MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132152398 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2000.859671

Applications of wavelet data compression using modified zerotrees in remotely sensed data

2002· article· en· W2132152398 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shen‐En Qian, A. Hollinger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData compressionComputer scienceWaveletWavelet transformCompression (physics)Lookup tableJPEG 2000AlgorithmCompression ratioImaging spectrometerTable (database)Image compressionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRemote sensingSpectrometerImage (mathematics)Image processingData miningGeologyMaterials scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computationally simple and effective wavelet transform based data compression algorithm has been developed at the Canadian Space Agency. It uses modified zerotrees and an optimized multi-level lookup table to improve the performance of an embedded zerotree wavelet algorithm. This new algorithm is either comparable to or surpasses previous algorithms which are much more sophisticated and computationally complex. In this paper, this algorithm was applied to compression of remotely sensed data acquired by the Airborne Visible/Infrared imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) and the Compact Airborne Spectrographic Imager (CASI). In order to evaluate the performance of the algorithm, the compression results obtained by this algorithm were compared with those by the LuraWave, as well as by the JPEG. The experiments show that compression ratios over 32:1 can be achieved with the fidelities greater than 40.0 dB.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.145 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207