Qo E E2 E5 User Centric Approach Katrien De Moor


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Qo E E2 E5 User Centric Approach Katrien De Moor

  1. 1. 2/2/2009 E2E QoE: User-Centric Approach Closing event E2E QoE @IMEC, Leuven, 29/01/09 Quality of Experience: user-centric approach WP3.1 User settings Definition and conceptualisation Measurement of QoE Environmental scan … WP3.2 Business perspectives Innovation policy Business models … WP3.3 Legal and regulatory issues Challenges in frequency management New technologies and ex ante regulation … 1
  2. 2. 2/2/2009 Presentation overview Evaluating Quality of Experience: bridging the gap between technical parameters and human experience factors Katrien De Moor - Lieven De Marez (IBBT-MICT-UGent) Situating Net Neutrality in a broader context. Towards an analytical framework for the distribution of content on the Internet Leo Van Audenhove - Luciano Morganti (IBBT-SMIT-VUB) The European Response to Network Neutrality in the Context of the Electronic Communications Reform Liyang Hou (IBBT - ICRI - KU Leuven) UGent Evaluating Quality of Experience: bridging the gap between technical parameters and human experience factors Katrien De Moor Lieven De Marez Closing event E2E QoE @IMEC, Leuven, 29/01/09 2
  3. 3. 2/2/2009 Introduction WP3 User settings Context: current ICT environment Changed role of the user Bottom-up approaches, user-driven innovation, … UGent 5 Context: ‘Experience’ as USP Quality of Experience, User Experience, … is omnipresent! UGent 3
  4. 4. 2/2/2009 Focus on two challenges 1. Conceptualisation and definition: Positioning QoE – UX – QoS Which factors are affecting (mobile) QoE? 2. Measuring QoE: Delivering high QoE: how? UGent Relevance? Good QoE users Find ways to enhance user’s QoE with existing applications li ti Anticipate future killer applications UGent http://mobchina.blogspot.com 4
  5. 5. 2/2/2009 Challenge 1: conceptualisation of QoE QoE definition and conceptualisation Lack of clear definition/conceptualisation Literature is scattered Inconsistency and confusion Scope usually too narrow (~QoS, ~Usability) Creation of conceptual model Input from desk research and expert panel 5 main building blocks, many subdimensions g y Emphasis on multidimensional character of QoE Objective and subjective dimensions Expectations Context … UGent Expectations Context Usability QoE DIMENSIONS Quality of Quality of Efficienty Effectiveness 5
  6. 6. 2/2/2009 … not only what the technology QoE is … can do … … but also what people (can) do with the technology… … what people want/expect from it … …in a certain context… in context Challenge 2: Measuring QoE Currently: emphasis on post-development measurements (3), usability and QoS measurements (2) 1 2 Prior-to-development & 3 Prior-to-launch (Post)Development & Prior-to-launch Post development & Post-launch Prototypes, demo’s, ???? …. Expectations? E t ti ? Usability testing User research: QoS optimisation Satisfaction measurements Good experience? UGent 12 6
  7. 7. 2/2/2009 Measuring and enhancing QoE: how? Measuring all dimensions: objective ánd subjective Interdisciplinary and more anticipatory approach QoE-expectations before usage / development Q E t ti b f d l t Actual experience during and after usage QoE measurement as a ‘flow’ “QoE is a journey rather than a destination” j y (Enterprise Management Associates, 2001) Empirical case-studies 4 common scenarios: Video-on-Demand Videoconferencing 3D-Gaming Networked video sensors 7
  8. 8. 2/2/2009 Development of new methodology (MICT-WiCa) Focus on: Relation between technical parameters and human experience factors p WHAT is happening on the network? WHY is the user behaving in a certain way? Pre- during and post-usage First tests: Mobile wineguide Wapedia-application: case-study (N=10) in controlled research setting Results relate network QoS in a mobile setting to perception of the user Illustration of five-step methodology Pre-usage user research Step 1 - detection of relevant user experience dimensions and expectations - multi-method approach Pre-usage translation workshops - find optimal match between ‘user-indicated’ QoE dimensions and Step 2 ‘measurable QoS parameters’ (e.g. Simulation exercises) - social scientists + engineers Monitoring during usage g g g - usage scenarios for test users Step 3 - e.g. case-study: different reception levels + monitoring of ‘signal strength’ - software probe model (cfr. Deryckere, Joseph et al, 2008) 8
  9. 9. 2/2/2009 Illustration of five-step methodology Post-usage questions on device Step 4 - after completion of usage scenario questions on device (general experience, frustration, speed, …) Post-usage Comparison (expectations vs. Step 5 experience) - user experience gaps? Multi-method approach cfr. phase 1 reduction in speed (lower [dBm] general experience drops Illustration of five-step methodology 9
  10. 10. 2/2/2009 What’s next? IBBT GR@SP project Refinement of relevant dimensions and QoE metrics Large-scale QoE-research in real-life contexts / Living Lab Creation of interdisciplinary short- and long-term evaluation tools Combine objective monitoring of various parameters with subjective human experience factors Extend with contextual information (e.g. context-aware context aware experience sampling) … Thank you! Q&A? KatrienR.DeMoor@Ugent.be Lieven.DeMarez@Ugent.be www.mict.be www mict be 10