Talk:Huffman coding: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Explanation of huffman coding) |
m (made formulation more clear) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
: Yep. It is not Huffman coding. (Hmm, I do like the wikipedia description of the two queue method though ...) --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
: Yep. It is not Huffman coding. (Hmm, I do like the wikipedia description of the two queue method though ...) --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
||
::I did it based on what I learned in class today. If you look at the "Basic technique" section on the WP it shows codes identical to ones I used in the example so I'm pretty sure it is Huffman coding. There must be a few ways to generate them that give different actual codes with the same idea. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 13:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
::I did it based on what I learned in class today. If you look at the "Basic technique" section on the WP it shows codes identical to ones I used in the example so I'm pretty sure it is Huffman coding. There must be a few ways to generate them that give different actual codes with the same idea. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 13:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
||
::: For the example given, the Huffman code indeed looks like this. But as a general algorithm, it's wrong. What you do is that you "combine" the last two elements in the table, and sort them back into your list. So starting with the example, |
::: For the example given, the Huffman code indeed looks like this. But as a general algorithm, it's wrong. What you should do is that you "combine" the last two elements in the table, and sort them back into your list. So starting with the example, |
||
(A=?): 50% |
(A=?): 50% |
||
(B=?): 25% |
(B=?): 25% |
||