After the emergence of video streaming services, more creative and diverse multimedia content has become available, and now the capability of streaming 360-degree videos will open a new era of multimedia experiences. However, streaming these videos requires larger bandwidth and less latency than what is found in conventional video streaming systems. Rate adaptation of tiled videos and view prediction techniques are used to solve this problem. In this paper, we introduce the Navigation Graph, which models viewing behaviors in the temporal (segments) and the spatial (tiles) domains to perform the rate adaptation of tiled media associated with the view prediction. The Navigation Graph allows clients to perform view prediction more easily by sharing the viewing model in the same way in which media description information is shared in DASH. It is also useful for encoding the trajectory information in the media description file, which could also allow for more efficient navigation of 360-degree videos. This paper provides information about the creation of the Navigation Graph and its uses. The performance evaluation shows that the Navigation Graph based view prediction and rate adaptation outperform other existing tiled media streaming solutions. Navigation Graph is not limited to 360-degree video streaming applications, but it can also be applied to other tiled media streaming systems, such as volumetric media streaming for augmented reality applications.
more »
« less
L3BOU: Low Latency, Low Bandwidth, Optimized Super-Resolution Backhaul for 360-Degree Video Streaming
In recent years, streamed 360° videos have gained popularity within Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) applications. However, they are of much higher resolutions than 2D videos, causing greater bandwidth consumption when streamed. This increased bandwidth utilization puts tremendous strain on the network capacity of the cloud providers streaming these videos. In this paper, we introduce L3BOU, a novel, three-tier distributed software framework that reduces cloud-edge bandwidth in the backhaul network and lowers average end-to-end latency for 360° video streaming applications. The L3BOU framework achieves low bandwidth and low latency by leveraging edge-based, optimized upscaling techniques. L3BOU accomplishes this by utilizing down-scaled MPEG-DASH-encoded 360° video data, known as Ultra Low Resolution (ULR) data, that the L3BOU edge applies distributed super-resolution (SR) techniques on, providing a high quality video to the client. L3BOU is able to reduce the cloud-edge backhaul bandwidth by up to a factor of 24, and the optimized super-resolution multi-processing of ULR data provides a 10-fold latency decrease in super resolution upscaling at the edge.
more »
« less
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10343387
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM)
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 138 to 147
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9.more » « less
-
With the advent of 5G, supporting high-quality game streaming applications on edge devices has become a reality. This is evidenced by a recent surge in cloud gaming applications on mobile devices. In contrast to video streaming applications, interactive games require much more compute power for supporting improved rendering (such as 4K streaming) with the stipulated frames-per second (FPS) constraints. This in turn consumes more battery power in a power-constrained mobile device. Thus, the state-of-the-art gaming applications suffer from lower video quality (QoS) and/or energy efficiency. While there has been a plethora of recent works on optimizing game streaming applications, to our knowledge, there is no study that systematically investigates themore » « less
-
Streaming of live 360-degree video allows users to follow a live event from any view point and has already been deployed on some commercial platforms. However, the current systems can only stream the video at relatively low-quality because the entire 360-degree video is delivered to the users under limited bandwidth. In this paper, we propose to use the idea of "flocking" to improve the performance of both prediction of field of view (FoV) and caching on the edge servers for live 360-degree video streaming. By assigning variable playback latencies to all the users in a streaming session, a "streaming flock" is formed and led by low latency users in the front of the flock. We propose a collaborative FoV prediction scheme where the actual FoV information of users in the front of the flock are utilized to predict of users behind them. We further propose a network condition aware flocking strategy to reduce the video freeze and increase the chance for collaborative FoV prediction on all users. Flocking also facilitates caching as video tiles downloaded by the front users can be cached by an edge server to serve the users at the back of the flock, thereby reducing the traffic in the core network. We propose a latency-FoV based caching strategy and investigate the potential gain of applying transcoding on the edge server. We conduct experiments using real-world user FoV traces and WiGig network bandwidth traces to evaluate the gains of the proposed strategies over benchmarks. Our experimental results demonstrate that the proposed streaming system can roughly double the effective video rate, which is the video rate inside a user's actual FoV, compared to the prediction only based on the user's own past FoV trajectory, while reducing video freeze. Furthermore, edge caching can reduce the traffic in the core network by about 80%, which can be increased to 90% with transcoding on edge server.more » « less
-
more » « less
360-degree video is an emerging form of media that encodes information about all directions surrounding a camera, offering an immersive experience to the users. Unlike traditional 2D videos, visual information in 360-degree videos can be naturally represented as pixels on a sphere. Inspired by state-of-the-art deep-learning-based 2D image super-resolution models and spherical CNNs, in this paper, we design a novel spherical super-resolution (SSR) approach for 360-degree videos. To support viewport-adaptive and bandwidth-efficient transmission/streaming of 360-degree video data and save computation, we propose the Focused Icosahedral Mesh to represent a small area on the sphere. We further construct matrices to rotate spherical content over the entire sphere to the focused mesh area, allowing us to use the focused mesh to represent any area on the sphere. Motivated by the PixelShuffle operation for 2D super-resolution, we also propose a novel VertexShuffle operation on the mesh and an improved version VertexShuffle_V2. We compare our SSR approach with state-of-the-art 2D super-resolution models and show that SSR has the potential to achieve significant benefits when applied to spherical signals.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1109/ISM52913.2021.00031
