MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167252182 · doi:10.1109/icc.1995.524439

Fixed-rate entropy-coded vector quantization using linear (zero-one) programming

2002· article· en· W2167252182 on OpenAlexaff
Amir K. Khandani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsLinear programmingCombinatoricsEntropy (arrow of time)Decoding methodsDiscrete mathematicsSimplexAlgorithmMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider two sets of points X, A and their n-fold cartesian products {A}/sup n/, {X}n. A non-negative cost is associated with each element of A. A measure of distance is defined between an element of A and an element of X. It is assumed that the cost and also the distance in the n-fold space has an additive property. The shaped set is composed of a subset of elements of {A}/sup n/ of the least cost. Decoding of an element x/spl isin/{X}/sup n/ is the process of finding the element of the shaped set which has the minimum distance to x. Using the additivity property of cost and distance measures, the decoding problem is formulated as a linear program. Using the generalized upper bounding technique of linear programming in conjunction with some special features of the problem, we present methods to substantially reduce the complexity of the corresponding simplex search. The proposed method is used for the fixed-rate entropy-coded vector quantization of a Gaussian source. For n=128 (space dimensionality) using 8 points per dimension and for a rate of 2.5 bits/dimension, we need about 52 additions, 87 comparisons, 0.2 divisions, and 0.4 multiplications per dimension to achieve SNR=13.31 dB (the bound obtained from the rate-distortion curve is 13.52 dB). This is substantially less complex than the traditional methods based on the dynamic programming.

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 score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207