User Quality of Experience (QoE) In IEEE 802.11 Wlan: A Comprehensive Review

Abstract— Quality of Experience (QoE) has become a central metric for evaluating user satisfaction in telecommunication networks, yet most research has focused on LTE, GSM, and UMTS, leaving IEEE 802.11 WLANs still the backbone of global connectivity less explored from a QoE perspective. This paper presents a comprehensive review of QoE in WLANs, integrating technical, regulatory, and business viewpoints. We examine QoE models and their interplay with IEEE 802.11 standards (802.11n/ac/ax/be), and analyze application-level QoE for video streaming, VoIP, online gaming, live event broadcasting, AR/VR, and web browsing. The mapping between Quality of Service (QoS) metrics and user-perceived QoE is discussed, along with methodologies for measurement, simulation, and testbed evaluation. Special attention is given to challenges arising in dense, moderate, and home deployments. Building on this analysis, we propose a priority-aware framework that links QoS indicators, subjective user perception, and contextual application importance (e.g., emergency announcements, interactive gaming, or live sports streaming). We introduce mathematical models for embedding QoE into WLAN operations and identify open challenges, including ML-driven prediction, privacy-preserving telemetry, and QoE-aware scheduling. Our study concludes with recommendations to guide future research and industry practices toward user-centric WLAN design.

Quality of Experience (QoE), IEEE 802.11 WLAN, Wi‑Fi 6, Wi‑Fi 7, QoS–QoE Mapping, Machine Learning

1. ITU-T Rec. P.800, “Methods for subjective determination of transmission quality,” 1996. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. ITU-T Rec. G.107, “The E-model: a computational model for use in transmission planning,” 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cisco, “Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018–2023),” White Paper, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. IEEE Std 802.11r-2008, “Amendment 2: Fast Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition,” IEEE, 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Netflix Tech Blog, “VMAF: The Video Multi-Method Assessment Fusion,” 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Laghari, A. A., Laghari, K., Memon, K. A., Soomro, M. B., Laghari, R. A., & Kumar, V. (2020). Quality of experience (QoE) assessment of games on workstations and mobile. Entertainment Computing, 34, 100362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100362. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. C. Keighrey, R. Flynn, S. Murray and N. Murray, "A QoE evaluation of immersive augmented and virtual reality speech & language assessment applications," 2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Erfurt, Germany, 2017, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/QoMEX.2017.7965656. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. ITU-T Rec. P.1203, “Parametric Bitstream-Based Quality Assessment of Video Streaming,” 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. ETSI TS 126 114, “IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS); Multimedia Telephony; Media handling and interaction,” 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. IEEE Std 802.11ax-2021, “IEEE Standard for Information Technology—Telecommunications and information exchange between systems Local and metropolitan area networks—Specific requirements—Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications,” IEEE, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. IEEE Std 802.11be/Draft 5.0, “EHT (Extremely High Throughput),” IEEE, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. ITU-T Rec. P.863, “Perceptual Objective Listening Quality Assessment (POLQA),” 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Skorin-Kapov, Lea, Martín Varela, Tobias Hoßfeld, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2018. “A Survey of Emerging Concepts and Challenges for QoE Management of Multimedia Services.” ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications 14 (2s): Article 29, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3176648. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Agarwal, Trapty, Madhur Grover, Madhusmita Sahu, Varun Ojha, Sunil MP, and M. Saravanan. 2025. “QoE-Based Resource Allocation in Wireless Networks: An Analysis.” In 2025 International Conference on Automation and Computation (AUTOCOM), 690–695. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/AUTOCOM64127.2025.10957456. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. ITU-T Rec. P.911, “Subjective audiovisual quality assessment methods for multimedia applications,” 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Sandvine, “Global Internet Phenomena Report,” 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nichols, Kathleen, and Van Jacobson. 2012. “Controlling Queue Delay.” Communications of the ACM 55 (7): 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/2209249.2209264. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. H. Susanto, B. Liu and B. -G. Kim, "QoE-Based User-Regulated Congestion Control," 2018 IEEE 38th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Vienna, Austria, 2018, pp. 1612-1617, doi: 10.1109/ICDCS.2018.00181. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Wi-Fi Alliance, “WMM® Specification: Wi-Fi Multimedia QoS,” Wi-Fi Alliance, 2016 (and subsequent updates). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. J. Babiarz, K. Chan, and F. Baker, “RFC 4594: Configuration Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes,” IETF, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. ITU-T Rec. G.107, “The E-model: a computational model for use in transmission planning,” 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. ITU-T Rec. P.1203, “Parametric Bitstream-Based Quality Assessment of Video Streaming,” 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Google Web.dev, “Core Web Vitals,” 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Juluri, Parikshit, Venkatesh Tamarapalli, and Deep Medhi. 2016. “Measurement of Quality of Experience of Video-on-Demand Services: A Survey.” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 18 (1): 401–418. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2401424. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Concannon, David, Ronan Flynn, and Niall Murray. 2019. “A Quality of Experience Evaluation System and Research Challenges for Networked Virtual Reality-Based Teleoperation Applications.” In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Workshop on Immersive Mixed and Virtual Environment Systems (MMVE ’19), 10–12. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3304113.3326119. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Netflix, “VMAF: The Video Multi-Method Assessment Fusion,” Netflix Tech Blog, 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. ITU-T Rec. P.910, “Subjective video quality assessment methods,” 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Egger-Lampl, Sebastian, Judith Redi, Tobias Hoßfeld, Matthias Hirth, Sebastian Möller, Babak Naderi, Christian Keimel, and Dietmar Saupe. 2017. “Crowdsourcing Quality of Experience Experiments.” In Evaluation in the Crowd: Crowdsourcing and Human-Centered Experiments, edited by Daniel Archambault, Helen Purchase, and Tobias Hoßfeld, 154–190. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66435-4_7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. T. Henderson et al., “The ns-3 Network Simulator: Modeling 802.11ax,” Workshop on ns-3, ACM, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. P. Casas et al., "Predicting QoE in cellular networks using machine learning and in-smartphone measurements," 2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Erfurt, Germany, 2017, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/QoMEX.2017.7965687. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. L. Skorin-Kapov et al., “Cross-Layer QoE Management in Wireless Networks,” Springer Handbook of QoE, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. E. Khorov, A. Kiryanov, A. Lyakhov and G. Bianchi, "A Tutorial on IEEE 802.11ax High Efficiency WLANs," in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 197-216, Firstquarter 2019, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2018.2871099. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. A. Zubow et al., “Enabling Seamless Handover in Enterprise WLANs: The Role of IEEE 802.11k/v/r,” Computer Networks, vol. 180, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Wi-Fi Alliance, “Wi-Fi EasyMesh™: Multi-AP Wi-Fi for the Home,” White Paper, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Mozaffariahrar, Erfan, Fabrice Theoleyre, and Michael Menth. 2022. "A Survey of Wi-Fi 6: Technologies, Advances, and Challenges" Future Internet 14, no. 10: 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14100293. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Kulin, Merima, Tarik Kazaz, Eli De Poorter, and Ingrid Moerman. 2021. "A Survey on Machine Learning-Based Performance Improvement of Wireless Networks: PHY, MAC and Network Layer" Electronics 10, no. 3: 318. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10030318. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. B. Bellalta, "IEEE 802.11ax: High-efficiency WLANS," in IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 38-46, February 2016, doi: 10.1109/MWC.2016.7422404. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Kairouz, P., McMahan, H. B., Avent, B., Bellet, A., Bennis, M., Bhagoji, A. N., Bonawitz, K., Charles, Z., Cormode, G., Cummings, R., D’Oliveira, R. G. L., Eichner, H., El Rouayheb, S., Evans, D., Gardner, J., Garrett, Z., Gascón, A., Ghazi, B., Gibbons, P. B., … Zhao, S. (2021). Advances and open problems in federated learning. Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning, 14(1–2), 1–210. Now Publishers Inc. https://doi.org/10.1561/2200000083. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. M. Beshley, N. Kryvinska and H. Beshley, "Energy-Efficient QoE-Driven Radio Resource Management Method for 5G and Beyond Networks," in IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 131691-131710, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3228758. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Ruan, Jinjia, and Dongliang Xie. 2021. "A Survey on QoE-Oriented VR Video Streaming: Some Research Issues and Challenges" Electronics 10, no. 17: 2155. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10172155. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Advanced Techniques for Fake News Detection on Twitter Using NLP and AI: A Comprehensive Review
• Review of Self Compacting Geopolymer Concrete Using Slag Sand as Fine Aggregate
• Performance of Local Construction Contractors – Case Study of Registered Contractors in Monrovia, Liberia
• Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Innovation Management in Multinational Organizations
• Modeling of Reaction Between Dissolved Oxygen (DO) And Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) in Degradation River