# SemanticZip: A Pilot Framework for Lossy Text Compression with LLMs as Semantic Decompressors

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24541 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.24541/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08560/) (2023)
- [Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckList](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.04118/) (2020)
- [LongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06839/) (2023)
- [LLMLingua: Compressing Prompts for Accelerated Inference of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05736/) (2023)
- [Language Modeling Is Compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10668/) (2023)
- [Show Your Work: Improved Reporting of Experimental Results](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.03004/) (2019)
- [Reproducibility in NLP: What Have We Learned from the Checklist?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.09562/) (2023)
- [Semantic Compression With Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.12512/) (2023)
- [Compress the Context, Keep the Commitments: A Formal Framework for Verifiable LLM Context Compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.17304/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Text compression for large language model (LLM) systems is usually framed as token deletion, retrieval, summarization, or exact reconstruction. We study a more aggressive but explicitly lossy setting: compress text into compact codes that an LLM can expand into task-relevant meaning. We call this setting SemanticZip. Unlike lossless compression, SemanticZip does not require byte-identical reconstruction; unlike ordinary summarization, it treats model-based decompression as part of the codec and evaluates whether task-relevant semantic commitments are recovered. This paper is a pilot framework, not a benchmark claim. We formalize LLM-mediated decompression, define a protected/lossy packet architecture, and evaluate six representation regimes over five author-constructed diagnostic cases: structured prose, JSON, CCL-Core, CCL-Min, SemanticZip ASCII, and SemanticZip emoji. An independent decoder LLM reconstructs typed semantic atoms from each compressed representation, and we score Critical Atom Recall, Weighted Atom Recall, precision, and tokenizer gain. In this pilot, structured prose has the highest recoverability, with WAR = 0.956 and 19.1% o200k_base token gain. CCL-Min is the strongest balanced point, with 39.4% token gain and WAR = 0.874. SemanticZip ASCII provides the largest useful compression, with 46.5% token gain and WAR = 0.802, while emoji-heavy SemanticZip performs worse on both compression and recovery. The main contribution is not the claim that these numbers establish a universal frontier. Rather, we introduce a reproducible experimental interface for studying lossy, LLM-decompressible text codes and a design principle: safety-critical and exact commitments should remain protected, while predictable low-risk context may be semantically zipped.