The present invention relates generally to wireless transmission systems, and relates more particularly to distributed channel time allocation and rate adaptation for multiple user video streaming.
Developing enhanced television systems is a significant consideration for consumer electronics manufacturers. In conventional television systems, a display device may be utilized to view program information received from a program source. The conventional display device is typically positioned in a stationary location because of restrictions imposed by various physical connections coupling the display device to input devices, output devices, and operating power. Other considerations such as display size and display weight may also significantly restrict viewer mobility in traditional television systems.
Portable television displays may advantageously provide viewers with additional flexibility when choosing an appropriate viewing location. For example, in a home environment, a portable television may readily be relocated to view programming at various remote locations throughout the home. A user may thus flexibly view television programming, even while performing other tasks in locations that are remote from a stationary display device.
Furthermore, a significant proliferation in the number of potential program sources (both analog and digital) available may benefit a system user by providing an abundance of program material for selective viewing. Examples of video sources include satellite and cable television transmission, terrestrial television broadcasts, digital video disks (DVD), video cassette recorders (VCR), digital video recorders (DVR), personal computers (PC) and the Internet. Video material may be available in either a live manner, for example from live broadcasts or live Internet video streaming, or in a stored manner, such as from video recorders or Internet downloads. In particular, an economical wireless audio/video transmission system for flexible home use may enable television viewers to significantly improve their television-viewing experience by facilitating portability while simultaneously providing an increased number of program source selections. The ease of installation of wireless home networks is another major benefit compared to wired home networks.
The evolution of digital data network technology and wireless digital transmission techniques may provide additional flexibility and increased quality to television systems in the home. However, current wireless data networks typically are not optimized for transmission of high quality video information.
High quality continuous media streams, such as video image streams, in their raw form often require high transmission rates, or bandwidth, for effective and/or timely transmission. In many cases, the cost and/or effort of providing the required transmission rate is prohibitive. This transmission rate problem is often solved by compression schemes that take advantage of the continuity in content to create highly packed data. Compression methods for audio and video such as based on ISO Motion Picture Experts Group (MPEG) standards, ITU standards and their variants are well known. With high resolution video, such as the resolutions of 720p, 1080i, or 1080p, used in high definition television (HDTV), the data transmission rate of such a video image stream will be very high even after compression.
It may be difficult to transmit continuous media in networks with a limited bandwidth or capacity. For example, in a local area network with multiple receiving/output devices, such a network will often have a limited bandwidth or capacity, and hence be physically and/or logistically incapable of simultaneously supporting multiple receiving/output devices. Furthermore, the available bandwidth of wireless interconnections and networks often varies over time and is unpredictable due to several factors.
Transmission of compressed media data over such networks is difficult, because a high bandwidth is required continuously, and because of the stringent delay constraints associated with continuous media streams. Degradation of the channel condition may result in data packets being lost or delayed, leading to distortions or interruptions of the media presentation.
In some cases for video an ad hoc wireless network is a collection of wireless nodes which communicate with each other without the assistance of fixed infrastructure. In some cases, these wireless nodes may be configured as a wireless mesh network. Each node may be a source, a destination, and/or a relay for traffic. Wireless links between nodes are established when needed for transmission of data. Since the installation of such a network is fast and flexible because the nodes may be located at suitable locations and merely turned on, it is useful to support real-time media streaming over such an ad hoc network. However, in such ad hoc networks the limited power resources and bandwidth limitations of the wireless nodes, combined with the demanding rate and delay requirements of video streaming, impose limitations that are not typical of conventional data networking. In particular, rate allocation, scheduling, and routing of the video packets should be done in such a manner for efficient utilization of the network resources without overwhelming any individual wireless link.
When multiple video streams are present in the network, they share and compete for the common resources such as transmission power and media access. The shared wireless channel is subject to interference from other transmitters, multi-path fading and shadowing, causing fluctuations in link capacities and transmission errors. Also, the traffic patterns of compressed media streams typically change over time due to content variations and dynamic user behavior, the received media quality may be degraded due to packet losses, and error propagation may occur in the compressed bit stream. Further, media streaming applications usually have high data rate and stringent latency requirements, which is at odds with the limited bandwidth recourses in a wireless network. Rate allocation among various media streams serves the purpose of resource allocation among the video streams. In general, a transmitter at a high video source rate utilizes more network resources and achieves better quality of the transmitted video. The rate allocated for a particular video stream determines the distortion of that video stream. Moreover, the rate-distortion tradeoff for different video streams are usually different, hence it is preferable to allocate rates to the video streams in a manner that considers this tradeoff. In general, the rate allocation technique should achieve a fair and efficient resource allocation among the video streams using the ad hoc network. It is also desirable to have a distributed technique so that the computational burden is shared among the participating nodes to reduce the computations requirements of any particular node.
For multi-user video streaming over ad hoc wireless networks, one technique is to use a centralized scheme for minimizing the total video distortion under a total rate constraint for the network. While such a centralized approach suits well for some applications, such as surveillance video with a common receiver, it introduces significant additional overhead due to the need for collection of information at the central decision node as well as the need to communicate the decisions taken at the central node to all other nodes.
It is desirable to have distributed channel time allocation that adapts the rate for multiple users of a wireless network.
The foregoing and other objectives, features, and advantages of the invention will be more readily understood upon consideration of the following detailed description of the invention, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
Referring to
where γ<1.0 is a provisioning factor to prevent overloading the network. The first equation seeks to minimize the distortion over all the video streams i. The second equation seeks to impose a constraint that the time permitted for all of the streams is less than 1, namely, less than all of the time. Thus the system attempts to optimize the quality for all of the different video streams by allocation of time for each stream.
For simplicity, the optimization may be performed for continuous values of si's, and the distortion for Ri,k<siCi<Ri,k+1 may be obtained via linear interpolation between two available discrete rate points. Note that for convex distortion-rate functions (including a piecewise linear model), the problem has a convex objective function and linear constraints, thus can be solved readily in a centralized manner using existing optimization techniques.
It is desirable to do the optimization of the transmission of the video streams in a distributed manner among the various transmitters. By using a distributed optimization technique, the system reduces the computation burden on a particular node by being shared among many nodes. Also, the distributed optimization technique reduces the overhead of transmitting all of the needed information to a central server, and increases the robustness against failure of the central node.
The distributed optimization may be achieved using any suitable distributed technique, such as for example (1) a so-called primal decomposition of the optimization problem among the users, and (2) a so-called dual decomposition based on maximizing the dual function of the objective in equation 1.
In the primal decomposition approach, each user updates its allocated time separately, along the gradient of the cost function with respect to its own variable si which is the time to allocate to a particular video stream:
is the slope of distortion reduction caused by rate reduction, which is different for each video stream i. The scaling factor μ decreases over time to guarantee convergence. Thus the channel time for a particular stream is adjusted based upon its current value and the cost function. The slope
may be characterized by D′i(Ri)=D′i(siCi).
After each or selected update of the variable si, each of the nodes should send out its current si value either in a separate packet or within a video packet to all of the other nodes. While many of the other nodes may not be the destination node of a particular packet, the other nodes will still sense the packet and thus may extract the information from it. After each update (or selected updates), the allocation is confined within the range of 0<s<γ. If the total allocated time exceeds the constraint γ, each transmitter should back up accordingly:
is the excess in channel time allocation and n is the total number of users in the network. This corresponds to iteratively projecting the variable vector s back into the constrained convex set.
In the dual decomposition approach, instead of minimizing the primal problem, the system may instead maximize the corresponding dual problem, by incorporating the linear constraints into the cost function:
is optimized independently at each user, given λ. It is desirable to increase si of Di(siCi) in order to minimize the distortion, which increases the data rate. Likewise it is desirable to decrease si of λsi in order to minimize the share of channel time taken (to avoid violating the channel time constraint). Accordingly, there is balance that minimizes the overall function. The use of λ shifts the balance of the minimization point, where λ is a value shared among all the nodes, which is transmitted among the nodes in packets.
Optimization of λ, in turn, is achieved by descending along the gradient of the dual cost function:
The update step size is modulated by a scaling factor μ that decreases over time, and is proportional to the excess of total allocated channel time with respect to the constraint. The scaling factor μ could, for example, decrease with the iteration count or with an elapsed time. Using an elapsed time would decrease the need to share the iteration count among the nodes in the video packets which decreases the bandwidth used. Intuitively, the dual variable λ can be understood as a shadow price that helps to regulate the channel time allocation: if the total channel time exceeds the limit γ, the price increases accordingly, resulting in reduced si for each stream to minimize gi(λ).
It may be observed that these techniques attempt to find a target bit rate by solving the joint rate allocation in a distributed manner. The allocation is based upon the distortion with the channel time being a constraint. Both the primal and dual decomposition techniques are preferably implemented as distributed optimization protocols at the application and MAC layer of the wireless nodes. In addition, a wireless node transmitting video may perform adaptation of the video stream itself in order to conform to the optimal target bit rate for that stream. Adaptation of a video stream may be performed by selectively omitting (dropping) packets or frames from the stream before transmission. Other rate adaptation techniques may be used instead of, or in combination with, such a packet and frame omission technique. An overview of exemplary system structures is illustrated in
Referring to
extracting the channel time allocation information sj, j≠i from data packets transmitted by other users. Likewise, each user may maintain a common shadow price λ in the case of the dual decomposition scheme. In order to synchronize the update step sizes at all users, only the values of λ and Δ as reported by the stream with the smallest flow ID are used for update at each node. The iterative technique is considered to converge when the variations between the previous and newly computed allocated channel time is observed to be smaller than a given threshold. In that case, the optimal allocation si* is used to guide the adaptive frame omission process, to find the omission pattern that meets the target rate Ri*=Cisi*. According to the omission pattern, only a subset of the encoded frames in the group of frames are fragmented into multiple packets and passed along to the MAC layer for transmission over the wireless link.
Effective bandwidth Ci is calculated where the average payload size and total transmission time needed for each application-layer packet are estimated by recording packet arrival and departures at the MAC layer. Note that, in each wireless node, the MAC layer may pass along video packets of all streams to the application layer, so as to allow extraction of reported channel time allocation and shadow prices from other users.
Another system structure may be based on omitting individual packets, rather than entire video frames. Note that a single compressed video frame may be encapsulated by one or multiple packets. In case of high bit rate streams, such as streams carrying SD or HD television content, a single frame corresponds often corresponds to multiple packets. Hence, adaptive transmission and omission of individual packets results in a fine-grained video adaptation system. Referring to
Each wireless node maintains and updates a set of local observations for its video and channel state, and extracts from other users' video packet headers several variables to perform the distributed optimization. These are summarized in Tables I and II. These data tables include fields for both the primal and dual techniques. In practice, only a subset of these fields may be utilized, depending on the implementation.
The optimization procedures may be implemented in the functions listed in Table III. Note that these procedures can be invoked either at the sender or the receiver side of the video streaming session. In the sender-driven case, the source node estimates the rate-distortion tradeoff of the encoded video stream for each group of pictures, performs the optimization using functions update_rate_primal or update_rate_dual, and announces the allocate channel time in the header of video packets. In the receiver-driven case, the optimization is performed at the destination node, whereas the sender embeds the rate distortion tradeoff information of the video stream in the header of video packets, and extracts the allocated time decision piggybacked in the application-layer acknowledgment packet headers.
The bandwidth estimates (e.g., the capacity of the channel) may be calculated in any suitable manner. In some implementations the protocol may use a cross-layer information exchange between the MAC and application layers. By way of illustration, a wireless link is formed by communication between a pair of wireless nodes. Although the wireless media is shared by all nodes, different wireless links may experience different channel conditions, thus have different effective bandwidths. The effective bandwidth for one user denoted by “i” is affected by random losses due to transmission errors over the wireless link, and can be roughly estimated as:
where
by logging average packet payload size
The selection of packets or frames to omit may be determined in any suitable manner. A frame omission pattern corresponds to a series of decisions to either transmit or omit particular frames from the set of frames comprising a group of frames. Likewise, a packet omission pattern corresponds to a series of decisions to either transmit or omit particular packets from the set of packets comprising a group of frames. Potentially, a very large number of different candidate frame or packet omission patterns may exist. To reduce complexity in terms of computational burden as well as storage requirements, it is desirable to reduce the number of frame or packet omission patterns that the system considers. For this reason, the system may employ heuristic techniques when determining how packets and frames can be omitted from a coded video stream. The different frames of the encoded video sequence, such as I, P, and B frames, have a different effect on the resulting video quality if they are omitted. In addition, the order in which the same or different type of frames are omitted also has an impact on the resulting video quality. Moreover, it was also determined that depending on the particular video encoding scheme different sequences of frames may be used to transmit the frames of video, which may be characterized to determined how to best omit frames of the video. It is noted that an I frame is encoded as a single image, with no reference to any past or future frames; a P frame is encoded relative to a single reference frame, a B frame is encoded relative to one or two reference frames. Such different encoding types and techniques result in dependencies between the compressed video frames. The frame encoding types and frame dependencies are considered when selecting frames and packets to be omitted.
In order to estimate the distortion for a particular video rate (i.e., decrease in video image quality) when dropping particular packets or frames of a video sequence, such as a group of pictures, a calculation or a measurement may be performed on line or off line. For example, the distortion data may be already calculated for an entire video stream. For example, the distortion information may be calculated in a live manner or otherwise be based upon a model that includes a set of parameters. The parameters may include, for example, type of frames, number of bits, etc. The distortion-rate tradeoff of each video stream i for a given group of frames l is obtained by dropping encoded video frames or packets according to pre-determined omission patterns. For each omission pattern ok, the rate Rk is calculated by summing over all transmitted encoded packet sizes:
where Tl denotes time duration of one group of pictures, and where Bk′ is the size (in bits) of a packet that is not omitted. Distortion Dk for omission pattern ok may be an empirical mean-squared-error that results from decoding the video sequence while omitting the packets according to ok. By varying over different omission patterns, a collection of rate-distortion tradeoff points {(R1, D1), (R2, D2) . . . (RK, DK)} can be obtained, which may be dynamically updated for each group of pictures of each sequence during the optimization.
Referring to
The resulting rate-distortion tradeoff from such a scheme is shown in
Another video adaptation technique may be based upon dropping particular packets of particular frames in a suitable order. Heuristic pruning techniques based upon the distortion contribution of individual packets may be used to select suitable packets to drop in a particular order. Also, the packet pruning may be based upon the type of the frame each packet belongs to.
For example, the scheme may include pruning packets according to their individual distortion contributions, regardless of frame type.
For example, the scheme may include pruning based upon the omission patterns such as, packets from every other B frame, starting from the head of each group of pictures, followed by packets in the remaining B frames, and finally those from P frames, starting from the end of the group of pictures. Within each frame, packets of smaller distortion contributions may be dropped first.
For example, packets may be dropped according to the frame type to which they belong, such as, packets from every other B frame, starting from the head of each group of pictures, followed by packets in the remaining B frames, and finally those from P frames, starting from the end of the group of pictures. Within each frame, packets are pruned starting from the end of each encoded frame.
Note that other types of rate adaptation schemes, such as trans-coding, scalable coding, packet pruning, or switching between different versions of pre-encoded streams may also be used to achieve a different set of rate-distortion tradeoff points.
The terms and expressions which have been employed in the foregoing specification are used therein as terms of description and not of limitation, and there is no intention, in the use of such terms and expressions, of excluding equivalents of the features shown and described or portions thereof, it being recognized that the scope of the invention is defined and limited only by the claims which follow.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional App. No. 60/845,582, filed Sep. 18, 2006.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5159447 | Haskell et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5506686 | Auyeung et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5541852 | Eyuboglu et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5546377 | Ozveren | Aug 1996 | A |
5548581 | Makrucki | Aug 1996 | A |
5606369 | Keesman et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5742594 | Natarajan | Apr 1998 | A |
5805220 | Keesman et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5936940 | Marin et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5978236 | Faberman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982778 | Mangin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995705 | Lang | Nov 1999 | A |
6014694 | Aharoni et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6049549 | Ganz et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6055578 | Williams et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6167084 | Wang et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167253 | Farris et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6233226 | Gringeri et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6263503 | Margulis et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6275497 | Varma et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275531 | Li | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6292834 | Ravi et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6300665 | Peeters et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6310495 | Zhang | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6343085 | Krishnan et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6351153 | Fischer | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6363056 | Beigi et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6377624 | Keesman | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389068 | Smith et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6434606 | Borella et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6456591 | Mishra | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6459811 | Hurst, Jr. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6542467 | Umayabashi | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6587875 | Ogus | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6590936 | Kadono | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6598228 | Hejna | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6600720 | Gvozdanovic | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6665751 | Chen et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6700869 | Falco et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6731605 | Deshpande | May 2004 | B1 |
6741565 | Wicklund | May 2004 | B1 |
6747991 | Hemy et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6959448 | Seo | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6988144 | Luken et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7830958 | Wu et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
20010047423 | Shao et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020010938 | Zhang et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020054578 | Zhang et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020075857 | LeBlanc | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020085587 | Mascolo | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020101880 | Kim | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020114393 | Vleeschouwer | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020126891 | Osberger | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020136298 | Anantharamu et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020140851 | Laksono | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169880 | Loguinov et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020186660 | Bahadiroglu | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030016630 | Vega-Garcia et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030035133 | Berkema et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030067872 | Harrell et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030067877 | Sivakumar et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030095594 | Laksono et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101274 | Yi et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030152032 | Yanagihara et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030189589 | LeBlanc et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040017773 | Piche et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040045030 | Reynolds et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040057381 | Tseng et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040062182 | Pietruszynski et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040062207 | Gross | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040071096 | Na et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040086268 | Radha et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040153951 | Walker et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040170186 | Shao et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040190515 | Nogima et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040204041 | Fillebrown et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040252759 | John Winder et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040255328 | Baldwin et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050007956 | Nilsson et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050041689 | Wu et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055201 | Florencio et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050094622 | Mallila | May 2005 | A1 |
20050105469 | Hao | May 2005 | A1 |
20050152465 | Maltsev et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050169174 | Apostolopoulos et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050195821 | Yun et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050213502 | Convertino et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216950 | MacInnis | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060045020 | Picco et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060077993 | Pereira et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060139201 | Nagata et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060165166 | Chou et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060198392 | Park et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070064722 | Fang | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070263657 | Sugar et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080117915 | Khirman | May 2008 | A1 |
20080259792 | Cimini et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1 026 855 | Jun 2000 | EP |
1 047 223 | Oct 2000 | EP |
1 047 223 | Feb 2001 | EP |
1 179 925 | Feb 2002 | EP |
0 699 368 | Jul 2002 | EP |
1300046 | Apr 2003 | EP |
1 179 925 | Aug 2003 | EP |
1536582 | Jun 2005 | EP |
2 367 219 | Mar 2002 | GB |
6-338918 | Dec 1994 | JP |
10-200484 | Jul 1998 | JP |
11-215480 | Aug 1999 | JP |
2000-308023 | Nov 2000 | JP |
2001-223716 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2002-58002 | Feb 2002 | JP |
2002-94567 | Mar 2002 | JP |
2002-217965 | Aug 2002 | JP |
2003-008487 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2003-32316 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2003-37649 | Feb 2003 | JP |
2003-204342 | Jul 2003 | JP |
WO 0139508 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0203609 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO 0203609 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO 02087276 | Oct 2002 | WO |
WO 02087276 | Oct 2002 | WO |
WO 02101513 | Dec 2002 | WO |
WO 03003630 | Jan 2003 | WO |
WO 03009581 | Jan 2003 | WO |
WO 03032643 | Apr 2003 | WO |
WO 03075021 | Sep 2003 | WO |
WO 03096698 | Nov 2003 | WO |
WO 2004062291 | Jul 2004 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“IEEE Wireless LAN Edition: A compilation based on IEEE Std 802.11—1999 (R2003) and its amendments,” IEEE Standards Information Network, IEEE Press, Copyright 2003. |
Draft Amendment to IEEE Std. 802.11 (1999 Edition), Part 11: MAC and PHY specifications: Medium Access Control (MAC) Quality of Service (QoS) Enhancements, IEEE P802.11e/D8.0, Feb. 2004. |
Peter Van Beek, et al., “Adaptive streaming of high-quality video over wireless LANs,” Visual communications and Image Processing 2004, Proc. of SPIE-IS&T Electronics Imaging, SPIE vol. 5308, 2004, pp. 647-660. |
Jun Xin et al., “Bit allocation for Joint Transcoding of Multiple MPEG Coded Video Streams,” Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Washington, Box 352500, Seattle, WA 98195, 4 pages, date unknown. |
Limin Wang and Andre Vincent, “Bit allocation and Contraints for Joint Coding of Multiple Video Programs,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for video Technology, vol. 9, No. 6, Sep. 1999, pp. 949-959. |
Sergio D. Servetto and Klara Nahrstedt, “Broadcast Quality video over IP,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 3, No. 1, Mar. 2001, pp. 162-173. |
Bernd Girod and Niko Farber, “Chapter 12: Wireless Video,” Compressed video Over Networks, Nov. 14, 1999, Telecommunications laboratory, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Cauerstrasse 7, 91058 Erlangen, Germany, pp. 1-38. |
Amy R. Reibman and Barry G. Haskell, “Constraints on Variable Bit-Rate Video for ATM Networks,” IEEE Transactions on circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 2, No. 4, Dec. 1992, pp. 361-372. |
Arunchandar Vasan and A. Udaya Shankar, “An Empirical Characterization of Instantaneous Throughput in 802.11b WLANs,” Department of computer Science and UMIACS, University of Mayland, college Park, MD 20742, 6 pages. |
Jean-Chrysostome Bolot and Thierry Turletti, “A rate control mechanism for packet video in the Internet,” INRIA, B. P. 93, 06902 Sophia-Antipolis Cedex, France, 8 pages. |
Vern Paxson, “End-to-End Internet Packet Dynamics,” Network Research Group, Lawrence Berkeley National laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, Jun. 23, 1997, 17 pages. |
J-C Bolot and T. Turletti, “Experience with Control Mechanisms for Packet Video in the Internet,” INRIA, 2004, route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France, 12 pages, date unknown. |
Daji Qiao, et al., “Goodput Analysis and Link Adaptation for IEEE 802.1la Wireless LANs,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 1, No. 4, Oct.-Dec. 2002, pp. 278-292. |
Steve Gardner, et al., “HomePlug Standard Brings Networking to the Home,” CSD Dec. 2000: Feature: HomePlug Standard Brings Networking to the Home, http://www.commsdesign.com/main/2000/12/0012feat5.htm, 9 pages. |
Bob O'Hara and Al Petrick, “IEEE 802.11 Handbook: A Designer's Companion,” Published by Standards Information Network, IEEE Press, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 174 pages. Copyright 2001. |
Draft “Test Model 5,” Test Model Editing Committee, ISO-IEC/JTC1/SC29/WG11/N0400, Coded Representation of Picture and Audio Information, Apr. 1993, Telecommunication Standardization Sector Study Group 15, Experts Group for ATM video Coding. |
James C. Chen, Ph.D., Measured Performance of 5-GHz 802.11a Wireless LAN Systems, Aug. 27, 2001, Atheros Communications, Inc., 11 pages. |
Kevin Lai and Mary Baker, “Measuring Bandwidth,” Jul. 15, 1998, 25 pages, laik@cs.stanford,edu and mgbaker@cs.stanford.edu. |
Chi-Yuan Hsu, et al., “Rate Control for Robust Video Transmission over Burst-Error Wireless Channels,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 17, No. 5, May 1999, pp. 1-18. |
Philip A. Chou and Zhourong Miao, “Rate-Distortion Optimized Streaming of Packetized Media,” Submitted to IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, Feb. 2001, pp. 1-20. |
Dmitri Loguinov and Hayder Radha, “Video Receiver Based Real-Time Estimation of channel Capacity,” IEEE ICIP 2002, pp. III-213-III-216. |
Wendell Smith, “Wireless Video White Paper,” ViXS Systems Inc., ViXS Confidential, Jan. 9, 2002, 15 pages. |
James F. Kurose and Keith W. Ross, “Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach Featuring the Internet,” Copyright 2001 by Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. |
M. Kalman, E. Steinbach, and B. Girod, “Adaptive Media Playout for Low-Delay video Streaming Over Error-Prone Channels,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 14, No. 6, Jun. 2004, pp. 841-851. |
R. Ramjee, J. Kurose, D. Towsley, and H. Schulzrinne, “Adaptive Playout Mechanisms for Packetized Audio Applications in Wide-Area Networks,” IEEE Infocom, Toronto, Canada, Jun. 1994, 9 pages. |
M. Kalman, E. Steinbach, and B. Girod, “Adaptive Playout for Real-Time Media Streaming,” Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, ISCAS-2002, Scottsdale, AZ, May 2002, 4 pages. |
International Search Report for PCT/US 06/36433 mailed Apr. 27, 2007. |
M. Kalman, B. Giron and P. Van Beek, “Optimized transcoding rate selection and packet scheduling for transmitting multiple video streams over a shared channel,” IEEE Int. Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2005), Genova, Italy, Sep. 2005, 4 pages. |
K. Stuhlmuller, N. Farber, M. Link and B. Girod, “Analysis of video transmission over lossy channels,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 18, No. 6, Jun. 2000, pp. 1012-1032. |
S. Aramvith, I-M. Pao and M.-T. Sun, “A rate control scheme for video transport over wireless channels,” IEEE Trans. on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 11, No. 5, May 2001. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080069201 A1 | Mar 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60845582 | Sep 2006 | US |