MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031217404 · doi:10.1587/transfun.2019eap1063

Compression by Substring Enumeration Using Sorted Contingency Tables

2020· article· en· W3031217404 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics Communications and Computer Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstringLexicographical orderUpper and lower boundsEnumerationAlgorithmMathematicsEncoding (memory)Computer scienceCombinatoricsData structureArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes two variants of improved Compression by Substring Enumeration (CSE) with a finite alphabet. In previous studies on CSE, an encoder utilizes inequalities which evaluate the number of occurrences of a substring or a minimal forbidden word (MFW) to be encoded. The inequalities are derived from a contingency table including the number of occurrences of a substring or an MFW. Moreover, codeword length of a substring and an MFW grows with the difference between the upper and lower bounds deduced from the inequalities, however the lower bound is not tight. Therefore, we derive a new tight lower bound based on the contingency table and consequently propose a new CSE algorithm using the new inequality. We also propose a new encoding order of substrings and MFWs based on a sorted contingency table such that both its row and column marginal total are sorted in descending order instead of a lexicographical order used in previous studies. We then propose a new CSE algorithm which is the first proposed CSE algorithm using the new encoding order. Experimental results show that compression ratios of all files of the Calgary corpus in the proposed algorithms are better than those of a previous study on CSE with a finite alphabet. Moreover, compression ratios under the second proposed CSE get better than or equal to that under a well-known compressor for 11 files amongst 14 files in the corpus.

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 score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.238 · 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