Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Improving Adaptive Video Streaming through Session Classification

Published: 07 September 2019 Publication History

Abstract

With internet video gaining increasing popularity and soaring to dominate network traffic, extensive studies are being carried out on how to achieve higher Quality of Experience (QoE) with the delivery of video content. Associated with the chunk-based streaming protocol, Adaptive Bitrate (ABR) algorithms have recently emerged to cope with the diverse and fluctuating network conditions by dynamically adjusting bitrates for future chunks. This inevitably involves predicting the future throughput of a video session. Some of the session features like Internet Service Provider (ISP), geographical location, and so on, could affect network conditions and contain helpful information for this throughput prediction. In this article, we consider how our knowledge about the session features can be utilized to improve ABR quality via customized parameter settings. We present our ABR-independent, QoE-driven, feature-based partition method to classify the logged video sessions so that different parameter settings could be adopted in different situations to reach better quality. A variation of Decision Tree is developed for the classification and has been applied to a sample ABR for evaluation. The experiment shows that our approach can improve the average bitrate of the sample ABR by 36.1% without causing the increase of the rebuffering ratio where 99% of the sessions can get improvement. It can also improve the rebuffering ratio by 87.7% without causing the decrease of the average bitrate, where, among those sessions involved in rebuffering, 82% receives improvement and 18% remains the same.

References

[1]
Z. Akhtar, Y. S. Nam, R. Govindan, S. Rao, J. Chen, E. Katz-Bassett, B. Ribeiro, J. Zhan, and H. Zhang. 2018. Oboe: Auto-tuning video ABR algorithms to network conditions. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM.
[2]
A. Balachandran, V. Sekar, A. Akella, S. Seshan, I. Stoica, and Hui Zhang. 2013. Developing a predictive model of quality of experience for internet video. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM.
[3]
L. Breiman, J. H. Friedman, R. A. Olshen, and C. J. Stone. 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont.
[4]
F. Chiariotti, S. D’Aronco, L. Toni, and P. Frossard. 2016. Online learning adaptation strategy for DASH clients. In Proceedings of the ACM MMSys.
[5]
L. De Cicco, V. Caldaralo, V. Palmisano, and S. Mascolo. 2013. ELASTIC: A client-side controller for dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH). In Proceedings of Packet Video Workshop.
[6]
F. Dobrian, V. Sekar, A. Awan, I. Stoica, D. Joseph, A. Ganjam, J. Zhan, and H. Zhang. 2011. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM. 362--373.
[7]
R. Houdaille and S. Gouache. 2012. Shaping HTTP adaptive streams for a better user experience. In Proceedings of the ACM MMSys. 1--9.
[8]
T. Huang, R. Johari, N. McKeown, M. Trunnell, and M. Watson. 2014. A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: Evidence from a large video streaming service. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM. 187--198.
[9]
J. Jiang, V. Sekar, H. Milner, D. Shepherd, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. 2016. CFA: A practical prediction system for video QoE optimization. In Proceedings of the USENIX NSDI. 137--150.
[10]
J. Jiang, V. Sekar, and H. Zhang. 2012. Improving fairness, efficiency, and stability in HTTP-based adaptive video streaming with FESTIVE. In Proceedings of the CoNEXT.
[11]
Z. Li, X. Zhu, J. Gahm, R. Pan, H. Hu, A. Begen, and D. Oran. 2014. Probe and adapt: Rate adaptation for HTTP video streaming at scale. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 32, 4 (Apr. 2014), 719--733.
[12]
W. Y. Loh. 2014. Fifty years of classification and regression trees. Int. Statist. Rev. 82, 3 (2014), 329--348.
[13]
H. Mao, R. Netravali, and M. Alizadeh. 2017. Neural adaptive video streaming with Pensieve. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM.
[14]
V. Martin, J. Cabrera, and N. Garcia. 2016. Design, optimization and evaluation of a Q-learning HTTP adaptive streaming client. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 62, 4 (2016), 380--388.
[15]
J. R. Quinlan. 1986. Introduction of decision trees. Mach. Learn. 1 (1986), 81--106.
[16]
J. R. Quinlan. 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
[17]
Spark Machine Learning Library. 2017. Spark Machine Learning Library (MLlib) Guide. Retrieved from spark.apache.org/docs/latest/mllib-guide.html.
[18]
J. Summers, T. Brecht, D. Eager, and B. Wong. 2012. To chunk or not to chunk: Implications for HTTP streaming video server performance. In Proceedings of the ACM NOSSDAV. 15--20.
[19]
Y. Sun, Yin X, J. Jiang, V. Sekar, F. Lin, N. Wang, T. Liu, and B. Sinopoli. 2016. CS2P: Improving video bitrate selection and adaptation with data-driven throughput prediction. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM. 272--285.
[20]
G. Tian and Y. Liu. 2012. Towards agile and smooth video adaptation in dynamic HTTP streaming. In Proceedings of the CoNEXT.
[21]
J. van der Hooft, S. Petrangeli, M. Claeys, J. Famaey, and F. De Turck. 2015. A learning-based algorithm for improved bandwidth awareness of adaptive streaming clients. In Proceedings of the IEEE IM. 131--138.
[22]
X. Yin, A. Jindal, V. Sekar, and B. Sinopoli. 2015. A control-theoretic approach for dynamic adaptive video streaming over HTTP. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM. 325--338.
[23]
A. H. Zahran, J. Quinlan, D. Raca, C. J. Sreenan, E. Halepovic, R. K. Sinha, R. Jana, and V. Gopalakrishnan. 2016. OSCAR: An optimized stall-cautious adaptive bitrate streaming algorithm for mobile networks. In Proceedings of the ACM MoVid.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Data and Information Quality
Journal of Data and Information Quality  Volume 11, Issue 4
December 2019
139 pages
ISSN:1936-1955
EISSN:1936-1963
DOI:10.1145/3357606
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 September 2019
Accepted: 01 January 2019
Revised: 01 November 2018
Received: 01 April 2018
Published in JDIQ Volume 11, Issue 4

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Video delivery
  2. adaptive bitrate algorithms

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 216
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media