A smart object is an object that enhances the interaction with not only people but also with other smart objects. Also known as smart connected products or smart connected things (SCoT), they are products, assets and other things embedded with processors, sensors, software and connectivity that allow data to be exchanged between the product and its environment, manufacturer, operator/user, and other products and systems. Connectivity also enables some capabilities of the product to exist outside the physical device, in what is known as the product cloud. The data collected from these products can be then analysed to inform decision-making, enable operational efficiencies and continuously improve the performance of the product. It can not only refer to interaction with physical world objects but also to interaction with virtual (computing environment) objects. A smart physical object may be created either as an artifact or manufactured product or by embedding electronic tags such as RFID tags or sensors into non-smart physical objects. Smart virtual objects are created as software objects that are intrinsic when creating and operating a virtual or cyber world simulation or game. The concept of a smart object has several origins and uses, see History. There are also several overlapping terms, see also smart device, tangible object or tangible user interface and Thing as in the Internet of things. == History == In the early 1990s, Mark Weiser, from whom the term ubiquitous computing originated, referred to a vision "When almost every object either contains a computer or can have a tab attached to it, obtaining information will be trivial", Although Weiser did not specifically refer to an object as being smart, his early work did imply that smart physical objects are smart in the sense that they act as digital information sources. Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer refer to tangible objects in terms of tangibles bits or tangible user interfaces that enable users to "grasp & manipulate" bits in the center of users' attention by coupling the bits with everyday physical objects and architectural surfaces. The smart object concept was introduced by Marcelo Kallman and Daniel Thalmann as an object that can describe its own possible interactions. The main focus here is to model interactions of smart virtual objects with virtual humans, agents, in virtual worlds. The opposite approach to smart objects is 'plain' objects that do not provide this information. The additional information provided by this concept enables far more general interaction schemes, and can greatly simplify the planner of an artificial intelligence agent. In contrast to smart virtual objects used in virtual worlds, Lev Manovich focuses on physical space filled with electronic and visual information. Here, "smart objects" are described as "objects connected to the Net; objects that can sense their users and display smart behaviour". More recently in the early 2010s, smart objects are being proposed as a key enabler for the vision of the Internet of things. The combination of the Internet and emerging technologies such as near field communications, real-time localization, and embedded sensors enables everyday objects to be transformed into smart objects that can understand and react to their environment. Such objects are building blocks for the Internet of things and enable novel computing applications. In 2018, one of the world's first smart houses was built in Klaukkala, Finland in the form of a five-floor apartment block, using the Kone Residential Flow solution created by KONE, allowing even a smartphone to act as a home key. == Characteristics == Although we can view interaction with physical smart object in the physical world as distinct from interaction with virtual smart objects in a virtual simulated world, these can be related. Poslad considers the progression of: how humans use models of smart objects situated in the physical world to enhance human to physical world interaction; versus how smart physical objects situated in the physical world can model human interaction in order to lessen the need for human to physical world interaction; versus how virtual smart objects by modelling both physical world objects and modelling humans as objects and their subsequent interactions can form a predominantly smart virtual object environment. === Smart physical objects === The concept smart for a smart physical object simply means that it is active, digital, networked, can operate to some extent autonomously, is reconfigurable and has local control of the resources it needs such as energy, data storage, etc. Note, a smart object does not necessarily need to be intelligent as in exhibiting a strong essence of artificial intelligence—although it can be designed to also be intelligent. Physical world smart objects can be described in terms of three properties: Awareness: is a smart object's ability to understand (that is, sense, interpret, and react to) events and human activities occurring in the physical world. Representation: refers to a smart object's application and programming model—in particular, programming abstractions. Interaction: denotes the object's ability to converse with the user in terms of input, output, control, and feedback. Based upon these properties, these have been classified into three types: Activity-Aware Smart Objects: Are objects that can record information about work activities and its own use. Policy-Aware Smart Objects: Are objects that are activity-aware Objects can interpret events and activities with respect to predefined organizational policies. Process-Aware Smart Objects: Processes play a fundamental role in industrial work management and operation. A process is a collection of related activities or tasks that are ordered according to their position in time and space. === Smart virtual objects === For the virtual object in a virtual world case, an object is called smart when it has the ability to describe its possible interactions. This focuses on constructing a virtual world using only virtual objects that contain their own interaction information. There are four basic elements to constructing such a smart virtual object framework. Object properties: physical properties and a text description Interaction information: position of handles, buttons, grips, and the like Object behavior: different behaviors based on state variables Agent behaviors: description of the behavior an agent should follow when using the object Some versions of smart objects also include animation information in the object information, but this is not considered to be an efficient approach, since this can make objects inappropriately oversized. === Categorization === The terms smart, connected product or smart product can be confusing as it is used to cover a broad range of different products, ranging from smart home appliances (e.g., smart bathroom scales or smart light bulbs) to smart cars (e.g., Tesla). While these products share certain similarities, they often differ substantially in their capabilities. Raff et al. developed a conceptual framework that distinguishes different smart products based on their capabilities, which features 4 types of smart product archetypes (in ascending order of "smartness"). Digital Connected Responsive Intelligent == Advantages == Smart, connected products have three primary components: Physical – made up of the product's mechanical and electrical parts. Smart – made up of sensors, microprocessors, data storage, controls, software, and an embedded operating system with enhanced user interface. Connectivity – made up of ports, antennae, and protocols enabling wired/wireless connections that serve two purposes, it allows data to be exchanged with the product and enables some functions of the product to exist outside the physical device. Each component expands the capabilities of one another resulting in "a virtuous cycle of value improvement". First, the smart components of a product amplify the value and capabilities of the physical components. Then, connectivity amplifies the value and capabilities of the smart components. These improvements include: Monitoring of the product's conditions, its external environment, and its operations and usage. Control of various product functions to better respond to changes in its environment, as well as to personalize the user experience. Optimization of the product's overall operations based on actual performance data, and reduction of downtimes through predictive maintenance and remote service. Autonomous product operation, including learning from their environment, adapting to users' preferences and self-diagnosing and service. === The Internet of things (IoT) === The Internet of things is the network of physical objects that contain embedded technology to communicate and sense or interact with their internal states or the external environment. The phrase "Internet of things" reflects the gro
Is an AI Copywriting Tool Worth It in 2026?
Looking for the best AI copywriting tool? An AI copywriting tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI copywriting tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks
Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks (KANs) are a type of artificial neural network architecture inspired by the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem, also known as the superposition theorem. Unlike traditional multilayer perceptrons (MLPs), which rely on fixed activation functions and linear weights, KANs replace each weight with a learnable univariate function, often represented using splines. == History == KANs (Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks) were proposed by Liu et al. (2024) as a generalization of the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem (KART), aiming to outperform MLPs in small-scale AI and scientific tasks. Before KANs, numerous studies explored KART's connections to neural networks or used it as a basis for designing new network architectures. In the 1980s and 1990s, early research applied KART to neural network design. Kůrková et al. (1992), Hecht-Nielsen (1987), and Nees (1994) established theoretical foundations for multilayer networks based on KART. Igelnik et al. (2003) introduced the Kolmogorov Spline Network using cubic splines to model complex functions. Sprecher (1996, 1997) introduced numerical methods for building network layers, while Nakamura et al. (1993) created activation functions with guaranteed approximation accuracy. These works linked KART's theoretical potential with practical neural network implementation. KART has also been used in other computational and theoretical fields. Coppejans (2004) developed nonparametric regression estimators using B-splines, Bryant (2008) applied it to high-dimensional image tasks, Liu (2015) investigated theoretical applications in optimal transport and image encryption, and more recently, Polar and Poluektov (2021) used Urysohn operators for efficient KART construction, while Fakhoury et al. (2022) introduced ExSpliNet, integrating KART with probabilistic trees and multivariate B-splines for improved function approximation. == Architecture == KANs are based on the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem, which was linked to the 13th Hilbert problem. Given x = ( x 1 , x 2 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle x=(x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n})} consisting of n variables, a multivariate continuous function f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(x)} can be represented as: f ( x ) = f ( x 1 , … , x n ) = ∑ q = 1 2 n + 1 Φ q ( ∑ p = 1 n φ q , p ( x p ) ) {\displaystyle f(x)=f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n})=\sum _{q=1}^{2n+1}\Phi _{q}\left(\sum _{p=1}^{n}\varphi _{q,p}(x_{p})\right)} (1) This formulation contains two nested summations: an outer and an inner sum. The outer sum ∑ q = 1 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{q=1}^{2n+1}} aggregates 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle 2n+1} terms, each involving a function Φ q : R → R {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}:\mathbb {R} \to \mathbb {R} } . The inner sum ∑ p = 1 n {\displaystyle \sum _{p=1}^{n}} computes n terms for each q, where each term φ q , p : [ 0 , 1 ] → R {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}:[0,1]\to \mathbb {R} } is a continuous function of the single variable x p {\displaystyle x_{p}} . The inner continuous functions φ q , p {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}} are universal, independent of f {\displaystyle f} , while the outer functions Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} depend on the specific function f {\displaystyle f} being represented. The representation (1) holds for all multivariate functions f {\displaystyle f} as proved in . If f {\displaystyle f} is continuous, then the outer functions Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} are continuous; if f {\displaystyle f} is discontinuous, then the corresponding Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} are generally discontinuous, while the inner functions φ q , p {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}} remain the same universal functions. Liu et al. proposed the name KAN. A general KAN network consisting of L layers takes x to generate the output as: K A N ( x ) = ( Φ L − 1 ∘ Φ L − 2 ∘ ⋯ ∘ Φ 1 ∘ Φ 0 ) x {\displaystyle \mathrm {KAN} (x)=(\Phi ^{L-1}\circ \Phi ^{L-2}\circ \cdots \circ \Phi ^{1}\circ \Phi ^{0})x} (3) Here, Φ l {\displaystyle \Phi ^{l}} is the function matrix of the l-th KAN layer or a set of pre-activations. Let i denote the neuron of the l-th layer and j the neuron of the (l+1)-th layer. The activation function φ j , i l {\displaystyle \varphi _{j,i}^{l}} connects (l, i) to (l+1, j): φ j , i l , l = 0 , … , L − 1 , i = 1 , … , n l , j = 1 , … , n l + 1 {\displaystyle \varphi _{j,i}^{l},\quad l=0,\dots ,L-1,\;i=1,\dots ,n_{l},\;j=1,\dots ,n_{l+1}} (4) where nl is the number of nodes of the l-th layer. Thus, the function matrix Φ l {\displaystyle \Phi ^{l}} can be represented as an n l + 1 × n l {\displaystyle n_{l+1}\times n_{l}} matrix of activations: x l + 1 = ( φ 1 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ 1 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ 1 , n l l ( ⋅ ) φ 2 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ 2 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ 2 , n l l ( ⋅ ) ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ φ n l + 1 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ n l + 1 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ n l + 1 , n l l ( ⋅ ) ) x l {\displaystyle x^{l+1}={\begin{pmatrix}\varphi _{1,1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{1,2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{1,n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\\\varphi _{2,1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{2,2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{2,n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\\\vdots &\vdots &\ddots &\vdots \\\varphi _{n_{l+1},1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{n_{l+1},2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{n_{l+1},n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\end{pmatrix}}x^{l}} == Implementations == To make the KAN layers optimizable, the inner function is formed by the combination of spline and basic functions as the formula: φ ( x ) = w b b ( x ) + w s spline ( x ) {\displaystyle \varphi (x)=w_{b}\,b(x)+w_{s}\,{\text{spline}}(x)} where b ( x ) {\displaystyle b(x)} is the basic function, usually defined as s i l u ( x ) = x / ( 1 + e x ) {\displaystyle silu(x)=x/(1+e^{x})} and w b {\displaystyle w_{b}} is the base weight matrix. Also, w s {\displaystyle w_{s}} is the spline weight matrix and spline ( x ) {\displaystyle {\text{spline}}(x)} is the spline function. The spline function can be a sum of B-splines. spline ( x ) = ∑ i c i B i ( x ) {\displaystyle {\text{spline}}(x)=\sum _{i}c_{i}B_{i}(x)} Many studies suggested to use other polynomial and curve functions instead of B-spline to create new KAN variants. == Functions used == The choice of functional basis strongly influences the performance of KANs. Common function families include: B-splines: Provide locality, smoothness, and interpretability; they are the most widely used in current implementations. RBFs (include Gaussian RBFs): Capture localized features in data and are effective in approximating functions with non-linear or clustered structures. Chebyshev polynomials: Offer efficient approximation with minimized error in the maximum norm, making them useful for stable function representation. Rational function: Useful for approximating functions with singularities or sharp variations, as they can model asymptotic behavior better than polynomials. Fourier series: Capture periodic patterns effectively and are particularly useful in domains such as physics-informed machine learning. Wavelet functions (DoG, Mexican hat, Morlet, and Shannon): Used for feature extraction as they can capture both high-frequency and low-frequency data components. Piecewise linear functions: Provide efficient approximation for multivariate functions in KANs. == Usage == In some modern neural architectures like convolutional neural networks (CNNs), recurrent neural networks (RNNs), and Transformers, KANs are typically used as drop-in substitutes for MLP layers. Despite KANs' general-purpose design, researchers have created and used them for a number of tasks: Scientific machine learning (SciML): Function fitting, partial differential equations (PDEs) and physical/mathematical laws. Continual learning: KANs better preserve previously learned information during incremental updates, avoiding catastrophic forgetting due to the locality of spline adjustments. Graph neural networks: Extensions such as Kolmogorov–Arnold Graph Neural Networks (KA-GNNs) integrate KAN modules into message-passing architectures, showing improvements in molecular property prediction tasks. Sensor data processing: Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks (KANs) have recently been applied to sensor data processing due to their ability to model complex nonlinear relationships with relatively few parameters and improved interpretability compared to conventional multilayer perceptrons. Applications include industrial soft sensors, biomedical signal analysis, remote sensing, and environmental monitoring systems. == Drawbacks == KANs can be computationally intensive and require a large number of parameters due to their use of polynomial functions to capture data.
Situated
In artificial intelligence and cognitive science, the term situated refers to an agent which is embedded in an environment. The term situated is commonly used to refer to robots, but some researchers argue that software agents can also be situated if: they exist in a dynamic (rapidly changing) environment, which they can manipulate or change through their actions, and which they can sense or perceive. Examples might include web-based agents, which can alter data or trigger processes (such as purchases) over the internet, or virtual-reality bots which inhabit and change virtual worlds, such as Second Life. Being situated is generally considered to be part of being embodied, but it is useful to consider each perspective individually. The situated perspective emphasizes that intelligent behaviour derives from the environment and the agent's interactions with it. The nature of these interactions are defined by an agent's embodiment.
Multi-armed bandit
In probability theory and machine learning, the multi-armed bandit problem (sometimes called the K- or N-armed bandit problem) is named from imagining a gambler at a row of slot machines (sometimes known as "one-armed bandits"), who has to decide which machines to play, how many times to play each machine and in which order to play them, and whether to continue with the current machine or try a different machine. More generally, it is a problem in which a decision maker iteratively selects one of multiple fixed choices (i.e., arms or actions) when the properties of each choice are only partially known at the time of allocation, and may become better understood as time passes. A fundamental aspect of bandit problems is that choosing an arm does not affect the properties of the arm or other arms. Instances of the multi-armed bandit problem include the task of iteratively allocating a fixed, limited set of resources between competing (alternative) choices in a way that minimizes the regret. A notable alternative setup for the multi-armed bandit problem includes the "best arm identification (BAI)" problem where the goal is instead to identify the best choice by the end of a finite number of rounds. The multi-armed bandit problem is a classic reinforcement learning problem that exemplifies the exploration–exploitation tradeoff dilemma. In contrast to general reinforcement learning, the selected actions in bandit problems do not affect the reward distribution of the arms. The multi-armed bandit problem also falls into the broad category of stochastic scheduling. In the problem, each machine provides a random reward from a probability distribution specific to that machine, that is not known a priori. The objective of the gambler is to maximize the sum of rewards earned through a sequence of lever pulls. The crucial tradeoff the gambler faces at each trial is between "exploitation" of the machine that has the highest expected payoff and "exploration" to get more information about the expected payoffs of the other machines. The trade-off between exploration and exploitation is also faced in machine learning. In practice, multi-armed bandits have been used to model problems such as managing research projects in a large organization, like a science foundation or a pharmaceutical company. In early versions of the problem, the gambler begins with no initial knowledge about the machines. Herbert Robbins in 1952, realizing the importance of the problem, constructed convergent population selection strategies in "some aspects of the sequential design of experiments". A theorem, the Gittins index, first published by John C. Gittins, gives an optimal policy for maximizing the expected discounted reward. == Empirical motivation == The multi-armed bandit problem models an agent that simultaneously attempts to acquire new knowledge (called "exploration") and optimize their decisions based on existing knowledge (called "exploitation"). The agent attempts to balance these competing tasks in order to maximize their total value over the period of time considered. There are many practical applications of the bandit model, for example: clinical trials investigating the effects of different experimental treatments while minimizing patient losses, adaptive routing efforts for minimizing delays in a network, financial portfolio design In these practical examples, the problem requires balancing reward maximization based on the knowledge already acquired with attempting new actions to further increase knowledge. This is known as the exploitation vs. exploration tradeoff in machine learning. The model has also been used to control dynamic allocation of resources to different projects, answering the question of which project to work on, given uncertainty about the difficulty and payoff of each possibility. Originally considered by Allied scientists in World War II, it proved so intractable that, according to Peter Whittle, the problem was proposed to be dropped over Germany so that German scientists could also waste their time on it. The version of the problem now commonly analyzed was formulated by Herbert Robbins in 1952. == The multi-armed bandit model == The multi-armed bandit (short: bandit or MAB) can be seen as a set of real distributions B = { R 1 , … , R K } {\displaystyle B=\{R_{1},\dots ,R_{K}\}} , each distribution being associated with the rewards delivered by one of the K ∈ N + {\displaystyle K\in \mathbb {N} ^{+}} levers. Let μ 1 , … , μ K {\displaystyle \mu _{1},\dots ,\mu _{K}} be the mean values associated with these reward distributions. The gambler iteratively plays one lever per round and observes the associated reward. The objective is to maximize the sum of the collected rewards. The horizon H {\displaystyle H} is the number of rounds that remain to be played. The bandit problem is formally equivalent to a one-state Markov decision process. The regret ρ {\displaystyle \rho } after T {\displaystyle T} rounds is defined as the expected difference between the reward sum associated with an optimal strategy and the sum of the collected rewards: ρ = T μ ∗ − ∑ t = 1 T r ^ t {\displaystyle \rho =T\mu ^{}-\sum _{t=1}^{T}{\widehat {r}}_{t}} , where μ ∗ {\displaystyle \mu ^{}} is the maximal reward mean, μ ∗ = max k { μ k } {\displaystyle \mu ^{}=\max _{k}\{\mu _{k}\}} , and r ^ t {\displaystyle {\widehat {r}}_{t}} is the reward in round t {\displaystyle t} . A zero-regret strategy is a strategy whose average regret per round ρ / T {\displaystyle \rho /T} tends to zero with probability 1 when the number of played rounds tends to infinity. Intuitively, zero-regret strategies are guaranteed to converge to a (not necessarily unique) optimal strategy if enough rounds are played. == Variations == A common formulation is the Binary multi-armed bandit or Bernoulli multi-armed bandit, which issues a reward of one with probability p {\displaystyle p} , and otherwise a reward of zero. Another formulation of the multi-armed bandit has each arm representing an independent Markov machine. Each time a particular arm is played, the state of that machine advances to a new one, chosen according to the Markov state evolution probabilities. There is a reward depending on the current state of the machine. In a generalization called the "restless bandit problem", the states of non-played arms can also evolve over time. There has also been discussion of systems where the number of choices (about which arm to play) increases over time. Computer science researchers have studied multi-armed bandits under worst-case assumptions, obtaining algorithms to minimize regret in both finite and infinite (asymptotic) time horizons for both stochastic and non-stochastic arm payoffs. === Best arm identification === An important variation of the classical regret minimization problem in multi-armed bandits is best arm identification (BAI), also known as pure exploration. This problem is crucial in various applications, including clinical trials, adaptive routing, recommendation systems, and A/B testing. In BAI, the objective is to identify the arm having the highest expected reward. An algorithm in this setting is characterized by a sampling rule, a decision rule, and a stopping rule, described as follows: Sampling rule: ( a t ) t ≥ 1 {\displaystyle (a_{t})_{t\geq 1}} is a sequence of actions at each time step Stopping rule: τ {\displaystyle \tau } is a (random) stopping time which suggests when to stop collecting samples Decision rule: a ^ τ {\displaystyle {\hat {a}}_{\tau }} is a guess on the best arm based on the data collected up to time τ {\displaystyle \tau } There are two predominant settings in BAI: Fixed budget setting: Given a time horizon T ≥ 1 {\displaystyle T\geq 1} , the objective is to identify the arm with the highest expected reward a ⋆ ∈ arg max k μ k {\displaystyle a^{\star }\in \arg \max _{k}\mu _{k}} minimizing probability of error δ {\displaystyle \delta } . Fixed confidence setting: Given a confidence level δ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle \delta \in (0,1)} , the objective is to identify the arm with the highest expected reward a ⋆ ∈ arg max k μ k {\displaystyle a^{\star }\in \arg \max _{k}\mu _{k}} with the least possible amount of trials and with probability of error P ( a ^ τ ≠ a ⋆ ) ≤ δ {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{\tau }\neq a^{\star })\leq \delta } . For example using a decision rule, we could use m 1 {\displaystyle m_{1}} where m {\displaystyle m} is the machine no.1 (you can use a different variable respectively) and 1 {\displaystyle 1} is the amount for each time an attempt is made at pulling the lever, where ∫ ∑ m 1 , m 2 , ( . . . ) = M {\displaystyle \int \sum m_{1},m_{2},(...)=M} , identify M {\displaystyle M} as the sum of each attempts m 1 + m 2 {\displaystyle m_{1}+m_{2}} , (...) as needed, and from there you can get a ratio, sum or mean as quantitative probability and sample your formulation for each slots. You can also do ∫ ∑ k ∝ i N − (
The AI Con
The AI Con: How to Fight Big Tech's Hype and Create the Future We Want is a 2025 non-fiction book by linguist Emily M. Bender and sociologist Alex Hanna. It argues that much of what is labeled "artificial intelligence" is a misleading term that obscures ordinary automation while concentrating power in a small number of technology firms. The book was published in May 2025 by Harper in the United States and Bodley Head in the United Kingdom. It was developed alongside the authors' long-running podcast Mystery AI Hype Theater 3000, which critiques exaggerated claims about AI. == Synopsis == The authors present AI as a marketing umbrella that encourages audiences to infer understanding and agency where none exist. They argue readers should treat such language skeptically and to separate specific automated tasks from broad claims of intelligence. The book describes a recurring hype cycle in which corporate narratives justify data and labor extraction, the replacement of human services with cheaper substitutes, and the diversion of attention from present harms to speculative futures. While acknowledging limited uses such as pattern recognition, the authors argue that contemporary systems are best understood as text and media generators shaped by training data and human labor, not as thinking or reasoning entities. A central theme is the social and environmental cost of scaling these systems, including increased energy and water use, the appropriation of creative work for training, and the outsourcing of ghost work to low-paid data workers worldwide. These costs are linked to workplace effects, with the authors arguing that automation rarely eliminates jobs outright and more often degrades them through surveillance, work intensification, and unpaid oversight. As alternatives to passive adoption, the authors propose concrete responses: asking precise questions about what is being automated and why, demanding transparency about data and evaluation, and practicing what they call strategic refusal when deployment conflicts with evidence or values. The book also develops a vocabulary for public debate, rejecting both boosterish and doomerish narratives as grounded in the same assumption that AI is a singular, autonomous force. The authors recommend reading strategies such as favoring trusted human sources over automated summaries and using humor to deflate inflated claims. They describe a link between language to policy and power, arguing that precise terminology can help policymakers and the public resist austerity-driven automation and demand accountability for errors and harms. == Reception == The Guardian praised the book's myth-busting approach and its analysis of how hype erodes cultural and civic life by normalizing synthetic media as a substitute for human judgment. Kirkus Reviews described it as a contrarian account that catalogs concrete risks while cutting through speculative predictions. An interview in Business Insider highlighted the authors' accessible frameworks, including their proposal to describe chatbots as conversation simulators and to evaluate systems in terms of values, labor, and evidence. Coverage in GeekWire emphasized the book's call for resistance through collective bargaining, stronger data rights, and a norm of rejecting deployments that fail basic standards of necessity and evaluation. Some reviews were more critical. A review in LLRX argued that the book's tone could be overly polemical and that it gave limited attention to potential benefits claimed for generative systems. Coverage in the Financial Times, focused on Bender's broader public scholarship, situated the book within her long-standing critique of anthropomorphic narratives about large language models and her advocacy for more democratic oversight of automated systems.
A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity
"A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity" is a 1943 paper written by Warren Sturgis McCulloch and Walter Pitts, published in the journal The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics. The paper proposed a mathematical model of the nervous system as a network of simple logical elements, later known as artificial neurons, or McCulloch–Pitts neurons. These neurons receive inputs, perform a weighted sum, and fire an output signal based on a threshold function. By connecting these units in various configurations, McCulloch and Pitts demonstrated that their model could perform all logical functions. It is a seminal work in cognitive science, computational neuroscience, computer science, and artificial intelligence. It was a foundational result in automata theory. John von Neumann cited it as a significant result. == Mathematics == The artificial neuron used in the original paper is slightly different from the modern version. They considered neural networks that operate in discrete steps of time t = 0 , 1 , … {\displaystyle t=0,1,\dots } . The neural network contains a number of neurons. Let the state of a neuron i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} be N i ( t ) {\displaystyle N_{i}(t)} . The state of a neuron can either be 0 or 1, standing for "not firing" and "firing". Each neuron also has a firing threshold θ {\displaystyle \theta } , such that it fires if the total input exceeds the threshold. Each neuron can connect to any other neuron (including itself) with positive synapses (excitatory) or negative synapses (inhibitory). That is, each neuron can connect to another neuron with a weight w {\displaystyle w} taking an integer value. A peripheral afferent is a neuron with no incoming synapses. We can regard each neural network as a directed graph, with the nodes being the neurons, and the directed edges being the synapses. A neural network has a circle or a circuit if there exists a directed circle in the graph. Let w i j ( t ) {\displaystyle w_{ij}(t)} be the connection weight from neuron j {\displaystyle j} to neuron i {\displaystyle i} at time t {\displaystyle t} , then its next state is N i ( t + 1 ) = H ( ∑ j = 1 n w i j ( t ) N j ( t ) − θ i ( t ) ) , {\displaystyle N_{i}(t+1)=H\left(\sum _{j=1}^{n}w_{ij}(t)N_{j}(t)-\theta _{i}(t)\right),} where H {\displaystyle H} is the Heaviside step function (outputting 1 if the input is greater than or equal to 0, and 0 otherwise). === Symbolic logic === The paper used, as a logical language for describing neural networks, "Language II" from The Logical Syntax of Language by Rudolf Carnap with some notations taken from Principia Mathematica by Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell. Language II covers substantial parts of classical mathematics, including real analysis and portions of set theory. To describe a neural network with peripheral afferents N 1 , N 2 , … , N p {\displaystyle N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{p}} and non-peripheral afferents N p + 1 , N p + 2 , … , N n {\displaystyle N_{p+1},N_{p+2},\dots ,N_{n}} they considered logical predicate of form P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N p , t ) {\displaystyle Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{p},t)} where P r {\displaystyle Pr} is a first-order logic predicate function (a function that outputs a boolean), N 1 , … , N p {\displaystyle N_{1},\dots ,N_{p}} are predicates that take t {\displaystyle t} as an argument, and t {\displaystyle t} is the only free variable in the predicate. Intuitively speaking, N 1 , … , N p {\displaystyle N_{1},\dots ,N_{p}} specifies the binary input patterns going into the neural network over all time, and P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N n , t ) {\displaystyle Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{n},t)} is a function that takes some binary input patterns, and constructs an output binary pattern P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N n , 0 ) , P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N n , 1 ) , … {\displaystyle Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{n},0),Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{n},1),\dots } . A logical sentence P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N n , t ) {\displaystyle Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{n},t)} is realized by a neural network iff there exists a time-delay T ≥ 0 {\displaystyle T\geq 0} , a neuron i {\displaystyle i} in the network, and an initial state for the non-peripheral neurons N p + 1 ( 0 ) , … , N n ( 0 ) {\displaystyle N_{p+1}(0),\dots ,N_{n}(0)} , such that for any time t {\displaystyle t} , the truth-value of the logical sentence is equal to the state of the neuron i {\displaystyle i} at time t + T {\displaystyle t+T} . That is, ∀ t = 0 , 1 , 2 , … , P r ( N 1 , N 2 , … , N p , t ) = N i ( t + T ) {\displaystyle \forall t=0,1,2,\dots ,\quad Pr(N_{1},N_{2},\dots ,N_{p},t)=N_{i}(t+T)} === Equivalence === In the paper, they considered some alternative definitions of artificial neural networks, and have shown them to be equivalent, that is, neural networks under one definition realizes precisely the same logical sentences as neural networks under another definition. They considered three forms of inhibition: relative inhibition, absolute inhibition, and extinction. The definition above is relative inhibition. By "absolute inhibition" they meant that if any negative synapse fires, then the neuron will not fire. By "extinction" they meant that if at time t {\displaystyle t} , any inhibitory synapse fires on a neuron i {\displaystyle i} , then θ i ( t + j ) = θ i ( 0 ) + b j {\displaystyle \theta _{i}(t+j)=\theta _{i}(0)+b_{j}} for j = 1 , 2 , 3 , … {\displaystyle j=1,2,3,\dots } , until the next time an inhibitory synapse fires on i {\displaystyle i} . It is required that b j = 0 {\displaystyle b_{j}=0} for all large j {\displaystyle j} . Theorem 4 and 5 state that these are equivalent. They considered three forms of excitation: spatial summation, temporal summation, and facilitation. The definition above is spatial summation (which they pictured as having multiple synapses placed close together, so that the effect of their firing sums up). By "temporal summation" they meant that the total incoming signal is ∑ τ = 0 T ∑ j = 1 n w i j ( t ) N j ( t − τ ) {\displaystyle \sum _{\tau =0}^{T}\sum _{j=1}^{n}w_{ij}(t)N_{j}(t-\tau )} for some T ≥ 1 {\displaystyle T\geq 1} . By "facilitation" they meant the same as extinction, except that b j ≤ 0 {\displaystyle b_{j}\leq 0} . Theorem 6 states that these are equivalent. They considered neural networks that do not change, and those that change by Hebbian learning. That is, they assume that at t = 0 {\displaystyle t=0} , some excitatory synaptic connections are not active. If at any t {\displaystyle t} , both N i ( t ) = 1 , N j ( t ) = 1 {\displaystyle N_{i}(t)=1,N_{j}(t)=1} , then any latent excitatory synapse between i , j {\displaystyle i,j} becomes active. Theorem 7 states that these are equivalent. === Logical expressivity === They considered "temporal propositional expressions" (TPE), which are propositional formulas with one free variable t {\displaystyle t} . For example, N 1 ( t ) ∨ N 2 ( t ) ∧ ¬ N 3 ( t ) {\displaystyle N_{1}(t)\vee N_{2}(t)\wedge \neg N_{3}(t)} is such an expression. Theorem 1 and 2 together showed that neural nets without circles are equivalent to TPE. For neural nets with loops, they noted that "realizable P r {\displaystyle Pr} may involve reference to past events of an indefinite degree of remoteness". These then encodes for sentences like "There was some x such that x was a ψ" or ( ∃ x ) ( ψ x ) {\displaystyle (\exists x)(\psi x)} . Theorems 8 to 10 showed that neural nets with loops can encode all first-order logic with equality and conversely, any looped neural networks is equivalent to a sentence in first-order logic with equality, thus showing that they are equivalent in logical expressiveness. As a remark, they noted that a neural network, if furnished with a tape, scanners, and write-heads, is equivalent to a Turing machine, and conversely, every Turing machine is equivalent to some such neural network. Thus, these neural networks are equivalent to Turing computability and Church's lambda-definability. == Context == === Previous work === The paper built upon several previous strands of work. In the symbolic logic side, it built on the previous work by Carnap, Whitehead, and Russell. This was contributed by Walter Pitts, who had a strong proficiency with symbolic logic. Pitts provided mathematical and logical rigor to McCulloch’s vague ideas on psychons (atoms of psychological events) and circular causality. In the neuroscience side, it built on previous work by the mathematical biology research group centered around Nicolas Rashevsky, of which McCulloch was a member. The paper was published in the Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, which was founded by Rashevsky in 1939. During the late 1930s, Rashevsky's research group was producing papers that had difficulty publishing in other journals at the time, so Rashevsky decided to found a new journal exclusively devoted to mathematical biophysics. Also in the Rashevsky's group was Alston Scott Householder, who in 1941 published an abstract model