Towards Guidelines for Subjective Haptic Quality Assessment: A Case Study on Quality Assessment of Compressed Haptic Signals

Andréas Pastor, P. Callet
{"title":"Towards Guidelines for Subjective Haptic Quality Assessment: A Case Study on Quality Assessment of Compressed Haptic Signals","authors":"Andréas Pastor, P. Callet","doi":"10.1109/ICME55011.2023.00287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Modern systems are multimodal (e.g., video, audio, smell), and haptic feedback provides the user with additional entertainment and sensory immersion. Standard recommendation groups extensively studied and focused on video and audio subjective quality assessment, especially in signal transmission. In that context, subjective quality assessment and Quality of Experience (QoE) of Haptic signals is at its infant age. We propose further analyzing the collected data from a recent subjective quality assessment campaign as part of the MPEG haptic standardization group. In particular, we are addressing the following questions: 1) How the emerging field of haptic signal QoE can benefit from existing efforts of video and audio quality assessment standards? 2) How to detect possible outliers or characterize the rater’s reliability? 3) How does the discriminability of haptic tests increases with the number of raters? Towards this goal, we question if traditional analysis as proposed for audio or video signal are suitable, as well as other state-of-the-art techniques. We also compare the discriminability of the haptics quality assessment tests with other modalities such as audio, video, and immersive content (360° contents). We propose recommendations on the number of raters required to meet the usual discriminability obtained for other perceptual modalities and how to process ratings to remove possible noise and biases. These results could feed future recommendations in standards such as BT500-14 or P.913 but for haptic signals.","PeriodicalId":321830,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME)","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICME55011.2023.00287","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Modern systems are multimodal (e.g., video, audio, smell), and haptic feedback provides the user with additional entertainment and sensory immersion. Standard recommendation groups extensively studied and focused on video and audio subjective quality assessment, especially in signal transmission. In that context, subjective quality assessment and Quality of Experience (QoE) of Haptic signals is at its infant age. We propose further analyzing the collected data from a recent subjective quality assessment campaign as part of the MPEG haptic standardization group. In particular, we are addressing the following questions: 1) How the emerging field of haptic signal QoE can benefit from existing efforts of video and audio quality assessment standards? 2) How to detect possible outliers or characterize the rater’s reliability? 3) How does the discriminability of haptic tests increases with the number of raters? Towards this goal, we question if traditional analysis as proposed for audio or video signal are suitable, as well as other state-of-the-art techniques. We also compare the discriminability of the haptics quality assessment tests with other modalities such as audio, video, and immersive content (360° contents). We propose recommendations on the number of raters required to meet the usual discriminability obtained for other perceptual modalities and how to process ratings to remove possible noise and biases. These results could feed future recommendations in standards such as BT500-14 or P.913 but for haptic signals.
主观触觉质量评价指南:以压缩触觉信号质量评价为例
现代系统是多模态的(例如,视频、音频、气味),触觉反馈为用户提供了额外的娱乐和感官沉浸。标准推荐小组广泛研究和关注视频和音频主观质量评价,特别是在信号传输方面。在这种背景下,触觉信号的主观质量评价和体验质量(QoE)还处于婴儿期。我们建议进一步分析从最近的主观质量评估活动中收集的数据,作为MPEG触觉标准化小组的一部分。我们特别要解决以下问题:1)如何从现有的视频和音频质量评估标准中受益于新兴的触觉信号QoE领域?2)如何检测可能的异常值或描述评分者的可靠性?3)触觉测试的可辨别性如何随评分者数量的增加而增加?为了实现这一目标,我们质疑传统的音频或视频信号分析是否适用,以及其他最先进的技术。我们还比较了触觉质量评估测试与其他模式(如音频、视频和沉浸式内容(360°内容))的可辨别性。我们就满足其他感知模式通常的可判别性所需的评分者数量以及如何处理评分以消除可能的噪声和偏差提出了建议。这些结果可以为BT500-14或P.913等标准提供未来的建议,但仅限于触觉信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信