A120

  30. 30.

    Uitto M, Vehkaperä J (2009) Spatial enhancement layer utilisation for SVC in base layer error concealment. In: Proceedings of the 5th international ICST mobile multimedia communications conference, Mobimedia ’09, ICST, Brussels, Belgium, pp 10:1–10:7.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    JVT (2009) SVC reference software JSVM (joint scalable video model) 9.17.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Wenger S, Wang Y-K, Schierl T, Eleftheriadis A (2011) Rfc6190: Rtp payload format for SVC video. In: Internet engineering task force (IETF).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Mushkin M, Bar-David I (2002) Capacity and coding for the Gilbert-Elliot channels. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 35:1277–1290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Issariyakul T, Hossain E (2007) Introduction to Network Simulator 2 (NS2). pp. 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Ellis M, Perkins C, Pezaros D (2011) End-to-end and network-internal measurements on real-time traffic to residential users. In: Proc of ACM multimedia systems

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Skupin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Skupin, R., Hellge, C., Schierl, T. et al. Packet level video quality evaluation of extensive H.264/AVC and SVC transmission simulation. J Internet Serv Appl 2, 129–138 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13174-011-0025-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Network simulation
  • Video quality evaluation
  • H.264/AVC
  • SVC
  • IPTV