AI Analysis X Ray

AI Analysis X Ray — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Mixed raster content

Mixed raster content (MRC) is a method for compressing images that contain both binary-compressible text and continuous-tone components, using image segmentation methods to improve the level of compression and the quality of the rendered image. By separating the image into components with different compressibility characteristics, the most efficient and accurate compression algorithm for each component can be applied. MRC-compressed images are typically packaged into a hybrid file format such as DjVu and sometimes PDF. This allows for multiple images, and the instructions to properly render and reassemble them, to be stored within a single file. Some image scanners optionally support MRC when scanning to PDF. A typical manual states that without MRC, the image is generated in a single process, with text and graphics not distinguished. With MRC, separate processes are used for text, graphics, and other elements, producing clearer graphics and sharper text, at the price of slightly slower processing. MRC is recommended to optimise the scanning of documents with harder-to-read text or lower-quality graphics. MRC can also reduce the size of the scanned file, though higher compression using JBIG2 can sometimes lead to character substitution errors in scanned documents. == File format == A form of MRC is defined by international standard bodies as ISO/IEC 16485, or ITU recommendation T.44 (accessible free of charge). It defines a file format with bilevel masks and two data layers in each "stripe" of the image. The mask can be encoded in ITU T.4, JBIG1, or JBIG2, while the images can be JPEG, JBIG1, or run-length encoded color. The format is loosely based on JPEG, with a APP13 segment registered for this purpose. It is not known whether this file format is actually used, as formats like DjVu and PDF have their own ways of defining layers and masks.
Read more →
Paul Christiano

Paul Christiano is an American researcher in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), with a specific focus on AI alignment, which is the subfield of AI safety research that aims to steer AI systems toward human interests. He serves as the Head of Safety for the Center for AI Standards and Innovation inside NIST. He formerly led the language model alignment team at OpenAI and became founder and head of the non-profit Alignment Research Center (ARC), which works on theoretical AI alignment and evaluations of machine learning models. In 2023, Christiano was named as one of the TIME 100 Most Influential People in AI (TIME100 AI). In September 2023, Christiano was appointed to the UK government's Frontier AI Taskforce advisory board. Before working at the Center for AI Standards and Innovation, he was an initial trustee on Anthropic's Long-Term Benefit Trust. == Education == Christiano attended the Harker School in San Jose, California. He competed on the U.S. team and won a silver medal at the 49th International Mathematics Olympiad (IMO) in 2008. In 2012, Christiano graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) with a degree in mathematics. At MIT, he researched data structures, quantum cryptography, and combinatorial optimization. He then went on to complete a PhD at the University of California, Berkeley. While at Berkeley, Christiano collaborated with researcher Katja Grace on AI Impacts, co-developing a preliminary methodology for comparing supercomputers to brains, using traversed edges per second (TEPS). He also experimented with putting Carl Shulman's donor lottery theory into practice, raising nearly $50,000 in a pool to be donated to a single charity. == Career == At OpenAI, Christiano co-authored the paper "Deep Reinforcement Learning from Human Preferences" (2017) and other works developing reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). He is considered one of the principal architects of RLHF, which in 2017 was "considered a notable step forward in AI safety research", according to The New York Times. Other works such as "AI safety via debate" (2018) focus on the problem of scalable oversight – supervising AIs in domains where humans would have difficulty judging output quality. Christiano left OpenAI in 2021 to work on more conceptual and theoretical issues in AI alignment and subsequently founded the Alignment Research Center to focus on this area. One subject of study is the problem of eliciting latent knowledge from advanced machine learning models. ARC also develops techniques to identify and test whether an AI model is potentially dangerous. In April 2023, Christiano told The Economist that ARC was considering developing an industry standard for AI safety. As of April 2024, Christiano was listed as the head of AI safety for the US AI Safety Institute at NIST. One month earlier in March 2024, staff members and scientists at the institute threatened to resign upon being informed of Christiano's pending appointment to the role, stating that his ties to the effective altruism movement may jeopardize the AI Safety Institute's objectivity and integrity. === Views on AI risks === He is known for his views on the potential risks of advanced AI. In 2017, Wired magazine stated that Christiano and his colleagues at OpenAI weren't worried about the destruction of the human race by "evil robots", explaining that "[t]hey’re more concerned that, as AI progresses beyond human comprehension, the technology’s behavior may diverge from our intended goals." However, in a widely quoted interview with Business Insider in 2023, Christiano said that there is a “10–20% chance of AI takeover, [with] many [or] most humans dead.” He also conjectured a “50/50 chance of doom shortly after you have AI systems that are human level.” == Personal life == Christiano is married to Ajeya Cotra, a member of METR's technical staff.
Read more →
Corpus-assisted discourse studies

Corpus-assisted discourse studies (abbr.: CADS) is related historically and methodologically to the discipline of corpus linguistics. The principal endeavor of corpus-assisted discourse studies is the investigation, and comparison of features of particular discourse types, integrating into the analysis the techniques and tools developed within corpus linguistics. These include the compilation of specialised corpora and analyses of word and word-cluster frequency lists, comparative keyword lists and, above all, concordances. A broader conceptualisation of corpus-assisted discourse studies would include any study that aims to bring together corpus linguistics and discourse analysis. Such research is often labelled as corpus-based or corpus-assisted discourse analysis, with the term CADS coined by a research group in Italy (Partington 2004) for a specific type of corpus-assisted discourse analysis (see the section 'in different countries' below). == Aims == Corpus-assisted discourse studies aim to uncover non-obvious meaning, that is, meaning which might not be readily available to naked-eye perusal. Much of what carries meaning in texts is not open to direct observation: “you cannot understand the world just by looking at it” (Stubbs [after Gellner 1959] 1996: 92). We use language “semi-automatically”, in the sense that speakers and writers make semi-conscious choices within the various complex overlapping systems of which language is composed, including those of transitivity, modality (Michael Halliday 1994), lexical sets (e.g. freedom, liberty, deliverance), modification, and so on. Authors themselves are, famously, generally unaware of all the meanings their texts convey. By combining the quantitative research approach, that is, statistical analysis of large amounts of the discourse in question - more precisely, large numbers of tokens of the discourse type under study contained in a corpus - with the more qualitative research approach typical of discourse analysis, that is, the close, detailed examination of particular stretches of discourse it may be possible to better understand the processes at play in the discourse type and to gain access to non-obvious meanings. Aims can differ in other types of corpus-based or corpus-assisted discourse analysis; but in general such studies combine quantitative and qualitative research and aim to shed light on discourses, registers, discourse patterns, etc., with the help of a corpus linguistic approach. Specific aims and techniques depend on the relevant project. == In different countries == In German-speaking countries: Pioneering work in corpus-based discourse analysis was conducted in Europe, in particular by Hardt-Mautner/Mautner (1995, 2000) and Stubbs (1996, 2001). CADS and other types of corpus-based discourse analysis are inspired by this important early work. In Italy: A considerable body of research has been conducted in Italy either by individual researchers or under the aegis of combined inter-university projects such as Newspool (Partington et al. 2004) and CorDis (Morley and Bayley eds, 2009). It has concentrated on political and media language, mainly because a nucleus of linguists in Italian universities work in Political Science faculties and are increasingly interested in the use of corpus techniques to conduct a particular type of sociopolitical discourse analysis, including the unearthing of noteworthy ideological metaphors and motifs in the language of political figures and institutions. Italian researchers also developed Modern diachronic corpus-assisted discourse studies (MD-CADS). This approach contrasts the language contained in comparable corpora from different but recent points in time in order to track changes in modern language usage but also social, cultural and political changes over modern times, as reflected - and shared among people - in language. It is this Italian body of research that makes most use of the label CADS. In the UK: Linguists in the UK tend to undertake corpus-based critical discourse analysis (CDA). CDA generally adopts a leftist political stance, focusing on the ways that social and political domination is reproduced by text and talk. This type of corpus-based research was originally associated with Lancaster University (Baker et al. 2008), but has spread more widely since. Such work typically studies the discourses around particular groups of people (e.g. Muslims, people with disabilities) or concepts/events (e.g. feminism, same-sex marriage). In Australia: Corpus-based discourse analysis is undertaken by a growing number of Australian researchers, most often on media texts. Some of this work aims to elucidate specific features of discourse types (news, social media, television series, etc.), while other work is rooted in the tradition of corpus-based critical discourse analysis. == Comparison with traditional corpus linguistics == Traditional corpus linguistics has, quite naturally, tended to privilege the quantitative approach. In the drive to produce more authentic dictionaries and grammars of a language, it has been characterised by the compilation of some very large corpora of heterogeneric discourse types in the desire to obtain an overview of the greatest quantity and variety of discourse types possible, in other words, of the chimerical but useful fiction called the “general language” (“general English”, “general Italian”, and so on). This has led to the construction of immensely valuable research tools such as the Bank of English and the British National Corpus. Some branches of corpus linguistics have also promoted an approach that is "corpus-driven", in which we need, grammatically speaking, a mental tabula rasa to free ourselves of the baleful prejudice exerted by traditional models and allow the data to speak entirely for itself. The aim of corpus-assisted discourse studies and related approaches is radically different. Here the aim of the exercise is to acquaint oneself as much as possible with the discourse type(s) in hand. Researchers typically engage with their corpus in a variety of ways. As well as via wordlists and concordancing, intuitions for further research can also arise from reading or watching or listening to parts of the data-set, a process which can help provide a feel for how things are done linguistically in the discourse-type being studied. Corpus-assisted discourse analysis is also typically characterised by the compilation of ad hoc specialised corpora, since very frequently there exists no previously available collection of the discourse type in question. Often, other corpora are utilized in the course of a study for purposes of comparison. These may include pre-existing corpora or may themselves need to be compiled by the researcher. In some sense, all work with corpora – just as all work with discourse - is properly comparative. Even when a single corpus is employed, it is used to test the data it contains against another body of data. This may consist of the researcher's intuitions, or the data found in reference works such as dictionaries and grammars, or it may be statements made by previous authors in the field. == CADS as a specific type of corpus-based discourse analysis == Researchers in Italy have developed CADS as a specific type of corpus-based discourse analysis, creating a standard set of methods: 'A basic, standard methodology in CADS may resemble the following:' Step 1: Decide upon the research question; Step 2: Choose, compile or edit an appropriate corpus; Step 3: Choose, compile or edit an appropriate reference corpus / corpora; Step 4: Make frequency lists and run a keywords comparison of the corpora; Step 5: Determine the existence of sets of key items; Step 6: Concordance interesting key items (with differing quantities of co-text); Step 7: (Possibly) refine the research question and return to Step 2. This basic procedure can of course vary according to individual research circumstances and requirements. A particular way of conceptualising research questions has also been proposed in such CADS projects: Given that P is a discourse participant (or possibly an institution) and G is a goal, often a political goal: How does P achieve G with language? What does this tell us about P? Comparative studies: how do P1 and P2 differ in their use of language? Does this tell us anything about their different principles and objectives? A second general type of CADS research question, which might be asked of interactive discourse data, has been conceptualised as follows: Given that P(x) is a particular participant or set of participants, DT is the discourse type, and R is an observed relationship between or among participants: How do {P(a), P(b)...P(n)} achieve / maintain R in DT [using language]? Another common type of research question has been conceptualised thus: Given that A is an author, Ph(x) is a phenomenon or practice or behaviour, and DT(x) is a particular discourse type. A has said P
Read more →
Pascale Fung

Pascale Fung (馮雁) (born in Shanghai, China) is a co-founder and Chief Research and Innovation Officer of AMI Labs, an artificial intelligence research company focused on world models. She is a professor in the Department of Electronic & Computer Engineering and the Department of Computer Science & Engineering at the Hong Kong University of Science & Technology(HKUST). She is the director of the Centre for AI Research (CAiRE) at HKUST. She is an elected Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) for her “contributions to human-machine interactions”, an elected Fellow of the International Speech Communication Association for “fundamental contributions to the interdisciplinary area of spoken language human-machine interactions” and an elected Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) for her “significant contributions toward statistical NLP, comparable corpora, and building intelligent systems that can understand and empathize with humans”. She is a member of the Global Future Council on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, a think tank of the World Economic Forum, and blogs for the Forum's online publication Agenda. She is a member of the Partnership on AI. She has been invited as an AI expert to different government initiatives in China, Japan, the UAE, India, the European Union and the United Nations. Fung's publication topics include spoken language systems, natural language processing, and empathetic human-robot interaction. She co-founded the Human Language Technology Center (HLTC) and is an affiliated faculty with the Robotics Institute and the Big Data Institute, both at HKUST. Additionally, she is the founding chair of the Women Faculty Association at HKUST. She is actively involved in encouraging young women into careers in engineering and science. == Career and research interests == Fung's work is focused on building systems that try to understand and empathize with humans. She has authored and co-authored hundreds of publications, along with many journal listings and book chapters. Fung is often found in the media, among others as a writer for Scientific American, the World Economic Forum, and the London School of Economics, and the Design Society. She was a pioneer in using statistical models for natural language understanding. Her PhD thesis proposed unsupervised methods for aligning texts and mining dictionary translations in different languages by distributional properties. She is an expert in spoken language understanding and computer emotional intelligence, and is a strong proponent of technology transfer. Fung has applied many of her research group's results in the fields of, among others, robotics, IoT, and financial analytics. Her efforts led to the launch of the world's first Chinese natural language search engine in 2001, the first Chinese virtual assistant for smartphones in 2010, and the first emotional intelligent speaker in 2017. == Honors == Elected Fellow, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), for “significant contributions to the field of Conversational AI and to the development of ethical AI principles and algorithms” Elected Fellow, Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), for “significant contributions toward statistical NLP, comparable corpora, and building intelligent systems that can understand and empathize with humans” Nominee, the VentureBeat AI Innovation Awards at Transform 2020, for "AI for Good" Awardee, 2017 Outstanding Women Professionals & Entrepreneurs Award, Hong Kong Women Professionals & Entrepreneurs Association Elected Fellow, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), for “contributions to human-machine interactions” Elected Fellow, International Speech Communication Association (ISCA), for “fundamental contributions to the interdisciplinary area of spoken language human-machine interactions" Member, Global Future Council on AI and Robotics, World Economic Forum (2016–) One of the Top 50 Women of Hope, selected by List Magazine in 2014 Selected as “My Favorite Teacher” by top engineering students in 2007 and in 2009 == Affiliations == Fung is affiliated with the following institutions and organizations: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology World Economic Forum Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Association for Computational Linguistics International Speech Communication Association Association for Computing Machinery Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence
Read more →
Language Server Protocol

The Language Server Protocol (LSP) is an open, JSON-RPC-based protocol for use between source-code editors or integrated development environments (IDEs) and servers that provide "language intelligence tools": programming language-specific features like code completion, syntax highlighting and marking of warnings and errors, as well as refactoring routines. The goal of the protocol is to allow programming language support to be implemented and distributed independently of any given editor or IDE. In the early 2020s, LSP quickly became a "norm" for language intelligence tools providers. == History == LSP was originally developed for Microsoft Visual Studio Code and is now an open standard. On June 27, 2016, Microsoft announced a collaboration with Red Hat and Codenvy to standardize the protocol's specification. Its specification is hosted and developed on GitHub. == Background == Modern IDEs provide programmers with sophisticated features like code completion, refactoring, navigating to a symbol's definition, syntax highlighting, and error and warning markers. For example, in a text-based programming language, a programmer might want to rename a method read. The programmer could either manually edit the respective source code files and change the appropriate occurrences of the old method name into the new name, or instead use an IDE's refactoring capabilities to make all the necessary changes automatically. To be able to support this style of refactoring, an IDE needs a sophisticated understanding of the programming language that the program's source is written in. A programming tool without such an understanding—for example, one that performs a naive search-and-replace instead—could introduce errors. When renaming a read method, for example, the tool should not replace the partial match in a variable that might be called readyState, nor should it replace the portion of a code comment containing the word "already". Neither should renaming a local variable read, for example, end up altering identically-named variables in other scopes. Conventional compilers or interpreters for a specific programming language are typically unable to provide these language services, because they are written with the goal of either transforming the source code into object code or immediately executing the code. Additionally, language services must be able to handle source code that is not well-formed, e.g. because the programmer is in the middle of editing and has not yet finished typing a statement, procedure, or other construct. Additionally, small changes to a source code file which are done during typing usually change the semantics of the program. In order to provide instant feedback to the user, the editing tool must be able to very quickly evaluate the syntactical and semantical consequences of a specific modification. Compilers and interpreters therefore provide a poor candidate for producing the information needed for an editing tool to consume. Prior to the design and implementation of the Language Server Protocol for the development of Visual Studio Code, most language services were generally tied to a given IDE or other editor. In the absence of the Language Server Protocol, language services are typically implemented by using a tool-specific extension API. Providing the same language service to another editing tool requires effort to adapt the existing code so that the service may target the second editor's extension interfaces. The Language Server Protocol allows for decoupling language services from the editor so that the services may be contained within a general-purpose language server. Any editor can inherit sophisticated support for many different languages by making use of existing language servers. Similarly, a programmer involved with the development of a new programming language can make services for that language available to existing editing tools. Making use of language servers via the Language Server Protocol thus also reduces the burden on vendors of editing tools, because vendors do not need to develop language services of their own for the languages the vendor intends to support, as long as the language servers have already been implemented. The Language Server Protocol also enables the distribution and development of servers contributed by an interested third party, such as end users, without additional involvement by either the vendor of the compiler for the programming language in use or the vendor of the editor to which the language support is being added. LSP is not restricted to programming languages. It can be used for any kind of text-based language, like specifications or domain-specific languages (DSL). == Technical overview == When a user edits one or more source code files using a language server protocol-enabled tool, the tool acts as a client that consumes the language services provided by a language server. The tool may be a text editor or IDE and the language services could be refactoring, code completion, etc. The client informs the server about what the user is doing, e.g., opening a file or inserting a character at a specific text position. The client can also request the server to perform a language service, e.g. to format a specified range in the text document. The server answers a client's request with an appropriate response. For example, the formatting request is answered either by a response that transfers the formatted text to the client or by an error response containing details about the error. The Language Server Protocol defines the messages to be exchanged between client and language server. They are JSON-RPC preceded by headers similar to HTTP. Messages may originate from the server or client. The protocol does not make any provisions about how requests, responses and notifications are transferred between client and server. For example, client and server could be components within the same process exchanging JSON strings via method calls. They could also be different processes on the same or on different machines communicating via network sockets. == Registry == There are lists of LSP-compatible implementations, maintained by the community-driven Langserver.org or Microsoft.
Read more →
AI Text-to-video Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

Curious about the best AI text-to-video tool? An AI text-to-video tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-video tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Read more →
Postediting

Post-editing (or postediting) is the process whereby humans amend machine-generated translation to achieve an acceptable final product. A person who post-edits is called a post-editor. The concept of post-editing is linked to that of pre-editing. In the process of translating a text via machine translation, best results may be gained by pre-editing the source text – for example by applying the principles of controlled language – and then post-editing the machine output. It is distinct from editing, which refers to the process of improving human generated text (a process which is often known as revision in the field of translation). Post-edited text may afterwards be revised to ensure the quality of the language choices are proofread to correct simple mistakes. Post-editing involves the correction of machine translation output to ensure that it meets a level of quality negotiated in advance between the client and the post-editor. Light post-editing aims at making the output simply understandable; full post-editing at making it also stylistically appropriate. With advances in machine translation full post-editing is becoming an alternative to manual translation. Practically all computer-assisted translation (CAT) tools now support post-editing of machine translated output. == Post-editing and machine translation == Machine translation left the labs to start being used for its actual purpose in the late seventies at some big institutions such as the European Commission and the Pan-American Health Organization, and then, later, at some corporations such as Caterpillar and General Motors. First studies on post-editing appeared in the eighties, linked to those implementations. To develop appropriate guidelines and training, members of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas (AMTA) and the European Association for Machine Translation (EAMT) set a Post-editing Special Interest Group in 1999. After the nineties, advances in computer power and connectivity sped machine translation development and allowed for its deployment through the web browser, including as a free, useful adjunct to the main search engines (Google Translate, Bing Translator, Yahoo! Babel Fish). A wider acceptance of less than perfect machine translation was accompanied also by a wider acceptance of post-editing. With the demand for localisation of goods and services growing at a pace that could not be met by human translation, not even assisted by translation memory and other translation management technologies, industry bodies such as the Translation Automation Users Society (TAUS) expect machine translation and post-editing to play a much bigger role within the next few years. The use of Machine Translation suggests sometimes pre-editing. Human translators possess significantly more sophisticated cognitive abilities than machine translation (MT) systems. They leverage a wealth of life experience, common sense, and multi-sensory input to understand context, identify semantic intent, and add cultural nuances to translations. This remains true even as MT capabilities continue to improve. Unlike MT systems, which primarily focus on literal word-for-word conversion, human translators grasp the underlying meaning and intent, even when information is implicit. They "read between the lines," guided by their understanding of the world. Essentially, MT models excel at text string prediction, not true comprehension. Their success often stems from framing problems as prediction tasks, such as in self-driving cars or fraud detection. Studies have demonstrated that integrating adaptive MT with post-editing interfaces can lead to reductions in technical effort and time, improving overall translation efficiency. These systems are also supported by research that highlights the benefits of adaptive MT in real-world translation scenarios. For example, incremental adaptation in Neural Machine Translation (NMT) for professional post-editors has been shown to improve translation quality and reduce time spent on edits, showcasing how human expertise and machine assistance can complement each other effectively. == Light and full post-editing == For many years, no widely accepted, standardized post-editing guidelines existed; however, in 2017, ISO standard 18587:2017: Translation services — Post-editing of machine translation output — Requirements was published. Studies in the eighties distinguished between degrees of post-editing which, in the context of the European Commission Translation Service, were first defined as conventional and rapid or full and rapid. Light and full post-editing seems the wording most used today. Light post-editing implies minimal intervention by the post-editor, with the aim of ensuring quality is "good enough" or "understandable"; the expectation is that the client will use it for inbound purposes only, often when the text is needed urgently, or has a short time span. Full post-editing involves a greater level of intervention to achieve a degree of quality to be negotiated between client and post-editor; the expectation is that the outcome will be a text that is not only understandable but presented in some stylistically appropriate way, so it can be used for assimilation and even for dissemination, for inbound and for outbound purposes. The quality is expected to be publishable and equivalent to that of a human translation. The assumption, however, has been that it takes less effort for translators to work directly from the source text than to post-edit the machine generated version. With advances in machine translation, this may be changing. For some language pairs and for some tasks, and with engines that have been customised with domain specific good quality data, some clients are already requesting translators to post-edit instead of translating from scratch, in the belief that they will attain similar quality at a lower cost. The light/full classification, developed in the nineties when machine translation still came on a CD-ROM, may not suit advances in machine translation at the light post-editing end either. For some language pairs and some tasks, particularly if the source has been pre-edited, raw machine output may be good enough for gisting purposes without requiring subsequent human intervention. == Post-editing efficiency == Post-editing is used when raw machine translation is not good enough and human translation not required. Industry advises post-editing to be used when it can at least double the productivity of manual translation, even fourfold it in the case of light post-editing (1000 words per hour vs. 250 wph). However, post-editing efficiency is difficult to predict. Various studies from both academia and industry have claimed that post-editing is generally faster than translating from scratch, regardless of language pairs or translators' experience. There is, however, no agreement about how much time can be saved through post-editing in practice (if any at all): While the industry reports on time savings around 40%, some academic studies suggest that time savings under actual working conditions are more likely to be between 0–20%, or that it may depend on the terminological proximity between the source and target languages. Professionals have also reported negative productivity gains where corrections require more time than to translate from scratch. == Post-editing and the language industry == After some thirty years, post-editing is still "a nascent profession". What the right profile of the post-editor is, has not yet been fully studied. Post-editing overlaps with translating and editing, but only partially. Most think the ideal post-editor will be a translator keen to be trained on the specific skills required, but there are some who think a bilingual without a background in translation may be easier to train. Not much is known either on who the actual post-editors are, whether they tend to be professional translators, whether they work mostly as in-house employees or self-employed, and on which conditions. Many professional translators dislike post-editing, among other reasons because it tends to be paid at lower rates than conventional translations, with the International Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (IAPTI) having been particularly vocal about it.
Read more →
AI Humanizers: Free vs Paid (2026)

Trying to pick the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI humanizer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
Neural style transfer

Neural style transfer (NST) software algorithms are able to manipulate digital images, or videos, in order to adopt the appearance or visual style of another image. NST algorithms are characterized by their use of deep neural networks for the sake of image transformation. Common uses for NST are the creation of artificial artwork from photographs, for example by transferring the appearance of famous paintings to user-supplied photographs. Several notable mobile apps use NST techniques for this purpose, including DeepArt and Prisma. This method has been used by artists and designers around the globe to develop new artwork based on existent style(s). == History == NST is an example of image stylization, a problem studied for over two decades within the field of non-photorealistic rendering. The first two example-based style transfer algorithms were image analogies and image quilting. Both of these methods were based on patch-based texture synthesis algorithms. Given a training pair of images–a photo and an artwork depicting that photo–a transformation could be learned and then applied to create new artwork from a new photo, by analogy. If no training photo was available, it would need to be produced by processing the input artwork; image quilting did not require this processing step, though it was demonstrated on only one style. NST was first published in the paper "A Neural Algorithm of Artistic Style" by Leon Gatys et al., originally released to ArXiv 2015, and subsequently accepted by the peer-reviewed CVPR conference in 2016. The original paper used a VGG-19 architecture that has been pre-trained to perform object recognition using the ImageNet dataset. In 2017, Google AI introduced a method that allows a single deep convolutional style transfer network to learn multiple styles at the same time. This algorithm permits style interpolation in real-time, even when done on video media. == Mathematics == This section closely follows the original paper. === Overview === The idea of Neural Style Transfer (NST) is to take two images—a content image p → {\displaystyle {\vec {p}}} and a style image a → {\displaystyle {\vec {a}}} —and generate a third image x → {\displaystyle {\vec {x}}} that minimizes a weighted combination of two loss functions: a content loss L content ( p → , x → ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{content }}({\vec {p}},{\vec {x}})} and a style loss L style ( a → , x → ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{style }}({\vec {a}},{\vec {x}})} . The total loss is a linear sum of the two: L NST ( p → , a → , x → ) = α L content ( p → , x → ) + β L style ( a → , x → ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{NST}}({\vec {p}},{\vec {a}},{\vec {x}})=\alpha {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{content}}({\vec {p}},{\vec {x}})+\beta {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{style}}({\vec {a}},{\vec {x}})} By jointly minimizing the content and style losses, NST generates an image that blends the content of the content image with the style of the style image. Both the content loss and the style loss measures the similarity of two images. The content similarity is the weighted sum of squared-differences between the neural activations of a single convolutional neural network (CNN) on two images. The style similarity is the weighted sum of Gram matrices within each layer (see below for details). The original paper used a VGG-19 CNN, but the method works for any CNN. === Symbols === Let x → {\textstyle {\vec {x}}} be an image input to a CNN. Let F l ∈ R N l × M l {\textstyle F^{l}\in \mathbb {R} ^{N_{l}\times M_{l}}} be the matrix of filter responses in layer l {\textstyle l} to the image x → {\textstyle {\vec {x}}} , where: N l {\textstyle N_{l}} is the number of filters in layer l {\textstyle l} ; M l {\textstyle M_{l}} is the height times the width (i.e. number of pixels) of each filter in layer l {\textstyle l} ; F i j l ( x → ) {\textstyle F_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})} is the activation of the i th {\textstyle i^{\text{th}}} filter at position j {\textstyle j} in layer l {\textstyle l} . A given input image x → {\textstyle {\vec {x}}} is encoded in each layer of the CNN by the filter responses to that image, with higher layers encoding more global features, but losing details on local features. === Content loss === Let p → {\textstyle {\vec {p}}} be an original image. Let x → {\textstyle {\vec {x}}} be an image that is generated to match the content of p → {\textstyle {\vec {p}}} . Let P l {\textstyle P^{l}} be the matrix of filter responses in layer l {\textstyle l} to the image p → {\textstyle {\vec {p}}} . The content loss is defined as the squared-error loss between the feature representations of the generated image and the content image at a chosen layer l {\displaystyle l} of a CNN: L content ( p → , x → , l ) = 1 2 ∑ i , j ( A i j l ( x → ) − A i j l ( p → ) ) 2 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{content }}({\vec {p}},{\vec {x}},l)={\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{i,j}\left(A_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})-A_{ij}^{l}({\vec {p}})\right)^{2}} where A i j l ( x → ) {\displaystyle A_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})} and A i j l ( p → ) {\displaystyle A_{ij}^{l}({\vec {p}})} are the activations of the i th {\displaystyle i^{\text{th}}} filter at position j {\displaystyle j} in layer l {\displaystyle l} for the generated and content images, respectively. Minimizing this loss encourages the generated image to have similar content to the content image, as captured by the feature activations in the chosen layer. The total content loss is a linear sum of the content losses of each layer: L content ( p → , x → ) = ∑ l v l L content ( p → , x → , l ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{content }}({\vec {p}},{\vec {x}})=\sum _{l}v_{l}{\mathcal {L}}_{\text{content }}({\vec {p}},{\vec {x}},l)} , where the v l {\displaystyle v_{l}} are positive real numbers chosen as hyperparameters. === Style loss === The style loss is based on the Gram matrices of the generated and style images, which capture the correlations between different filter responses at different layers of the CNN: L style ( a → , x → ) = ∑ l = 0 L w l E l , {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\text{style }}({\vec {a}},{\vec {x}})=\sum _{l=0}^{L}w_{l}E_{l},} where E l = 1 4 N l 2 M l 2 ∑ i , j ( G i j l ( x → ) − G i j l ( a → ) ) 2 . {\displaystyle E_{l}={\frac {1}{4N_{l}^{2}M_{l}^{2}}}\sum _{i,j}\left(G_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})-G_{ij}^{l}({\vec {a}})\right)^{2}.} Here, G i j l ( x → ) {\displaystyle G_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})} and G i j l ( a → ) {\displaystyle G_{ij}^{l}({\vec {a}})} are the entries of the Gram matrices for the generated and style images at layer l {\displaystyle l} . Explicitly, G i j l ( x → ) = ∑ k F i k l ( x → ) F j k l ( x → ) {\displaystyle G_{ij}^{l}({\vec {x}})=\sum _{k}F_{ik}^{l}({\vec {x}})F_{jk}^{l}({\vec {x}})} Minimizing this loss encourages the generated image to have similar style characteristics to the style image, as captured by the correlations between feature responses in each layer. The idea is that activation pattern correlations between filters in a single layer captures the "style" on the order of the receptive fields at that layer. Similarly to the previous case, the w l {\displaystyle w_{l}} are positive real numbers chosen as hyperparameters. === Hyperparameters === In the original paper, they used a particular choice of hyperparameters. The style loss is computed by w l = 0.2 {\displaystyle w_{l}=0.2} for the outputs of layers conv1_1, conv2_1, conv3_1, conv4_1, conv5_1 in the VGG-19 network, and zero otherwise. The content loss is computed by w l = 1 {\displaystyle w_{l}=1} for conv4_2, and zero otherwise. The ratio α / β ∈ [ 5 , 50 ] × 10 − 4 {\displaystyle \alpha /\beta \in [5,50]\times 10^{-4}} . === Training === Image x → {\displaystyle {\vec {x}}} is initially approximated by adding a small amount of white noise to input image p → {\displaystyle {\vec {p}}} and feeding it through the CNN. Then we successively backpropagate this loss through the network with the CNN weights fixed in order to update the pixels of x → {\displaystyle {\vec {x}}} . After several thousand epochs of training, an x → {\displaystyle {\vec {x}}} (hopefully) emerges that matches the style of a → {\displaystyle {\vec {a}}} and the content of p → {\displaystyle {\vec {p}}} . As of 2017, when implemented on a GPU, it takes a few minutes to converge. == Extensions == In some practical implementations, it is noted that the resulting image has too much high-frequency artifact, which can be suppressed by adding the total variation to the total loss. Compared to VGGNet, AlexNet does not work well for neural style transfer. NST has also been extended to videos. Subsequent work improved the speed of NST for images by using special-purpose normalizations. In a paper by Fei-Fei Li et al. adopted a different regularized loss metric and accelerated method for training to produce results in real-time (three orders of magnitude faster than Gatys). Their idea was to use not the pixel-based loss defined above but rather a 'perceptual loss' measuring t
Read more →
Glottochronology

Glottochronology (from Attic Greek γλῶττα 'tongue, language' and χρόνος 'time') is the part of lexicostatistics which involves comparative linguistics and deals with the chronological relationship between languages. The idea was developed by Morris Swadesh in the 1950s in his article on Salish internal relationships. He developed the idea under two assumptions: there indeed exists a relatively stable basic vocabulary (referred to as Swadesh lists) in all languages of the world; and, any replacements happen in a way analogous to radioactive decay in a constant percentage per time elapsed. Using mathematics and statistics, Swadesh developed an equation to determine when languages separated and give an approximate time of when the separation occurred. His methods aimed to aid linguistic anthropologists by giving them a definitive way to determine a separation date between two languages. The formula provides an approximate number of centuries since two languages were supposed to have separated from a singular common ancestor. His methods also purported to provide information on when ancient languages may have existed. Despite multiple studies and literature containing the information of glottochronology, it is not widely used today and is surrounded with controversy. Glottochronology tracks language separation from thousands of years ago but many linguists are skeptical of the concept because it is more of a 'probability' rather than a 'certainty.' On the other hand, some linguists may say that glottochronology is gaining traction because of its relatedness to archaeological dates. Glottochronology is not as accurate as archaeological data, but some linguists still believe that it can provide a solid estimate. Over time many different extensions of the Swadesh method evolved; however, Swadesh's original method is so well known that 'glottochronology' is usually associated with him. == Methodology == The original method of glottochronology presumed that the core vocabulary of a language is replaced at a constant (or constant average) rate across all languages and cultures and so can be used to measure the passage of time. The process makes use of a list of lexical terms and morphemes which are similar to multiple languages. Lists were compiled by Morris Swadesh and assumed to be resistant against borrowing (originally designed in 1952 as a list of 200 items, but the refined 100-word list in Swadesh (1955) is much more common among modern day linguists). The core vocabulary was designed to encompass concepts common to every human language such as personal pronouns, body parts, heavenly bodies and living beings, verbs of basic actions, numerals, basic adjectives, kin terms, and natural occurrences and events. Through a basic word list, one eliminates concepts that are specific to a particular culture or time period. It has been found through differentiating word lists that the ideal is really impossible and that the meaning set may need to be tailored to the languages being compared. Word lists are not homogenous throughout studies and they are often changed and designed to suit both languages being studied. Linguists find that it is difficult to find a word list where all words used are culturally unbiased. Many alternative word lists have been compiled by other linguists and often use fewer meaning slots. The percentage of cognates (words with a common origin) in the word lists is then measured. The larger the percentage of cognates, the more recently the two languages being compared are presumed to have separated. === Glottochronologic constant === Determining word lists rely on morpheme decay or change in vocabulary. Morpheme decay must stay at a constant rate for glottochronology to be applied to a language. This leads to a critique of the glottochronologic formula because some linguists argue that the morpheme decay rate is not guaranteed to stay the same throughout history. American Linguist Robert Lees obtained a value for the "glottochronological constant" (r) of words by considering the known changes in 13 pairs of languages using the 200 word list. He obtained a value of 0.8048 ± 0.0176 with 90% confidence. For his 100-word list Swadesh obtained a value of 0.86, the higher value reflecting the elimination of semantically unstable words. === Divergence time === The basic formula of glottochronology proposed by Morris Swadesh is: t = − ln ⁡ ( c ) 2 ln ⁡ ( r ) {\displaystyle t=-{\frac {\ln(c)}{2\ln(r)}}} t = a given period of time from one stage of the language to another (measured in millennia), c = proportion of wordlist items retained at the end of that period and r = rate of replacement for that word list. By testing historically verifiable cases in which t is known by nonlinguistic data (such as the approximate distance from Classical Latin to modern Romance languages), Swadesh arrived at the empirical value of approximately 0.14 for L, (c?) which means that the rate of replacement constitutes around 14 words from the 100-wordlist per millennium. This is represented in the table below. === Results === Glottochronology was applied to a range of language families, including Salishan, Indo-European, Japonic, Afro-Asiatic, Chinese and Mayan and other American languages. For Amerind, correlations have been obtained with radiocarbon dating and blood groups as well as archaeology. === Example Wordlist === Below is an example of a basic word list composed of basic Turkish words and their English translations. == Discussion == The concept of language change is old, and its history is reviewed in Hymes (1973) and Wells (1973). In some sense, glottochronology is a reconstruction of history and can often be closely related to archaeology. Many linguistic studies find the success of glottochronology to be found alongside archaeological data. Glottochronology itself dates back to the mid-20th century. An introduction to the subject is given in Embleton (1986) and in McMahon and McMahon (2005). Glottochronology has been controversial ever since, partly because of issues of accuracy but also because of the question of whether its basis is sound (for example, Bergsland 1958; Bergsland and Vogt 1962; Fodor 1961; Chrétien 1962; Guy 1980). The concerns have been addressed by Dobson et al. (1972), Dyen (1973) and Kruskal, Dyen and Black (1973). The assumption of a single-word replacement rate can distort the divergence-time estimate when borrowed words are included (Thomason and Kaufman 1988). The presentations vary from "Why linguists don't do dates" to the one by Starostin discussed below. Since its original inception, glottochronology has been rejected by many linguists, mostly Indo-Europeanists of the school of the traditional comparative method. Criticisms have been answered in particular around three points of discussion: Criticism levelled against the higher stability of lexemes in Swadesh lists alone (Haarmann 1990) misses the point because a certain amount of losses only enables the computations (Sankoff 1970). The non-homogeneity of word lists often leads to lack of understanding between linguists. Linguists also have difficulties finding a completely unbiased list of basic cultural words. it can take a long time for linguists to find a viable word list which can take several test lists to find a usable list. Traditional glottochronology presumes that language changes at a stable rate. Thus, in Bergsland & Vogt (1962), the authors make an impressive demonstration, on the basis of actual language data verifiable by extralinguistic sources, that the "rate of change" for Icelandic constituted around 4% per millennium, but for closely connected Riksmal (Literary Norwegian), it would amount to as much as 20% (Swadesh's proposed "constant rate" was supposed to be around 14% per millennium). That and several other similar examples effectively proved that Swadesh's formula would not work on all available material, which is a serious accusation since evidence that can be used to "calibrate" the meaning of L (language history recorded during prolonged periods of time) is not overwhelmingly large in the first place. It is highly likely that the chance of replacement is different for every word or feature ("each word has its own history", among hundreds of other sources:). That global assumption has been modified and downgraded to single words, even in single languages, in many newer attempts (see below). There is a lack of understanding of Swadesh's mathematical/statistical methods. Some linguists reject the methods in full because the statistics lead to 'probabilities' when linguists trust 'certainties' more. A serious argument is that language change arises from socio-historical events that are, of course, unforeseeable and, therefore, uncomputable. == Modifications == Somewhere in between the original concept of Swadesh and the rejection of glottochronology in its entirety lies the idea that glottochronology as a formal method of linguistic
Read more →
Max Welling

Max Welling (born 1968) is a Dutch computer scientist in machine learning at the University of Amsterdam. In August 2017, the university spin-off Scyfer BV, co-founded by Welling, was acquired by Qualcomm. He has since then served as a Vice President of Technology at Qualcomm Netherlands. He is also a Distinguished Scientist at Microsoft Research AI4Science, based in Amsterdam. Welling received his PhD in physics with a thesis on quantum gravity under the supervision of Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft (1998) at the Utrecht University. He has published over 250 peer-reviewed articles in machine learning, computer vision, statistics and physics, and has most notably invented variational autoencoders (VAEs), together with Diederik P Kingma. In 2025 Welling was elected member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Read more →
Best AI Video Editors in 2026

Shopping for the best AI video editor? An AI video editor is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI video editor slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Read more →
AI data center

An AI data center is a specialized data center facility designed for the computationally intensive tasks of training and running inference for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning models. Unlike general-purpose data centers, they are optimized for the parallel processing demands of AI workloads, typically using hardware such as AI accelerators (e.g., GPUs, TPUs) and high-speed interconnects. The global push to construct these specialized facilities accelerated dramatically during the AI boom of the 2020s. Memory manufacturers prioritized production of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) essential for AI servers, which led to a global memory supply shortage amid a broader competition for advanced chips, power, and infrastructure. Major tech companies are estimated to spend $650 billion on AI data centers in 2026. == Architecture == Data centers for building and running large machine learning models contain specialized computer chips, GPUs, that use 2 to 4 times as much energy as their regular CPU counterparts (250-500 watts). AI data centers use 60 or more kilowatts per server rack, whereas more standard data centers typically use 5 to 10 kilowatts per rack. == Operators == As of August 2025, The Information tracked 18 planned or existing AI data centers in the United States, operated by Amazon Web Services, CoreWeave, Crusoe, Meta, Microsoft/OpenAI, Oracle, Tesla, and xAI. Other AI data center operators include Digital Realty and Alibaba. Data centers are also being built in China, India, Europe, Saudi Arabia, and Canada. The New Yorker described CoreWeave as the most prominent AI data center operator in the United States. Two types of data center providers for machine learning have been noted: hyperscalers and neoclouds. The Verge listed large technology companies such as Google, Meta, Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon as hyperscalers. The New York Times described neoclouds as "a new generation of data center providers". CoreWeave, Nebius, Nscale, and Lambda have been described as examples of neoclouds. In January 2025, OpenAI, in partnership with Oracle and Softbank, announced the Stargate project, which as of September 2025 is composed of six built or proposed AI data centers in the United States. In response to the Stargate project, Amazon launched in October 2025 an AI data center on 1,200 acres of farmland in Indiana. This data center, known as Project Rainier, is one of the largest AI data centers in the world, with Amazon spending $11 billion on the project. Rainier is specifically intended for training and running machine learning models from Anthropic. As of that time, this facility contains seven data centers (out of an estimated 30 planned) and will use 2.2 gigawatts of electricity (equivalent to 1 million households) and millions of gallons of water per year. Computer chips from Annapurna Labs and Anthropic, Trainium 2, were designed for use in such facilities. Amazon pumped millions of gallons of water out of the ground to construct the data center, and as of June 2025, Indiana state officials are investigating whether this dewatering process led to dry wells for local residents. In November 2025, Anthropic announced a plan in partnership with Fluidstack to develop artificial intelligence infrastructure in the United States, including data centers in New York and Texas, worth $50 billion. Other AI data center projects include the Colossus supercomputer from xAI, a Louisiana-based project from Meta, Hyperion, expected to use 5 GW of power, and a second Ohio-based Meta project, Prometheus, with a capacity of 1 GW. A 3,200-acre AI data center, capable of 4.4-4.5 GW of power and located on the decommissioned Homer City Generating Station, is under construction as of 2025, and will use seven 30-acre gas generating stations supplied by EQT. As of December 2025, CRH is working on over 100 data centers in the United States. In 2025, ExxonMobil and NextEra announced plans to build a data center powered by natural gas and using carbon capture technology, with 1.2 GW of power capacity. They previously purchased 2,500 acres of land in the Southeastern United States and plan to market the data center to an artificial intelligence company. The increased interest in AI data centers has led to several executives from companies in that space becoming billionaires, including CoreWeave, QTS, Nebius, Astera Labs, Groq, Fermi (which is connected to former United States Secretary of Energy Rick Perry), Snowflake and Cipher Mining. Several companies involved in cryptocurrency mining, such as Bitdeer, CoreWeave, Cipher Mining, TeraWulf, IREN, Core Scientific, and CleanSpark have also been involved with AI data centers. == Finances == Between January and August 2024, Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon collectively spent $125 billion on AI data centers. Citigroup forecasted that $2.8 trillion would be spent on AI data centers by 2030, while McKinsey and Company estimated that almost $7 trillion would be spent globally by that time. According to S&P Global, $61 billion has been spent on the data center market as a whole in 2025, while debt issuance for data centers was $182 billion during the same year. Large technology companies have offloaded the financial risks of building AI data centers by setting up special purpose vehicles or by contracting with neoclouds. For example, Meta's Hyperion was mostly funded by Blue Owl Capital, which did so using a bond offering from PIMCO. Those bonds were sold to a number of clients, including BlackRock. Meta did not borrow money itself and instead established a special purpose vehicle from which it would rent the data center. This deal was structured by Morgan Stanley for $30 billion, the largest known private capital transaction as of 2025. Neoclouds such as CoreWeave have gone into debt to buy computer chips from Nvidia for their data centers, and the chips themselves have been used for loan collateral. As of December 2025, CoreWeave took out three GPU-backed loans, collectively worth $12.4 billion, from private credit firms (Blackstone, Coatue, BlackRock, PIMCO) and from banks (Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo). Thus, these companies provide an indirect connection between private credit and established banks. Data centers have also established asset-backed securities, and debt for data centers has its own derivative financial products. The real estate industry, including asset managers, public companies and private investors, has also invested in data centers. == Energy sourcing == == Environmental footprint == Average AI data centers have an electricity footprint equivalent to 100,000 households, and use billions of gallons of water for cooling their hardware. In 2025, the International Energy Agency estimated that the larger AI data centers currently under construction could consume as much electricity as 2 million households. A 2024 report from the United States Department of Energy stated that data centers overall used 17 billion gallons of water per year in the United States, primarily due to "rapid proliferation of AI servers", and that this usage was forecasted to grow to nearly 80 billion gallons by 2028. Researchers estimated that AI data centers in the United States would emit 24-44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and use 731–1,125 million cubic meters of water per year between 2024 and 2030. Peaking power plants, which have been proposed as a power source for AI data centers, emit sulfur dioxide and have historically been located disproportionately near communities of color in the United States. Reciprocating internal combustion engines, proposed as another power source for a data center, emit PM 2.5, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. == AI data centers in the United States == In the United States, both the Biden administration and second Trump administration supported the construction of AI data centers. In January 2025, then-president Joe Biden signed an executive order for federal government agencies to support AI data centers on federal sites built by private companies, study their effect on energy prices, and encourage their use of renewable energy. In April 2025, the United States Department of Energy suggested 16 possible sites, including Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In its July 2025 AI Action Plan, the second Trump administration supported increased production of AI data centers. Several US states have incentivized local data center construction. For example, in 2024, lawmakers in Michigan approved tax breaks for data center equipment and construction material. Some data center companies have also invested or promised to invest in the infrastructure of local communities. In December 2025, Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen, and Richard Blumenthal wrote to seven technology companies (Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, CoreWeave, Digital Realty, and Equinix) that they w
Read more →
Jian Ma (computational biologist)

Jian Ma (Chinese: 马坚) is an American computer scientist and computational biologist. He is the Ray and Stephanie Lane Professor of Computational Biology in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. He is a faculty member in the Ray and Stephanie Lane Computational Biology Department. His lab develops AI/ML methods to study the structure and function of the human genome and cellular organization and their implications for health and disease. During his Ph.D. and postdoc training, he developed algorithms to reconstruct the ancestral mammalian genome and evolutionary history. His research group has recently pioneered a series of new machine learning solutions for 3D genome organization, single-cell epigenomics, spatial omics, and complex molecular interactions. His lab also explores large language models to uncover gene regulatory mechanisms and the intricate connections among cellular components, with the aim of driving discovery and guiding experimentation. He received an NSF CAREER award in 2011. In 2020, he was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship in Computer Science. He received the Allen Newell Award for Research Excellence (2025). He is an elected Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering, the International Society for Computational Biology, and the Association for Computing Machinery. He leads an NIH 4D Nucleome Center to develop machine learning algorithms to better understand the cell nucleus. He served as the Program Chair for RECOMB 2024. He is also a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub Chicago (CZ Biohub Chicago) and the RECOMB Steering Committee. In 2024, he launched the Center for AI-Driven Biomedical Research (AI4BIO) at CMU, which will be a catalyst for innovations at the intersection of AI and biomedicine across the School of Computer Science and campus. == Selected Recent Publications == Chen V#, Yang M#, Cui W, Kim JS, Talwalkar A, and Ma J. Applying interpretable machine learning in computational biology - pitfalls, recommendations and opportunities for new developments. Nature Methods, 21(8):1454-1461, 2024. Xiong K#, Zhang R#, and Ma J. scGHOST: Identifying single-cell 3D genome subcompartments. Nature Methods, 21(5):814-822, 2024. Zhou T, Zhang R, Jia D, Doty RT, Munday AD, Gao D, Xin L, Abkowitz JL, Duan Z, and Ma J. GAGE-seq concurrently profiles multiscale 3D genome organization and gene expression in single cells. Nature Genetics, 56(8):1701-1711, 2024. Zhang Y, Boninsegna L, Yang M, Misteli T, Alber F, and Ma J. Computational methods for analysing multiscale 3D genome organization. Nature Reviews Genetics, 5(2):123-141, 2024. Chidester B#, Zhou T#, Alam S, and Ma J. SPICEMIX enables integrative single-cell spatial modeling of cell identity. Nature Genetics, 55(1):78-88, 2023. [Cover Article] Zhang R#, Zhou T#, and Ma J. Ultrafast and interpretable single-cell 3D genome analysis with Fast-Higashi. Cell Systems, 13(10):P798-807.E6, 2022. [Cover Article] Zhu X#, Zhang Y#, Wang Y, Tian D, Belmont AS, Swedlow JR, and Ma J. Nucleome Browser: An integrative and multimodal data navigation platform for 4D Nucleome. Nature Methods, 19(8):911-913, 2022. Zhang R, Zhou T, and Ma J. Multiscale and integrative single-cell Hi-C analysis with Higashi. Nature Biotechnology, 40:254–261, 2022.
Read more →
AI Avatar Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

Comparing the best AI avatar generator? An AI avatar generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI avatar generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →