MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803808538 · doi:10.1109/tc.2018.2837755

Computation of 2D 8×8 DCT Based on the Loeffler Factorization Using Algebraic Integer Encoding

2018· article· en· W2803808538 on OpenAlexaff
Diego F. G. Coelho, Sushmabhargavi Nimmalapalli, Vassil S. Dimitrov, Renato J. Cintra, Arnaud Tisserand

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Filter Design and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscrete cosine transformComputationInteger (computer science)Algebraic numberMathematicsAlgorithmField-programmable gate arrayBlock (permutation group theory)PixelDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceArithmeticImage (mathematics)Computer hardwareCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a computational method for 2D 8×8 DCT based on algebraic integers. The proposed algorithm is based on the Loeffler 1D DCT algorithm, and it is shown to operate with exact computation—i.e., error-free arithmetic—up to the final reconstruction step (FRS). The proposed algebraic integer architecture maintains error-free computations until an entire block of DCT coefficients having size 8×8 is computed, unlike algorithms in the literature which claim to be error-free but in fact introduce arithmetic errors between the column- and row-wise 1D DCT stages in a 2D DCT operation. Fast algorithms are proposed for the final reconstruction step employing two approaches, namely, the expansion factor and dyadic approximation. A digital architecture is also proposed for a particular FRS algorithm, and is implemented on an FPGA platform for on-chip verification. The FPGA implementation operates at 360 MHz, and is capable of a real-time throughput of$3.6\cdot 10^8$2D DCTs of size 8×8 every second, with corresponding pixel rate of$2.3\cdot 10^{10}$pixels per second. The digital architecture is synthesized using 180 nm CMOS standard cells and shows a chip area of 7.41 mm$^2$. The CMOS design is predicted to operate at 893 MHz clock frequency, at a dynamic power consumption 13.22 mW/MHz$\cdot$V$_{sup}^2$.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.290
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ComputersSame topicDigital Filter Design and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207