2011 First International Conference on Data Compression, Communications and Processing 2011
DOI: 10.1109/ccp.2011.21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Review of DNA Microarray Image Compression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results presented in Table 2 and Table 3 are normalized with respect to the Weighted Average results of under the column BWIC. In Table 4 microarray-specific compressors results retrieved from [11] are given.…”
Section: B Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results presented in Table 2 and Table 3 are normalized with respect to the Weighted Average results of under the column BWIC. In Table 4 microarray-specific compressors results retrieved from [11] are given.…”
Section: B Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They showed that the Burrows-Wheeler Transformation[10] helps to reduce the total entropy and improves the compression gain for microarray image data. Further details about other proposed compression techniques in compression of microarray images can be found in the review paper of Hernndez-Cabronero et al in[11]. This paper is organized as follows: In section 2, we briefly explain the Burrows-Wheeler Transformation and Inversion Coder.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While Pinho et al tested only the JJ2000 implementation using the default parameter selections of DWT, with 5 decomposition levels and 33 quality layers, we have also evaluated the performance with 0 to 5 decomposition levels and the same number of quality layers with both the JJ2000 and Kakadu implementations. We show in Table 6 an updated version of the data that we have previously provided [49]. As in the case of the general compression schemes, results are obtained by dividing the total number of bits of the compressed images by the total number of pixels of the original images.…”
Section: Image Compression Standardsmentioning
confidence: 99%