Quality of experience Sample Clauses

Quality of experience. We recognise that the trajectory of each town and urban district is different. There are different types of place, with different functions. We agree to support the enhancement quality of experience for people in each type of town and urban district, informing strategies around the blend of services, amenities and design quality.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Quality of experience. In Section 7 is devoted to the definition and discussion of the Quality of Experience (QoE). QoE is a subjective measure of a user’s experiences with a service. In the con- text of network-aware P2P video distribution networks, QoE evaluation could give the peers and nodes (and, as a consequence, the service providers and network operators) the capability to optimize network resources. All best known approaches to QoE evaluation can be broadly classified into the fol- lowing areas: direct comparison, subjective quality evaluations, loss-distortion models. From our review of those approaches, it appears that this kind of evaluation is a matter of objective and subjective procedures, and all researches indicate that video quality es- timates depend on the specific characteristics of individual videos and that the human factor plays a major role into the overall algorithm calibration. This mandatory leads to the design of models which are to be fine-tuned by means of averaged subjective inputs from human observers assessing some levels of reference quality for the streams. Our main conclusion is that all models that succeeded in removing the model’s dependencies on specific characteristics of the video streams, must be calibrated by a panel of human observers, who are needed to tune a mapping function between network loss-related parameters and acceptable subjective quality: taking the video out of the equation can only be done by bringing the user into it! This calibration effort is to be done only once at bootstrap time, and the mapping seems to be simple in terms of mathematical expression (monotonic in both the re- viewed rPSNR and PSQA approaches), and its sensitivity to the set of human subjects employed to derive it is quite low, since similar results where obtained by different research groups under much different conditions. Thus a safe incremental approach can be taken in our project in the design of a real-time QoE evaluation module.
Sample 1
Quality of experience. Serving public sector organizations has been an integral part of North Highland since the firm’s inception nearly 30 years ago. Over the last five years alone, North Highland delivered more than 1,100 projects for public sector agencies. We are proud of this track record, and have achieved it because of our team’s consistent delivery of the highest quality services. The outstanding quality of our experience, and in turn the value we bring to our public sector clients, is demonstrated through the expertise of our people, our comprehensive set of public sector management consulting service offerings, and perhaps most importantly, our excellent rate of repeat business among clients.
Sample 1

Related to Quality of experience

  • Independent Expert The Parties and the other signatories may, upon written agreement, resort to an independent expert in order to obtain a well-grounded opinion that may lead to the settlement of the dispute or controversy. In case such agreement is signed, arbitration may only be filed after issuance of the expert’s opinion.

  • General Experience The Applicant shall meet the following minimum criteria: -

  • Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-­‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-­‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.

  • Role of Experts 1. On request of a disputing Party, or on its own initiative, the Panel may seek information and technical advice from any person or body that it deems appropriate. The requirements set out in subparagraphs (b) and (c) of Article 178 (Qualifications of Panelists) shall apply to the selection of experts or groups, as appropriate. 2. Before the Panel seeks information or technical advice, appropriate procedures shall be established in consultation with the disputing Parties. The Panel shall: (a) notify the Parties, in advance, of its intention to seek information or technical advice pursuant to paragraph 1, establishing an adequate time period for the Parties to make the comments and observations that they deem convenient; and (b) provide the disputing Parties with a copy of any information or technical advice received pursuant to paragraph 1, and with a period of time for the Parties to submit its comments. 3. When the Panel takes into consideration the information or technical advice sought pursuant to paragraph 1 for the preparation of its report, it shall also take into account any comments or observations submitted by the disputing Parties with respect to such information or technical advice.

  • Teaching Experience Recognized Years of Experience: Uncredited Experience:

  • Exclusion Review Notwithstanding any provision of Title 42 of the United States Code or Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the only issues in a proceeding for exclusion based on a material breach of this CIA shall be:

  • Work Experience Formula hour equivalents will be given on the basis of the following number of students enrolled at fourth week census: 5-14 students enrolled = 1 (one) formula hour 15-24 students enrolled = 2 (two) formula hours 25-34 students enrolled = 3 (three) formula hours

  • Evaluation of Teaching 1. All reports on a teacher shall be in writing.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Previous Experience 31.01 New employees will be classified according to previous comparable experience for the purpose of establishing wage rates. The Co-operative shall not be required to recognize previous experience of new employees who have not worked in the same or similar business in the past two (2) years. Recognized credit for previous experience shall be applicable to qualifying employees commencing with the first working day following completion of said employee's probationary period.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.