$\ell_{2}$ Optimized Predictive Image Coding With $\ell_{\infty}$ Bound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many scientific, medical, and defense applications of image/video compression, an [Symbol: see text]∞ error bound is required. However, pure[Symbol: see text]∞-optimized image coding, colloquially known as near-lossless image coding, is prone to structured errors such as contours and speckles if the bit rate is not sufficiently high; moreover, most of the previous [Symbol: see text]∞-based image coding methods suffer from poor rate control. In contrast, the [Symbol: see text]2 error metric aims for average fidelity and hence preserves the subtlety of smooth waveforms better than the ∞ error metric and it offers fine granularity in rate control, but pure [Symbol: see text]2-based image coding methods (e.g., JPEG 2000) cannot bound individual errors as the [Symbol: see text]∞-based methods can. This paper presents a new compression approach to retain the benefits and circumvent the pitfalls of the two error metrics. A common approach of near-lossless image coding is to embed into a DPCM prediction loop a uniform scalar quantizer of residual errors. The said uniform scalar quantizer is replaced, in the proposed new approach, by a set of context-based [Symbol: see text]2-optimized quantizers. The optimization criterion is to minimize a weighted sum of the [Symbol: see text]2 distortion and the entropy while maintaining a strict [Symbol: see text]∞ error bound. The resulting method obtains good rate-distortion performance in both [Symbol: see text]2 and [Symbol: see text]∞ metrics and also increases the rate granularity. Compared with JPEG 2000, the new method not only guarantees lower [Symbol: see text]∞ error for all bit rates, but also it achieves higher PSNR for relatively high bit rates.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".