MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113737171 · doi:10.1109/icip.1998.723520

Adaptive image compression based on segmentation and block classification

2002· article· en· W2113737171 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud R. El-Sakka, Mohamed S. Kamel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage compressionJPEGArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionData compressionCompression ratioTexture compressionData compression ratioBlock (permutation group theory)JPEG 2000Compression (physics)Standard test imageImage segmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Human visual system modelImage (mathematics)Image processingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new digital image compression scheme which exploits one of the human visual system properties-namely that of, recognizing images by their regions-to achieve high compression ratios. It also assigns a variable bit-count to each image region that is proportional to the amount of information the region conveys to the viewer. The new scheme copes with image non-stationarity by adaptively segmenting the image into variable-block sized regions, and classifying them into statistically and perceptually different classes. Then, blocks in each class are separately encoded. Based on extensive testing, the performance of the new scheme surpasses the performance of the JPEG standard and goes beyond its compression limits. In most test cases, the new compression scheme results in a maximum compression ratio that is at least twice of JPEG, while exhibiting lower objective and subjective image degradations. Moreover, the performance of the new block-based compression is comparable to the performance of the state-of-the-art wavelet-based compression technique and provides a good alternative when adaptability to image content is of interest.

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)0.000
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 score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207