-
White Paper on Crowdsourced Network and QoE Measurements -- Definitions, Use Cases and Challenges
Authors:
Tobias Hoßfeld,
Stefan Wunderer,
André Beyer,
Andrew Hall,
Anika Schwind,
Christian Gassner,
Fabrice Guillemin,
Florian Wamser,
Krzysztof Wascinski,
Matthias Hirth,
Michael Seufert,
Pedro Casas,
Phuoc Tran-Gia,
Werner Robitza,
Wojciech Wascinski,
Zied Ben Houidi
Abstract:
This white paper is the outcome of the Würzburg seminar on "Crowdsourced Network and QoE Measurements" which took place from 25-26 September 2019 in Würzburg, Germany. International experts were invited from industry and academia. They are well known in their communities, having different backgrounds in crowdsourcing, mobile networks, network measurements, network performance, Quality of Service (…
▽ More
This white paper is the outcome of the Würzburg seminar on "Crowdsourced Network and QoE Measurements" which took place from 25-26 September 2019 in Würzburg, Germany. International experts were invited from industry and academia. They are well known in their communities, having different backgrounds in crowdsourcing, mobile networks, network measurements, network performance, Quality of Service (QoS), and Quality of Experience (QoE). The discussions in the seminar focused on how crowdsourcing will support vendors, operators, and regulators to determine the Quality of Experience in new 5G networks that enable various new applications and network architectures. As a result of the discussions, the need for a white paper manifested, with the goal of providing a scientific discussion of the terms "crowdsourced network measurements" and "crowdsourced QoE measurements", describing relevant use cases for such crowdsourced data, and its underlying challenges. During the seminar, those main topics were identified, intensively discussed in break-out groups, and brought back into the plenum several times. The outcome of the seminar is this white paper at hand which is - to our knowledge - the first one covering the topic of crowdsourced network and QoE measurements.
△ Less
Submitted 25 May, 2020;
originally announced June 2020.
-
Impact of the Number of Votes on the Reliability and Validity of Subjective Speech Quality Assessment in the Crowdsourcing Approach
Authors:
Babak Naderi,
Tobias Hossfeld,
Matthias Hirth,
Florian Metzger,
Sebastian Möller,
Rafael Zequeira Jiménez
Abstract:
The subjective quality of transmitted speech is traditionally assessed in a controlled laboratory environment according to ITU-T Rec. P.800. In turn, with crowdsourcing, crowdworkers participate in a subjective online experiment using their own listening device, and in their own working environment. Despite such less controllable conditions, the increased use of crowdsourcing micro-task platforms…
▽ More
The subjective quality of transmitted speech is traditionally assessed in a controlled laboratory environment according to ITU-T Rec. P.800. In turn, with crowdsourcing, crowdworkers participate in a subjective online experiment using their own listening device, and in their own working environment. Despite such less controllable conditions, the increased use of crowdsourcing micro-task platforms for quality assessment tasks has pushed a high demand for standardized methods, resulting in ITU-T Rec. P.808. This work investigates the impact of the number of judgments on the reliability and the validity of quality ratings collected through crowdsourcing-based speech quality assessments, as an input to ITU-T Rec. P.808 . Three crowdsourcing experiments on different platforms were conducted to evaluate the overall quality of three different speech datasets, using the Absolute Category Rating procedure. For each dataset, the Mean Opinion Scores (MOS) are calculated using differing numbers of crowdsourcing judgements. Then the results are compared to MOS values collected in a standard laboratory experiment, to assess the validity of crowdsourcing approach as a function of number of votes. In addition, the reliability of the average scores is analyzed by checking inter-rater reliability, gain in certainty, and the confidence of the MOS. The results provide a suggestion on the required number of votes per condition, and allow to model its impact on validity and reliability.
△ Less
Submitted 25 March, 2020;
originally announced March 2020.
-
A Survey of Crowdsourcing in Medical Image Analysis
Authors:
Silas Ørting,
Andrew Doyle,
Arno van Hilten,
Matthias Hirth,
Oana Inel,
Christopher R. Madan,
Panagiotis Mavridis,
Helen Spiers,
Veronika Cheplygina
Abstract:
Rapid advances in image processing capabilities have been seen across many domains, fostered by the application of machine learning algorithms to "big-data". However, within the realm of medical image analysis, advances have been curtailed, in part, due to the limited availability of large-scale, well-annotated datasets. One of the main reasons for this is the high cost often associated with produ…
▽ More
Rapid advances in image processing capabilities have been seen across many domains, fostered by the application of machine learning algorithms to "big-data". However, within the realm of medical image analysis, advances have been curtailed, in part, due to the limited availability of large-scale, well-annotated datasets. One of the main reasons for this is the high cost often associated with producing large amounts of high-quality meta-data. Recently, there has been growing interest in the application of crowdsourcing for this purpose; a technique that has proven effective for creating large-scale datasets across a range of disciplines, from computer vision to astrophysics. Despite the growing popularity of this approach, there has not yet been a comprehensive literature review to provide guidance to researchers considering using crowdsourcing methodologies in their own medical imaging analysis. In this survey, we review studies applying crowdsourcing to the analysis of medical images, published prior to July 2018. We identify common approaches, challenges and considerations, providing guidance of utility to researchers adopting this approach. Finally, we discuss future opportunities for development within this emerging domain.
△ Less
Submitted 4 September, 2019; v1 submitted 25 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
