On the space complexity of one-pass compression
Travis Gagie

TL;DR
This paper investigates the memory requirements of one-pass compression algorithms, establishing bounds on their space complexity relative to multi-pass algorithms and empirical entropy.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of (f(n, ll))-footprint compressors and proves bounds on their existence based on memory usage and entropy.
Findings
Existence of (f(n, ll))-footprint compressors for certain space bounds.
Non-existence of such compressors below specific space thresholds.
Quantitative bounds relating memory and compression performance.
Abstract
We study how much memory one-pass compression algorithms need to compete with the best multi-pass algorithms. We call a one-pass algorithm an (f (n, \ell))-footprint compressor if, given , and an -ary string , it stores in ((\rule{0ex}{2ex} O (H_\ell (S)) + o (\log n)) |S| + O (n^{\ell + 1} \log n)) bits -- where (H_\ell (S)) is the th-order empirical entropy of -- while using at most (f (n, \ell)) bits of memory. We prove that, for any (\epsilon > 0) and some (f (n, \ell) \in O (n^{\ell + \epsilon} \log n)), there is an (f (n, \ell))-footprint compressor; on the other hand, there is no (f (n, \ell))-footprint compressor for (f (n, \ell) \in o (n^\ell \log n)).
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgorithms and Data Compression · semigroups and automata theory · Cellular Automata and Applications
