That's a very interesting case. If you want I will look into this in more detail, I'm waiting for some parts so I have some time to kill.

Are you an expert in this field? I'm curious if the AI generated code here is actually good.

I've done some work on compression really long ago but I am very far from an expert in the field, in fact I'm not an expert in any field ;) The best I ever did was a way to compress video better than what was available at the time but wavelets overtook that and I have not kept current.

I'm curious about two things:

- is it really that much better (if so, that would by itself be a publishable result) where better is

  - not worse for other cases

  - always better for the cases documented

I think that's a fair challenge.

- is it correct?

And as a sidetrack to the latter: can it be understood to the point that you can prove it is correct? Unfortunately I don't have experience with your toolchain but that's a nice learning opportunity.

Question: are you familiar with

https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Techn...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary_corpus

https://corpus.canterbury.ac.nz/

As a black box it works. It produces smaller binaries. when extracted matching bit-by-bit to the original file.

I tested across 100 packages. better efficiency across the board.

But I don't know if I (or anyone) want to maintain software like this. Where it's a complete black box.

it was a fun experiment though. proves that with a robust testing harness you can do interesting things with pure AI coding

I think the copyright issue is the bigger one to solve, you can't really contribute it anywhere because you don't actually own it. You'll need to convince potential users somehow that you're in it for the long haul and not having ownership is going to put the brakes on distribution.