Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. -- Albert Einstein


devel / comp.compression / Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subset

SubjectAuthor
* Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subsetFrederico Guth
`- Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subsetEli the Bearded

1
Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subset

<fa4d39eb-808b-4d45-a3b4-fe7d283dda41n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=111&group=comp.compression#111

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.compression
X-Received: by 2002:a37:f612:: with SMTP id y18mr36678566qkj.436.1621977056286;
Tue, 25 May 2021 14:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:addc:: with SMTP id d28mr48318990ybe.448.1621977055891;
Tue, 25 May 2021 14:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 14:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <36da806e-3612-44e1-9157-c667816de78c@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=189.6.81.232; posting-account=2Cg1wQoAAACsEilJTAtGFd4E7AYMYsa9
NNTP-Posting-Host: 189.6.81.232
References: <36da806e-3612-44e1-9157-c667816de78c@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <fa4d39eb-808b-4d45-a3b4-fe7d283dda41n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subset
From: fredg...@fredguth.com (Frederico Guth)
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 21:10:56 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Frederico Guth - Tue, 25 May 2021 21:10 UTC

I am studying this myself. Here is my take. A Typical subset is a delta-sufficient subset. But not all delta-sufficient subsets are typical. Why? Because the elements of the typical subset have similar probabilities, while the smallest delta-sufficient subset, for example, is not typical (by construction. You chose the most probable elements).

Why to compress with the typical and not with the smallest delta-sufficient subset:
Imagine a very naive compression of a text. You may choose to compress using the smallest delta-sufficient subset of the letters of the alphabet. So, e is the most probable letter and you will keep it. q is the least used letter and it is not in your subset. The problem is that the least used letters are more informative than the most used letters. You can probabily infr a txt without the lttr 'e'. The typical set is the most informative subset of your alphabet.

Fred
On Wednesday, February 25, 2009 at 10:26:20 AM UTC-3, Simba wrote:
> Hi,
> I studied the source coding theorem, chapter 4 of the MacKay's book,
> but I have some perplexities.
> The source coding theorem implies that, for large N, the cardinality
> of the smallest delta-sufficient subset is about 2^(NH). So, in this
> set we have the 2^(NH) most probable outcomes.
> There is also the asymptotic equipartition principle, which implies
> that, for large N, the typical set, whose elements have probability of
> 'about' 2^(-NH), contains almost all the probability. So, the typical
> set has about 2^(NH) elements.
> So, we have that the typical set and the smallest delta-sufficient
> subset for large N have approximately the same cardinality, 2^(NH),
> right?
> But the typical set doesn't contain the most probable outcomes (as for
> the other set), so I imagine it as the smallest delta-sufficient
> subset "shifted" a bit towards the less probable outcomes, where
> "shifted" refers to a picture in which the outcomes are represented as
> points on segment, with probability increasing from left to right: the
> smallest delta-sufficient subset is at the extreme right, while the
> typical set is a bit more centered, right?
> So, the book says that we can (and probably should) define a
> compression algorithm that gives a distinct name of length NH bits to
> each element of the typical set. That's ok, but my question is: why
> the typical set and not the smallest delta-sufficient set? I know that
> it should be equivalent, because both sets contains almost all the
> probability, but why should we choose the typical set?
> Thanks

Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subset

<eli$2105251756@qaz.wtf>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=112&group=comp.compression#112

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.compression
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!panix!qz!not-for-mail
From: *...@eli.users.panix.com (Eli the Bearded)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Typical set vs. smallest delta-sufficient subset
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 21:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Some absurd concept
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <eli$2105251756@qaz.wtf>
References: <36da806e-3612-44e1-9157-c667816de78c@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com> <fa4d39eb-808b-4d45-a3b4-fe7d283dda41n@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix5.panix.com
X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1621979782 9340 166.84.1.5 (25 May 2021 21:56:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 21:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Liz: It's actually happened, the entire Internet is a massive game of Redcode
X-Motto: "Erosion of rights never seems to reverse itself." -- kenny@panix
X-US-Congress: Moronic Fucks.
X-Attribution: EtB
XFrom: is a real address
Encrypted: double rot-13
User-Agent: Vectrex rn 2.1 (beta)
 by: Eli the Bearded - Tue, 25 May 2021 21:56 UTC

In comp.compression, Frederico Guth <fredguth@fredguth.com> wrote:
> I am studying this myself. Here is my take. A Typical subset is a
> delta-sufficient subset. But not all delta-sufficient subsets are
> typical. Why? Because the elements of the typical subset have similar
> probabilities, while the smallest delta-sufficient subset, for example,
> is not typical (by construction. You chose the most probable elements).
....
> On Wednesday, February 25, 2009 at 10:26:20 AM UTC-3, Simba wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I studied the source coding theorem, chapter 4 of the MacKay's book,
>> but I have some perplexities.

Top-posted reply 12 years after the original post.

By construction, the least useful subset of replies are those that are
composed long after an answer is expected.

Elijah
------
need to wait a few more decades to for the smallest possible usefulness

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor