Қызмет сапасының қанағаттану деңгейі: тұтынушының көзқарасы

Quality of experience (QoE) is a measure of the delight or annoyance of a customer's experiences with a service (e. g., web browsing, phone call, TV broadcast). QoE focuses on the entire service experience; it is a holistic concept, similar to the field of user experience, but with its roots in telecommunication. QoE is an emerging multidisciplinary field based on social psychology, cognitive science, economics, and engineering science, focused on understanding overall human quality requirements.

In 2013, within the context of the COST Action QUALINET, QoE has been defined as: Before, various definitions of QoE had existed in the domain, with the above mentioned definition now finding wide acceptance in the community. QoE has historically emerged from Quality of Service (QoS), which attempts to objectively measure service parameters (such as packet loss rates or average throughput). QoS measurement is most of the time not related to a customer, but to the media or network itself. QoE however is a purely subjective measure from the user’s perspective of the overall quality of the service provided, by capturing people’s aesthetic and hedonic needs. QoE looks at a vendor's or purveyor's offering from the standpoint of the customer or end user, and asks, "What mix of goods, services, and support, do you think will provide you with the perception that the total product is providing you with the experience you desired and/or expected?" It then asks, "Is this what the vendor/purveyor has actually provided?" If not, "What changes need to be made to enhance your total experience?" In short, QoE provides an assessment of human expectations, feelings, perceptions, cognition and satisfaction with respect to a particular product, service or application. QoE is a blueprint of all human subjective and objective quality needs and experiences arising from the interaction of a person with technology and with business entities in a particular context. The following so called "influence factors" have been identified and classified by Reiter et al. :

Wechsung and De Moor identify the following key differences between the fields: So, when designing systems, the expected output, i. e. the expected QoE, is often taken into account – also as a system output metric and optimization goal. To measure this level of QoE, human ratings can be used. The mean opinion score (MOS) is a widely used measure for assessing the quality of media signals. It is a limited form of QoE measurement, relating to a specific media type, in a controlled environment and without explicitly taking into account user expectations. The MOS as an indicator of experienced quality has been used for audio and speech communication, as well as for the assessment of quality of Internet video, television and other multimedia signals, and web browsing. Due to inherent limitations in measuring QoE in a single scalar value, the usefulness of the MOS is often debated. Subjective quality evaluation requires a lot of human resources, establishing it as a time consuming process. Objective evaluation methods can provide quality results faster, but require dedicated computing resources. Since such instrumental video quality algorithms are often developed based on a limited set of subjective data, their QoE prediction accuracy may be low when compared to human ratings. QoE metrics are often measured at the end devices and can conceptually be seen as the remaining quality after the distortion introduced during the preparation of the content and the delivery through the network, until it reaches the decoder at the end device. There are several elements in the media preparation and delivery chain, and some of them may introduce distortion. This causes degradation of the content, and several elements in this chain can be considered as ”QoE relevant“ for the offered services. The causes of degradation are applicable for any multimedia service, that is, not exclusive to video or speech. Typical degradations occur at the encoding system (compression degradation), transport network, access network (e. g., packet loss or packet delay), home network (e. g. WiFi performance) and end device (e. g. decoding performance).

Several QoE centric network management and bandwidth management solutions have been proposed, which aim to improve the QoE delivered to the end users. When managing a network, QoE fairness may be taken into account in order to keep the users sufficiently satisfied (i. e., high QoE) in a fair manner. From a QoE perspective, network resources and multimedia services should be managed in order to guarantee specific QoE levels instead of classical QoS parameters, which are unable to reflect the actual delivered QoE. A pure QoE centric management is challenged by the nature of the Internet itself, as the Internet protocols and architecture were not originally designed to support today's complex and high demanding multimedia services. As an example for an implementation of QoE management, network nodes can become QoE aware by estimating the status of the multimedia service as perceived by the end users. This information can then be used to improve the delivery of the multimedia service over the network and proactively improve the users' QoE. This can be achieved, for example, via traffic shaping. QoE management gives the service provider and network operator the capability to minimize storage and network resources by allocating only the resources that are sufficient to maintain a specific level of user satisfaction. As it may involve limiting resources for some users or services in order to increase the overall network performance and QoE, the practice of QoE management requires that net neutrality regulations are considered.