mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Image Compression: Sparse Coding vs. Bottleneck Autoencoders

arXiv 1710.09926 ↗First posted 26 Oct 2017cs.CVcited by 3

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

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

3 papers.