List Update Algorithms for Data Compression
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
List update algorithms have been widely used as subroutines in compression schemas, most notably as part of Burrows-Wheeler compression. The Burrows-Wheeler transform (BWT), which is the basis of many state-of-the-art general purpose compressors applies a compression algorithm to a permuted version of the original text. List update algorithms are a common choice for this second stage of BWT-based compression. In this paper we perform an experimental comparison of various list update algorithms both as stand alone compression mechanisms and as a second stage of the BWT-based compression. Our experiments showMTF outperforms other list update algorithms in practice after BWT. This is consistent with the intuition that BWT increases locality of reference and the predicted result from the locality of reference model of Angelopoulos et al. [LATIN 2008]. Lastly, we observe that due to an often neglected difference in the cost models, good list update algorithms may be far from optimal for BWT compression and construct an explicit example of this phenomena. This is a fact that had yet to be supported theoretically in the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it