skip to main content
10.1145/3229625.3229630acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free Access

Joint Rate and FoV adaptation in immersive video streaming

Published:07 August 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

The responsiveness of the network is critical when the application is immersive video streaming or 360 degree video streaming. The users look at the video stream on a display that can only show a fraction of the full video stream, and the time that the information spend in transit dramatically impacts the QoE of the end user. Further, transmitting a 360 degree video stream significantly increases the bandwidth usage and the impact on the already strained network. We propose a mechanism to use the responsiveness of the network to perform a Field of View (FoV) adaptation, so as to reduce the bandwidth consumption while at the same time enhancing the QoE of the user. In our simulation, such mechanism significantly improves the resolution seen by the end user, by selecting a higher bit rate. This translates to an improvement of up to 1.34 x better resolution when compared with the full spherical 360 degree video stream. Further, when rate adaption is used, it ensures the QoE of end users evolves according to the changes in the network conditions. This means that our proposed rate and FoV adaptation based upon the network responsiveness achieves both the apprently contradictory goals of increasing the end-user QoE and reducing the overall bandwidth consumption at the network layer.

References

  1. Shahryar Afzal, Jiasi Chen, and K. K. Ramakrishnan. 2017. Characterization of 360-degree Videos. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network (VR/AR Network '17). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. NGMN Alliance. 2015. NGMN 5G White Paper. https://www.ngmn.org/uploads/media/NGMN_5G_White_Paper_V1_0.pdf. (Feb. 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Stephen Cass and Charles Choi. 2015. Google Glass, HoloLens, and the Real Future of Augmented Reality. In IEEE Spectrum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jacob Chakareski. 2017. VR/AR Immersive Communication: Caching, Edge Computing, and Transmission Trade-Offs. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network. ACM, 36--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jacob Chakareski, Ridvan Aksu, Xavier Corbillon, Gwendal Simon, and Viswanathan Swaminathan. 2018. Viewport-Driven Rate-Distortion Optimized 360° Video Streaming. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.08177 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Xavier Corbillon, Francesca De Simone, and Gwendal Simon. 2017. 360-degree video head movement dataset. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference. ACM, 199--204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Xavier Corbillon, Alisa Devlic, Gwendal Simon, and Jacob Chakareski. 2017. Optimal Set of 360-Degree Videos for Viewport-Adaptive Streaming. in Proc. of ACM Multimedia (MM) (2017). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Xavier Corbillon, Gwendal Simon, Alisa Devlic, and Jacob Chakareski. 2017. Viewport-adaptive navigable 360-degree video delivery. In Communications (ICC), 2017 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Fanyi Duanmu, Eymen Kurdoglu, S Amir Hosseini, Yong Liu, and Yao Wang. 2017. Prioritized buffer control in two-tier 360 video streaming. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network. ACM, 13--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. F. Duanmu, E. Kurdoglu, Y. Liu, and Y. Wang. 2017. View direction and bandwidth adaptive 360 degree video streaming using a two-tier system. In 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Tarek El-Ganainy. 2017. Spatiotemporal Rate Adaptive Tiled Scheme for 360 Sports Events. CoRR abs/1705.04911 (2017). http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.04911Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mohammad Hosseini and Viswanathan Swaminathan. 2016. Adaptive 360 VR Video Streaming based on MPEG-DASH SRD. In IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM'16).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Xing Liu, Qingyang Xiao, Vijay Gopalakrishnan, Bo Han, Feng Qian, and Matteo Varvello. 2017. 360 Innovations for Panoramic Video Streaming. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks. ACM, 50--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Simone Mangiante, Guenter Klas, Amit Navon, Zhuang GuanHua, Ju Ran, and Marco Dias Silva. 2017. Vr is on the edge: How to deliver 360 videos in mobile networks. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network. ACM, 30--35. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Kazuhisa Matsuzono, Hitoshi Asaeda, and Thierry Turletti. 2017. Low latency low loss streaming using in-network coding and caching. In INFOCOM 2017-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, IEEE. IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Djuro Mirkovic, Grenville Armitage, and Philip Branch. 2018. A survey of Round Trip Time Prediction Systems. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Feng Qian, Bo Han, Lusheng Ji, and Vijay Gopalakrishnan. 2016. Optimizing 360 Video Delivery Over Cellular Networks. In ACM MobiCom All Things Cellular Workshop. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Cedric Westphal. 2017. Challenges in Networking to Support Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality. In IEEE ICNC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Liyang Zhang, Syed Obaid Amin, and Cedric Westphal. 2017. VR video conferencing over named data networks. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network. ACM, 7--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Joint Rate and FoV adaptation in immersive video streaming

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        VR/AR Network '18: Proceedings of the 2018 Morning Workshop on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Network
        August 2018
        38 pages
        ISBN:9781450359139
        DOI:10.1145/3229625

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        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: 7 August 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader