QoS/QoE in Flying Ad Hoc Networks Applied in Natural Disasters
Source abstract
Abstract
In this work, a group of mechanisms are exposed to provide quality of experience in flying ad hoc networks using a swarm of drones in a natural disaster service. End-to-end video traffic was analyzed. The metrics used to experimentally measure QoE/QoS are: delay, jitter and packet loss. The experience quality was evaluated before the disaster (C00), at the moment (B00) and after the disaster (I00). The methodology used to perform the design was experimental, and the NS simulator was used to evaluate the behavior of the swarm of drones connected through a flying ad hoc network. To perform data analysis, treatment and repetitions related to video traffic, the response surface methodology (MSR) was used, which is a set of mathematical techniques in order to optimize the obtained responses. The composite core design (DCC) was also used as it was the best fit to our experiment due to its flexibility. Since the quality of the experience was evaluated at three moments, the quality of services was also analyzed with three metrics. The main contributions of the research are a mathematical model of the quality of the experience based on the quality of the service; an experiment design using the end-to-end NS simulator; a methodology for the mathematical and statistical analysis of the data obtained; an algorithm that allows, from service quality metrics, to obtain the quality of the experience for end-to-end video traffic; and a proposal for future work for data analysis in a physical environment and applied to the environmental sector.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Image and Video Quality Assessment · Advanced MIMO Systems Optimization · Telecommunications and Broadcasting Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Closemobile R&D Telecommunications LS, 28070 Madrid, Spain
Telematics Department, Universidad del Cauca, Popayán 190001, Colombia
Information and Communication Technologies Department, Universidad ICESI, Cali 760001, Colombia
COMBA R&D Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Cali 760001, Colombia
Electronic and Communications Technology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28070 Madrid, Spain
Funding
the Telematics Engineering Group of the University of Cauca
References (56)
Show source-provided references
1. (2018, December 13). Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Trends. Available online: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/white-paper-c11-741490.pdf.
2. Cuellar, J.C., Arciniegas, J.L., and Ortiz, J.H. (2019, January 19–22). Model to evaluate Quality of Experience to IPTV service. Proceedings of the 14th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Coimbra, Portugal.
3. QoE-Based Analysis of DASH Streaming Parameters Over Mobile Broadcast Networks10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2755438 ↗
4. Towards Individual QoE for Multiparty Videoconferencing10.1109/TMM.2017.2777466 ↗
5. Acceptability-Based QoE Models for Mobile Video10.1109/TMM.2014.2298217 ↗
6. IP-Based Mobile and Fixed Network Audiovisual Media Services10.1109/MSP.2011.942472 ↗
7. Cuellar, J.C., Arciniegas, J.L., and Ortiz, J.H. (2018). Modelo para la medición de QoE en IPTV, Editorial Universidad Icesi. [1st ed.]. Available online: http://www.icesi.edu.co/editorial/medicion-de-qoe/.10.18046/EUI/ee.3.2018 ↗
8. Cuellar, J.C., Acosta, D., and Arciniegas, J.L. (2018, January 29–31). QoE/QoS Mapping Models to Measure Quality of Experience to IPTV Service. Proceedings of the IV School of Systems and Networks (SSN 2018), Valdivia, Chile.
9. A survey on parametric QoE estimation for popular services10.1016/j.jnca.2016.10.016 ↗
10. (2018, February 13). Vocabulary for Performance, Quality of Service and Quality of Experience. Available online: https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-P.10-201711-I/es.
11. From QoS to QoE: A Tutorial on Video Quality Assessment10.1109/COMST.2014.2363139 ↗
12. A concise review of the quality of experience assessment for video streaming10.1016/j.comcom.2014.11.005 ↗
13. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2002). Methodology for subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. ITU-R Recommendation BT.500-13, ITU Publications.
14. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (1994). Multichannel stereophonic sound system with and without accompanying picture. ITU-R Recommendation ITU-R BS.775-1, ITU Publications.
15. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (1997). Methods for the subjective assessment of audio systems with accompanying picture. ITU-R Recommendation BS.1286, ITU Publications.
16. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2008). Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. ITU-T Recommendation P.910, ITU Publications.
17. Survey on QoE\QoS Correlation Models for Multimedia Services
18. No-Reference Quality Evaluator of Transparently Encrypted Images10.1109/TMM.2019.2913315 ↗
19. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2004). Objective Perceptual Video Quality Measurement Techniques for Digital Cable Television in the presence of a full reference. ITU-T Recommendation J.144, ITU Publications.
20. A packet-layer video quality assessment model with spatiotemporal complexity estimation10.1186/1687-5281-2011-5 ↗
21. Garcia, M.N. (October, January 30). Parametric model for audiovisual quality assessment in IPTV: ITU-T Rec. P.1201.2. Proceedings of the IEEE 15th International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP), Pula, Italy.
22. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2012). Parametric non-intrusive assessment of audiovisual media streaming quality-lower resolution application area. ITU-T Prepublished Recommendation P.1201, ITU Publications.
23. Standardization activities in the ITU for a QoE assessment of IPTV10.1109/MCOM.2008.4473087 ↗
24. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2013). Parametric non-intrusive bitstream assessment of video media streaming quality–higher resolution application area. ITU-T Recommendation P.1202.2, ITU Publications.
25. Rahrer, T., Fiandra, R., and Wright, S. (2006). DSL Forum Technical Report TR-126. Triple-play Services Quality of Experience (QoE) Requirements. Architecture & Transport Working Group, DSL Forum. Available online: https://1library.net/document/q0xxg33q-technical-report-triple-services-quality-experience-requirements-december.html.
26. Challenges of future multimedia QoE monitoring for internet service providers10.1007/s11042-017-4870-z ↗
27. A content-adaptive video quality assessment method for online media service10.1007/s11042-016-3359-5 ↗
28. QoE-Enabled Big Video Streaming for Large-Scale Heterogeneous Clients and Networks in Smart Cities10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2506648 ↗
29. Wang, T., Pervez, A., and Zou, H. (2010, January 26–28). VQM-based QoS/QoE mapping for streaming video. Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Broadband Network and Multimedia Technology (IC-BNMT), Beijing, China.
30. Kim, H.J., Lee, D.H., Lee, J.M., Lee, K.H., Lyu, W., and Choi, S.G. (2008, January 2–4). The QoE Evaluation Method through the QoS-QoE Correlation Model. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Networked Computing and Advanced Information Management, Lulea, Sweden.10.1109/NCM.2008.202 ↗
31. Packet losses and objective video quality metrics in H.264 video streaming10.1016/j.jvcir.2014.12.003 ↗
32. Packet loss rate mapped to the quality of experience10.1007/s11042-016-4254-9 ↗
33. A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality10.1109/TBC.2004.834028 ↗
34. Montgomery, D.C. (2013). Diseño y Análisis de Experimentos, Limusa Wiley Publications. [2nd ed.].
35. (2018, July 30). The Linux Foundation. Available online: https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/netem.
36. Lübke, R., Büschel, P., Schuster, D., and Schill, A. (2014, January 27–30). Measuring accuracy and performance of network emulators. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom), Odessa, Ukraine.10.1109/BlackSeaCom.2014.6849005 ↗
37. Catellier, A., and Pinson, M. (2015, January 14–16). Characterization of the HEVC Coding Efficiency Advance Using 20 Scenes, ITU-T Rec. P.913 Compliant Subjective Methods, VQM, and PSNR. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM), Miami, FL, USA.10.1109/ISM.2015.38 ↗
38. (2018, February 21). Stefan Winkler Resources. Available online: https://stefan.winkler.site/resources.html.
39. Yamagishi, K., Kawano, T., and Hayashi, T. (December, January 30). Hybrid Video-Quality-Estimation Model for IPTV Services. Proceedings of the IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM), Honolulu, HI, USA.
40. Rifai, H., Mohammed, S., and Mellouk, A. (2011, January 25–27). A brief synthesis of QoS-QoE methodologies. Proceedings of the 2011 10th International Symposium on Programming and Systems (ISPS), Piscataway, NJ, USA.10.1109/ISPS.2011.5898880 ↗
41. Video Quality Assessment Models for IPTV Services
42. (2019, December 16). MSU Video Quality Measurement Tool. Available online: http://compression.ru/video/quality_measure/video_measurement_tool.html.
43. (2018, September 09). Minitab. Available online: http://www.minitab.com/es-mx/.
44. México, D.F. (2012). Estadística Aplicada a los Negocios y a la Economía, McGrawHill. [13th ed.].
45. International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (2003). Final Report from the Video Quality Experts Group on the Validation of Objective Models of Video Quality Assessment, Phase II (FR-TV2) VQEG, ITU Publications.
46. VQAMap: A Novel Mechanism for Mapping Objective Video Quality Metrics to Subjective MOS Scale10.1109/TBC.2016.2570002 ↗
47. Objective Video Quality Assessment Methods: A Classification, Review, and Performance Comparison10.1109/TBC.2011.2104671 ↗
48. Tavera, C.A., Castro, D.F., Ortiz, J.H., Khalaf, O.I., and Vargas, M.A. (2021). Synergy between Circular Economy and Industry 4.0: A Literature Review. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13084331 ↗
49. Wearable Wireless Body Area Networks for Medical Applications10.1155/2021/5574376 ↗
50. Software Architecture for Planning Educational Scenarios by Applying an Agile Methodology10.3991/ijet.v16i08.20603 ↗
51. Web Application Commercial Design for Financial Entities Based on Business Intelligence
52. Narvaez, C., Alomía, G.A., Loaiza, D.F., and Tavera, C.A. (2021). Society 5.0: A Japanese Concept for a Superintelligent Society. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13126567 ↗
53. García, M., Canovas, A., Edo, M., and Lloret, J. (2009, January 11–16). A QoE Management System for Ubiquitous IPTV Devices. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Mobile Ubiquitous Computing, Systems, Services and Technologies, Sliema, Malta.10.1109/UBICOMM.2009.31 ↗
54. A QoE management system to improve the IPTV network10.1002/dac.1145 ↗
55. Sideris, A., Markakis, E., Zotos, N., Pallis, E., and Skianis, C. (2015, January 26–29). MPEG-DASH users’ QoE: The segment duration effect. Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Pilos, Greece.10.1109/QoMEX.2015.7148117 ↗
56. Quality of Experience Driven Rate Adaptation for Adaptive HTTP Streaming10.1109/TBC.2018.2799301 ↗