MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100204172 · doi:10.1109/dcc.2008.101

All-Match LZ77 Bit Recycling

2008· article· en· W2100204172 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDCC · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRedundancy (engineering)Multiplicity (mathematics)ExploitData compressionAlgorithmComputer hardwareTheoretical computer scienceArithmeticMathematicsOperating systemComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. Recently, a technique called bit recycling (BR) was introduced to help reduce the redundancy caused by the multiplicity of encodings. It has been used to improve LZ77 compression, which is especially prone to allow for the existence of numerous different compressed files for some given original file F. The multiplicity of encodings causes redundancy. Instead of trying to eliminate or reduce the multiplicity itself, BR exploits it and extracts a compensation from it. It uses implicit communication that happens when, at some point in the compression process, we have that: 1. the compressor C has more than one option; and 2. the decompressor D is able to recognize that situation. The mere fact that C has the liberty to select one among many options allows it to implicitly send bits to D. The particularity of BR is that it avoids storing as many bits as possible in the compressed file by implicitly sending them instead. Previous work presented a technique that recycles bits based on the existence of multiple longest matches, called longest-match BR (LMBR). This work presents a more general, and more powerful, technique, called all-match BR (AMBR) that exploits shorter matches.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.221 · 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