Segmentation of Source Symbols for Adaptive Arithmetic Coding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive arithmetic coding is a general technique for coding source symbols of a stochastic process based on an adaptive model. The adaptive model provides measures of the statistics of source symbols and is updated, along with encoding/decoding processes, when more encoded/decoded symbols are fed as samples to the adaptive model. The coding performance depends on how well the adaptive model fits the statistics of source symbols. If the number of source symbols is large and the number of samples is small, the adaptive model may not be able to provide valid measures of the statistics, which results in an inefficient coding performance of the adaptive arithmetic coder. To this end, this paper presents segmentation of source symbols to improve the performance of the adaptive arithmetic coder. Each source symbol is divided into several segments. Each segment is separately coded with an adaptive arithmetic coder. With this division, possible values of each segment are concentrated within a small range. Given the limited number of samples, this concentration leads to a better fit of the adaptive model to the statistics of source symbols and therefore to an improvement of the coding efficiency. The proposed coding algorithm is applied to lossless motion vector coding for video transmission as an application example to show its performance improvement and coding gains.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".