Image Compression: Sparse Coding vs. Bottleneck Autoencoders
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Bottleneck autoencoders have been actively researched as a solution to image compression tasks. However, we observed that bottleneck autoencoders produce subjectively low quality reconstructed images. In this work, we explore the ability of sparse coding to improve reconstructed image quality for the same degree of compression. We observe that sparse image compression produces visually superior reconstructed images and yields higher values of pixel-wise measures of reconstruction quality (PSNR and SSIM) compared to bottleneck autoencoders. % In addition, we find that using alternative metrics that correlate better with human perception, such as feature perceptual loss and the classification accuracy, sparse image compression scores up to 18.06% and 2.7% higher, respectively, compared to bottleneck autoencoders. Although computationally much more intensive, we find that sparse coding is otherwise superior to bottleneck autoencoders for the same degree of compression.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 26 Oct 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
3 papers.
- 2021Lossy compression of statistical data using quantum annealercited by 4
- 2023Implementing and Benchmarking the Locally Competitive Algorithm on the Loihi 2 Neuromorphic Processorcited by 4
- 2026Performance Benchmarking and Optimisation of Clustering Algorithms for Local and Non-Local Similarity Measure in Medical Image Analysiscited by 0
- 2026Performance Benchmarking and Optimisation of Clustering Algorithms for Local and Non-Local Similarity Measure in Medical Image Analysis10 Jul 2026
- 2023Implementing and Benchmarking the Locally Competitive Algorithm on the Loihi 2 Neuromorphic Processor25 Jul 2023
- 2021Lossy compression of statistical data using quantum annealer5 Oct 2021