Using bit recycling to reduce the redundancy in plurally parsable dictionaries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tunstall proposed an efficient algorithm for constructing the optimal dictionary of any particular size to obtain a variable-to-fixed code. More accurately, the algorithm constructs the optimal uniquely parsable dictionary. In fact, Savari showed that, if one allows herself to consider plurally parsable dictionaries, better codes may be constructed. Savari found a class of plurally parsable dictionaries that outperform the Tunstall code for memoryless, highly skewed, binary sources. This work addresses the redundancy in plurally parsable dictionaries and proposes the use of bit recycling as the means to reduce this redundancy, extending the range of random binary sources that may benefit from a plurally parsable dictionary at the same time. We present a theoretical analysis that evaluates the performance of variable-to-fixed codes based on the Tunstall dictionary and ones based on plurally parsable dictionaries, using Savari's coding on the one hand and coding with bit recycling on the other hand.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it