MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1778948012 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.cs/0609123

Optimal Design of Multiple Description Lattice Vector Quantizers

2006· preprint· en· W1778948012 on OpenAlexaff
Xiang Huang, Xiaolin Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLattice (music)Computer scienceTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the design of multiple description lattice vector quantizers (MDLVQ), index assignment plays a critical role. In addition, one also needs to choose the Voronoi cell size of the central lattice v, the sublattice index N, and the number of side descriptions K to minimize the expected MDLVQ distortion, given the total entropy rate of all side descriptions Rt and description loss probability p. In this paper we propose a linear-time MDLVQ index assignment algorithm for any K >= 2 balanced descriptions in any dimensions, based on a new construction of so-called K-fraction lattice. The algorithm is greedy in nature but is proven to be asymptotically (N -> infinity) optimal for any K >= 2 balanced descriptions in any dimensions, given Rt and p. The result is stronger when K = 2: the optimality holds for finite N as well, under some mild conditions. For K > 2, a local adjustment algorithm is developed to augment the greedy index assignment, and conjectured to be optimal for finite N. Our algorithmic study also leads to better understanding of v, N and K in optimal MDLVQ design. For K = 2 we derive, for the first time, a non-asymptotical closed form expression of the expected distortion of optimal MDLVQ in p, Rt, N. For K > 2, we tighten the current asymptotic formula of the expected distortion, relating the optimal values of N and K to p and Rt more precisely.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207