MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983265049 · doi:10.1109/ita.2010.5454072

On interactive encoding and decoding for distributed lossless coding of individual sequences

2010· article· en· W1983265049 on OpenAlexaff
En‐hui Yang, Jin Meng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecoding methodsEncoderLossless compressionComputer scienceJoint (building)Coding (social sciences)Encoding (memory)Adaptive codingAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceData compressionMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed near lossless coding of individual sequences X and Y is considered, where X and Y are first encoded separately and then sent to a joint decoder. Unlike distributed near lossless coding of correlated random sources, the joint decoder in distributed coding of individual sequences does not help at all. In other words, the minimum numbers of bits to be sent from X and Y respectively to the joint decoder are the same as in two independent, parallel systems where X and Y are encoded separately and decoded separately. In this paper, however, we show that by using interactive encoding and decoding where the joint decoder is allowed to interact with both separate encoders, the minimum number of total bits to be exchanged between the joint decoder and two separate encoders for each and every pair of individual sequences X and Y is the same as in the system where X and Y are jointly encoded and then jointly decoded, while X and Y can be recovered by the joint decoder in a near lossless manner.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207