Bibliographic record
Abstract
The entropy bottleneck introduced by Ballé et al. [1] is a common component used in many learned compression models. It encodes a transformed latent representation using a static distribution whose parameters are learned during training. However, the actual distribution of the latent data may vary wildly across different inputs. The static distribution attempts to encompass all possible input distributions, thus fitting none of them particularly well. This unfortunate phenomenon, sometimes known as the amortization gap, results in suboptimal compression. To address this issue, we propose a method that dynamically adapts the encoding distribution to match the latent data distribution for a specific input. First, our model estimates a better encoding distribution for a given input. This distribution is then compressed and transmitted as an additional side-information bitstream. Finally, the decoder reconstructs the encoding distribution and uses it to decompress the corresponding latent data. Our method achieves a Bjøntegaard-Delta (BD)-rate gain of -7.10% on the Kodak test dataset when applied to the standard fully-factorized architecture. Furthermore, considering computational complexity, the transform used by our method is an order of magnitude cheaper in terms of Multiply-Accumulate (MAC) operations compared to related side-information methods such as the scale hyperprior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".