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. == Definition and concepts == In 2013, within the context of the COST Action QUALINET, QoE has been defined as:The degree of delight or annoyance of the user of an application or service. It results from the fulfillment of his or her expectations with respect to the utility and / or enjoyment of the application or service in the light of the user’s personality and current state.This definition has been adopted in 2016 by the International Telecommunication Union in Recommendation ITU-T P.10/G.100. 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. Although QoE is perceived as subjective, it is an important measure that counts for customers of a service. Being able to measure it in a controlled manner helps operators understand what may be wrong with their services and how to improve them. == QoE factors == QoE aims at taking into consideration every factor that contributes to a user's perceived quality of a system or service. This includes system, human and contextual factors. The following so-called "influence factors" have been identified and classified by Reiter et al.: Human Influence Factors Low-level processing (visual and auditory acuity, gender, age, mood, …) Higher-level processing (cognitive processes, socio-cultural and economic background, expectations, needs and goals, other personality traits…) System Influence Factors Content-related Media-related (encoding, resolution, sample rate, …) Network-related (bandwidth, delay, jitter, …) Device-related (screen resolution, display size, …) Context Influence Factors Physical context (location and space) Temporal context (time of day, frequency of use, …) Social context (inter-personal relations during experience) Economic context Task context (multitasking, interruptions, task type) Technical and information context (relationship between systems) Studies in the field of QoE have typically focused on system factors, primarily due to its origin in the QoS and network engineering domains. Through the use of dedicated test laboratories, the context is often sought to be kept constant. == QoE versus User Experience == QoE is strongly related to but different from the field of User Experience (UX), which also focuses on users' experiences with services. Historically, QoE has emerged from telecommunication research, while UX has its roots in Human–Computer Interaction. Both fields can be considered multi-disciplinary. In contrast to UX, the goal of improving QoE for users was more strongly motivated by economic needs. Wechsung and De Moor identify the following key differences between the fields: == QoE measurement == As a measure of the end-to-end performance at the service level from the user's perspective, QoE is an important metric for the design of systems and engineering processes. This is particularly relevant for video services because – due to their high traffic demands –, bad network performance may highly affect the user's experience. 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). == QoE management == 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.
Fully probabilistic design
Decision making (DM) can be seen as a purposeful choice of action sequences. It also covers control, a purposeful choice of input sequences. As a rule, it runs under randomness, uncertainty and incomplete knowledge. A range of prescriptive theories have been proposed how to make optimal decisions under these conditions. They optimise sequence of decision rules, mappings of the available knowledge on possible actions. This sequence is called strategy or policy. Among various theories, Bayesian DM is broadly accepted axiomatically based theory that solves the design of optimal decision strategy. It describes random, uncertain or incompletely known quantities as random variables, i.e. by their joint probability expressing belief in their possible values. The strategy that minimises expected loss (or equivalently maximises expected reward) expressing decision-maker's goals is then taken as the optimal strategy. While the probabilistic description of beliefs is uniquely and deductively driven by rules for joint probabilities, the composition and decomposition of the loss function have no such universally applicable formal machinery. Fully probabilistic design (of decision strategies or control, FPD) removes the mentioned drawback and expresses also the DM goals of by the "ideal" probability, which assigns high (small) values to desired (undesired) behaviours of the closed DM loop formed by the influenced world part and by the used strategy. FPD has axiomatic basis and has Bayesian DM as its restricted subpart. FPD has a range of theoretical consequences , and, importantly, has been successfully used to quite diverse application domains.
Cipher device
A cipher device was a term used by the US military in the first half of the 20th century to describe a manually operated cipher equipment that converted the plaintext into ciphertext or vice versa. A similar term, cipher machine, was used to describe the cipher equipment that required external power for operation. Cipher box or crypto box is a physical cryptographic device used to encrypt and decrypt messages between plaintext (unencrypted) and ciphertext (encrypted or secret) forms. The ciphertext is suitable for transmission over a channel, such as radio, that might be observed by an adversary the communicating parties wish to conceal the plaintext from.
Conjugate coding
Conjugate coding is a cryptographic tool, introduced by Stephen Wiesner in the late 1960s. It is part of the two applications Wiesner described for quantum coding, along with a method for creating fraud-proof banking notes. The application that the concept was based on was a method of transmitting multiple messages in such a way that reading one destroys the others. This is called quantum multiplexing and it uses photons polarized in conjugate bases as "qubits" to pass information. Conjugate coding also is a simple extension of a random number generator. At the behest of Charles Bennett, Wiesner published the manuscript explaining the basic idea of conjugate coding with a number of examples but it was not embraced because it was significantly ahead of its time. Because its publication has been rejected, it was developed to the world of public-key cryptography in the 1980s as oblivious transfer, first by Michael Rabin and then by Shimon Even. It is used in the field of quantum computing. The initial concept of quantum cryptography developed by Bennett and Gilles Brassard was also based on this concept.
Data refuge
Data Refuge is a public and collaborative project designed to address concerns about federal climate and environmental data that is in danger of being lost. In particular, the initiative addresses five main concerns: What are the best ways to safeguard data? How do federal agencies play a crucial role in collecting, managing, and distributing data? How do government priorities impact data's accessibility? Which projects and research fields depend on federal data? Which data sets are of value to research and local communities, and why? Data Refuge began as a grassroots organization in opposition to government data on climate change and the environment not being archived systemically. Data Refuge's main goal is to collect and allocate data in multiple safe locations to create a sustainable way of archiving old and new data. Data Refuge was initiated in 2016 to protect federal climate and environmental data that is vulnerable under an administration that denies climate change. The system aims to make public research-quality copies of federal climate and environmental data. Data Refuge is supported by the National Geographic Foundation, private donors, Libraries+ Network, Preserving Electronic Governance Initiative (PEGI), the Union of Concerned Scientists (USC), and the Penn Program in Environmental Humanities (PPEH). == Types of data == Data Refuge collects public federal data on the climate and environment in the form of satellite imagery, PDFs, and stories. The data are stored in multiple trusted locations as they are less vulnerable if in only one location, and to ensure accessibility for researchers. Through the Data Rescue events, Data Refuge has accumulated 4 terabytes of data, 30,000 URLs, and 800 participants. === Storytelling === Data Refuge collects stories on vulnerable federal climate and environmental data through: surveys, oral history, photo essays, maps, video shorts, and animations. The stories are archived in a public bank that showcase how federal environmental data support health and safety in communities. Data Stories are collected at Data Rescue events, which are partnered with universities, city and town halls, and advocacy groups. Data stories are collected and used to emphasize the importance of Data Refuge, in how the data on climate change and the environment are being used by people in the United States and across the world for meaningful practices.
Stevens Award
The Stevens Award is a software engineering lecture award given by the Reengineering Forum, an industry association. The international Stevens Award was created to recognize outstanding contributions to the literature or practice of methods for software and systems development. The first award was given in 1995. The presentations focus on the current state of software methods and their direction for the future. This award lecture is named in memory of Wayne Stevens (1944-1993), a consultant, author, pioneer, and advocate of the practical application of software methods and tools. The Stevens Award and lecture is managed by the Reengineering Forum. The award was founded by International Workshop on Computer Aided Software Engineering (IWCASE), an international workshop association of users and developers of computer-aided software engineering (CASE) technology, which merged into The Reengineering Forum. Wayne Stevens was a charter member of the IWCASE executive board. == Recipients == 1995: Tony Wasserman 1996: David Harel 1997: Michael Jackson 1998: Thomas McCabe 1999: Tom DeMarco 2000: Gerald Weinberg 2001: Peter Chen 2002: Cordell Green 2003: Manny Lehman 2004: François Bodart 2005: Mary Shaw, Jim Highsmith 2006: Grady Booch 2007: Nicholas Zvegintzov 2008: Harry Sneed 2009: Larry Constantine 2010: Peter Aiken 2011: Jared Spool, Barry Boehm 2012: Philip Newcomb 2013: Jean-Luc Hainaut 2014: François Coallier 2015: Pierre Bourque
Chaotic cryptology
Chaotic cryptology is the application of mathematical chaos theory to the practice of cryptography, the study or techniques used to privately and securely transmit information with the presence of a third-party or adversary. Since first being investigated by Robert Matthews in 1989, the use of chaos in cryptography has attracted much interest. However, long-standing concerns about its security and implementation speed continue to limit its implementation. Chaotic cryptology consists of two opposite processes: Chaotic cryptography and Chaotic cryptanalysis. Cryptography refers to encrypting information for secure transmission, whereas cryptanalysis refers to decrypting and deciphering encoded encrypted messages. In order to use chaos theory efficiently in cryptography, the chaotic maps are implemented such that the entropy generated by the map can produce required Confusion and diffusion. Properties in chaotic systems and cryptographic primitives share unique characteristics that allow for the chaotic systems to be applied to cryptography. If chaotic parameters, as well as cryptographic keys, can be mapped symmetrically or mapped to produce acceptable and functional outputs, it will make it next to impossible for an adversary to find the outputs without any knowledge of the initial values. Since chaotic maps in a real life scenario require a set of numbers that are limited, they may, in fact, have no real purpose in a cryptosystem if the chaotic behavior can be predicted. One of the most important issues for any cryptographic primitive is the security of the system. However, in numerous cases, chaos-based cryptography algorithms are proved insecure. The main issue in many of the cryptanalyzed algorithms is the inadequacy of the chaotic maps implemented in the system. == Types == Chaos-based cryptography has been divided into two major groups: Symmetric chaos cryptography, where the same secret key is used by sender and receiver. Asymmetric chaos cryptography, where one key of the cryptosystem is public. Some of the few proposed systems have been broken. The majority of chaos-based cryptographic algorithms are symmetric. Many use discrete chaotic maps in their process. == Applications == === Image encryption === Bourbakis and Alexopoulos in 1991 proposed supposedly the earliest fully intended digital image encryption scheme which was based on SCAN language. Later on, with the emergence of chaos-based cryptography hundreds of new image encryption algorithms, all with the aim of improving the security of digital images were proposed. However, there were three main aspects of the design of an image encryption that was usually modified in different algorithms (chaotic map, application of the map and structure of algorithm). The initial and perhaps most crucial point was the chaotic map applied in the design of the algorithms. The speed of the cryptosystem is always an important parameter in the evaluation of the efficiency of a cryptography algorithm, therefore, the designers were initially interested in using simple chaotic maps such as tent map, and the logistic map. However, in 2006 and 2007, the new image encryption algorithms based on more sophisticated chaotic maps proved that application of chaotic map with higher dimension could improve the quality and security of the cryptosystems. === Hash function === Chaotic behavior can generate hash functions, such as applying the Chirikov/Julia 3D trajectory translation into a SHA-512 hash. === Random number generation === The unpredictable behavior of the chaotic maps can be used in the generation of random numbers. Some of the earliest chaos-based random number generators tried to directly generate random numbers from the logistic map. Many more recent works did so using the numerical solutions of hyperchaotic systems of differential equations, either at the integer-order, or the fractional-order.