MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076178488 · doi:10.5539/mas.v3n2p134

A Novel Method of Image Compression Using Multiwavelets and Set Partitioning Algorithm

2009· article· en· W2076178488 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
U. S. Ragupathy, A. Tamilarasi

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet partitioning in hierarchical treesAlgorithmJPEGImage compressionComputer scienceWaveletQuantization (signal processing)Data compressionWavelet transformDiscrete cosine transformJPEG 2000Artificial intelligenceDiscrete wavelet transformMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)Image processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in wavelet transforms and quantization methods have produced algorithms capable of surpassing the existing image compression standards like the Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) algorithm. The existing compression methods for JPEG standards are using DCT with arithmetic coding and DWT with Huffman coding. The DCT uses a single kernel where as wavelet offers more number of filters depends on the applications. The wavelet based Set Partitioning In Hierarchical Trees (SPIHT) algorithm gives better compression. For best performance in image compression, wavelet transforms require filters that combine a number of desirable properties, such as orthogonality and symmetry, but they cannot simultaneously possess all of these properties. The relatively new field of multiwavelets offer more design options and can combine all desirable transform features. But there are some limitations in using the SPIHT algorithm for multiwavelets coefficients. This paper presents a new method for encoding the multiwavelet decomposed images by defining coefficients suitable for SPIHT algorithm which gives better compression performance over the existing methods in many cases.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207