| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:24 pm Post subject: compression type |
 |
|
A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Jim Leonard
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 17, 7:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead.
[/quote]
This is what dictionary-based compression already does, but with a "1-
dimensional geographical location" token (match offset, match
length). If you want to represent the dictionary using 2 or 3
dimensions, that>s up to you but I think you>ll find the extra
housekeeping isn>t worth the cost. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:52 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
[/quote]
in a geometry area say so you can connect-the-dots of words that fit
in pattern, like from one way to the other is the sentence backwards.
so placing say every word in a file into a sphere area for example
where the words apart can make sentences with curves inside the
sphere, the math specificiation of the curves being what is the file
content to say what expands.
then different in idea than redundancy reduction, because patterns in
different order are called the same with a different coordinate map to
say what it is. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jim Leonard
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:08 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 17, 10:52 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
in a geometry area say so you can connect-the-dots of words that fit
in pattern, like from one way to the other is the sentence backwards.
so placing say every word in a file into a sphere area for example
where the words apart can make sentences with curves inside the
sphere, the math specificiation of the curves being what is the file
content to say what expands.
then different in idea than redundancy reduction, because patterns in
different order are called the same with a different coordinate map to
say what it is.
[/quote]
Yes, I know what you were trying to say in the first post. I still
think (read: I>m sure) you>re going to find that the amount of
information necessary to keep track of the vectors will not be nearly
as efficient as established standards. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Phil Carmody
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:07 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
Jim Leonard <MobyGamer@gmail.com> writes:
[quote]On Jul 17, 7:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead.
This is what dictionary-based compression already does, but with a "1-
dimensional geographical location" token (match offset, match
length). If you want to represent the dictionary using 2 or 3
dimensions, that>s up to you but I think you>ll find the extra
housekeeping isn>t worth the cost.
[/quote]
'\n>s in the stream provide the illusion of the 2nd dimension.
Phil
--
Dear aunt, let>s set so double the killer delete select all.
-- Microsoft voice recognition live demonstration |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:08 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 18, 12:08 am, Jim Leonard <MobyGa...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 17, 10:52 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
in a geometry area say so you can connect-the-dots of words that fit
in pattern, like from one way to the other is the sentence backwards.
so placing say every word in a file into a sphere area for example
where the words apart can make sentences with curves inside the
sphere, the math specificiation of the curves being what is the file
content to say what expands.
then different in idea than redundancy reduction, because patterns in
different order are called the same with a different coordinate map to
say what it is.
Yes, I know what you were trying to say in the first post. I still
think (read: I>m sure) you>re going to find that the amount of
information necessary to keep track of the vectors will not be nearly
as efficient as established standards.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
since it>s not reducing redundancy, but instead saying patterns
reordered. like
the whole line
a fine line
whole fine line
would only be stored as "the whole line fine" where you connect the
words in different order to say the token. I would go so far assuming
a proportation that can>t be compared to redundancy reduction with how
that can really turn out to be. and no matter what to say is the same
anyways, if tokens for single words aren>t with a resolution modifier
say to make further of a pattern. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:17 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 18, 5:08 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 18, 12:08 am, Jim Leonard <MobyGa...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jul 17, 10:52 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
in a geometry area say so you can connect-the-dots of words that fit
in pattern, like from one way to the other is the sentence backwards.
so placing say every word in a file into a sphere area for example
where the words apart can make sentences with curves inside the
sphere, the math specificiation of the curves being what is the file
content to say what expands.
then different in idea than redundancy reduction, because patterns in
different order are called the same with a different coordinate map to
say what it is.
Yes, I know what you were trying to say in the first post. I still
think (read: I>m sure) you>re going to find that the amount of
information necessary to keep track of the vectors will not be nearly
as efficient as established standards.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
since it>s not reducing redundancy, but instead saying patterns
reordered. like
the whole line
a fine line
whole fine line
would only be stored as "the whole line fine" where you connect the
words in different order to say the token. I would go so far assuming
a proportation that can>t be compared to redundancy reduction with how
that can really turn out to be. and no matter what to say is the same
anyways, if tokens for single words aren>t with a resolution modifier
say to make further of a pattern.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
forgot a....
mention that I don>t think this has ever been tried. It doesn>t seem
to test the idea of being a difficult algorithm that reaches far.
and over and over again, might as well be what you can try to do for
something compressed this way because it may as well land patterns by
saying patterns until you get what has no patterns in it at all, I see
that being such an easy case.
I bet random doesn>t say much against patterns... the only thing there
ought to be in the highest regard of what can>t be compressed is what
doesn>t have any patterns at all (the way of tokens, file allocations,
and distrance stretches would say different in implementation).
like random isn>t exactly (and could only be exactly) what doesn>t
show any recurring pattern, completely different thinking that
redundancy reduction. that>s no pattern of pattern of pattern of
pattern of pattern so on. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:55 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 18, 5:30 am, Thomas Richter <t...@math.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
[quote]mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
since it>s not reducing redundancy,
Hardly "pattern reordering" is one of the basic compression techniques,
see for example the Lempel-Ziv algorithm.
Greetings,
Thomas
[/quote]
so i mean this....
in a sphere geometry area for example, the words:
"in a while once"
now tokens are curved lines say, beginning in sphere area to draw a
line passing through each word.
so now a line curve as math figure for each token is available for any
way the words can order.
"it>s not once in a while, but often that I come across an idea that
takes once to see right, and a while to see through"
it>s not ^(curve through "once in a while"), but often that I com
across an idea that takes ^(curve at "once") to see right, and ^(curve
through "a while") to see through |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Marco Al
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:56 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
mcjason@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token
[/quote]
I can>t decide whether you are trying to describe a geometrical
equivalent of a HMM or whether your text is being generated by a HMM ...
Marco |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Thomas Richter
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:56 am Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
mcjason@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
since it>s not reducing redundancy,
[/quote]
Hardly "pattern reordering" is one of the basic compression techniques,
see for example the Lempel-Ziv algorithm.
Greetings,
Thomas |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Willem
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:50 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
mcjason@gmail.com wrote:
) Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
) since it>s not reducing redundancy, but instead saying patterns
) reordered. like
Compression *is* reducing redundancy. The two are equivalent.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I>m not paranoid. You all think I>m paranoid, don>t you !
#EOT |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:03 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 18, 12:50 pm, Willem <wil...@stack.nl> wrote:
[quote]mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
) Wouldn>t it be a whole different proportion of compression though
) since it>s not reducing redundancy, but instead saying patterns
) reordered. like
Compression *is* reducing redundancy. The two are equivalent.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I>m not paranoid. You all think I>m paranoid, don>t you !
#EOT
[/quote]
why can>t compression be reducing reorganized patterns?
so saying this once...
"hot dog vendor meal"
in a sphere ok, placed like one word in the middle and other words
around it.
now a token to say "dog meal" is in sphere curve line that connects
the words dog and meal, but misses any other words.
now a small token says "hot dog", "dog vendor", "hot meal", "dog
meal", "meal dog", "hot dog meal",
so that>s a token that is mathematical remark on curve in sphere.
that>s not redundancy reduction, but i don>t see it not being the idea
of compression somehow. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Willem
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:10 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
mcjason@gmail.com wrote:
) On Jul 18, 12:50 pm, Willem <wil...@stack.nl> wrote:
)> Compression *is* reducing redundancy. The two are equivalent.
)
) why can>t compression be reducing reorganized patterns?
Suppose you have a 100 byte file, and you have a compressor that
reduces that file to 500 bytes. That means that you are able to
represent the information in the original file with 500 bytes.
In other words: The original file represents some information with
1000 bytes, but that information is such that it can be represented
in 500 bytes. So, the other 500 bytes in that file must be redundant.
Conclusion: Compression *is* reducing redundancy.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I>m not paranoid. You all think I>m paranoid, don>t you !
#EOT |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
[/quote]
if I>m right the idea should have a different proportion to what
redundancy reduction yields. it>s not being the same basis at all.
a few strings that occur like:
L1/Rule1/Entry1
L2/Rule1/Entry2
L3/Rule4/Entry1
L1/Rule2/Entry2
L2/Rule3/Entry1
has it only so this is kept in geometry area:
L1/ Rule1/ Entry1 L2/ L3/ Rule2/ Rule3/ Rule4/ Entry2
So a token says each line. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: Re: compression type |
|
|
On Jul 19, 4:16 pm, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 17, 8:24 am, mcja...@gmail.com wrote:
A primitive idea maybe?
from what I understand most compression techniques try to use
redundancy elimination as their main score. So take for example repeat
occurances of the same and give token of replica instead. What would
happen say if you placed in a geometric area all of what gives a
token, and said not token but geometric location as what happens to be
it? Pretty much it maybe if the token is always the same size to be
what works right? so what happens if you say in geometric area what
out to be instead of just what repeats itself a sequence of words say
for example that occur in different order what is neighbouring
eachother where you can say in geometric area a plot course that draws
a string pattern different ways as the token, to be crude as any
example words spaced in a sphere, with a curve that intersects the
words that find themself ordered other ways as the token to say.
so you may see this in a file:
the first sentence to see
another sentence like this
a good sentence to run on about
a final sentence to finish
to see another sentence
about a good sentence
but put the word "sentence" in this sphere, and surround all the words
that make each sentence so that all you do to token the whole sentense
is to draw say a curve in the sphere through each word as what you say
is the token, like math that makes the curve and where it starts. but
also see the word "see" and "good" once because they show up in more
than one sentence, find the curve to be at the same place for those
words as the token for those setences.
isn>t this no matter what the same as redundancy reduction done right?
it says at least the same doesn>t it? but has yet better potention to
say nothing worse but better? in idea? since token space is allowed to
be the same for what geometry there can be to say a place? but
extended for the idea of patterns that rearrange?
doesn>t this have a better theory to it altogether with what
rearranged patterns can be as what can be found common enough I
suppose.
if I>m right the idea should have a different proportion to what
redundancy reduction yields. it>s not being the same basis at all.
a few strings that occur like:
L1/Rule1/Entry1
L2/Rule1/Entry2
L3/Rule4/Entry1
L1/Rule2/Entry2
L2/Rule3/Entry1
has it only so this is kept in geometry area:
L1/ Rule1/ Entry1 L2/ L3/ Rule2/ Rule3/ Rule4/ Entry2
So a token says each line.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Can>t this be seen as a different proportion though than anything said
like to work like redundancy reduction? because in geometry area you
find driving instructions to put an ordering together as they fit
together other ways too when the same is stored but another token is
used.
because redundancy reduction is saying less for the same that shows
itself often as how you can say once said what appears more often, but
say token for each time it>s found. so say a pattern another way
though, but think like this for how it works....
so geometry fills with parts of words, or whatever, where say to start
at a place in the middle is to build around how from middle to
somewhere forms a pattern, but not just from middle from otherside too
maybe. like the word coyote in a sphere has around it:
ugly pretty stunning
coyote
den run dance
movie
good bad best
speed
now token for curve start at ugly, go through coyote, and end up at
dance.
another curve start at ugly, end up at den.
another curve start at coyote, go through ugly, end up at movie
now many curves to make up sentences with a small token for each. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
