IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`––––––––––
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`––––––––––
`Unified Patents Inc.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GE Video Compression, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`––––––––––
`
`Case No. 2019-00726
`Patent 6,943,710
`––––––––––
`
`DECLARATION OF JACOB ROBERT MUNFORD
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000001
`
`

`

`1.
`
`My name is Jacob Robert Munford. I am over the age of 18, have
`
`personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and am competent to testify to the
`
`same.
`
`2.
`
`I earned a Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) from
`
`the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in 2009. I have over ten years of
`
`experience in the library/information science field. Beginning in 2004, I have
`
`served in various positions in the public library sector including Assistant
`
`Librarian, Youth Services Librarian and Library Director. I have attached my
`
`Curriculum Vitae as Appendix A.
`
`3.
`
`During my career in the library profession, I have been responsible for
`
`materials acquisition for multiple libraries. In that position, I have cataloged,
`
`purchased and processed incoming library works. That includes purchasing
`
`materials directly from vendors, recording publishing data from the material in
`
`question, creating detailed material records for library catalogs and physically
`
`preparing that material for circulation. In addition to my experience in acquisitions,
`
`I was also responsible for analyzing large collections of library materials, tailoring
`
`library records for optimal catalog search performance and creating lending
`
`agreements between libraries during my time as a Library Director.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000002
`
`

`

`4.
`
`I am not a lawyer and I am not rendering an opinion on the legal
`
`question of whether a particular document is, or is not, a “printed publication”
`
`under the law.
`
`5.
`
`I am, however, rendering my expert opinion on the authenticity of the
`
`documents referenced herein and on when and how these documents were
`
`disseminated or otherwise made available to the extent that persons interested and
`
`ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could
`
`have located the documents in the 1985-1987 timeframe.
`
`6.
`
`I am informed by counsel that an item is considered authentic if there
`
`is sufficient evidence to support a finding that the item is what it is claimed to be. I
`
`am also informed that authenticity can be established based on the contents of the
`
`documents themselves, such as the appearance, content, substance, internal
`
`patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all of
`
`the circumstances.
`
`7.
`
`I am informed by counsel that a printed publication qualifies as
`
`publicly accessible as of the date it was disseminated or otherwise made available
`
`such that a person interested in and ordinarily skilled in the relevant subject matter
`
`could locate it through the exercise of ordinary diligence.
`
`8. While I understand that the determination of public accessibility under
`
`the foregoing standard rests on a case-by-case analysis of the facts particular to an
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000003
`
`

`

`individual publication, I also understand that a printed publication is rendered
`
`“publicly accessible” if it was disseminated with no restrictions and was intended
`
`to reach the general public. I further understand that a printed publication is also
`
`rendered “publicly accessible” if it was cataloged and indexed by a library such
`
`that a person interested in the relevant subject matter could locate it (i.e., I
`
`understand that cataloging and indexing by a library is sufficient, though there are
`
`other ways that a printed publication may qualify as publicly accessible). One
`
`manner of sufficient indexing is indexing according to subject matter category. I
`
`understand that the cataloging and indexing by a single library of a single instance
`
`of a particular printed publication is sufficient, even if the single library is in a
`
`foreign country. I understand that, even if access to a library is restricted, a printed
`
`publication that has been cataloged and indexed therein is publicly accessible so
`
`long as a presumption is raised that the portion of the public concerned with the
`
`relevant subject matter would know of the printed publication. I also understand
`
`that the cataloging and indexing of information that would guide a person
`
`interested in the relevant subject matter to the printed publication, such as the
`
`cataloging and indexing of an abstract for the printed publication, is sufficient to
`
`render the printed publication publicly accessible.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000004
`
`

`

`9.
`
`I understand that routine business practices, such as general library
`
`cataloging and indexing practices, can be used to establish an approximate date on
`
`which a printed publication became publicly accessible.
`
`10.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration I have reviewed
`
`the documents and appendices referenced herein. These materials are records
`
`created in the ordinary course of business by publishers, libraries, indexing
`
`services, and others. From my years of experience, I am familiar with the process
`
`for creating many of these records, and I know these records are created by people
`
`with knowledge of the information in the record. Further, these records are created
`
`with the expectation that researchers and other members of the public will use
`
`them. All materials cited in this declaration and its appendices are of a type that
`
`experts in my field would reasonably rely upon and refer to in forming their
`
`opinions.
`
`11.
`
`I am told by counsel that the subject matter of this proceeding relates
`
`to digital data compression.
`
`12.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that a “person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time of the inventions” is a hypothetical person who is presumed to be
`
`familiar with the relevant field and its literature at the time of the inventions. This
`
`hypothetical person
`
`is also a person of ordinary creativity, capable of
`
`understanding the scientific principles applicable to the pertinent field.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000005
`
`

`

`13.
`
`I am told by counsel that persons of ordinary skill in this subject
`
`matter or art would have had the equivalent of at least a bachelor’s degree in
`
`electrical engineering, computer science, or a similar field with at least two years
`
`of experience in data compression or a person with a master’s degree in electrical
`
`engineering, computer science, or a similar field with a specialization in data
`
`compression. I am also told that a person with less education but more relevant
`
`practical experience may also meet this standard.
`
`14.
`
`In the 1990s and early 2000s such a person would have had access to
`
`a vast array of print resources in digital data compression, access to reference
`
`librarians (e.g., at universities), and access to a fast-changing set of online
`
`resources.
`
`15.
`
`I am fully familiar with the catalog record creation process in the
`
`library sector. In preparing a material for public availability, a library catalog
`
`record describing that material would be created. These records are typically
`
`written in Machine Readable Catalog (herein referred to as “MARC”) code and
`
`contain information such as a physical description of the material, metadata from
`
`the material’s publisher, and date of library acquisition.
`
`16.
`
`Libraries world-wide have used
`
`the machine-readable MARC
`
`(Machine-Readable Cataloging) format for catalog records. MARC formatted
`
`records have provided a variety of subject access points based on the content of the
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000006
`
`

`

`document being cataloged. A MARC record is comprised of several fields, each of
`
`which contains specific data about the work. Each field is identified by a
`
`standardized, unique, three-digit code corresponding to the type of data that
`
`follows. For example, MARC Field 600 identifies personal names used as subjects
`
`and the MARC Field 650 identifies topical terms. A researcher might discover
`
`material relevant to his or her topic by a search using the terms employed in the
`
`MARC Fields such as a work’s title recorded in field 245, the primary author of a
`
`work recorded in field 100, an item’s International Standard Book Number
`
`(“ISBN”) recorded in field 020, an item’s Library of Congress call number
`
`recorded in field 050 or the publication date recorded in field 260 under the
`
`subfield “c.” If a work is a periodical, then its publication frequency is recorded in
`
`field 310 and the publication dates (e.g., the first and last publication) are recorded
`
`in field 362, which is also referred to as the enumeration/chronology field.
`
`17.
`
`The MARC Field 040, subfield a, identifies the library or other entity
`
`that created the original catalog record for a given document and transcribed it into
`
`machine readable form. The MARC Field 008 identifies the date when this first
`
`catalog record was entered on the file. This date persists in subsequent uses of the
`
`first catalog record, although newly-created records for the same document,
`
`separate from the original record will show a new date. It is not unusual to find
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000007
`
`

`

`multiple catalog records for the same document, typically this is the result of the
`
`merger of RLG and OCLC.
`
`18. MARC records also include several fields that include subject matter
`
`classification information. An overview of MARC record fields is available
`
`through the Library of Congress at http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/. For
`
`example, 6XX fields are termed “Subject Access Fields.”1 Among these, for
`
`example, is the 650 field; this is the “Subject Added Entry – Topical Term” field.
`
`See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd650.html.
`
` The 650 field is a
`
`“[s]ubject added entry in which the entry element is a topical term.” Id. These
`
`entries “are assigned to a bibliographic record to provide access according to
`
`generally accepted thesaurus-building rules (e.g., Library of Congress Subject
`
`Headings (LCSH), Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)).” Id. Thus, a researcher
`
`might discover material relevant to his or her topic by a search using the terms
`
`employed in the MARC Fields 6XX.
`
`19.
`
`The 9XX fields are not part of the standard MARC 21 format.2
`
`OCLC has defined these 9XX fields for use by the Library of Congress and for
`
`internal OCLC use: 936, 938, 956, 987, 989, and 994. 955 is used by the Library of
`
`Congress to track the progress of a new acquisition from the time it is submitted
`
`1 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd6xx.html.
`
`2 https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/9xx.html
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000008
`
`

`

`for Cataloging in Publication (CIP) review until it is published and fully cataloged
`
`and available for use within the Library of Congress. Fields 901-907, 910, and
`
`945-949 have been defined by OCLC for local use and will pass OCLC validation.
`
`Fields 905 or 910 are often used by an individual library for internal processing
`
`purposes, for example the date of cataloging and the initials of the cataloger.
`
`20.
`
`Further, MARC records include call numbers, which themselves
`
`include a classification number. For example, the 050 field is the “Library of
`
`Congress Call Number.”3 A defined portion of the Library of Congress Call
`
`Number is the classification number, and “source of the classification number
`
`is Library of Congress Classification and the LC Classification-Additions and
`
`Changes.” Id. Thus, included in the 050 field is a subject matter classification.
`
`Each item in a library has a single classification number. A library selects a
`
`classification scheme (e.g., the Library of Congress Classification scheme just
`
`described or a similar scheme such as the Dewey Decimal Classification scheme)
`
`and uses it consistently. When the Library of Congress assigns the classification
`
`number, it appears as part of the 050 field. If a local library assigns the
`
`classification number, it appears in a 090 field. In either scenario, the MARC
`
`record
`
`includes a classification number
`
`that represents a subject matter
`
`classification.
`
`3 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd050.html.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000009
`
`

`

`21. WorldCat is the world’s largest public online catalog, maintained by
`
`the Online Computer Library Center, Inc., or OCLC, and built with the records
`
`created by the thousands of libraries that are members of OCLC. OCLC has
`
`provided bibliographic and abstract information to the public based on MARC
`
`records through its OCLC WorldCat database. WorldCat requires no knowledge
`
`of MARC tags and codes, and does not require a log-in or password. WorldCat is
`
`easily accessible through the World Wide Web to all who wish to search it; there
`
`are no restrictions to be a member of a particular community, etc. The date a given
`
`catalog record was created (corresponding to the MARC Field 008) appears in
`
`some detailed WorldCat records as the Date of Entry but not necessarily all.
`
`Whereas WorldCat records are widely available, the availability of MARC
`
`formatted records varies from library to library and when made available will be
`
`identified as MARC record or librarian/staff view.
`
`22. When an OCLC member institution acquires a work, it creates a
`
`MARC record for this work in its computer catalog system in the ordinary course
`
`of its business. MARC records created at the Library of Congress were historically
`
`tape-loaded into the OCLC database through a subscription to MARC Distribution
`
`Services daily or weekly. Once the MARC record is created by a cataloger at an
`
`OCLC member institution or is tape-loaded from the Library of Congress, the
`
`MARC record is then made available to any other OCLC members online, and
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000010
`
`

`

`therefore made available to the public. Accordingly, once the MARC record is
`
`created by a cataloger at an OCLC member institution or is tape-loaded from the
`
`Library of Congress or another library anywhere in the world, any publication
`
`corresponding to the MARC record has been cataloged and indexed according to
`
`its subject matter such that a person interested in that subject matter could, with
`
`reasonable diligence, locate and access the publication through any library with
`
`access to the OCLC WorldCat database or through the Library of Congress.
`
`23. When an OCLC member institution creates a new MARC record,
`
`OCLC automatically supplies the date of creation for that record. The date of
`
`creation for the MARC record appears in the fixed field (008), characters 00
`
`through 05. The MARC record creation date reflects the date on which the item
`
`was first acquired or cataloged. Initially, field 005 of the MARC record is
`
`automatically populated with the date the MARC record was created in year,
`
`month, day format (YYYYMMDD) (some of the newer library catalog systems
`
`also include hour, minute, second (HHMMSS)). Thereafter, the library’s computer
`
`system may automatically update the date in field 005 every time the library
`
`updates the MARC record (e.g., to reflect that an item has been moved to a
`
`different shelving location within the library).
`
`24. Once one library has cataloged and indexed a publication by creating
`
`a MARC record for that publication, other libraries that receive the publication do
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000011
`
`

`

`not create additional MARC records—the other libraries instead rely on the
`
`original MARC record. They may update or revise the MARC record to ensure
`
`accuracy, but they do not replace or duplicate it. This practice does more than save
`
`libraries from duplicating labor. It also enhances the accuracy of MARC records.
`
`Further, it allows librarians around the world to know that a particular MARC
`
`record is authoritative (in contrast, a hypothetical system wherein duplicative
`
`records were created would result in confusion as to which record is authoritative).
`
`25.
`
`The date of creation of the MARC record by a cataloger at an OCLC
`
`member institution reflects when the underlying item is accessible to the public.
`
`Upwards of two-thirds to three-quarters of book sales to libraries come from a
`
`jobber or wholesaler for online and print resources. These resellers make it their
`
`business to provide books to their customers as fast as possible, often providing
`
`turnaround times of only a single day after publication. Libraries purchase a
`
`significant portion of the balance of their books directly from publishers
`
`themselves, which provide delivery on a similarly expedited schedule. In general,
`
`libraries make these purchases throughout the year as the books are published and
`
`shelve the books as soon thereafter as possible in order to make the books available
`
`to their patrons. Thus, books are generally available at libraries across the country
`
`within just a few weeks of publication.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000012
`
`

`

`26. As discussed above, the 008 field of the MARC record is reserved for
`
`denoting the date of creation of the library record itself. As this typically occurs
`
`during the process of preparing materials for public access, it is my experience that
`
`an item’s MARC record indicates the date of an item’s public availability.
`
`27. A library typically creates a catalog record for a periodical publication
`
`when the library receives its first issue. When the institution receives subsequent
`
`issues/volumes of the periodical, the issues/volumes are checked in (often using a
`
`date stamp), added to the institution’s holding records, and made available very
`
`soon thereafter – normally within a few days of receipt or (at most) within a few
`
`weeks of receipt.
`
`28.
`
`The initial periodicals record will sometimes not reflect all subsequent
`
`changes in publication details (including minor variations in title, etc.).
`
`29.
`
`Every library sets its own practice or policy on whether-or-not to date
`
`stamp, but all will have an ownership stamp somewhere in the publication—
`
`typically on the cover page, verso of the cover page, or a designated page within
`
`the publication, sometimes even on the top, side, or bottom edge of the monograph
`
`or periodical. The ownership and date stamp can also vary from one library to
`
`another when the stamp is entered on the monograph or periodical. It could occur
`
`when received in acquisitions after shipment to the library, or it could be at time of
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000013
`
`

`

`cataloging. Therefore, there could be instances when the date of receipt precedes
`
`the cataloging date or vice versa.
`
`30. A researcher may discover material relevant to his or her topic in a
`
`variety of ways. One common means of discovery is to search for relevant
`
`information in an index of periodical and other publications. Having found
`
`relevant material, the researcher will then normally obtain it online, look for it in
`
`libraries, or purchase it from the publisher, a bookstore, a document delivery
`
`service, or other provider. Sometimes, the date of a document’s public
`
`accessibility will involve both indexing and library date information. Date
`
`information for indexing entries is, however, often unavailable. This is especially
`
`true for online indices.
`
`31.
`
`Indexing services use a wide variety of controlled vocabularies to
`
`provide subject access and other means of discovering the content of documents.
`
`The formats in which these access terms are presented vary from service to service.
`
`32. Online
`
`indexing
`
`services
`
`commonly provide bibliographic
`
`information, abstracts, and full-text copies of the indexed publications, along with
`
`a list of the documents cited in the indexed publication. These services also often
`
`provide lists of publications that cite a given document. A citation of a document
`
`is evidence that the document was publicly available and in use by researchers no
`
`later than the publication date of the citing document.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000014
`
`

`

`33. One such indexing service is the ACM digital library. This index is
`
`produced by the Association for Computing Machinery, the world’s largest
`
`scientific and educational computing society. ACM Digital Library contains the
`
`full text of all ACM publications, hosted full-text publications from selected
`
`publishers, and the ACM Guide to Computing Literature—a comprehensive
`
`bibliography of computing literature beginning in the 1950s with more than a
`
`million entries. All metadata in the database are freely available on the Web,
`
`including abstracts, linked references, citing work, and usage statistics. Full-text
`
`articles are available with subscription, and are also available in paper form at
`
`numerous libraries. Most major colleges and universities maintain subscriptions to
`
`the ACM database.
`
`34.
`
`I have reviewed Exhibit 1004, an article by Paul G. Howard and
`
`Jeffrey Scott Vitter entitled “Design and Analysis of Fast Text Compression Based
`
`on Quasi-Arithmetic Coding” (hereto referred to as ‘Howard’) as presented in
`
`Information Processing and Management Vol. 30, No. 6, November-December
`
`1994.
`
`35.
`
`Ex. 1004 is a true and correct copy of the spine, publication data, title
`
`page and complete Howard article from Information Processing and Management
`
`Vol. 30, No. 6, November-December 1994 from the University of Michigan’s
`
`library. The table of contents indicates that Howard began on page 777. On the
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000015
`
`

`

`cover of the issue is the ownership and date stamp of the University of Michigan
`
`Library, with a check-in date of June 28, 1995. Ex. 1004 was found within the
`
`custody of a library – a place where, if authentic, it would likely be housed and
`
`available.
`
`36.
`
`Exhibit 1004 is in a condition that creates no suspicion about its
`
`authenticity. Specifically, the Howard paper in Exhibit 1004 is not missing any
`
`intermediate pages of the article’s text, the text on each page appears to flow
`
`seamlessly from one page to the next, and there are no visible alterations to the
`
`document. Exhibit 1004 was found within the custody of a library – a place where,
`
`if authentic, it would likely be found.
`
`37.
`
`The Howard paper is also readily available online. Attachment A1 to
`
`my Declaration is a true and accurate copy of the table of contents for Information
`
`Processing and Management, Vol. 30, No. 6, 1994 provided by the ACM Digital
`
`Library, and also indicates that the Howard paper was found on pages 777-790.
`
`38. Attachment A2 to my Declaration is a true and accurate copy of the
`
`Howard paper referenced in the ACM Digital Library that was accessed through
`
`the University of Pittsburgh Library and hosted for downloading by Science Direct
`
`(sciencedirect.com) — a place where, if authentic, Howard would likely be found
`
`and made available.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000016
`
`

`

`39.
`
`I conclude, based on finding Howard in print and online through an
`
`accepted database service through a library, that the Howard paper is an authentic
`
`document, and that Exhibit 1004 and Attachment A2 are authentic copies of the
`
`Howard paper.
`
`40.
`
`Ex. 1022 is a true and accurate copy of the record in OCLC WorldCat
`
`for Information Processing and Management. This periodical was first published
`
`in July 1988. WorldCat indicates that 382 libraries hold this title in the United
`
`States alone.
`
` Ex. 1022 also indicates that Information Processing and
`
`Management was cataloged in a meaningful way—including being cataloged by
`
`subject. The Vol. 30, No. 6 November-December 1994 issue of Information
`
`Processing and Management was also cataloged in the ACM digital library. In
`
`addition, this issue was also cataloged in the University of Michigan Library’s
`
`catalog system (the library’s card catalog). Thus, in my opinion, Information
`
`Processing and Management was sufficiently accessible to the public interested in
`
`the art; and an ordinarily skilled researcher, exercising reasonable diligence, would
`
`have had no difficulty finding copies of Information Processing and Management
`
`containing Howard.
`
`41.
`
`Exhibit 1004 from the University of Michigan Library includes a
`
`library date stamp on page 3 indicating that the November-December, 1994 issue
`
`of Information Processing and Management was processed on June 28, 1995.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000017
`
`

`

`Based on my experience, I affirm this date label has the general appearance of date
`
`stamps that libraries have long affixed to periodicals in processing them. I do not
`
`see any indications or have any reason to believe this date stamp was affixed by
`
`anyone other than library personnel on or about the date indicated by the label.
`
`42.
`
`Exhibit 1019 is a true and correct copy of the MARC record
`
`describing Information Processing and Management from the University of
`
`Michigan’s Library. I secured this record myself from the library’s online catalog.
`
`The 008 field of this MARC record indicates Information Processing and
`
`Management was first cataloged by the University of Michigan Library as of July
`
`19, 1988. The item holdings indicate this journal was held in perpetuity from July
`
`1988 until 2006. Thus, this item record indicates the library’s collection includes
`
`the Vol. 30, No. 6, 1994 publication of Information Processing and Management
`
`containing Howard. In addition, the 008 field of this Marc record further indicates
`
`that Information Processing and Management was first catalogued July 19, 1988.
`
`In addition, Exhibit 1019 contains fields that would have enabled someone
`
`searching for this subject matter to easily identify the Information Processing and
`
`Management journal as containing relevant information. For example, the fields
`
`650, 710, 730 and 780 classify the journal’s subject matter as information science
`
`and information storage and retrieval systems. Thus, the material in Information
`
`Processing and Management was cataloged in an accessible manner.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000018
`
`

`

`43. As mentioned above, the date stamp on page 3 of Ex. 1004 indicates
`
`this journal was received as of June 28, 1995. Considering this information in
`
`concert with the record data from Exhibit 1019, and allowing for some time
`
`between the date stamp and the issue’s appearance on library shelves where it
`
`would have been publicly available, it is my opinion that the Vol. 30, No. 6,
`
`November-December 1994 edition of Information Processing and Management
`
`was made available and accessible to the public by the University of Michigan
`
`Library shortly after initial publication and certainly no later than the middle of
`
`July, 1995.
`
`44. Based on the evidence presented here—publication in the widely held
`
`periodical, online
`
`indexing and publication, and
`
`library processing and
`
`cataloging—it is my opinion that the Howard paper (Exhibit 1004 and Attachment
`
`A2) is an authentic document. It is also my opinion that the Architecture paper
`
`was publicly available no later than the middle of July 1995.
`
`45.
`
`I have been retained on behalf of the Petitioner to provide assistance
`
`in the above-illustrated matter in establishing the authenticity and public
`
`availability of the documents discussed in this declaration. I am being compensated
`
`for my services in this matter at the rate of $100.00 per hour plus reasonable
`
`expenses. My statements are objective, and my compensation does not depend on
`
`the outcome of this matter.
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000019
`
`

`

`46.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
`
`correct. I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are
`
`true and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true;
`
`and further that these statements were made the knowledge that willful false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Dated: February 28, 2019
`
`Jacob Robert Munford
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000020
`
`

`

`ATTACHMENT A1
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000021
`
`

`

`2/26/2019
`
`Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue: data compression
`
`SIGN IN SIGN UP
`
`
`
`Tools and Resources
`
`TOC Service:
`Email
`RSS
`
`Save to Binder
`
`Export Formats:
`BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref
`Share:
`
`|
`
`Author Tags
`
`Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue: data
`compression
`Volume 30 Issue 6, 1994 table of contents
`
`1994 Journal
`
` Bibliometrics
`· Citation Count: 81
`· Downloads (cumulative): n/a
`· Downloads (12 Months): n/a
`· Downloads (6 Weeks): n/a
`
`Editors:
`
`James Storer
`Abraham Bookstein The Univ. of Chicago, Chicago, IL
`
`Published in:
`· Journal
`Information Processing and Management: an International Journal archive
`Pergamon Press, Inc. Elmsford, NY, USA
`table of contents ISSN:0306-4573
`
`
`
`
` Contact Us
`
`|
`
` Switch to single page view (no tabs)
`
`Abstract
`
`Authors
`
`References
`
`Cited By
`
`Index Terms
`
`Publication
`
`Reviews
`
`Comments
`
`Table of Contents
`
`Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue: data compression
`Volume 30 Issue 6, 1994
`Table of Contents
`
`previous issue | next issue
`
`Memory efficient ranking
`Alistair Moffat, Justin Zobel, Ron Sacks-Davis
`Pages: 733-744
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90002-7
`
`Online adaptive vector quantization with variable size codebook entries
`Cornel Constantinescu, James A. Storer
`Pages: 745-758
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90003-5
`
`Codes with monotonic codeword lengths
`Julia Abrahams
`Pages: 759-764
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90004-3
`
`Can random fluctuation be exploited in data compression?
`A. Bookstein, I. K. Ravichandra Rao, M. D. Patil
`Pages: 765-775
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90005-1
`
`Design and analysis of fast text compression based on quasi-arithmetic coding
`Paul G. Howard, Jeffrey Scott Vitter
`Pages: 777-790
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90006-X
`
`An empirical evaluation of coding methods for multi-symbol alphabets
`Alistair Moffat, Neil Sharman, Ian H. Witten, Timothy C. Bell
`Pages: 791-804
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90007-8
`
`Minimizing excess code length and VLSI complexity in the multiplication free approximation of arithmetic coding
`Gennady Feygin, P. Glenn Gulak, Paul Chow
`Pages: 805-816
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90008-6
`
`https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=198667&picked=prox
`
`1/2
`
` Check out a preview of the
`
` ACM DL
`
`next
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000022
`
`

`

`2/26/2019
`
`Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue: data compression
`
`Tomographic image compression using multidimensional transforms
`John D. Villasenor
`Pages: 817-828
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90009-4
`
`Image-data compression using edge-optimizing algorithm for WFA inference
`Karel Culik, II, Jarkko Kari
`Pages: 829-838
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90010-8
`
`Progressive image coding by hierarchical linear approximation
`Xiaolin Wu, Yonggang Fang
`Pages: 839-850
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90011-6
`
`Design and performance of tree-structured vector quantizers
`Jianhua Lin, James A. Storer
`Pages: 851-862
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90012-4
`
`Adaptive encoding for numerical data compression
`Hidetoshi Yokoo
`Pages: 863-873
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90013-2
`
`A new challenge for compression algorithms: genetic sequences
`Stéphane Grumbach, Fariza Tahi
`Pages: 875-886
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90014-0
`
`Subband image coding using entropy-constrained residual vector quantization
`Faouzi Kossentini, Wilson C. Chung, Mark J. T. Smith
`Pages: 887-896
`doi>10.1016/0306-4573(94)90015-9
`
`Powered by
`
`
`The ACM Digital Library is published by the Association for Computing Machinery. Copyright © 2019 ACM, Inc.
`Terms of Usage Privacy Policy Code of Ethics Contact Us
`
`https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=198667&picked=prox
`
`2/2
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000023
`
`

`

`ATTACHMENT A2
`
`Unified Patents, Ex. 1016
`
`000024
`
`

`

`Pergamon Information Processing & Management, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 777-790, 1994 Copyright 0 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 0306-4573/94 $6.00 + .OO 0306-4573(94)00023-9 DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF FAST TEXT COMPRESSION BASED ON QUASI-ARITHMETIC CODING’ PAUL G. HOWARD’ Department of Computer Science, Brown University, Providence, R.I. 02912-1910 and JEFFREY SCOTT VITTER~ Department of Computer Science, Duke University, Durham, N.C. 27706-0129 Abstract-We give a detailed algorithm