Download
proposed validation process for iptv perceptual quality measurement pqm n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Proposed Validation Process for IPTV Perceptual Quality Measurement (PQM) PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Proposed Validation Process for IPTV Perceptual Quality Measurement (PQM)

Proposed Validation Process for IPTV Perceptual Quality Measurement (PQM)

97 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Proposed Validation Process for IPTV Perceptual Quality Measurement (PQM)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposed Validation Process for IPTV Perceptual Quality Measurement (PQM) ATIS IIF QoSM Committee Sept. 2008

  2. On-demand Validation • PQM standards are useful, but they • Do not encourage continuous improvement • Become outdated • Proposal: On-demand validation process • Individual model testing • Quick turn-around times • Modifying & re-testing models possible • Secret, re-usable database • “Certification” of models

  3. Scope • Define test process for on-demand testing • Define test plan(s) • Define reporting process • Parties involved: • Model Developers • Independent Test Lab(s) • Model Users (e.g. service providers)

  4. Content Library • Secret SRC and PVS • Documentation of SRC & HRC available publicly (thumbnails, text description) • Maintained by independent labs • Avoids tuning possibilities • Re-usable, i.e. does not become “known content” after test • May grow over time

  5. Content Library • Cover different genres, applications and service scenarios • Linear TV, VoD, mobile TV, etc. • SD/HD • Model developers can choose validation against specific scenarios

  6. Certification vs. Standardization • Certification for different categories(e.g. HD video-only PQM) • Specify performance thresholds(may be scenario-dependent) • Define certification classes/levels (e.g. Class A for models above 90% corr.) • Encourages competition • Allows vendors to price/market based on certification level

  7. Results Reporting • Detailed report • For model developer’s use • Summary report • Part of certification (i.e. becomes public once developer releases certification results) • Report prediction performance as well as computational complexity (runtime)

  8. Discussion • Comments, feedback, suggestions? • Who would like to contribute? • Who can validate/certify? • Is this a process model VQEG would consider adopting and/or executing?