MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016099553 · doi:10.1109/dcc.2012.34

Prospicient Real-Time Coding of Markov Sources over Burst Erasure Channels: Lossless Case

2012· article· en· W2016099553 on OpenAlexaff
Farrokh Etezadi, Ashish Khisti, Mitchell Trott

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErasureComputer scienceAlgorithmMarkov processEncoderSource codeMarkov chainLossy compressionLossless compressionRate–distortion theoryData compressionMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a framework to study fundamental limits of sequential coding of Markov sources under an error propagation constraint. An encoder sequentially compresses a sequence of vector-sources that are spatially i.i.d. but temporally correlated according to a Markov process. The channel erases up to B packets in a single burst, but reveals all other packets to the destination. The destination is required to reproduce all the source-vectors instantaneously and in a loss less manner, except those sequences that occur in a window of length B+W following the start of the erasure burst. We define a rate-recovery function R(B, W), the minimum compression rate that can be achieved in this framework, and develop upper and lower bounds for first-order Markov sources. For the special class of linear diagonally correlated deterministic sources, we propose a new coding technique -- prospicient coding -- that achieves the rate-recovery function. Finally, a lossy extension to the rate-recovery function is also studied for a class of Gaussian sources where the source is temporally and spatially i.i.d. and the decoder aims to recover a collection of past K sources with a quadratic distortion measure. The optimal rate-recovery function is compared with the sub-optimal techniques including forward error correction coding (FEC) and Wyner-Ziv coding, and performance gains are quantified.

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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207