MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953983509 · doi:10.21460/jutei.2019.31.148

ANALISIS ALGORITMA MTF, MTF-1 DAN MTF-2 PADA BURROWS WHEELER COMPRESSION ALGORITHM

2019· article· id· W2953983509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sagara Mahardika Sunaryo, Lukas Chrisantyo, Yuan Lukito

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Terapan Teknologi Informasi · 2019
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Kristen Duta Wacana
KeywordsAlgorithmPhysicsLossless compressionComputer scienceMathematicsData compression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kebutuhan kompresi data teks di era komputasi awan saat ini masih cukup tinggi. Data teks perlu dikompresi sekecil mungkin agar mudah dikirimkan. Burrows Wheeler Compression Algorithm (BWCA) adalah salah satu algoritma kompresi teks jenis block sorting yang bersifat non-proprietary dan cukup populer digunakan. Dalam prosesnya, BWCA menggunakan metode pemrosesan awal yang disebut Global Structure Transformation (GST) untuk menyusun karakter agar lebih baik hasil kompresinya. Penelitian ini membandingkan tiga metode pemrosesan awal Move-to-Front, yaitu MTF, MTF-1 dan MTF-2. Bahan uji kompresi berupa data Alkitab Bahasa Inggris, Indonesia dan Jawa, dan beberapa data yang berasal dari Calgary Corpus. Oleh karena kompresi teks adalah kompresi yang bersifat lossless dan reversibel, maka selain melakukan pengujian untuk pengompresian data, juga dilakukan pengujian untuk pendekompresian data dengan Inverse Burrows Wheeler Transform. Pengujian kompresi dan dekompresi pada data Alkitab maupun Calgary Corpus berhasil dilakukan dan menunjukkan MTF-1 mampu memberikan rasio kompresi yang lebih baik dikarenakan jumlah total tiap bit pada proses Huffman lebih sedikit dibandingkan dua metode lainnya.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Terapan Teknologi InformasiSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207