Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Rate-Distortion-Perception Trade-off with Strong Realism Constraints: Role of Side Information and Common Randomness

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Perfect-realism compression with side information has a complete rate-randomness-distortion characterization.

desk verdict First full characterization of the RDP tradeoff with side info under strong realism; the Gaussian converse is the real news, and the proofs hold up on inspection. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.14825 v1 pith:3DSB3HSV submitted 2025-07-20 cs.IT math.IT

Yassine Hamdi , Aaron B. Wagner , Deniz Gündüz This is my paper
classification cs.ITmath.IT MSC 94A3494A1594A17
keywords rate-distortion-perceptiontrade-offstrongrealismperfectcommonrandomnesssideinformationlossysourcecodingsoftcoveringGaussian
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper studies lossy compression of a memoryless source when a correlated side-information sequence is available, under a strong realism constraint: the reconstructed sequence must be statistically indistinguishable from the original, either marginally or jointly with the side information. It aims to determine, for each distortion level, the minimum compression rate and the minimum rate of common randomness shared by encoder and decoder. The main result is a single-letter characterization of the achievable (rate, common-randomness, distortion) region when side information is available at both terminals and the realism constraint is on the marginal distribution of the output. A companion result shows that near-perfect realism costs nothing asymptotically: any code whose output is nearly indistinguishable from the source can be upgraded to a code whose output is exactly indistinguishable, under a mild uniform-integrability condition. The paper also solves the quadratic-Gaussian case explicitly, showing when decoder-only side information costs the same as encoder-plus-decoder side information.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the single-letter region $S_{E-D}^{(m)}$: distributions on $(X,Z,V,Y)$ with $(X,Z)$ matching the source, $Y$ matching the source marginal, and the Markov chain $X - (Z,V) - Y$, whose rate inequalities are evaluated in mutual information. The proof machinery has three parts: a soft-covering lemma with side information, a concentration result showing that random codebooks indexed by side-information sequences make the output nearly indistinguishable from the target distribution; an identity rewriting the rate sum as $I_p(Y;V,Z) - H_p(Z)$, which displays the effective codebook rate $R + R_c + H(Z)$; and a coupling argument under uniform integrability that upgrades near-perfect to perfect realism without changing rates or distortion.

What would settle it

Construct a source and distortion pair that is not uniformly integrable but has a finite rate-distortion function (the paper supplies such a pair) and check whether near-perfect and perfect realism give the same asymptotic region under marginal realism. If a gap appears, the equivalence theorem, and with it the main characterization, fails outside the uniform-integrability assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is Theorem 8: for a Polish source alphabet, a finite side-information alphabet, and a uniformly integrable distortion, the closure of the set of triplets $(R, R_c, \Delta)$ achievable with perfect or near-perfect marginal realism under encoder–decoder side information equals the closure of the single-letter region $S_{E-D}^{(m)}$, defined by $R \geq I_p(X;V|Z)$, $R + R_c \geq I_p(Y;V|Z) - H_p(Z|Y)$, and $\Delta \geq E_p[d(X,Y)]$, over distributions satisfying $(X,Z) \sim p_{X,Z}$, $p_Y = p_X$, and the Markov chain $X - (Z,V) - Y$. The extra entropy term $-H_p(Z|Y)$ is what lets the side information double as a source of common randomness: when $Z$ is independent of $X$, it contributes exactly $H(Z)$ to the common-randomness budget. For joint realism, where $(Y^n,Z^n)$ must match $(X^n,Z^n)$, the same machinery yields a region with no entropy term, meaning the side information no longer acts as common randomness. The paper further shows that in the quadratic-Gaussian case with enough common randomness, decoder-only side information achieves the same rate-distortion trade-off as encoder–decoder side information, and that this equivalence fails when common randomness is absent.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is uniform integrability of the distortion–source pair $(d, p_X)$: roughly, events causing very large distortion must have vanishing total probability. The paper proves this fails for some heavy-tailed sources that still have finite rate-distortion functions, and if it fails the upgrade from near-perfect to perfect realism and the achievability proofs no longer go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With encoder–decoder side information and marginal realism, the side information contributes $H(Z|Y)$ bits of common randomness in addition to its rate-reduction role, so common-randomness budgets can be smaller than they would be without side information.
  • Under joint realism the side information provides no common randomness; the achievable region matches the no-side-information region with every mutual information conditioned on $Z$.
  • Near-perfect and perfect realism are asymptotically equivalent for uniformly integrable distortion–source pairs, so a critic cannot exploit the difference at large blocklengths.
  • For a standard Normal source with MSE distortion, the minimal rate for a target distortion and common-randomness rate is explicit, and with unbounded common randomness it converges to the known distribution-preserving rate $\frac{1}{2}\log\frac{1}{\Delta(1-\Delta/4)}$.
  • In the jointly Gaussian case with sufficient common randomness, decoder-only side information achieves the same rate-distortion trade-off as encoder–decoder side information, matching classical side-information coding; without common randomness this equivalence fails.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the characterization extends to non-uniformly-integrable pairs, the Gaussian and heavy-tailed examples suggest the entropy term $H(Z|Y)$ may still be the right correction, but the achievable scheme would need a different argument in the tail.
  • The open gap for decoder-only side information under marginal realism suggests that the true region there depends on how much of $Z$ can be converted into common randomness; a common-information decomposition of $(X,Z)$ is the natural next object to try.
  • For learned video codecs, the paper's entropy term quantifies a previously implicit cost: using previously-compressed frames as side information may create a hidden common-randomness requirement that a rate-distortion-optimized encoder must budget for.
  • A testable extension would be to measure, for a fixed finite common-randomness rate, whether the rate-distortion curve of a neural codec with a strong perceptual loss matches the paper's Gaussian formula; the $R_c=0$ case in particular gives a definite quantitative prediction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the rate-distortion-perception trade-off for memoryless sources with side information under strong perfect and near-perfect realism constraints, with emphasis on the role of limited common randomness. The main results are: Theorem 8, a single-letter closure characterization for E-D codes under marginal realism when the side-information alphabet is finite; Theorem 14, an inner bound for D-codes under marginal realism; Theorems 15 and 16, optimality results in two special cases for D-codes; Theorem 17, a closure characterization for E-D codes under joint realism; Theorem 18, a closure characterization for D-codes under joint realism; and Propositions 19 and 20, explicit Gaussian solutions. The proofs use soft-covering lemmas with side information, quantized converses, and a uniform-integrability based equivalence between near-perfect and perfect realism (Theorem 7).

Significance. If correct, the results are significant. Theorem 8 gives the first general-alphabet characterization of the three-way trade-off between rate, common-randomness rate, and distortion under strong marginal realism with side information at both terminals, and the Gaussian results provide concrete, falsifiable formulas. The paper is also careful about its hypotheses: the uniform-integrability assumption is stated explicitly, shown to hold for finite alphabets and for MSE with finite fourth moment, and demonstrated to be non-vacuous by the heavy-tailed counterexample in Appendix C-D. I found the main proof architecture internally consistent; in particular, the coupling argument in Proposition 54 applies the uniform-integrability supremum to a distribution whose X- and Y-marginals are exactly p_X, so the stress-test concern about a marginal mismatch does not land.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section VIII-A, Theorem 15] The statement A_D^(m) = S_D^(m) is not supported by the proof. The converse in Section VIII-A2 only shows that for every ε > 0 there exists a distribution satisfying the defining inequalities of S_D^(m) with slack ε, i.e., Eqs. (111)-(114) hold with R+ε, R+Rc+ε, and Δ+ε. This places (R,Rc,Δ) in the closure of S_D^(m), not necessarily in S_D^(m) itself. Achievability is also only available at the level of closures: the proof says 'Achievability follows from Theorem 14', but Theorem 14 states only that the closure of A_D^(m) contains the closure of S_D^(m), not that S_D^(m) ⊆ A_D^(m). Since S_D^(m) is not shown to be closed, the exact equality is not established. The proof supports equality of closures: closure(A_D^(m)) = closure(S_D^(m)). Please either prove that S_D^(m) is closed under the finite-common-component assumptions, or restate Theorem 15 and the surrounding text with closures, as is already done consistently in Theorems 14, 16, 17, and 18.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section VIII-B1] The sentence 'By Theorem 14, we have S_D^(m) ⊆ A_D^(m)' is stronger than what Theorem 14 states; Theorem 14 gives only containment of closures. For Theorem 16 the weaker statement is sufficient, but the citation should be corrected to 'closure(S_D^(m)) ⊆ closure(A_D^(m))'.
  2. [Abstract and Section III.B] The phrase 'characterize the information theoretic limits under various scenarios' overstates the decoder-only marginal-realism case, where Theorem 14 is only an inner bound and conclusive results are obtained only in two special cases. Please qualify the abstract and introduction accordingly.
  3. [Corollary 9] The notation R≥0 × [H(Z), ∞] × R≥0 in Eq. (7) is nonstandard because ∞ is not a real number; please clarify that this denotes the set of triples with Rc ≥ H(Z), or use a separate phrase for the unconstrained-common-randomness case.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typos, including 'receiever' in the introduction and 'infomration' in Appendix C; also, the caption of Fig. 2 writes Rc = ∞ where the text correctly uses Rc → ∞.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the single-letter regions are derived from operational code definitions, the Gaussian formulas emerge from the optimization rather than from fitted inputs, and every load-bearing construction is either proved in this paper or rests on external lemmas, not on self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central theorems (8,14,17,18) relate operationally defined achievable sets (Definition 4) to independently defined single-letter regions S built from auxiliary V; both inclusions are proven, not assumed. Converse proofs single-letterize an arbitrary code with V=(M,J,Z_[n]\T,T), derive rate inequalities from H(M)<=nR and H(M,J)<=n(R+Rc), and use quantizer limits (Proposition 51) plus finiteness of I(Z;V) (Lemma 47). Achievability constructs codebooks and applies Cuff's soft-covering lemmas [45], with rate conditions matching the single-letter inequalities via chain-rule identities (32)-(34). Proposition 19's rho is the unique solution of fixed-point eq. (121)/(135), derived from the converse optimization, not fitted; the achievability verifies the same rho by direct computations (Claim 29). Proposition 20's b is derived in Claims 34-35. Self-citations ([40],[42]) are attribution/background; Corollary 10 and Prop. 19 are consequences of Theorem 8 proved here. The uniform-integrability assumption is disclosed, shown non-vacuous in App. C-D, verified for finite alphabets and MSE with finite fourth moment (Claim 6), and used exactly where coupling in Props. 53-54 requires it; the coupling marginals match the supremum's PX=PY=pX. No step reduces to its own inputs, so no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard information-theoretic machinery (Polish spaces, regular kernels, soft covering lemma), the non-vacuous uniform integrability assumption, and the i.i.d. memoryless source model. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The finite side-information alphabet in two of the main theorems is a stated modeling limitation rather than a hidden assumption.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Polish space and regular conditional kernel framework for general alphabets
    Used throughout Appendix A to define regular conditional distributions, Markov chains and information quantities for general alphabets.
  • domain assumption Uniform integrability of (d, pX)
    Assumed after Definition 5; needed for Theorem 7 and achievability proofs. Holds for finite alphabets and MSE with finite fourth moment, but is non-vacuous (Appendix C-D).
  • standard math Soft covering lemma with side information (Lemma 56 and Lemma 57 from Cuff [45])
    Used as a known result in the achievability proofs (Appendices C-A and C-B) to show that the output distribution of a random codebook converges in total variation to the target distribution.
  • domain assumption Memoryless i.i.d. source, additive distortion, and exact distribution matching via total variation
    Problem formulation in Definitions 1 and 4: X^n and Z^n are i.i.d., distortion is additive and single-letter, and realism is exact (or near-perfect in total variation) matching of the output distribution.
  • domain assumption Finite side-information alphabet in Theorems 8 and 17
    The full single-letter characterizations for E-D codes with marginal or joint realism assume finite Z; the Gaussian case (Prop 20) treats continuous side information separately.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Rate-Distortion-Perception Trade-off with Strong Realism Constraints: Role of Side Information and Common Randomness." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3DSB3HSV

@misc{pith2026250714825,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Rate-Distortion-Perception Trade-off with Strong Realism Constraints: Role of Side Information and Common Randomness},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3DSB3HSV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.14825}
}
abstract

In image compression, with recent advances in generative modeling, existence of a trade-off between the rate and perceptual quality has been brought to light, where the perceptual quality is measured by the closeness of the output and source distributions. We consider the compression of a memoryless source sequence $X^n=(X_1, \ldots, X_n)$ in the presence of memoryless side information $Z^n=(Z_1, \ldots, Z_n),$ originally studied by Wyner and Ziv, but elucidate the impact of a strong perfect realism constraint, which requires the joint distribution of output symbols $Y^n=(Y_1,...,Y_n)$ to match the distribution of the source sequence. We consider two cases: when $Z^n$ is available only at the decoder, or at both the encoder and decoder, and characterize the information theoretic limits under various scenarios. Previous works show the superiority of randomized codes under strong perceptual quality constraints. When $Z^n$ is available at both terminals, we characterize its dual role, as a source of common randomness, and as a second look on the source for the receiver. We also study different notions of strong perfect realism which we call marginal realism, joint realism and near-perfect realism. We derive explicit solutions when $X$ and $Z$ are jointly Gaussian under the squared error distortion measure. In traditional lossy compression, having $Z$ only at the decoder imposes no rate penalty in the Gaussian scenario. We show that, when strong perfect realism constraints are imposed this holds only when sufficient common randomness is available.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.14825 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The system model. The side information Z n is always available at the decoder, but not necessarily at the encoder. of random string Xn , denoted by PˆXn , is the distribution on X defined by: for any measurable A ⊆ X , PˆXn (A) = 1 n Xn t=1 PXt (A). B. Definitions In this section we formulate the information-theoretical problem for general alphabets. To have the existence of conditional distribution given a joint di… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Rate-distortion trade-offs for a standard Normal source with MSE distortion for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Graphical model for the distribution Q (1) appearing in the proof of Theorem 8 (E-D-achievable tuples with marginal realism). This is an instance of the graphical model involved in the soft covering lemma with side information [45, Lemma VII.5]. C. Random codebook Here, we prove that S (m) E-D ⊆ A (m) E-D by proving that S (m) E-D ⊆ A (m) E-D. Let (R, Rc, ∆) be a triplet in S (m) E-D. Let pX,Y,Z,V be a corresponding… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Graphical model for the distribution Q (1) appearing in the proof of Theorem 14 (D-achievable tuples with marginal realism). This is an instance of the graphical model involved in the soft covering lemma [45, Lemma VII.4]. it little by little to obtain an intermediate …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Graphical model for Q (1) with quantized variables, where kn = ⌊2 n(R+ε) ⌋ × ⌊2 nR′ ⌋ × ⌊2 nRc ⌋. The variables inside a dashed oval are independent from variables inside another oval. Proposition 52: [41, Equation 7.28, Lemma 7.4] Let (X, Y ) be a couple of joint dist…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The Rate-Distortion Function for Source Coding with Side Information at the Decoder,

    A. Wyner and J. Ziv, “The Rate-Distortion Function for Source Coding with Side Information at the Decoder,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 22, no. 1, 1976

    work page 1976

  2. [2]

    W. A. Pearlman and A. Said, Digital Signal Compression: Principles and Practice . Cambridge (England): Cambridge University Press, 2011

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Sayood, Introduction to Data Compression , 4th ed

    K. Sayood, Introduction to Data Compression , 4th ed. Waltham, MA (United States of America): Morgan Kaufmann, 2012

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    Berger, Rate Distortion Theory: A Mathematical Basis for Data Compression

    T. Berger, Rate Distortion Theory: A Mathematical Basis for Data Compression . Englewood Cliffs, NJ (United States of America): Prentice Hall, 1971

    work page 1971

  5. [5]

    End-to-end Optimized Image Compression,

    J. Ballé, V . Laparra, and E. P. Simoncelli, “End-to-end Optimized Image Compression,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Conditional Probability Models for Deep Image Compression,

    F. Mentzer, E. Agustsson, M. Tschannen, R. Timofte, and L. V . Gool, “Conditional Probability Models for Deep Image Compression,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Channel-Wise Autoregressive Entropy Models for Learned Image Compression,

    D. Minnen and S. Singh, “Channel-Wise Autoregressive Entropy Models for Learned Image Compression,” in IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    End-To-End Optimized Speech Coding with Deep Neural Networks,

    S. Kankanahalli, “End-To-End Optimized Speech Coding with Deep Neural Networks,” in IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2018

    work page 2018

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Wavenet Based Low Rate Speech Coding,

    W. B. Kleijn, F. S. C. Lim, A. Luebs, J. Skoglund, F. Stimberg, Q. Wang, and T. C. Walters, “Wavenet Based Low Rate Speech Coding,” in IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Harp-Net: Hyper-Autoencoded Reconstruction Propagation for Scalable Neural Audio Coding,

    D. Petermann, S. Beack, and M. Kim, “Harp-Net: Hyper-Autoencoded Reconstruction Propagation for Scalable Neural Audio Coding,” in IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    SoundStream: An End-to-End Neural Audio Codec,

    N. Zeghidour, A. Luebs, A. Omran, J. Skoglund, and M. Tagliasacchi, “SoundStream: An End-to-End Neural Audio Codec,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing , vol. 30, 2022

    2022

  4. [12]

    Video Compression Through Image Interpolation,

    C.-Y . Wu, N. Singhal, and P. Krähenbühl, “Video Compression Through Image Interpolation,” in European Conference on Computer Vision, 2018

    2018

  5. [13]

    Learned Video Compression,

    O. Rippel, S. Nair, C. Lew, S. Branson, A. Anderson, and L. Bourdev, “Learned Video Compression,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    Neural Inter-Frame Compression for Video Coding,

    A. Djelouah, J. Campos, S. Schaub-Meyer, and C. Schroers, “Neural Inter-Frame Compression for Video Coding,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Video Compression With Rate-Distortion Autoencoders,

    A. Habibian, T. V . Rozendaal, J. Tomczak, and T. Cohen, “Video Compression With Rate-Distortion Autoencoders,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    FVC: A New Framework towards Deep Video Compression in Feature Space,

    Z. Hu, G. Lu, and D. Xu, “FVC: A New Framework towards Deep Video Compression in Feature Space,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Deep Learning in Latent Space for Video Prediction and Compression,

    B. Liu, Y . Chen, S. Liu, and H. S. Kim, “Deep Learning in Latent Space for Video Prediction and Compression,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021 . 66

    2021

  10. [18]

    Generative Adversarial Networks for Extreme Learned Image Compression,

    E. Agustsson, M. Tschannen, F. Mentzer, R. Timofte, and L. V . Gool, “Generative Adversarial Networks for Extreme Learned Image Compression,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Moment Preserving Quantization (Signal Processing),

    E. J. Delp and O. R. Mitchell, “Moment Preserving Quantization (Signal Processing),” IEEE Transactions on Communi- cations, vol. 39, no. 11, 1991

    1991

  12. [20]

    Distribution Preserving Quantization With Dithering and Transformation,

    M. Li, J. Klejsa, and W. B. Kleijn, “Distribution Preserving Quantization With Dithering and Transformation,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 17, no. 12, 2010

    2010

  13. [21]

    On Distribution Preserving Quantization,

    M. Li, J. Klejsa, and W. Kleijn, “On Distribution Preserving Quantization,” arXiv e-prints, 2011, arXiv:1108.3728

    2011 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Audio Coding with Power Spectral Density Preserving Quantization,

    M. Li, J. Klejsa, A. Ozerov, and W. B. Kleijn, “Audio Coding with Power Spectral Density Preserving Quantization,” in IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing , 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    Multiple Description Distribution Preserving Quantization,

    J. Klejsa, G. Zhang, M. Li, and W. B. Kleijn, “Multiple Description Distribution Preserving Quantization,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , vol. 61, no. 24, 2013

    2013

  16. [24]

    Generative Compression,

    S. Santurkar, D. Budden, and N. Shavit, “Generative Compression,” in Picture Coding Symposium, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    Deep Generative Models for Distribution-Preserving Lossy Compression,

    M. Tschannen, E. Agustsson, and M. Lucic, “Deep Generative Models for Distribution-Preserving Lossy Compression,” in Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2018

    2018

  18. [26]

    The Perception-Distortion Tradeoff,

    Y . Blau and T. Michaeli, “The Perception-Distortion Tradeoff,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018

    2018

  19. [27]

    Introducing the Perception-Distortion Tradeoff into the Rate-Distortion Theory of General Information Sources,

    R. Matsumoto, “Introducing the Perception-Distortion Tradeoff into the Rate-Distortion Theory of General Information Sources,” IEICE Communications Express , vol. 7, no. 11, 2018

    2018

  20. [28]

    Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff of Variable-length Source Coding for General Information Sources,

    ——, “Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff of Variable-length Source Coding for General Information Sources,” IEICE Communications Express, vol. 8, no. 2, 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Rethinking Lossy Compression: The Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff,

    Y . Blau and T. Michaeli, “Rethinking Lossy Compression: The Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff,” in International Conference on Machine Learning , 2019

    2019

  22. [30]

    On the Rate-Distortion-Perception Function,

    J. Chen, L. Yu, J. Wang, W. Shi, Y . Ge, and W. Tong, “On the Rate-Distortion-Perception Function,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory , vol. 3, no. 4, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Output Constrained Lossy Source Coding With Limited Common Randomness,

    N. Saldi, T. Linder, and S. Yüksel, “Output Constrained Lossy Source Coding With Limited Common Randomness,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 61, no. 9, 2015

    2015

  24. [32]

    Wasserstein Distortion: Unifying Fidelity and Realism,

    Y . Qiu, A. B. Wagner, J. Ballé, and L. Theis, “Wasserstein Distortion: Unifying Fidelity and Realism,” arXiv e-prints , 2023, arXiv:2310.03629

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    On the Advantages of Stochastic Encoders,

    L. Theis and E. Agustsson, “On the Advantages of Stochastic Encoders,” in Neural Compression: From Information Theory to Applications – Workshop at the International Conference on Learning Representations , 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    A Coding Theorem for the Rate-Distortion-Perception Function,

    L. Theis and A. B. Wagner, “A Coding Theorem for the Rate-Distortion-Perception Function,” in Neural Compression: From Information Theory to Applications – Workshop at the International Conference on Learning Representations 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Universal Rate-Distortion-Perception Representations for Lossy Compression,

    G. Zhang, J. Qian, J. Chen, and A. Khisti, “Universal Rate-Distortion-Perception Representations for Lossy Compression,” in Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2021

    2021

  28. [36]

    A Rate-Distortion-Perception Theory for Binary Sources,

    J. Qian, G. Zhang, J. Chen, and A. Khisti, “A Rate-Distortion-Perception Theory for Binary Sources,” in International Zurich Seminar on Information and Communication , 2022

    2022

  29. [37]

    Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff for Lossy Compression Using Conditional Perception Measure,

    S. Salehkalaibar, J. Chen, A. Khisti, and W. Yu, “Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff for Lossy Compression Using Conditional Perception Measure,” in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory , 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Randomized Quantization and Source Coding With Constrained Output Distribution,

    N. Saldi, T. Linder, and S. Yüksel, “Randomized Quantization and Source Coding With Constrained Output Distribution,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 61, no. 1, 2015. 67

    2015

  31. [39]

    On the Choice of Perception Loss Function for Learned Video Compression,

    S. Salehkalaibar, T. B. Phan, J. Chen, W. Yu, and A. Khisti, “On the Choice of Perception Loss Function for Learned Video Compression,” in Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    The Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff: The Role of Common Randomness,

    A. B. Wagner, “The Rate-Distortion-Perception Tradeoff: The Role of Common Randomness,” arXiv e-prints , 2022, arXiv:2202.04147

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    R. M. Gray, Entropy and Information Theory , 2nd ed. New York, NY (United States of America): Springer, 2011

    2011

  34. [42]

    The Rate-Distortion-Perception Trade-off: the Role of Private Randomness,

    Y . Hamdi, A. B. Wagner, and D. Gündüz, “The Rate-Distortion-Perception Trade-off: the Role of Private Randomness,” in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory , 2024

    2024

  35. [43]

    Hypothesis Testing, Information Divergence and Computational Geometry,

    F. Nielsen, “Hypothesis Testing, Information Divergence and Computational Geometry,” in International Conference on Geometric Science of Information , 2013

    2013

  36. [44]

    T. S. Han, Information-Spectrum Methods in Information Theory , English ed. Berlin, Heidelberg (Germany): Springer, 2003

    2003

  37. [45]

    Distributed Channel Synthesis,

    P. Cuff, “Distributed Channel Synthesis,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 59, no. 11, 2013

    2013

  38. [46]

    Output-Constrained Lossy Source Coding With Application to Rate-Distortion- Perception Theory,

    L. Xie, L. Li, J. Chen, and Z. Zhang, “Output-Constrained Lossy Source Coding With Application to Rate-Distortion- Perception Theory,” arXiv e-prints, 2024, arXiv:2403.14849

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Distributed Rate-Distortion With Common Components,

    A. B. Wagner, B. G. Kelly, and Y . Altug, “Distributed Rate-Distortion With Common Components,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 57, no. 7, 2011

    2011

  40. [48]

    Cover and J

    T. Cover and J. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory , 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ (United States of America): Wiley, 2006

    2006

  41. [49]

    El Gamal and Y .-H

    A. El Gamal and Y .-H. Kim, Network Information Theory . Cambridge (England): Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  42. [50]

    Channel Simulation via Interactive Communications,

    M. H. Yassaee, A. Gohari, and M. R. Aref, “Channel Simulation via Interactive Communications,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 61, no. 6, 2015

    2015

  43. [51]

    The Likelihood Encoder for Lossy Compression,

    E. C. Song, P. Cuff, and H. V . Poor, “The Likelihood Encoder for Lossy Compression,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 62, no. 4, 2016

    2016

  44. [52]

    Lindvall, Lectures on the Coupling Method

    T. Lindvall, Lectures on the Coupling Method . New York: Wiley, 1992

    1992

  45. [53]

    Billingsley, Probability and Measure, 4th ed

    P. Billingsley, Probability and Measure, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ (United States of America): Wiley, 2012

    2012

  46. [54]

    Neveu, Bases Mathématiques du Calcul des Probabilités , 2nd ed

    J. Neveu, Bases Mathématiques du Calcul des Probabilités , 2nd ed. Paris (France): Masson, 1970

    1970

  47. [55]

    D. W. Stroock, Probability Theory : An Analytic View , 2nd ed. Cambridge (England): Cambridge University Press, 2010

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.