English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The research domain on the Quality of Experience (QoE) of 2D video streaming has been well established. However, a new video format is emerging and gaining popularity and availability: VR 360-degree video. The processing and transmission of 360-degree videos brings along new challenges such as large bandwidth requirements and the occurrence of different distortions. The viewing experience is also substantially different from 2D video, it offers more interactive freedom on the viewing angle but can also be more demanding and cause cybersickness. The first goal of this article is to complement earlier research by Tran ,  et al. (2017) [39] testing the effects of quality degradation, freezing, and content on the QoE of 360-videos. The second goal is to test the contribution of visual attention as an influence factor in the QoE assessment. Data was gathered through subjective tests where participants watched degraded versions of 360-videos through a Head-Mounted Display with integrated eye-tracking sensors. After each video they answered questions regarding their quality perception, experience, perceptual load, and cybersickness. Our results showed that the participants rated the overall QoE rather low, and the ratings decreased with added degradations and freezing events. Cyber sickness was found not to be an issue. The effects of the manipulations on visual attention were minimal. Attention was mainly directed by content, but also by surprising elements. The addition of eye-tracking metrics did not further explain individual differences in subjective ratings. Nevertheless, it was found that looking at moving objects increased the negative effect of freezing events and made participants less sensitive to quality distortions. More research is needed to conclude whether visual attention is an influence factor on the QoE in 360-video.

Quality of experience of 360 video – subjective and eye-tracking assessment of encoding and freezing distortions