Download Postscript file
Download Gzip compressed Postscript file
P. Cherriman, T. Keller, and L. Hanzo
Department of Electronics and Computer Science,
University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Tel: +44 703 593125, Fax: +44 703 593045
Email:
lh@ecs.soton.ac.uk
© 1998 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to refuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.
Submitted to IEEE Tr. on CSVT, 1998
A range of video demonstrations supporting this treatise can be found under
http://www-mobile.ecs.soton.ac.uk/peter/robust-h263/robust.html
Key words: H.263-based wireless video communications, OFDM-based video
The video performance of a 155 Mbps wireless asynchronous transfer mode (WATM) proposal and that of a 2 Mbps Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) concept is evaluated for a range of low- to high-quality video application scenarios, various propagation conditions and video bitrates using the H.263 video codec, assisted by a novel packetisation and packet acknowledgement scheme. Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) is invoked over the highly dispersive channels for conveying high-rate video signals. Various binary Bose-Chaudhuri-Hochquenghem (BCH) and turbo codes are investigated comparatively, with the conclusion that due to the high error-resilience of the video packetisation and acknowledgement scheme the increased power of the higher complexity turbo codec does not translate to substantially improved overall system robustness, although the bit error rate and acknowledgement flag error-rate is significantly reduced. The whole range of video resolutions and system parameters are summarised for reasons of space economy in Tables ?, ?, and ?. The required channel signal-to-noise ratio for near-unimpaired video quality is about 16dB for the inherently lower-quality, lower-resolution video frame formats, but slightly higher, about 18 dB for the high-definition formats, where the error-induced subjective video degradations become more objectionable over the highly dispersive worst-case channels used.