Re: Fixpoint for LZH
From: Ioannis (morpheus_at_olympus.mons)
Date: 07/15/04
- Next message: Michael Varney: "Re: Sarfatti in Dublin GR 17"
- Previous message: smithaa02: "Re: whether economics is zero-sum Re: Properties of VonNeumann games of minimax theorem; proving chessis a draw OS"
- In reply to: hack: "Re: Fixpoint for LZH"
- Next in thread: David Bandel: "Re: Fixpoint for LZH"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:55:42 +0300
hack wrote:
> In article <1089923101.955081@athnrd02.forthnet.gr>,
[snip]
>>>And what is about RLE( 12345) = 12345 or RLE( 4321) = 4321 and so on?
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Luc
>>
>>Yes, that's theoretically correct. Any string of data that does not
>>contain repeating substrings, will be a "fixed point" of RLE.
>
>
> You're forgetting that you need to be able to *decode* the thing, so you
> have to be able to tell a repetition count from an unrepeated value.
>
> Your original example suggested a strict alternation of count and symbol,
> so that RLE(12345) would in fact expand to 1112131415.
I was rather having in mind the insertion of a count only when there is
a repeat. Nevertheless your point still stands, although the
decompression would be undefined for RLE(12345) without additional
sentinels telling RLE how to treat the cells.
> That's ok -- any
> lossless compression method must expand some inputs, and the point of the
> compression is that, in a given application domain, the objects of interest
> have patterns that are mostly compressible.
>
> Once the need for decodability is is taken into account, it becomes a bit
> more difficult to find a realistic example.
Probably agree. I tried to think of a fixed point for a variant of RLE
which inserts a sentinel m prior to the count, but could not come up
with anything. Note that in this case the sentinel has to be outside the
range of the data, if it is to make any sense *as* an indicator for a
coming count. The later conspires highly for the non-existence of a
fixed point, although I cannot see it clearly.
> Michel.
-- I. N. Galidakis http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/jgal/ ------------------------------------------ Eventually, _everything_ is understandable
- Next message: Michael Varney: "Re: Sarfatti in Dublin GR 17"
- Previous message: smithaa02: "Re: whether economics is zero-sum Re: Properties of VonNeumann games of minimax theorem; proving chessis a draw OS"
- In reply to: hack: "Re: Fixpoint for LZH"
- Next in thread: David Bandel: "Re: Fixpoint for LZH"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|