skip to main content
survey

Mapping QoE through QoS in an Approach to DDB Architectures: Research Analysis and Conceptualization

Published:03 November 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In the context of distributed databases (DDBs), the absence of mathematically well defined equations to evaluate quality of service (QoS), especially with statistical models, seems to have taken database community attention from the possible performance guarantees that could be handled by concepts related to quality of experience (QoE). In this article, we targeted the definition of QoE based on completeness of QoS to deal with decisions concerning with performance correction in a system level. This study also presents a statistical bibliometric analysis before the proposed model. The idea was to show the origin of first studies with correlated focus, which also have initial conceptualizations, and then propose a new model. This model concerns concise QoS definitions, grouped to provide a basis for QoE analysis. Afterward, it is foreseen that a DDB system will be able to autoevaluate and be aware of recovering situations before they happen.

References

  1. NORSIG. 2006. Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Signal Processing Symposium (NORSIG’06).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. SPIE-IS. 2011. Proceedings of SPIE-IS and T electronic imaging—multimedia on mobile devices 2011, and multimedia content access—algorithms and systems V. In Proceedings of SPIE: The International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 7881.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. IC-NIDC. 2012. Proceedings of the 2012 3rd IEEE International Conference on Network Infrastructure and Digital Content (IC-NIDC’12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. QoMEX. 2012. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. ICETE. 2013. Proceedings of the 10th International Joint Conference on ICETE 2013; Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on DCNET 2013; Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on ICE-B 2013 and OPTICS 2013; and Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Optical Communication Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. W. Abramowicz, M. Kaczmarek, M. Kowalkiewicz, and D. Zyskowski. 2006. Architecture for service profiling. In Proceedings of Services Computing Workshops. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Alvarez, S. Cabrero, X. G. Paneda, R. Garcia, D. Melendi, and R. Orea. 2011. A flexible QoE framework for video streaming services. In Proceedings of the IEEE GLOBECOM Workshops (GC Wkshps’11). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1226--1230.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. J. Angelopoulos, K. Kanonakis, H. C. Leligou, T. Orfanoudakis, and M. Katsigiannis. 2008. Dynamic QoS provisioning for Ethernet-based networks. In Proceedings of the International Electronic Conference on Computer Science (AIP Conference Proceedings), Vol. 1060. 151--154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. D. Balduzzi and G. Tononi. 2009. Qualia: The geometry of integrated information. In PLoS Computational Biology, Vol. 5. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000462Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Barkowsky, J. Li, T. Han, S. Youn, J. Ok, C. Lee, C. Hedberg, I. V. Ananth, K. Wang, K. Brunnstrm, and P. Le Callet. 2013. Towards standardized 3DTV QoE assessment: Cross-lab study on display technology and viewing environment parameters. In Proceedings of SPIE: The International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 8648. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2004050Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. I. B. Barla, D. A. Schupke, and G. Carle. 2012. Resilient virtual network design for end-to-end cloud services. In NETWORKING 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7289. Springer, 161--174. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30045-5_13 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. I. B. Barla, D. A. Schupke, M. Hoffmann, and G. Carle. 2013. Optimal design of virtual networks for resilient cloud services. In Proceedings of the 2013 9th International Conference on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks, (DRCN’13). 218--225.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. N. Bhatti, A. Bouch, and A. Kuchinsky. 2000. Integrating User-Perceived Quality into Web Server Design. Technical Report HPL-2000-3. Hewlett-Packard Labs.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Bouch, N. Bhatti, and A. Kuchinsky. 2000. Quality Is the Eye of the Beholder: Meeting User’s Requirements for Internet Quality of Service. Technical Report HPL-2000-4. Hewlett-Packard Labs.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. P. Brooks and B. Hestnes. 2010. User measures of quality of experience: Why being objective and quantitative is important. In IEEE Network, Vol. 24. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 8--13. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2010.5430138 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. P. Le Callet, S. Möller, and A. Perkis. 2013. QualiNet white paper on definitions of quality of experience. In European Network on Quality of Experience in Multimedia Systems and Services (COST Action IC 1003), Lausanne (Ed.). Switzerland. Version 1.2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Y. Cao, C. Ritz, and R. Raad. 2013. How much longer to go? The influence of waiting time and progress indicators on quality of experience for mobile visual search applied to print media. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’13). 112--117. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2013.6603220Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. A. Caruana. 2002. Service loyalty: The effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing 36, 7--8, 811--828. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560210430818Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. D. Chang, G. Xu, L. Hu, and K. Yang. 2013. A network-aware virtual machine placement algorithm in mobile cloud computing environment. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference Workshops (WCNCW’13). 117--121. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WCNCW.2013.6533325Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. C. Chen, L. K. Choi, G. De Veciana, C. Caramanis, R. W. Heath Jr., and A. C. Bovik. 2013. A dynamic system model of time-varying subjective quality of video streams over HTTP. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing. 3602--3606. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2013.6638329Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Find Your Cloud. 2013. The Definition of Customer Quality of Experience. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from https://www.findyourcloud.com/Articles/Quality-of-Experience/The-Definition-of-Customer-Quality-of-Experience/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Find Your Cloud. 2014. Quality of Experience Articles. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from https://www.findyourcloud.com/Articles/Quality-of-Experience/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. M. Crotti, D. Ferri, F. Gringoli, M. Peli, and L. Salgarelli. 2011. PP2db: A privacy-preserving, P2P-based scalable storage system for mobile networks. In Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics, and Telecommunications Engineering. Springer, 533--542. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31909-9_34Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. NoSQL Databases. 2014. NoSQL Home Page. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from http://nosql-database.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. R. L. de Carvalho Costa and P. Furtado. 2011. Quality of experience in distributed databases. Distributed and Parallel Databases 29, 5--6, 361--396. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10619-011-7083-x Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. R. L. de Carvalho Costa and P. Furtado. 2013. Providing quality of experience for users: The next DBMS challenge. Computer 46, 9, 86--93. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. R. B. D’ Agostino. 1970. Transformation to normality of the null distribution of g1. Biometrika 57, 679--681.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. T. Erl, R. Puttini, and Z. Mahmood. 2013. Cloud Computing: Concepts, Technology & Architecture. Prentice Hall. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. A. Fiorese, P. Simoes, and F. Boavida. 2011. An approach to peer selection in service overlays. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM’11). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. A. Fiorese, P. Simoes, and F. Boavida. 2012. Peer selection in P2P service overlays using geographical location criteria. In Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7334. Springer, 234--248. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. A. Fiorese, P. Simoes, and F. Boavida. 2013. Approach for service search and peer selection in P2P service overlays. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN’13). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. K. Fliegel, S. Vitek, T. Jindra, P. Pata, and M. Klima. 2012. Comparison of stereoscopic technologies in various configurations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Applications of Digital Images Processing XXXV (Proceedings of SPIE), Vol. 8499. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.929237Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. A. Floris, L. Atzori, G. Ginesu, and D. D. Giusto. 2012. QoE assessment of multimedia video consumption on tablet devices. In Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. J. Forlizzi and S. Ford. 2000. Building blocks of experience: An early framework for interaction designers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS’00). ACM, New York, NY, 419--423. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. G. Fortetsanakis, M. Katsarakis, M. Plakia, N. Syntychakis, and M. Papadopouli. 2012. Supporting wireless access markets with a user-centric QoE-based geo-database. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Workshop on Mobility in the Evolving Internet Architecture (MobiArch’12). 29--36. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2348676.2348685 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. L. Goldmann, J.-S. Lee, and T. Ebrahimi. 2010a. Temporal synchronization in stereoscopic video: Influence on quality of experience and automatic asynchrony detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Image Processing. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 3241--3244. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2010.5651142Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. L. Goldmann, F. De Simone, and T. Ebrahimi. 2010b. A comprehensive database and subjective evaluation methodology for quality of experience in stereoscopic video. In Proceedings of SPIE: The International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 7526. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.839438Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Y. Gong, F. Yang, L. Huang, and S. Su. 2009. Model-based approach to measuring quality of experience. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Emerging Network Intelligence. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 29--32. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EMERGING.2009.17 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. C. Gronroos. 1984. A service quality model and its market implications. European Journal of Marketing 18, 4, 36--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Y. He, C. Wang, H. Long, and K. Zheng. 2012. PNN-based QoE measuring model for video applications over LTE system. In Proceedings of the 7th International ICST Conference on Communications and Networking in China (CHINACOM’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. D. Heimbigner and D. McLeod. 1985. A federated architecture for information management. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 3, 3, 253--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. A. Hines, J. Skoglund, A. Kokaram, and N. Harte. 2013. Robustness of speech quality metrics to background noise and network degradations: Comparing ViSQOL, PESQ and POLQA. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP’13). 3697--3701. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2013.6638348Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Y. Honda, H. Ninomiya, and Y. Sassa. 2001. Development of cabin air quality system. In Proceedings of the SAE 2001 World Congress. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/2001-01-0292Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. K. R. Hoogeboom. 1989. Restoration and development guidelines for ocean beach recreation areas. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management (Coastal Zone’89), Vol. 4. 3120--3134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. A. Turner II and L. T. Nowell. 2000. Beyond the desktop: Diversity and artistry. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA’00). 35--36. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/633292.633317 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. ISO 9241-210. 2010. ISO 9241-210:2010-Human-Centred Design Processes for Interactive Systems. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=21197Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. ITU-T.P.862. 2001. Perceptual Evaluation of Speech Quality (PESQ): An Objective Method for End-to-End Speech Quality Assessment of Narrow-Band Telephone Networks and Speech Codecs. Technical Report. Telecommunication Standardization Sector of ITU, Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. C. M. Jarque and A. K. Bera. 1980. Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals. Economic Letters 6, 3, 255--259. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(80)90024-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. S. Jelassi and G. Rubino. 2011a. A comparison study of automatic speech quality assessors sensitive to packet loss burstiness. In Proceedings of the IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC’11). 415--420. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CCNC.2011.5766503Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. S. Jelassi and G. Rubino. 2011b. A study of artificial speech quality assessors of VoIP calls subject to limited bursty packet losses. Eurasip Journal on Image and Video Processing 2011, 9. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1687-5281-2011-9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. A. Khan, L. Sun, and E. Ifeachor. 2012. QoE prediction model and its application in video quality adaptation over UMTS networks. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 14, 431--442. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2011.2176324 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. H.-J. Kim, D.-H. Lee, J.-M. Lee, K.-H. Lee, W. Lyu, and S.-G. Choi. 2008. The QoE evaluation method through the QoS-QoE correlation model. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Networked Computing and Advanced Information Management (NCM’08), Vol. 2. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 719--725. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/NCM.2008.202 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. A. A. Laghari, K. U. R. Laghari, M. Ibrahim, and T. H. Falk. 2012. QON: Quality of experience (QoE) framework for network services. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Software Technology and Engineering (ICSTE’12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. J.-S. Lee. 2012. Comparison of objective quality metrics on the scalable extension of H.264/AVC. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP’12). 693--696. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2012.6466954Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. J.-S. Lee, L. Goldmann, and T. Ebrahimi. 2013. Paired comparison-based subjective quality assessment of stereoscopic images. In Multimedia Tools and Applications, Vol. 67. Springer, 31--48. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1011-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. R. C. Lewis and B. H. Booms. 1983. The marketing aspects of service quality. In Emerging Perspectives in Service Marketing, L. L. Berry, G. Shostack, and G. Upah (Eds.). American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, 99--107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. M. Li, Z. Chen, and Y.-P. Tan. 2012a. QoE analysis for scalable video adaptation. In Proceedings of IEEE Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. M. Li, Z. Chen, and Y.-P. Tan. 2012b. QoE-aware resource allocation for scalable video transmission over multiuser MIMO-OFDM systems. In Proceedings of IEEE Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. M. Li, Z. Chen, and Y.-P. Tan. 2013. On Quality of Experience of Scalable Video Adaptation, Vol. 24. Academic Press, 509--521. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2013.03.006Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. X. Liu, C. Sun, and L. T. Yang. 2013. DCT-based objective quality assessment metric of 2D/3D image. In Multimedia Tools and Applications, 1--18. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11042-013-1698-z Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. M. Loukil, M. Zekri, T. Ghariani, and B. Jouaber. 2012. A reputation based vertical handover decision making framework (R-VHDF). In Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. A. E. Mahdi and D. Picovici. 2010. New single-ended objective measure for non-intrusive speech quality evaluation. In Signal Image and Video Processing, Vol. 4. Springer, London, 23--38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Z. Mai, C. Doutre, P. Nasiopoulos, and R. K. Ward. 2012. Rendering 3-D high dynamic range images: Subjective evaluation of tone-mapping methods and preferred 3-D image attributes. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 6, 597--610. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSTSP.2012.2193555Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. R. Mielke, A. Zahralddin, D. Padam, and T. Mastaglio. 1998. Simulation applied to theme park management. In Proceedings of the 1998 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC’98), Part 1, Vol. 2. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1199--1203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. MobiArch. 2012. Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Workshop on Mobility in the Evolving Internet Architecture (MobiArch’12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. S. Möller, F. Hinterleitner, T. H. Falk, and T. Polzehl. 2010. Comparison of approaches for instrumentally predicting the quality of text-to-speech systems. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the International Speech-Communication Association, Vol. 1--2. 1325--1328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. S. Möller and A. Raake (Eds.). 2014. Quality of Experience: Advanced Concepts, Applications, and Methods. Springer. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. K. De Moor, I. Ketyko, W. Joseph, T. Deryckere, L. De Marez, L. Martens, and G. Verleye. 2010. Proposed framework for evaluating quality of experience in a mobile, testbed-oriented living lab setting. In Mobile Networks & Applications, Vol. 15. Springer, 378--391. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11036-010-0223-0 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. A. K. Moorthy and A. C. Bovik. 2011. Visual quality assessment algorithms: What does the future hold? In Multimedia Tools and Applications, Vol. 51. 675--696. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11042-010-0640-x Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. A. K. Moorthy and A. C. Bovik. 2013. A survey on 3D quality of experience and 3D quality assessment. In Proceedings of SPIE: The International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 8651. Burlingame, CA. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2008355Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. A. K. Moorthy, C.-C. Su, A. Mittal, and A. Conrad Bovik. 2013. Subjective evaluation of stereoscopic image quality. In Signal Processing Image Communication, Vol. 28. Elsevier Science BV, 870--883. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.image.2012.08.004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. M. G. Morris and J. M. Turner. 2001. Assessing users’ subjective quality of experience with the World Wide Web: An exploratory examination of temporal changes in technology acceptance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 54, 6, 877--901. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2001.0460 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. C. Moy, L. Doyle, and Y. Sanada. 2009. Foreword-cognitive radio: From equipment to networks. In Annales des Telecommunications/Annals of Telecommunications, Vol. 64. 415--417. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12243-009-0125-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. M. S. Mushtaq, B. Augustin, and A. Mellouk. 2012. Empirical study based on machine learning approach to assess the QoS/QoE correlation. In Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Network and Optical Communications (NOC’12), and the 7th Conference on Optical Cabling and Infrastructure (OC and I’12). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/NOC.2012.6249939Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. I. Papafili, J. Rückert, P. Poullie, S. Soursos, T. Bocek, K. Wajda, D. Hausheer, G. D. Stamoulis, and B. Stiller. 2013. SmartenIT cloud traffic management approach and architectural considerations. In Proceedings of the Future Network and Mobile Summit (FutureNetworkSummit’13).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. M. P. Papazoglou, J. Bubenko, and M. Norrie. 1988. INTENT: An integrated environment for distributed heterogeneous databases. In Proceedings of the 1988 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Object-Based Concurrent Programming (OOPSLA/ECOOP’88). ACM, New York, NY, 126--128. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/67386.67421 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, and L. L. Bery. 1985. A conceptual model of service quality and its implication for future research. Journal of Marketing 49, 41--50.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, and L. L. Bery. 1988. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing 64, 1, 12--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, and L. L. Bery. 1994. Alternative scales for measuring service quality: A comparative assessment based on psychometric and diagnostic criteria. Journal of Retailing 70, 3, 201--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  80. F. Qi, T. Jiang, S. Ma, and D. Zhao. 2012. Quality of experience assessment for stereoscopic images. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1712--1715.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. E. Redd, T. J. Gay, D. M. Blankenship, J. T. Park, J. L. Peacher, and D. G. Seely. 1987. Measurements of helium excitation in Be+-He and Mg+-He collisions. Nuclear Inst ruments and Methods in Physics Research B, 24--25. 305--308.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. A. Rehman and Z. Wang. 2013. Perceptual experience of time-varying video quality. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’13). 218--223. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2013.6603240Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  83. Thomson Reuters. 2013. Web of Knowledge at Web of Science v.5.1.3.1. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from http://apps.webofknowledge.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. S. Richter and A. Bohm. 2006. A location and privacy service enabler for context-aware and location-based services in NGN. In Proceedings of the Telecommunications Network Strategy and Planning Symposium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. K. Sato and W. Verplank. 2000. Panel: Teaching tangible interaction design. In Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS’00). ACM, New York, NY, 444--445. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. I. Sedano, M. Kihl, K. Brunnstrom, and A. Aurelius. 2011. Evaluation of video quality metrics on transmission distortions in H.264 coded video. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Broadband Multimedia Systems and Broadcasting (BMSB’11). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/BMSB.2011.5954960Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. S. S. Shapiro and M. B. Wilk. 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52, 34, 591--611. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. S. Shenker, C. Partridge, and R. Guerin. 1997. RFC 2212: Specification of Guaranteed Quality of Service. Technical Report. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2212. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. S. Shenker and J. Wroclawski. 1997. RFC 2216: Network Element Service Specification Template. Technical Report. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  90. Y. Shi, Y. Ding, and J. Li. 2010. A user-perceived video quality assessment metric using inter-frame redundancy. International Journal of Digital Content Technology and Its Applications 4, 151--160. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4156/jdcta.vol4.issue4.15Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  91. D. P. Siewiorek and R. S. Swarz. 1998. Reliable Computer Systems: Design and Evaluation (3rd ed.). Natick, MA: A. K. Peters. https://archive.org/details/reliablecomputer00siew. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  92. S. Sladojevic, D. Culibrk, M. Mirkovic, D. Ruiz Coll, and G. R. Borba. 2013. Logging real packet reception patterns for end-to-end quality of experience assessment in wireless multimedia transmission. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW’13). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICMEW.2013.6618453Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  93. J. M. Smith, P. A. Bernstein, U. Dayal, N. Goodman, T. Landers, K. W. T. Lin, and E. Wong. 1981. Multibase: Integrating heterogeneous distributed database systems. In Proceedings of the AFIPS National Computer Conference. ACM, New York, NY. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1500412.1500483 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  94. D. Soldani, M. Li, and R. Cuny. 2006. QoS and QoE Management in UMTS Cellular Systems. Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. N. Staelens, G. Van Wallendael, R. Van De Walle, F. De Turck, and P. Demeester. 2013. High definition H.264/AVC subjective video database for evaluating the influence of slice losses on quality perception. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’13). 130--135. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2013.6603225Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. M. Taheri and N. Ansari. 2013. A feasible solution to provide cloud computing over optical networks. IEEE Network, 27, 31--35. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MNET.2013.6678924Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  97. H. A. Tran, A. Mellouk, and S. Hoceini. 2011. QoE content distribution network for cloud architecture. In Proceedings of the 2011 1st International Symposium on Network Cloud Computing and Applications (NCCA’11). 14--19. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/NCCA.2011.10 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  98. K. U. R. Laghari, N. Crespi, and K. Connelly. 2012. Towards total quality of experience: A QoE for multimedia services in communication ecosystem. IEEE Communications Magazine 50, 4, 58--65.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  99. K. U. R. Laghari, N. Crespi, B. Molina, and C. E. Palau. 2011. QoE aware service delivery in distributed environment. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA’11). 837--842. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WAINA.2011.58 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  100. B. V. Elsevier. 2013. Scopus Home Page. Retrieved September 29, 2015, from http://www.scopus.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. K. Vandenbroucke, K. De Moor, and L. De Marez. 2013. Use- and QoE-related aspects of personal cloud applications: An exploratory survey. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’13). 36--37. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2013.6603202Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  102. D. De Vera, P. Rodriguez-Bocca, and G. Rubino. 2007. QoE monitoring platform for video delivery networks. In IP Operations and Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4786. Springer, 131--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  103. Y. Wei, S. H. Son, and J. A. Stankovic. 2004. Maintaining data freshness in distributed real-time databases. In Proceedings of the 16th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS’04). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 251--260. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EMRTS.2004.1311028 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  104. M. Wijnants, W. Lamotte, B. De Vleeschauwer, F. De Turck, B. Dhoedt, P. Demeester, P. Lambert, D. Van de Walle, J. De Cock, S. Notebaert, and R. Van de Walle. 2008. Optimizing user QoE through overlay routing, bandwidth management and dynamic transcoding. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile, and Multimedia Networks, Vols. 1--2. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 557--563. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  105. K. Wolter and A. van Moorsel. 2001. The Relationship between Quality of Service and Business Metrics: Monitoring, Notification, and Optimization. Technical Report 96. HP Laboratories.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  106. L. Xing, J. You, T. Ebrahimi, and A. Perkis. 2010a. Estimating quality of experience on stereoscopic images. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ISPACS’10). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISPACS.2010.5704599Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  107. L. Xing, J. You, T. Ebrahimi, and A. Perkis. 2010b. An objective metric for assessing quality of experience on stereoscopic images. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP’10). 373--378. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MMSP.2010.5662049Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  108. L. Xing, J. You, T. Ebrahimi, and A. Perkis. 2011. Objective metrics for quality of experience in stereoscopic images. In Proceeding of the 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP’11). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  109. D. Xu, L. Coria, and P. Nasiopoulos. 2010. Guidelines for capturing high quality stereoscopic content based on a systematic subjective evaluation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits, and Systems (ICECS’10). 162--165. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICECS.2010.5724479Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  110. D. Xu, L. E. Coria, and P. Nasiopoulos. 2012. Guidelines for an improved quality of experience in 3-D TV and 3-D mobile displays. Journal of the Society for Information Display 20, 397--407. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1889/JSID20.7.397Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  111. K. Yu, Y. Cao, X. H. Huang, and X. F. Wu. 2010. Analysis of overlay topology of peer-to-peer applications. Journal of China Universities of Posts and Telecommunications, 17, 60--66. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1005-8885(09)60581-1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  112. E. Zerman, G. B. Akar, B. Konuk, and G. Nur. 2013a. Spatiotemporal no-reference video quality assessment model on distortions based on encoding. In Proceedings of the 21st Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU’13). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  113. E. Zerman, G. B. Akar, B. Konuk, and G. Nur. 2013b. Spatiotemporal no-reference video quality assessment model on distortions based on encoding. In Proceedings of the 21st Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU’13). DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SIU.2013.6531235Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Mapping QoE through QoS in an Approach to DDB Architectures: Research Analysis and Conceptualization

            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

            Full Access

            • Published in

              cover image ACM Computing Surveys
              ACM Computing Surveys  Volume 48, Issue 2
              November 2015
              615 pages
              ISSN:0360-0300
              EISSN:1557-7341
              DOI:10.1145/2830539
              • Editor:
              • Sartaj Sahni
              Issue’s Table of Contents

              Copyright © 2015 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 the author(s) 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: 3 November 2015
              • Accepted: 1 September 2015
              • Revised: 1 June 2015
              • Received: 1 November 2014
              Published in csur Volume 48, Issue 2

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • survey
              • Research
              • Refereed

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader