arxiv: 2605.08266 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 📡 eess.IV · cs.CV

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Coarse-to-Fine: Progressive Image Compression for Semantically Hierarchical Classification

Jungwoo Kim , Jun-Hyuk Kim , Jong-Seok Lee

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 00:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.IV cs.CV

keywords progressive image compressionsemantic scalabilityhierarchical classificationlearned image compressionCLIP embeddingsautoregressive latent modelcoarse-to-fine coding

0 comments

The pith

By ordering latent channels to match CLIP-derived class hierarchies, a progressive codec improves coarse recognition at low bitrates while preserving fine accuracy at higher rates.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a progressive image compression method that supports semantic scalability from a single bitstream. It groups ImageNet-1K classes into hierarchies using CLIP embedding similarities and assigns these levels to ordered blocks in a channel-wise autoregressive latent model. Each block is trained specifically to enable recognition at its corresponding semantic level. Experiments show that early parts of the bitstream yield stronger broad-category results than standard progressive codecs, while the complete stream maintains detailed classification performance.

Core claim

The central claim is that decomposing latent representations into hierarchically ordered channel blocks, each explicitly optimized for a semantic hierarchy derived from CLIP embeddings of ImageNet-1K classes, produces semantic scalability in progressive transmission for hierarchical classification.

What carries the argument

Hierarchically ordered channel blocks within a channel-wise autoregressive latent model, with each block trained for one level of a CLIP-based semantic hierarchy.

If this is right

Coarse-level recognition improves substantially at low bitrates relative to prior progressive codecs.
Fine-grained accuracy remains comparable at higher bitrates.
A single bitstream supports decoding that adapts to the semantic level required by the task.
Hierarchical evaluation metrics demonstrate outperformance over existing progressive methods.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same block-ordering idea could be tested on video or other modalities if comparable semantic hierarchies are constructed.
Systems that decide early on broad categories might save bandwidth by truncating the stream after the first blocks.
Alternative methods for building the hierarchies, such as using different embedding models, would test whether the gains depend on the CLIP choice.

Load-bearing premise

The CLIP embedding method must produce stable and meaningful hierarchies of ImageNet classes that align with actual classification needs at each level.

What would settle it

A direct comparison at the highest tested bitrate showing lower fine-grained accuracy for the hierarchy-ordered method than for a standard progressive baseline without such ordering.

read the original abstract

Recent advances in learned image compression (LIC) have enabled practical deployments, spurring active research into image compression for machines and progressive coding schemes. However, their integration remains under-explored: prior works on progressive machine codec predominantly target sample-level difficulty adaptation (i.e., easy-to-hard), without considering semantic-level scalability. In this work, we introduce a semantic hierarchy-aware progressive codec that enables semantic scalability (i.e., coarse-to-fine) from a single bitstream. We first systematically categorize ImageNet-1K classes into CLIP embedding-based semantic hierarchies. Based on a channel-wise autoregressive framework, we decompose latent representations into hierarchically ordered channel blocks, each explicitly optimized for a corresponding semantic hierarchy. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach substantially improves coarse-level recognition at low bitrates while maintaining fine-grained accuracy at higher bitrates. By reframing progressive transmission through the lens of semantic scalability, our work provides an efficient and interpretable solution for task-adaptive image coding, outperforming existing progressive codecs under hierarchical evaluation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This adds semantic hierarchy ordering to progressive learned compression via CLIP on ImageNet, which is a clean extension but the practical gains and hierarchy stability need closer scrutiny.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that the paper takes a standard channel-wise autoregressive learned compressor and reorders its latent blocks according to coarse-to-fine semantic levels derived from CLIP embeddings on ImageNet-1K. This lets early bits support coarse class recognition while later bits fill in the fine details, which is a step past the usual sample-level easy-to-hard progressive schemes. They show measurable lifts in coarse accuracy at low rates and keep fine-grained top-1 reasonable at full rate, with the hierarchical evaluation metric making the comparison straightforward. That part is executed cleanly and the idea is easy to follow. The experiments appear to use reasonable baselines and report the expected rate-accuracy curves. The soft spots sit mainly in the hierarchy construction itself. CLIP clusters can be driven by visual texture rather than label semantics, and the paper does not seem to test how much the coarse/fine split changes with different embedding models or random seeds. Because the autoregressive model ties channels together, forcing this particular order could also create small hidden costs in overall rate-distortion or final accuracy that are not fully quantified in the ablations. Those are fixable but worth pressing on. This is useful reading for people already working on machine-oriented or scalable compression codecs. A reader who cares about task-adaptive bitstreams in constrained bandwidth settings will pick up a concrete technique and a new evaluation angle. It is solid enough to send for peer review; the core claim is testable and the method is described at a level that allows reproduction. I would recommend review with a request for more checks on hierarchy robustness and the full set of rate-distortion numbers including any fine-grained penalty.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a progressive learned image compression codec that achieves semantic scalability (coarse-to-fine) from a single bitstream. It first constructs semantic hierarchies over ImageNet-1K classes via CLIP embeddings, then decomposes the latent representation of a channel-wise autoregressive model into ordered channel blocks, each explicitly optimized for the corresponding semantic level. Experiments claim substantial gains in coarse-level recognition at low bitrates while preserving fine-grained top-1 accuracy at higher rates, outperforming prior progressive codecs under hierarchical evaluation.

Significance. If the central claims hold after addressing the hierarchy stability and trade-off concerns, the work would meaningfully advance task-adaptive image coding by shifting progressive compression from sample-level difficulty adaptation to semantic-level scalability. This provides an interpretable mechanism for prioritizing coarse semantics in early bitstream portions, which is relevant for bandwidth-constrained machine-vision pipelines. The approach builds on established channel-wise autoregressive frameworks without introducing new free parameters beyond the hierarchy definition.

major comments (2)

[Section 3.1] Section 3.1 (Semantic Hierarchy Construction): The central claim depends on CLIP embedding-based categorization producing stable, classification-aligned coarse/fine hierarchies. No evidence is provided that the resulting levels are robust to CLIP model variant, embedding seed, or clustering hyperparameters; if the partitions primarily reflect low-level visual similarity rather than label semantics, the low-bitrate coarse-recognition gains cannot be attributed to semantic scalability as stated.
[Section 5.2] Section 5.2 and associated rate-accuracy curves: The assertion that fine-grained accuracy is maintained at higher bitrates must be supported by direct comparison of full-bitrate top-1 accuracy against both progressive and non-progressive LIC baselines. If the hierarchical channel-block ordering introduces any rate-distortion penalty or autoregressive dependency disruption, the “no degradation” claim is undermined; current reporting leaves this load-bearing point unverified.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract and Section 5 should explicitly list the exact hierarchical metrics (e.g., coarse-level top-1 at 0.1 bpp, fine-level top-1 at 1.0 bpp) and the precise set of progressive baselines used for comparison.
[Section 4] Notation for the channel-block decomposition and the modified autoregressive conditioning should be introduced with a clear diagram or equation early in Section 4 to avoid ambiguity when describing how blocks are ordered and optimized.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help strengthen the paper's claims on semantic scalability. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate additional analysis and explicit comparisons.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Section 3.1] Section 3.1 (Semantic Hierarchy Construction): The central claim depends on CLIP embedding-based categorization producing stable, classification-aligned coarse/fine hierarchies. No evidence is provided that the resulting levels are robust to CLIP model variant, embedding seed, or clustering hyperparameters; if the partitions primarily reflect low-level visual similarity rather than label semantics, the low-bitrate coarse-recognition gains cannot be attributed to semantic scalability as stated.

Authors: We agree that robustness analysis is needed to support attributing gains to semantic rather than low-level factors. The manuscript uses standard CLIP ViT-B/32 embeddings with fixed-seed k-means on class prototypes. In revision, we will add a sensitivity study (new subsection or appendix) quantifying partition stability across CLIP variants (e.g., RN50, ViT-L/14) and seeds, reporting overlap metrics. We will also include qualitative hierarchy examples showing semantic groupings (e.g., related animal classes at coarse level) to illustrate alignment beyond low-level similarity, leveraging CLIP's established semantic properties from zero-shot tasks. revision: yes
Referee: [Section 5.2] Section 5.2 and associated rate-accuracy curves: The assertion that fine-grained accuracy is maintained at higher bitrates must be supported by direct comparison of full-bitrate top-1 accuracy against both progressive and non-progressive LIC baselines. If the hierarchical channel-block ordering introduces any rate-distortion penalty or autoregressive dependency disruption, the “no degradation” claim is undermined; current reporting leaves this load-bearing point unverified.

Authors: We acknowledge the need for explicit full-bitrate verification. Because the complete latent (all channel blocks) is transmitted at high rates and the entropy model reconstructs the full representation, performance should match the non-progressive baseline. To confirm no penalty from hierarchical ordering or optimization, the revised Section 5.2 will include a table directly comparing top-1 accuracy at the highest tested bitrate for our method versus the standard channel-wise autoregressive LIC and other progressive codecs. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation remains self-contained

full rationale

The paper's core steps—CLIP-based categorization of ImageNet-1K into semantic hierarchies followed by channel-block decomposition in a standard channel-wise autoregressive latent model—are grounded in external embeddings and conventional LIC architectures. No load-bearing claim reduces by construction to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, a self-citation chain, or an ansatz smuggled via prior work. The claimed coarse-to-fine scalability is an empirical outcome of the new decomposition and optimization, not a definitional tautology. This matches the default expectation for non-circular papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of CLIP embeddings for creating semantic hierarchies and on the assumption that channel-wise decomposition can be optimized independently per hierarchy level without compromising the overall rate-distortion or classification performance.

axioms (1)

domain assumption CLIP embeddings yield stable and meaningful semantic hierarchies for ImageNet-1K classes that align with human-interpretable coarse-to-fine classification needs
Invoked when the paper states it systematically categorizes classes into CLIP embedding-based semantic hierarchies.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5480 in / 1366 out tokens · 30040 ms · 2026-05-12T00:55:39.545520+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We first systematically categorize ImageNet-1K classes into CLIP embedding-based semantic hierarchies... decompose latent representations into hierarchically ordered channel blocks, each explicitly optimized for a corresponding semantic hierarchy.
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AbsoluteFloorClosure.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

CLIP-based Semantic Clustering... k-means clustering to the normalized embeddings... three-level hierarchy... K∈{10,100,1000}

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Coarse-to-Fine: Progressive Image Compression for Semantically Hierarchical Classification

INTRODUCTION Image compression, one of the fundamental research prob- lems in image processing, has recently evolved from tradi- tional signal processing techniques [1, 2] to learned image compression (LIC) [3–6], achieving superior rate-distortion performance through end-to-end optimization. However, most LIC codecs lack fine-grained scalability, requiri...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[2]

RELATED WORK Progressive Image Compression.Progressive image com- pression enables a single bitstream to be decoded at multi- ple levels for flexible rate control. Early efforts primarily fo- cused on training schemes to achieve scalability [7,10,11,14], while more recent works introduced trit-plane coding [8, 9, 13] and efficient latent ordering [12]. De...

work page
[3]

a photo of{ }

SEMANTIC HIERARCHY IN IMAGENET To enable semantically progressive transmission, we first es- tablish a three-level hierarchy over the ImageNet-1K [22] classes. CLIP-based Semantic Clustering.Since ImageNet-1K classes are intrinsically mapped to WordNet [23] synsets, a straightforward approach to establish a semantic hierarchy is to perform a depth-based c...

work page
[4]

#$𝐌!"#$ 𝐙

METHODS In this section, we introduce our semantic hierarchy-aware progressive codec (see Fig. 3), which aligns each decoding stage with a corresponding level of semantic hierarchy. 𝚺!"#$𝐌!"#$ 𝐙"𝐙 𝐗𝑄 𝑄! 𝐗$"#$ Encoder (𝑔!) HyperEncoder (ℎ!) HyperDecoder (ℎ") Decoder(𝑔!) 𝐏 𝐘𝐘&ContextModelContextModelContextModel 𝐂!"#$ 𝐂!##% 𝐂!&#' EntropyDecoder 𝚺!##%𝐌!##% E...

work page
[5]

Vulture”. The Wu-Palmer similarity scores shown in the figure correspond to the following predicted classes: “Airliner

EXPERIMENTS 5.1. Experimental Setup Training Details.We train our codec on 80K images ran- domly sampled from the ImageNet-1K training set [22] for 100 epochs with a batch size of 8. Our model is based on TIC [4], with modifications to incorporate∆-networks that adaptively adjust distribution parameters at each se- mantic level. We setλ={1e −4,1e −3,1e −2...

work page
[6]

CONCLUSION In this work, we presented a semantic hierarchy-aware pro- gressive codec that aligns each decoding stage with a corre- sponding level of class granularity, enabling coarse-to-fine semantic scalability from a single bitstream. Experiments showed that reframing progressive transmission through se- mantic scalability outperforms existing codecs u...

work page
[7]

RS-2024-00453301, RS- 2025-00517159) and by Institute of Information & commu- nications Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant (IITP-2025-RS-2024-00428780)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by the National Research Foun- dation of Korea (NRF) grant (No. RS-2024-00453301, RS- 2025-00517159) and by Institute of Information & commu- nications Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant (IITP-2025-RS-2024-00428780)

work page 2024
[8]

The jpeg 2000 still image compression standard,

A. Skodras, C. Christopoulos, and T. Ebrahimi, “The jpeg 2000 still image compression standard,”IEEE SPM, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 36–58, 2001

work page 2000
[9]

Overview of the versatile video coding (vvc) standard and its applications,

B. Bross et al., “Overview of the versatile video coding (vvc) standard and its applications,”IEEE TCSVT, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 3736–3764, 2021

work page 2021
[10]

Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior,

J. Ball ´e et al., “Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior,” inICLR, 2018

work page 2018
[11]

Transformer- based image compression,

M. Lu, P. Guo, H. Shi, C. Cao, and Z. Ma, “Transformer- based image compression,” inDCC, 2022, pp. 469–469

work page 2022
[12]

Joint global and local hierarchical priors for learned image compression,

J.-H. Kim, B. Heo, and J.-S. Lee, “Joint global and local hierarchical priors for learned image compression,” in CVPR, 2022, pp. 5992–6001

work page 2022
[13]

Learned image com- pression with mixed transformer-cnn architectures,

J. Liu, H. Sun, and J. Katto, “Learned image com- pression with mixed transformer-cnn architectures,” in CVPR, 2023, pp. 14388–14397

work page 2023
[14]

Progressive neural image compression with nested quantization and latent ordering,

Y . Lu et al., “Progressive neural image compression with nested quantization and latent ordering,” inICIP, 2021, pp. 539–543

work page 2021
[15]

Dpict: Deep progressive image com- pression using trit-planes,

J.-H. Lee et al., “Dpict: Deep progressive image com- pression using trit-planes,” inCVPR, 2022, pp. 16113– 16122

work page 2022
[16]

Context- based trit-plane coding for progressive image compres- sion,

S. Jeon, K. Choi, Y . Park, and C.-S. Kim, “Context- based trit-plane coding for progressive image compres- sion,” inCVPR, 2023, pp. 14348–14357

work page 2023
[17]

Progdtd: Pro- gressive learned image compression with double-tail- drop training,

A. Hojjat, J. Haberer, and O. Landsiedel, “Progdtd: Pro- gressive learned image compression with double-tail- drop training,” inCVPRW, 2023, pp. 1130–1139

work page 2023
[18]

Limitnet: Progressive, content-aware image offloading for extremely weak devices & net- works,

A. Hojjat et al., “Limitnet: Progressive, content-aware image offloading for extremely weak devices & net- works,” inMobiSys, 2024, pp. 519–533

work page 2024
[19]

Efficient progressive image compres- sion with variance-aware masking,

A. Presta, E. Tartaglione, A. Fiandrotti, M. Grangetto, and P. Cosman, “Efficient progressive image compres- sion with variance-aware masking,” inWACV, 2025, pp. 7681–7689

work page 2025
[20]

Progressive learned image compression for machine perception,

J. Kim, J.-H. Kim, and J.-S. Lee, “Progressive learned image compression for machine perception,”arXiv, 2025

work page 2025
[21]

Deephq: Learned hi- erarchical quantizer for progressive deep image coding,

J. Lee, S. Y . Jeong, and M. Kim, “Deephq: Learned hi- erarchical quantizer for progressive deep image coding,” ACM TOMCCAP, vol. 22, no. 1, 2026

work page 2026
[22]

Vi- sually consistent hierarchical image classification,

S. Park, Y Zhang, S. Yu, S Beery, and J. Huang, “Vi- sually consistent hierarchical image classification,” in ICLR, 2025

work page 2025
[23]

Image coding for machines: An end-to-end learned approach,

N. Le et al., “Image coding for machines: An end-to-end learned approach,” inICASSP, 2021, pp. 1590–1594

work page 2021
[24]

Image coding for machines with edge information learning using segment anything,

T. Shindo et al., “Image coding for machines with edge information learning using segment anything,” inICIP, 2024, pp. 3702–3708

work page 2024
[25]

Transtic: Transferring transformer- based image compression from human perception to machine vision,

Y .-H. Chen et al., “Transtic: Transferring transformer- based image compression from human perception to machine vision,” inICCV, 2023, pp. 23297–23307

work page 2023
[26]

Image compression for machine and human vision with spatial-frequency adaptation,

H. Li, S. Li, S. Ding, W. Dai, M. Cao, C. Li, J. Zou, and H. Xiong, “Image compression for machine and human vision with spatial-frequency adaptation,” inECCV, 2024, p. 382–399

work page 2024
[27]

All-in-one image coding for joint human-machine vision with multi-path aggregation,

X. Zhang, P. Guo, M. Lu, and Z. Ma, “All-in-one image coding for joint human-machine vision with multi-path aggregation,” inNeurIPS, 2024, pp. 71465–71503

work page 2024
[28]

Slim: Semantic-based low-bitrate image compression for machines by leverag- ing diffusion,

H. Lee, J.-H. Kim, and J.-S. Lee, “Slim: Semantic-based low-bitrate image compression for machines by leverag- ing diffusion,”arXiv, 2025

work page 2025
[29]

Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge,

O. Russakovsky et al., “Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge,”IJCV, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 211– 252, 2015

work page 2015
[30]

Wordnet: a lexical database for en- glish,

George A. Miller, “Wordnet: a lexical database for en- glish,”Comm. ACM, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 39–41, 1995

work page 1995
[31]

Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,

A. Radford et al., “Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,” inICML, 2021, pp. 8748–8763

work page 2021
[32]

Verb semantics and lexical se- lection,

Z. Wu and M. Palmer, “Verb semantics and lexical se- lection,” inACL, 1994, pp. 133–138

work page 1994
[33]

Learned image compression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules,

Z. Cheng, H. Sun, M. Takeuchi, and J. Katto, “Learned image compression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules,” inCVPR, 2020, pp. 7939–7948

work page 2020
[34]

Deep residual learning for image recognition,

K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” inCVPR, 2016, pp. 770–778

work page 2016
[35]

A convnext for the 2020s,

Z. Liu et al., “A convnext for the 2020s,” inCVPR, 2022, pp. 11966–11976

work page 2022
[36]

Searching for mobilenetv3,

A. Howard et al., “Searching for mobilenetv3,” inICCV, 2019

work page 2019
[37]

An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,

A. Dosovitskiy et al., “An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,” inICLR, 2021

work page 2021
[38]

Calculation of average psnr differ- ences between rd-curves,

G. Bjontegaard, “Calculation of average psnr differ- ences between rd-curves,”ITU-T SG16, Doc. VCEG- M33, 2001

work page 2001