Skip to main content

QoE Assessment Aspects for Virtual Reality and Holographic Telepresence Applications

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Future Access Enablers for Ubiquitous and Intelligent Infrastructures (FABULOUS 2022)

Abstract

The cutting-edge evolution of mobile communication systems and Internet technologies in nowadays transitional period from the information age to the experience age has brought attention to the evolving virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) applications and moves towards the development of holographic telepresence systems. Since these applications are devoted in creating immersive and interactive experiences, the quality of experience (QoE) as it is perceived by the end-users will become fundamental constituent in their performance evaluation process. In this paper, the significance of QoE in the development and implementation of the emerging technologies of VR and holographic telepresence systems is analyzed. Moreover, the QoE influencing factors for VR applications and the distinction among this evolving technology and the conventional 2D video content are outlined. Furthermore, a classification of the QoE assessment methods, together with an analysis of the more significant metrics with regard to VR applications is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Brunnström, K., et al.: Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience. In: Fifth Qualinet Meeting, Novi Sad (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. ITU-T, Rec. ITU-T P.10/G.100: Vocabulary for performance, quality of service and quality of experience (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  3. ITU-T. Rec. ITU-T G.1035: Influencing factors on quality of experience for virtual reality services (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Reiter, U., et al.: Factors influencing quality of experience. In: Möller, S., Raake, A. (eds.) Quality of Experience. TSTS, pp. 55–72. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Burbeck, C.A., Kelly, D.H.: Spatiotemporal characteristics of visual mechanisms: excitatory-inhibitory model. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70(9), 1121–1126 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Greenberg, S., Ainsworth, W.A.: Speech processing in the auditory system: an overview. In: Speech Processing in the Auditory System. Springer Handbook of Auditory Research, vol. 18. Springer, NY (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-21575-1_1

  7. Kennedy, R.S., Lane, N.E., Berbaum, K.S., Lilienthal, M.G.: Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 3(3), 203–220 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Schatz, R., Hoßfeld, T., Janowski, L., Egger, S.: From packets to people: quality of experience as a new measurement challenge. In: Biersack, E., Callegari, C., Matijasevic, M. (eds.) Data Traffic Monitoring and Analysis. LNCS, vol. 7754, pp. 219–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36784-7_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Takahash, A.: Framework and standardization of quality of experience (QoE) design and management for audiovisual communication services. NTT Tech. Rev. 7(4), 1–5 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. ITU-T, Rec. ITU-T P.800.1: Mean Opinion Score (MOS) Terminology (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Alreshoodi, M.A., Woods, J.C.: Survey on QoE/QoS correlation models for multimedia services. Int. J. Distrib. Parallel Syst. 4(3) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang, Y., et al.: Subjective panoramic video quality assessment database for coding applications. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 64(2), 461–473 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. ITU-T, Rec. ITU-T P.910: Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. ITU-T, Rec. ITU-T P.919: Subjective test methodologies for 360º video on head-mounted displays (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Singla, A., Robitza, W., Raake, A.: Comparison of subjective quality test methods for omnidirectional video quality evaluation. In: Proceedings of the MMSP 2019, Kuala Lumpur (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kim, H.K., Park, J., Choi, Y., Choe, M.: Virtual reality sickness questionnaire (VRSQ): motion sickness measurement index in a virtual reality environment. Appl. Ergon. 69, 66–73 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Perez, P., Oyaga, N., Ruiz, J.J., Villegas, A.: Towards systematic analysis of cybersickness in high motion omnidirectional video. In: Proceedings of the QoMEX 2018, Cagliari (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  18. David, E.J., Gutiérrez, J., Coutrot, A., Da Silva, M.P., Le Callet, P.: A dataset of head and eye movements for 360° videos. In: Proceedings of the MMSys 2018, Amsterdam (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, Y., Zhang, P.: QoE Management in Wireless Networks, Springer, NY (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42454-5

  20. ITU-T, Rec. ITU-T G.1011: Reference guide to quality of experience assessment methodologies (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fiedler, M., Hossfeld, T., Tran-Gia, P.: A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Netw. 24(2), 36–41 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Juluri, P., Tamarapalli, V., Medhi, D.: Measurement of quality of experience of video-on-demand services: a survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 18(1), 401–418 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Song, W., Tjondronegoro, D.W., Docherty, M.J.: Understanding user experience of mobile video: framework, measurement, and optimization. In: Mobile Multimedia - User and Technology Perspectives, InTech, Rijeka, pp. 3–30 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vega, M.T., Perra, C., De Turck, F., Liotta, A.: A review of predictive quality of experience management in video streaming services. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 64(2), 432–445 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ruan, J., Xie, D.: A survey on QoE-oriented VR video streaming: some research issues and challenges. Electronics 10(17), 2155 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu, Y., Yang, L., Xu, M., Wang, Z.: Rate control schemes for panoramic video coding. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 53, 76–85 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zakharchenko, V., Choi, K.P., Park, J.H.: Quality metric for spherical panoramic video. In: Proceedings of the SPIE Optics + Photonics 2016, San Diego, CA (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Li, Y., Chen, Z., Wang, Z.: Spherical structural similarity index for objective omnidirectional video quality assessment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE ICME 2018, San Diego, CA (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tataria, H., Shafi, M., Molisch, A.F., Dohler, M., Sjöland, H., Tufvesson, F.: 6G wireless systems: vision, requirements, challenges, insights, and opportunities. Proc. IEEE 109(7), 1166–1199 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Clemm, A., Vega, M.T., Ravuri, H.K., Wauters, T., De Turck, F.: Toward truly immersive holographic-type communication: challenges and solutions. IEEE Commun. Mag. 58(1), 93–99 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shu, J., Chiu, M., Hui, P.: Emotion sensing for mobile computing. IEEE Commun. Mag. 57(11), 84–90 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the European Union, through the Horizon 2020 Marie Skodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks Programme “Mobility and Training for beyond 5G Ecosystems (MOTOR5G)” under grant agreement no. 861219.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georgios Kougioumtzidis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kougioumtzidis, G., Poulkov, V., Zaharis, Z., Lazaridis, P. (2022). QoE Assessment Aspects for Virtual Reality and Holographic Telepresence Applications. In: Perakovic, D., Knapcikova, L. (eds) Future Access Enablers for Ubiquitous and Intelligent Infrastructures. FABULOUS 2022. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 445. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15101-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15101-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15100-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15101-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics