MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102525660 · doi:10.1109/isit.2008.4595134

Improving LZ77 bit recycling using all matches

2008· article· en· W2102525660 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLossless compressionRedundancy (engineering)Computer scienceBit (key)ExploitAlgorithmData compressionMultiplicity (mathematics)MathematicsComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There exist lossless compression techniques, such as LZ77, that have the particularity that some original file may be compressed in more than one way, e.g. by choosing other matches than the closest longest ones only. The existence of multiple encodings per original file causes redundancy, i.e. it tends to make compressed files longer than necessary, on average. Recently, a technique called bit recycling was introduced to help reduce the redundancy caused by the multiplicity of encodings. It has been used to improve LZ77 compression. It exploits the fact that there often exists more than one longest match and it is called longest-match bit recycling. This work presents a more general, and more powerful, bit recycling technique that exploits shorter matches also. We call the technique all-match bit recycling. Our experiments demonstrate that at least 1 bit out of 11 results from the multiplicity of encodings, in LZ77 compression.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207