On multirate optimality of JPEG2000 code stream
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
Arguably, the most important and defining feature of the JPEG2000 image compression standard is its R-D optimized code stream of multiple progressive layers. This code stream is an interleaving of many scalable code streams of different sample blocks. In this paper, we reexamine the R-D optimality of JPEG2000 scalable code streams under an expected multirate distortion measure (EMRD), which is defined to be the average distortion weighted by a probability distribution of operational rates in a given range, rather than for one or few fixed rates. We prove that the JPEG2000 code stream constructed by embedded block coding of optimal truncation is almost optimal in the EMRD sense for uniform rate distribution function, even if the individual scalable code streams have nonconvex operational R-D curves. We also develop algorithms to optimize the JPEG2000 code stream for exponential and Laplacian rate distribution functions while maintaining compatibility with the JPEG2000 standard. Both of our analytical and experimental results lend strong support to JPEG2000 as a near-optimal scalable image codec in a fairly general setting.
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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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