MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123382753 · doi:10.1109/das.2012.51

Linear Compression of Digital Ink via Point Selection

2012· article· en· W2123382753 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
TopicDigital Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompression ratioCompression (physics)Computer scienceData compressionAlgorithmPiecewise linear functionPoint (geometry)Data compression ratioInkwellLinear approximationPiecewiseSelection (genetic algorithm)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceImage compressionNonlinear systemSpeech recognitionImage processingMaterials scienceMathematical analysisEngineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a method to compress digital ink based on piecewise-linear approximation within a given error threshold. The objective is to achieve good compression ratio with very fast execution. The method is especially effective on types of handwriting that have large portions with nearly linear parts, e.g. hand drawn geometric objects. We compare this method with an enhanced version of our earlier functional approximation method, finding the new technique to give slightly worse compression while performing significantly faster. This suggests the presented method can be used in applications where speed of processing is of higher priority than the compression ratio.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

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 communication0.0000.004
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207