0.3 Universal coding for classes of sources  (Page 2/3)

where $Q$ is the prior induced by the coding length function $l$ .

Minimal redundancy

Note that

Therefore,

In fact, Gallager showed that $R_n^{+}=R_n^{-}$ . That is, the min-max and max-min redundancies are equal.

Let us revisit the Bernoulli source $p_{\theta }$ where $\theta \in \Lambda =[0,1]$ . From the definition of [link] , which relies on a uniform prior for the sources, i.e., $w\left(\theta \right)=1,\forall \theta \in \Lambda$ , it can be shown that there there exists a universal code with length function $l$ such that

where $h_2\left(p\right)=-plog\left(p\right)-(1-p)log(1-p)$ is the binary entropy. That is, the redundancy is approximately $log\left(n\right)$ bits. Clarke and Barron  [link] studied the weighting approach,

and constructed a prior that achieves $R_n^{-}=R_n^{+}$ precisely for memoryless sources.

Theorem 5 [link] For memoryless source with an alphabet of size $r$ , $\theta =\left(p\right(0),p(1),\cdots ,p(r-1\left)\right)$ ,

where $O_n\left(1\right)$ vanishes uniformly as $n\to \infty$ for any compact subset of $\Lambda$ , and

is Fisher's information.

Note that when the parameter is sensitive to change we have large $I\left(\theta \right)$ , which increases the redundancy. That is, good sensitivity means bad universal compression.

Denote

this is known as Jeffrey's prior . Using $w\left(\theta \right)=J\left(\theta \right)$ , it can be shownthat $R_n^{-}=R_n^{+}$ .

Therefore, the Fisher information satisfies $I\left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{\theta (1-\theta )}$ .

where we used the gamma function. It can be shown that

where

Similar to before, this universal code can be implemented sequentially. It is due to Krichevsky and Trofimov  [link] , its redundancy satisfies   Theorem 5 by Clarke and Barron  [link] , and it is commonly used in universal lossless compression.

Rissanen's bound

Let us consider – on an intuitive level – why $C_n\approx \frac{r-1}{2}\frac{log\left(n\right)}{n}$ . Expending $\frac{r-1}{2}log\left(n\right)$ bits allows to differentiate between ${\left(\sqrt{n}\right)}^{r-1}$ parameter vectors. That is, we would differentiate between each of the $r-1$ parameters with $\sqrt{n}$ levels. Now consider a Bernoulli RV with (unknown) parameter $\theta$ .

One perspective is that with $n$ drawings of the RV, the standard deviation in the number of 1's is $O\left(\sqrt{n}\right)$ . That is, $\sqrt{n}$ levels differentiate between parameter levels up to a resolution that reflects the randomness of the experiment.

A second perspective is that of coding a sequence of Bernoulli outcomes with an imprecise parameter,where it is convenient to think of a universal code in terms of first quantizing the parameter and then using that (imprecise) parameter to encode the input $x$ . For the Bernoulli example, the maximum likelihood parameter ${\theta }_{ML}$ satisfies