(02-03-2026, 01:26 PM)nablator wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-03-2026, 11:44 AM)Mauro wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Does your 688640 bits improves on mine 480985 [I hope so]?
If I read this correctly 688640 > 480985 so no? Less bits is better compressed. It is not difficult to improve on a compression that has a severe restriction like 3-letter max chunks. Even BPE can do better because it is not limited by chunk size.
At face value yes, of course, but the two figures are not directly comparable, so it may be that 688640 is actually better than 480985. Then, as I said, there's no guarantee this kind of exercise is even meaningful, who knows.