Performance Comparison of Video Compression and Streaming over Wireless Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks Using MPEG-4 and H.264

  • M. Akhlaq
  • Tarek R. Sheltami
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 294)

Abstract

Video applications are becoming more popular over wireless ad hoc and sensor networks (WAHSNs). However, due to limited resources, WAHSNs need an efficient video-compression technique in order to minimize the amount of data and maximize the quality of video to be transferred over the network. To this end, we have performed NS2 simulations to evaluate the performance of MPEG-4 (MPEG-4 Part 2) and H.264 (MPEG-4 Part 10) video codecs using EvalVid framework and toolset, AODV routing protocol and constant bit rate (CBR) traffic. The results of simulations show that H.264 outperforms in terms of peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and end-to-end delay which makes it perfect for video applications over WAHSNs.

Keywords

Video Transmission EvalVid Framework Performance Evaluation Wireless Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks (WAHSNs) 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Melodia, T., Akyildiz, I.F.: Research Challenges for Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks. Distributed Video Sensor Networks, 233–246 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marpe, D., Wiegand, T., Sullivan, G.J.: The H. 264/MPEG4 advanced video coding standard and its applications. IEEE Communications Magazine 44, 134–143 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdel-Hady, M., Ward, R.: A Framework for Evaluating Video Transmission over Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. In: IEEE Pacific Rim Conference on Communications, Computers and Signal Processing, PacRim 2007, pp. 78–81 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wiegand, T., Sullivan, G.J., Bjontegaard, G., Luthra, A.: Overview of the H. 264/AVC video coding standard. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 13, 560–576 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lambert, P., De Neve, W., De Neve, P., Moerman, I., Demeester, P., Van de Walle, R.: Rate-distortion performance of H. 264/AVC compared to state-of-the-art video codecs. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 16, 134–140 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ong, E.P., Yang, X., Lin, W., Lu, Z., Yao, S., Lin, X., Rahardja, S., Seng, B.C.: Perceptual quality and objective quality measurements of compressed videos. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation 17, 717–737 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., Das, S., et al.: RFC 3561-ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing. IETF (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kamaci, N., Altunbasak, Y.: Performance comparison of the emerging H. 264 video coding standard with the existing standards. In: Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, ICME 2003, p. I–345 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Raja, G., Mirza, M.J.: Performance comparison of advanced video coding H. 264 standard with baseline H. 263 and H. 263+ standards. In: IEEE International Symposium on Communications and Information Technology, ISCIT 2004, pp. 743–746 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jiang, M., Ling, N.: On enhancing H. 264/AVC video rate control by PSNR-based frame complexity estimation. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics 51, 281–286 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nemcic, O., Vranjes, M., Rimac-Drlje, S.: Comparison of H. 264/AVC and MPEG-4 Part 2 coded video. In: ELMAR 2007, pp. 41–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hewage, C., Karim, H., Worrall, S., Dogan, S., Kondoz, A.: Comparison of stereo video coding support in MPEG-4 MAC, H. 264/AVC and H. 264/SVC. In: Proc. of IET Visual Information Engineering, VIE 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gvozden, G., Gosta, M., Grgic, S.: Comparison of H. 264/AVC and MPEG-4 ASP coding techniques designed for mobile applications using objective quality assessment methods. In: ELMAR 2007, pp. 51–54 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, M., Chang, Y., Yang, F., Wan, S.: Rate-Distortion Criterion Based Picture Padding for Arbitrary Resolution Video Coding Using H. 264/MPEG-4 AVC. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 20, 1233–1241 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dai, M., Zhang, Y., Loguinov, D.: A unified traffic model for MPEG-4 and H. 264 video traces. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 11, 1010–1023 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Casasempere, J., Sanchez, P., Villameriel, T., Del Ser, J.: Performance evaluation of H. 264/MPEG-4 Scalable Video Coding over IEEE 802.16 e networks. In: IEEE International Symposium on Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting, BMSB 2009, pp. 1–6 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tsai, M.C., Chang, T.S.: High performance context adaptive variable length coding encoder for MPEG-4 AVC/H. 264 video coding. In: IEEE Asia Pacific Conference on Circuits and Systems, APCCAS 2006, pp. 586–589 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Onthriar, K., Loo, K., Xue, Z.: Performance comparison of emerging Dirac video codec with H. 264/AV. In: International Conference on Digital Telecommunications, ICDT 2006, p. 22 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ravi, A., Rao, K.R.: Performance Analysis and Comparison of the Dirac Video Codec with H.264/MPEG-4, Part 10. In: Kountchev, R., Nakamatsu, K. (eds.) Advances in Reasoning-Based Image Processing Intelligent Systems. ISRL, vol. 29, pp. 9–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ravi, A.: Performance analysis and comparison of the Dirac video codec with H. 264/MPEG-4 Part 10 AVC (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Klaue, J., Rathke, B., Wolisz, A.: EvalVid – A Framework for Video Transmission and Quality Evaluation. In: Kemper, P., Sanders, W.H. (eds.) TOOLS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2794, pp. 255–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ke, C.H., Lin, C.H., Shieh, C.K., Hwang, W.S.: A novel realistic simulation tool for video transmission over wireless network. In: IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing, p. 7 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    EvalVid - A Video Quality Evaluation Tool-set, http://www.tkn.tu-berlin.de/menue/research/evalvid/
  24. 24.
    The Network Simulator ns2 Homepage, http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Akhlaq
    • 1
  • Tarek R. Sheltami
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Computer Science & EngineeringKing Fahd University of Petroleum & MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations