Talk:Universal code (data compression)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Universal code (data compression) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Rice codes = Rice coding? --Abdull 16:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

symbol of golden ratio

why is gamma used for the golden ratio instead of phi? --WhiteDragon 17:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Fibonacci coding asymptotically optimal or Byte Coding

I think that there is a mistake in this page. as far as I know the Fibonacci coding method is universal yet it is not asymptotically optimal.

How come? Honnza (talk) 13:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If Fibonacci coding is not asymptotically optimal. The same sources say that even all finite higher orders of Fibonacci are also not optimal for the same reason. But BYTE CODING where you code all nibbles in base 15 and use the last nibble as 4 ones for a stop code will at one point always use more bits than a higher order Fibonacci code that use 8 ones for a stop. So therefore the BYTE_CODING is not optimal for the same reason as Fibonacci

http://www.ics.uci.edu/~dan/pubs/DC-Sec3.html

"Fraenkel and Klein prove that the Fibonacci code of order 2 is universal, with c1=2 and c2=3 [Fraenkel and Klein 1985]. It is not asymptotically optimal since c1>1. Fraenkel and Klein also show that Fibonacci codes of higher order compress better than the order 2 code if the source language is large enough (i.e., the number of distinct source messages is large) and the probability distribution is nearly uniform. However, no Fibonacci code is asymptotically optimal." 99.69.170.177 (talk) 00:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Universal code (data compression). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]