* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Slides - TERENA Networking Conference 2004
Survey
Document related concepts
Transcript
Intelligent and Adaptive Middleware to Improve User-Perceived QoS in Multimedia Applications Pedro M. Ruiz, Juan A. Botia, Antonio Gomez-Skarmeta University of Murcia Terena Networking Conference 2004 Rhodes, June 2004 Drivers for adaptive applications • E2E QoS requires local resource management • Terminals are heterogeneous and media adaptation is needed • Network conditions are unpredictably changing and not under control (e.g. Ad hoc nets, PLC networks, etc.) • QoS in terms of bandwidth and delay cannot be guaranteed just with network-layer QoS mechanisms • In these cases, user-perceived QoS can be improved using applications being able to adapt to: – – – – Network conditions QoS Violations Shortage of local resources (eg. CPU, Memory, etc.) User preferences 2 Adaptive Applications 3 Video Quality vs. Bandwidth 10 FPS, SQCIF both for MJPEG and H.263 1190 Kbps 300 Kbps 210 Kbps 140 Kbps Non-linear Perception 70 Kbps 50 Kbps 30 Kbps 4 Towards user-awareness... • Traditional approaches based on profiles – Simple and easy to implement – Usually are not fine-grained enough – Are not able to capture the perceptual preferences • Adaptations based on low level parameters (e.g. Bandwidth, packet losses, etc) – Do not really consider user preferences – Perceptual QoS is not linearly related to those low level metrics • Previous works focused on evaluating the impact of each parameter on the user perception – There is not a real model of the user, particularly when multiple parameters can be tuned simultaneously (e.g. codecs, frame rates, etc.) 5 Architecture for Multimedia Adaptive Applications Type Seq # Loss % Delay User pref Estimated BW App. Layer Audio Codec Video Codec Frame Rate Size Quantization ... App. Layer QoS signaling QoS signaling Adaptation Logic Net. Layer Mon Net.Layer Mon Audio ... Video Slides Audio Adaptation Logic Video TCP/UDP TCP/UDP IP IP MAC MAC PHY PHY ... Slides 6 Basic Adaptation Logic START QoS Report lost++ no QoS Report? yes yes Loss > 5% QoS Report Lost >3 yes no Loss = 0%? no Reset Zero-loss count yes Zero-loss++ no Zero-loss > 15 no yes Downgrade Quality Upgrade Quality END 7 Why applications aware of the user-perceived QoS? • There are many ways to adapt data-rates to the available bandwidth – – – – – – – Audio & Video Codecs Video Quantization factor Audio sampling rate Video frame rate Video size Component selection Buffering Which combination would be preferred by the user? • Not trivial to select a new combination of settings satisfying the users – Reduce frame size?, reduce frame rate?, change codec? • Traditional adaptive applications improve user-perceived QoS but they offer sub-optimal solutions • Adaptive applications should be able to deal with the user perception of QoS! 8 Our proposal for user awareness • Use of machine learning techniques to help at modeling the user perceived QoS – Number of possible combinations of application settings is big enough! – Perceptual QoS may change from one indivudual to another and it is extemely complex to be analitically modelled – A “black box” model may resemble the usersatisfaction without needing to understand the complex processes involved in user perception 9 Modelling user-perceived QoS • Difficult to model, due to the subjective aspects involved • We apply a rule induction machine learning algorithm over learned data Initial data-set (864 entries) BW ACOD VCOD FSIZE Quant FPS Loss% Score 33, 56, 88, 128, 384Kb/s PCM, G.711u, G722, GSM MJPEG, H263 CIF, QCIF, 160x128 5, 10, 15, 30, 60 2..24 0..100% 1..5 (according to MOS) SLIPPER algorithm with t=5 Set of rules representing user-perceived QoS 10 Rules Generated by SLIPPER Some of the lessons learnt from rules Higher FR => higher QoS but user’s prefer lower FR (not below 4 FPS) provided that the video is bigger In most cases PCM audio is not required. The bandwidth savings can be used to improve other components Audio QoS has greater impact Etc.. if matchConfidence { [QFVIDEO >= 60, VIDCOD = MJPEG, FSIZE = QCIF, LOSS <= 10, FPS >= 6] -> 2.8792 [AUDCOD = GSM, BW >= 80, QFVIDEO >= 30, FSIZE = QCIF, FPS <= 6] -> 1.4357 [AUDCOD = GSM, BW >= 128, LOSS = 0, QFVIDEO >= 30, FPS >= 3, VIDCOD = MJPEG] -> 1.7013 [] -> -2.4188 } > 0 then 5 else if matchConfidence { [BW >= 384, QFVIDEO >= 40, FSIZE <= 2] -> 2.7121 [QFVIDEO >= 30, VIDCOD = MJPEG, LOSS <= 3, AUDCOD = G722, BW >=80] -> 1.1756 [FSIZE = CIF, QFVIDEO >= 30, LOSS <= 3, AUDCOD = G722, BW >= 80] -> 1.4437 [] -> -1.5044 } > 0 then 4 else if matchConfidence { [LOSS >= 30] -> 2.1188 [QFVIDEO <= 5] -> 1.4142 [LOSS >= 16, FPS <= 3] -> 1.5438 [] -> -1.0984207275826066 } > 0 then 1 else if matchConfidence { [LOSS >= 16] -> 1.9109 [QFVIDEO <= 10, FSIZE = QCIF] -> 1.5861 [FSIZE = 160X128, QFVIDEO <= 40, VIDCOD = H.263] -> 1.2546 [] -> -0.3953 } > 0 then 2 else 3 11 Empirical Results • Scenario – Real MMARP-based ad hoc network – Path specifically selected to guarantee variability • Application – ISABEL-Lite with extensions • Trials – Traditional multimedia application – Adaptive multimedia application 12 Total Losses 13 Histogram audio/video loss-rate 14 User’s Mean Opinion Scores 15 Conclusions and Future Work • Adaptive applications have demonstrated to be effective in wireless and mobile scenarios • The machine learning user’s modelling has shown to be effective • Applications aware to the user-perceived QoS have demonstrated to offer to better satisfy user’s QoS expectations in a real ad hoc wireless networks • Optimization on the triggering of the adaptation have demonstrated Future work include among others – Reinforcement learning inside the terminal – Combination with user profiling mechanisms 16 Intelligent and Adaptive Middleware to Improve User-Perceived QoS in Multimedia Applications Pedro M. Ruiz, Juan A. Botia, Antonio Gomez-Skarmeta University of Murcia Terena Networking Conference 2004 Rhodes, June 2004