MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169742131 · doi:10.1109/dcc.1996.488312

Free energy coding

2002· article· en· W2169742131 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInformation Technology Research Centre
KeywordsCode wordMaximizationComputer scienceAlgorithmCode (set theory)Parity-check matrixEnergy (signal processing)Source codeCoding (social sciences)MathematicsMathematical optimizationDecoding methodsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new approach to the problem of optimal compression when a source code produces multiple codewords for a given symbol. It may seem that the most sensible codeword to use in this case is the shortest one. However, in the proposed free energy approach, random codeword selection yields an effective codeword length that can be less than the shortest codeword length. If the random choices are Boltzmann distributed, the effective length is optimal for the given source code. The expectation-maximization parameter estimation algorithms minimize this effective codeword length. We illustrate the performance of free energy coding on a simple problem where a compression factor of two is gained by using the new method.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207