AI Analytics Data

AI Analytics Data — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Online OS

The Online Operating System was a fully multi-lingual and free to use web desktop written in JavaScript using Ajax. It was a Windows-based desktop environment with open-source applications and system utilities developed upon the reBOX web application framework by iCUBE Network Solutions, an Austrian company located in Vienna. == About the project == OOS.cc, which is short for Online Operating System, was a web application platform that mimicked the look and feel of classic desktop operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X or KDE. It consisted of various open source applications built upon the so-called reBOX web application framework. As applications could be executed in an integrated and parallel way, the OOS could have been considered a web desktop or webtop. It provided basic services such as a GUI, a virtual file system, access control management and possibilities to develop and deploy applications online. As the Online Operating System was executed within a web browser, it was no real operating system but rather a portal to various web applications, offering a high usability and flexibility. The project was partly funded by grants from the Internetprivatstiftung Austria (IPA). As at 01.08.2008 almost 20.000 users have joined the oos.cc community, using the offered featured and applications. == History == The development of the web desktop was started by iCUBE Network Solutions in 2005, followed by the first beta releases in 2006. Hence, together with YouOS and eyeOS, it can be considered to be one of the first publicly available systems of its kind. The first full version including core-level multi-language support, the file system and a basic set of applications was released to the public in March 2007 on the occasion of a national exhibition (ITnT Austria Archived 2007-06-30 at the Wayback Machine) and has left beta state half a year later in October 2007. The first release considered stable (1.0.0) was published in July 2007. The project itself and the contained applications have received several national innovation awards (see,) and have gained attention mainly due to the comprehensive approach taken (see,). OOS.cc started as a national project. The full platform including all offered applications are currently available in three languages (German, English as well as Spanish) and is receiving increasing coverage around the world (for examples see, or). The current version is 1.3.01 from 01.08.2008. == Technical overview == The project is fully written in JavaScript, exclusively using DHTML techniques to run in any web browser without any additional software installation needed. The system implements a modern kind of web application model, excessively using Ajax for communicating between client components and the Java server backend in an exclusively asynchronous manner. Aim is to offer users the unique interaction behavior following the desktop metaphor, which is the main idea of any web desktop. Also typical for this sort of web application is the broadly use of Javascript-on-demand techniques, cutting the complete project source into pieces and loading them instantly when needed. Based on this technical basis, reBOX was the framework library all applications in oos.cc were built of. It is a fully flexible and extensible API, including a GUI widget set, communication mechanisms and server services offering general and framework specific services. The Online Operating System itself consisted of a basic framework, which was able to launch any JavaScript application using the reBOX library. The user interface was based on the behavior of the Windows desktop with a start menu, a task bar and a desktop background. All applications were running in this environment. At server side, there were Java based web services that ran to serve the client processes and to provide data from the relational database in the backend. oos.cc also provided an integrated development environment called Developer Suite, which allowed the community to build own applications for the desktop environment based on reBOX (see development section below). == License == All applications available in oos.cc were open source under the European Union Public Licence (EUPL). The reBOX development toolkit is free to use developing any applications for the webtop. == Features == As mentioned above, all applications published on oos.cc are open source based on the EUPL, and can be "installed" or "deinstalled" to what-ever preferences the user has. Besides global services like the multi-language support or the global theme support, as well as some minor tools and games, oos.cc offered four major services that could be used completely free of charge. Integrated and fully flexible file storage (1 GB per user) HTTP as well as FTP file transfer from and to local file system User-based file-shares within the oos-community WebDAV access Document Management (including Version Control and File Locking mechanisms) Image publishing, organization and post-processing A free sub domain (user.oos.cc) for web- or image publishing, directly integrated in the desktop Groupware applications, including free mail, fetchmail and contact management An integrated development environment where oos-applications can be created directly from within the system (see development section below) Next releases were planned to focus on an extensive security and privacy suite, dealing with challenges like anonymous communication (browsing as well as temporary mail-addresses) as well as offering encrypted password and file storage and connectivity services. Since its initial stable release, OOS.cc could have been accessed using https to ensure secure communication. == Limitations and drawbacks == Limited number of applications: no commercial applications can be hosted. Only reviewed applications are being published No processing of popular office formats (.doc, .odt, etc.) Limited language support: Only English, German and Spanish Dependence on foreign infrastructure: No possibility to extend storage, no additional/guaranteed bandwidth, etc. == Development == One of the key focuses of the team was right from the beginning to offer a very flexible and comprehensive API, that can be used to develop not only custom applications within oos.cc, but also stand-alone web-applications or to integrate single components in existing web-sites. By decoupling the development from web-related "problems" using the reBOX API web-applications can be development in a similar fashion to any Java program: Elements can be positioned and can interact like in high-level object oriented programming languages, without taking care of divs, browser specific behavior or communication handling. The framework also offers multi-language and theme support for existing as well as newly created applications, allowing changing almost every aspect of the look and feel of the used components according to the preferences of its users. For taking advantage of this approach, one of the applications offered in the OOS was an integrated Development Suite, allowing directly writing and executing code and hence creating new programs within the boundaries of the web computer. All applications on oos.cc were released as open source, thus all existing programs were offered to be imported, reviewed or changed and then locally deployed. Following this idea, every user was free to submit changed or newly created applications to be included in the globally offered application set. The last release offered features like auto-completion and an outline-window.
Read more →
Legal expert system

A legal expert system is a domain-specific expert system that uses artificial intelligence to emulate the decision-making abilities of a human expert in the field of law. Legal expert systems employ a rule base or knowledge base and an inference engine to accumulate, reference and produce expert knowledge on specific subjects within the legal domain. == Purpose == It has been suggested that legal expert systems could help to manage the rapid expansion of legal information and decisions that began to intensify in the late 1960s. Many of the first legal expert systems were created in the 1970s and 1980s. Lawyers were originally identified as primary target users of legal expert systems. Potential motivations for this work included: quicker delivery of legal advice; reduced time spent in repetitive, labour-intensive legal tasks; development of knowledge management techniques that were not dependent on staff; reduced overhead and labour costs and higher profitability for law firms; and reduced fees for clients. Some early development work was oriented toward the creation of automated judges. One of the first use cases was the encoding of the British Nationality Act at Imperial College carried out under the supervision of Marek Sergot and Robert Kowalski. Lance Elliot wrote: "The British Nationality Act was passed in 1981 and shortly thereafter was used as a means of showcasing the efficacy of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques and technologies, doing so to explore how the at-the-time newly enacted statutory law might be encoded into a computerized logic-based formalization." The authors’ seminal article, "The British Nationality Act as a Logic Program," published in 1986 in the Communications of the ACM journal, is one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field. In 2021, the Inaugural CodeX Prize was awarded to Robert Kowalski, Fariba Sadri, and Marek Sergot in acknowledgment of their groundbreaking work on the application of logic programming to the formalization and analysis of the British Nationality Act. Later work on legal expert systems has identified potential benefits to non-lawyers as a means to increase access to legal knowledge. Legal expert systems can also support administrative processes, facilitate decision-making processes, automate rule-based analyses, and exchange information directly with citizen-users. == Types == === Architectural variations === Rule-based expert systems rely on a model of deductive reasoning that utilizes "If A, then B" rules. In a rule-based legal expert system, information is represented in the form of deductive rules within the knowledge base. In rule-based legal expert systems, logic programming has historically been applied to automate complex compliance paperwork. A notable early example designed for high-volume regulatory filings was the 1999 Intelligent Filing Manager (INTELLIFM), which utilized Prolog rules as its core inference engine to automate the generation, publishing, and population of structured forms via distributed COM interfaces. Case-based reasoning models, which store and manipulate examples or cases, hold the potential to emulate an analogical reasoning process thought to be well-suited for the legal domain. This model effectively draws on known experiences our outcomes for similar problems. A neural net relies on a computer model that mimics that structure of a human brain, and operates in a very similar way to the case-based reasoning model. This expert system model is capable of recognizing and classifying patterns within the realm of legal knowledge and dealing with imprecise inputs. Fuzzy logic models attempt to create 'fuzzy' concepts or objects that can then be converted into quantitative terms or rules that are indexed and retrieved by the system. In the legal domain, fuzzy logic can be used for rule-based and case-based reasoning models. === Theoretical variations === Some legal expert system architects have adopted a very practical approach, employing scientific modes of reasoning within a given set of rules or cases. Others have opted for a broader philosophical approach inspired by jurisprudential reasoning modes emanating from established legal theoreticians. === Functional variations === Some legal expert systems aim to arrive at a particular conclusion in law, while others are designed to predict a particular outcome. An example of a predictive system is one that predicts the outcome of judicial decisions, the value of a case, or the outcome of litigation. == Reception == Many forms of legal expert systems have become widely used and accepted by both the legal community and the users of legal services. == Challenges == === Domain-related problems === The inherent complexity of law as a discipline raises immediate challenges for legal expert system knowledge engineers. Legal matters often involve interrelated facts and issues, which further compound the complexity. Factual uncertainty may also arise when there are disputed versions of factual representations that must be input into an expert system to begin the reasoning process. === Computerized problem solving === The limitations of most computerized problem solving techniques inhibit the success of many expert systems in the legal domain. Expert systems typically rely on deductive reasoning models that have difficulty according degrees of weight to certain principles of law or importance to previously decided cases that may or may not influence a decision in an immediate case or context. === Representation of legal knowledge === Expert legal knowledge can be difficult to represent or formalize within the structure of an expert system. For knowledge engineers, challenges include: Open texture: Law is rarely applied in an exact way to specific facts, and exact outcomes are rarely a certainty. Statutes may be interpreted according to different linguistic interpretations, reliance on precedent cases or other contextual factors including a particular judge's conception of fairness. The balancing of reasons: Many arguments involve considerations or reasons that are not easily represented in a logical way. For instance, many constitutional legal issues are said to balance independently well-established considerations for state interests against individual rights. Such balancing may draw on extra-legal considerations that would be difficult to represent logically in an expert system. Indeterminacy of legal reasoning: In the adversarial arena of law, it is common to have two strong arguments on a single point. Determining the 'right' answer may depend on a majority vote among expert judges, as in the case of an appeal. === Time and cost effectiveness === Creating a functioning expert system requires significant investments in software architecture, subject matter expertise and knowledge engineering. Faced with these challenges, many system architects restrict the domain in terms of subject matter and jurisdiction. The consequence of this approach is the creation of narrowly focused and geographically restricted legal expert systems that are difficult to justify on a cost-benefit basis. Current applications of AI in the legal field utilize machines to review documents, particularly when a high level of completeness and confidence in the quality of document analysis is depended upon, such as in instances of litigation and where due diligence play a role. Among the numerically most quantifiable advantages of AI in the legal field are the time and money saving impact by freeing lawyers from having to spend inordinate amounts of their valuable time on routine tasks, aiding in setting free lawyers’ creative energy by reducing stress. This in turn increases the rate of case load reduction by accomplishing better results in less time, which unlocks potential additional revenue per unit of time spend on a case. The cost of setting up and maintaining AI systems in law is more than offset by the attained savings through increased efficacy; unbalanced cost can be assigned to clients. === Lack of correctness in results or decisions === Legal expert systems may lead non-expert users to incorrect or inaccurate results and decisions. This problem could be compounded by the fact that users may rely heavily on the correctness or trustworthiness of results or decisions generated by these systems. == Examples == ASHSD-II is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models in the area of matrimonial property disputes under English law. CHIRON is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models to support tax planning activities under United States tax law and codes. JUDGE is a rule-based legal expert system that deals with sentencing in the criminal legal domain for offences relating to murder, assault and manslaughter. Legislate is a knowledge graph powered contract management platform whi
Read more →
Cube 3D

Cube 3D is an artificial intelligence model that is developed by Roblox Corporation. It is open source and available on GitHub and Hugging Face. In March 2026, Roblox announced Cube 3D as a mesh generation model that takes text input. In February 2026, Roblox released 4D creation in a public beta, allowing embedding Cube 3D into Roblox games. Cube 3D is integrated into Roblox Studio and its API, and supports two modes of 4D creation. == History == In March 2025, Roblox announced Cube 3D as a mesh generation model that takes text input. Its first feature was an API that allows mesh generation. That month, it was made open source. Over 1.8 million assets have been generated by Cube 3D since March 2025. In March 2025, 4D creation was announced. That November, 4D creation was released in early access. In February 2026, Roblox released 4D creation in a public beta, allowing embedding Cube 3D into Roblox games. == Technology == Cube 3D is trained on Roblox meshes. To generate meshes, it tokenises meshes and shapes and predicts the next token. Cube 3D is integrated into Roblox Studio and the Roblox Studio API. Its API allows mesh generation. In 4D creation, two modes can be used. Car-5 supports modular objects, and Body-1 only supports single-mesh objects.
Read more →
AI Snake Oil

AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference is a 2024 non-fiction book written by scholars Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor. It is a critique of the tech industry's overly inflated promises and capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) as well as a debunking of the flawed science fueling AI hype while attempting to outline both the potential positives and negatives that come with different modes of the technology. == Contents == === Publication === The book was published in September 2024 by the Princeton University Press. AI Snake Oil consists of 360 pages and features eight chapters, and sections for acknowledgements, references, and an index. An updated edition with a new preface and epilogue by the authors was published in September 2025. The authors use the term "AI snake oil" derived from the U.S. idiom for a fraudulent remedy, to describe overhyped AI systems. === Chapter one: Introduction === Narayanan and Kapoor argue that many individuals do not yet have the literacy to detect functioning aspects of AI compared to potential snake oil, which they identify as "AI that does not and cannot work as advertised". Some of the major examples utilized by the authors include Allstate's 2013 use of predictive AI, as well as the concern surrounding actors and AI attempting to replicate or use their likeness. Important discussions regarding discrimination are brought up and explored in the first chapter, including the false arrests of six Black individuals due to errors with AI facial recognition tools. The chapter concludes with a comparison to the Industrial Revolution, where Narayanan and Kapoor highlight the extensive human labour that is necessary for artificial intelligence technologies to function. === Chapter two: How Predictive AI Goes Wrong === Chapter two focuses on predictive artificial intelligence, and criticizes the overestimation of the capabilities of the technology. === Chapter three: Why Can't AI Predict the Future? === Chapter three works to inform the reader about the history of early computational prediction attempts, with examples from companies like Simulatics. === Chapter four: The Long Road to Generative AI === The fourth chapter goes in more in-depth in explorations of generative AI. Generative AI software examples include ChatGPT, Midjourney, and DALL-E. The section begins with a positive example of generative AI. As the chapter progresses, the authors begin to provide examples of harm produced by generative AI, including the suicide of a Belgian man after connecting with Chai, a generative chatbot. Issues of deepfakes and preservation of artistic property are also discussed. The use of generative AI to create non-consensual pornographic deepfake content is discussed in relation to female celebrities. === Chapter five: Is Advanced AI an Existential Threat? === The fifth chapter draws attention the AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence. The authors describe AGI as "AI that can perform most or economically relevant tasks as effectively as any human". They summarize that many contributors to the field of artificial intelligence believe AGI to be an impending threat that demands attention. However, they argue that the perceived threat of AGI would only exist if the technology continually functioned reliably. In order to better illustrate the hype surrounding AGI, Narayanan and Kapoor use the Ladder of Generality, which is described as a visual tool in which "each rung represents a way of computing that is more flexible, and more general, than the previous one". They note that we are not yet aware of the next rungs on the ladder, or if the ladder will eventually result in a dead end. The rungs that have been identified so far are as follows: (0, or floor) special purpose hardware, (1) programmable computers, (2) stored program computers, (3) machine learning, (4) deep learning, (5) pretrained models, and, finally, (6) instruction-tuned models. The potential for future rungs and what those rungs might be are currently undetermined. The chapter also discusses the ELIZA effect, which Lawrence Switzky discusses in his article "ELIZA Effects". Switzky attributes the coined term ELIZA Effect to Sherry Turke, who defined it as "our more general tendency to treat responsive computer programs as more intelligent than they really are". === Chapter six: Why Can't AI Fix Social Media? === The sixth chapter focuses on content moderation, why it is important, and how it has been and could be affected by artificial automation. The first issue raised in regard to AI-driven content moderation is the inability for computers and machines to understand context and nuance, resulting in potential for discriminatory moderation and shadow banning. While they note that there are issues with automating content moderation, Narayanan and Kapoor also highlight the psychological impact on human content moderators and their labour. They indicate the hidden labour behind moderation, which is often outsourced to less developed countries, where labourers sort through potentially traumatizing content for pay. However, the discussion focuses more heavily on why automated moderation can be problematic, including discriminatory algorithms and lack of nuance. To balance their argument, issues of discrimination and bias are also discussed in relation the human content moderators. To automate moderation, there are two types of AI used, which are fingerprint matching and machine learning. === Chapter seven: Why Do Myths about AI Persist? === The seventh chapter outlines possible factors that contribute to hype surrounding AI. Narayanan and Kapoor explain how companies often promote their new AI models without properly disclosing how the model works, and what it is learning from. They attribute hype to several different groups, including journalists, researchers, and companies. They explain the impact of companies and the misplaced hype that they spread can be attributed to greed and a desire to grow corporate funds. For journalists, one of the stated sources of hype, they argue that news media has a tendency to prioritize financial incentives over validity and quality of writing. As well, Narayanan and Kapoor point out the emergence of company statement regurgitation in news media, leading to clickbait. Hype from researchers is potentially linked to lack of reproducibility in studies as well as leakage, which occurs when AI models are tested on their training data. === Chapter eight: Where do we go from here? === The final chapter, chapter eight, turns its attention to the future. The authors express their ideas and predictions for how the technology will evolve and be utilized in the upcoming years. == Authors == Author Narayanan is a computer science professor at Princeton University. Kapoor is a doctoral candidate at the same university, and both scholars are located at the Center for Information Technology at Princeton. In 2023, Narayanan and Kapoor appeared on the TIME100 Artificial Intelligence list, which features influential figures in the field. == Reception == Nature, a science and technology peer-reviewed journal, released an article highlighting the top "10 essential reads from the past year", listing Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor's AI Snake Oil. The article states the that text is "one of the best on this controversial subject". Elizabeth Quill, in her review of the text in Science News, writes that the authors "squarely achieve their stated goal: to empower people to distinguish AI that works well from AI snake oil". Joshua Rothman of The New Yorker writes that "compared with many technologists, Narayanan, Kapoor, and Vallor [Shannon Vallor, University of Edinburgh], are deeply skeptical about today's A.I. technology and what it can achieve. Perhaps they shouldn't be". Rothman argues, following an interview with prominent computer scientist Geoffrey Hinton of University of Toronto, that the potential for AI to replicate complexity is already here and continues to be heavily funded, enhancing the prospective capabilities of the technology. However, he does praise the author's ability to address questions regarding the existential human experience. Alexya Martinez discusses the text in a book review for Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, critiquing AI Snake Oil for its extensive focus on the West. Martinez writes that Narayanan and Kapoor "do not fully explore how AI impacts other countries", and suggests more focus on countries outside of the United States to enhance their argument.
Read more →
Automated dispensing cabinet

An automated dispensing cabinet (ADC), also called a unit-based cabinet (UBC), automated dispensing device (ADD), or automated dispensing machine (ADM)[1], is a computerized medicine cabinet for hospitals and healthcare settings. ADCs allow medications to be stored and dispensed near the point of care while controlling and tracking drug distribution. == Overview == Hospital pharmacies have provided medications for patients by filling patient-specific cassettes of unit-dose medications that were then delivered to the nursing unit and stored in medication cabinets or carts. ADCs, originally designed for hospital use, were introduced in hospitals in the 1980s and have facilitated the transition to alternative delivery models and more decentralized medication distribution systems.[2] Implementing automated dispensing cabinets as part of a decentralized or hybrid medication distribution system can improve patient safety and the accountability of the inventory, streamline certain billing processes. However, in the 2000s, the technology began to be deployed into other care settings where medication doses were stored onsite, and higher security methods were needed to control inventory, access, and dispensing of each patient dose. Settings that now deploy ADCs include long-term care facilities, hospice, critical access hospitals, surgery centers, group homes, residential care facilities, rehab and psych environments, animal health, dental clinics, and nursing education simulation. These diverse care settings share a common need to safely store, account for, and dispense individual doses of medications, especially narcotics and high-value medications, at the point of care.[3] ADCs track user access and dispensed medications, and their use can improve control over medication inventory. The real-time inventory reports generated by many cabinets can simplify the filling process and help the pharmacy track expired drugs. Furthermore, by restricting individual drugs – such as high-risk medications and controlled substances – to unique drawers within the cabinet, overall inventory management, patient safety, and medication security can be improved. Automated dispensing cabinets allow the pharmacy department to profile physician orders before they are dispensed.[4] ADCs can also enable providers to record medication charges upon dispensing, reducing the billing paperwork the pharmacy is responsible for. In addition, nurses can note returned medications using the cabinets' computers, enabling direct credits to patients' accounts. Since automated cabinets can be located on the nursing unit floor, nursing have speedier access to a patient's medications. Also, shorter waiting time ensures improved patient comfort and care.[5] == Role of automated dispensing in healthcare == Automated dispensing is a pharmacy practice in which a device dispenses medications and fills prescriptions. ADCs, which can handle many different medications, are available from a number of manufacturers such as BD, ARxIUM, and Omnicell. Though members of the pharmacy community have been utilizing automation technology since the 1980s, companies are constantly improving ADCs to meet changing needs and health standards in the industry. Several goals can be met by implementing an automated product in a healthcare facility. Patient safety can be ensured with the use of ADC technology such as barcoding. Anesthesia ADCs in operating rooms and perioperative areas may include label printing to prevent mix-ups such as errors between morphine and hydromorphone, two different opioid analgesics that frequently get confused. These systems also communicate with the pharmacy and its information management system to track medications removed and support inventory replenishment. == Key features == ADCs are like automated teller machines whose specific technologies such as barcode scanning and clinical decision support can improve medication safety. Some have metal locking drawers for added security and some have automated single-dose dispensing to prevent the need for a blind count each time a controlled substance is accessed. Over the years, ADCs have been adapted to facilitate compliance with emerging regulatory requirements such as pharmacy review of medication orders and safe practice recommendations. ADCs incorporate advanced software and electronic interfaces to synthesize high-risk steps in the medication use process. These unit-based medication repositories provide computer-controlled storage, dispensation, tracking, and documentation of medication distribution in the resident care unit. Since automated dispensing cabinets are not located in the pharmacy, they are considered "decentralized" medication distribution systems. Instead, they can be found at the point of care on the resident care unit. Tracking of the stocking and distribution process can occur by interfacing the unit with a central pharmacy computer. These cabinets can also be interfaced with other external databases such as resident profiles, the facility's admission/discharge/transfer system, and billing systems. Most ADC providers offer scalable systems since several important factors vary widely by facility such as budget, physical room size, patient population/demographics, type of healthcare facility, etc.
Read more →
Computer-automated design

Design Automation usually refers to electronic design automation, or Design Automation which is a Product Configurator. Extending Computer-Aided Design (CAD), automated design and Computer-Automated Design (CAutoD) are more concerned with a broader range of applications, such as automotive engineering, civil engineering, composite material design, control engineering, dynamic system identification and optimization, financial systems, industrial equipment, mechatronic systems, steel construction, structural optimisation, and the invention of novel systems. The concept of CAutoD perhaps first appeared in 1963, in the IBM Journal of Research and Development, where a computer program was written. to search for logic circuits having certain constraints on hardware design to evaluate these logics in terms of their discriminating ability over samples of the character set they are expected to recognize. More recently, traditional CAD simulation is seen to be transformed to CAutoD by biologically-inspired machine learning, including heuristic search techniques such as evolutionary computation, and swarm intelligence algorithms. == Guiding designs by performance improvements == To meet the ever-growing demand of quality and competitiveness, iterative physical prototyping is now often replaced by 'digital prototyping' of a 'good design', which aims to meet multiple objectives such as maximised output, energy efficiency, highest speed and cost-effectiveness. The design problem concerns both finding the best design within a known range (i.e., through 'learning' or 'optimisation') and finding a new and better design beyond the existing ones (i.e., through creation and invention). This is equivalent to a search problem in an almost certainly, multidimensional (multivariate), multi-modal space with a single (or weighted) objective or multiple objectives. == Normalized objective function: cost vs. fitness == Using single-objective CAutoD as an example, if the objective function, either as a cost function J ∈ [ 0 , ∞ ) {\displaystyle J\in [0,\infty )} , or inversely, as a fitness function f ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle f\in (0,1]} , where f = J 1 + J {\displaystyle f={\tfrac {J}{1+J}}} , is differentiable under practical constraints in the multidimensional space, the design problem may be solved analytically. Finding the parameter sets that result in a zero first-order derivative and that satisfy the second-order derivative conditions would reveal all local optima. Then comparing the values of the performance index of all the local optima, together with those of all boundary parameter sets, would lead to the global optimum, whose corresponding 'parameter' set will thus represent the best design. However, in practice, the optimization usually involves multiple objectives and the matters involving derivatives are a lot more complex. == Dealing with practical objectives == In practice, the objective value may be noisy or even non-numerical, and hence its gradient information may be unreliable or unavailable. This is particularly true when the problem is multi-objective. At present, many designs and refinements are mainly made through a manual trial-and-error process with the help of a CAD simulation package. Usually, such a posteriori learning or adjustments need to be repeated many times until a ‘satisfactory’ or ‘optimal’ design emerges. == Exhaustive search == In theory, this adjustment process can be automated by computerised search, such as exhaustive search. As this is an exponential algorithm, it may not deliver solutions in practice within a limited period of time. == Search in polynomial time == One approach to virtual engineering and automated design is evolutionary computation such as evolutionary algorithms. === Evolutionary algorithms === To reduce the search time, the biologically-inspired evolutionary algorithm (EA) can be used instead, which is a (non-deterministic) polynomial algorithm. The EA based multi-objective "search team" can be interfaced with an existing CAD simulation package in a batch mode. The EA encodes the design parameters (encoding being necessary if some parameters are non-numerical) to refine multiple candidates through parallel and interactive search. In the search process, 'selection' is performed using 'survival of the fittest' a posteriori learning. To obtain the next 'generation' of possible solutions, some parameter values are exchanged between two candidates (by an operation called 'crossover') and new values introduced (by an operation called 'mutation'). This way, the evolutionary technique makes use of past trial information in a similarly intelligent manner to the human designer. The EA based optimal designs can start from the designer's existing design database, or from an initial generation of candidate designs obtained randomly. A number of finely evolved top-performing candidates will represent several automatically optimized digital prototypes. There are websites that demonstrate interactive evolutionary algorithms for design. allows you to evolve 3D objects online and have them 3D printed. allows you to do the same for 2D images.
Read more →
Dreams of Violets

Dreams of Violets is a film entirely generated by artificial intelligence, produced and directed by brothers Ash and Pooya Koosha. The film will be screened at the Tribeca Film Festival on 10 June 2026. All images and characters in the film were generated using AI-powered video tools and based on journalistic reports, photographs, and eyewitness accounts. == Plot == The film is a fictionalized dramatization of the events surrounding the massacre of Iranian civilians in January 2026. International organizations estimate the death toll at over 7,000, amidst protests and state violence that unfolded during a communications blackout.
Read more →
Belief–desire–intention software model

The belief–desire–intention software model (BDI) is a software model developed for programming intelligent agents. Superficially characterized by the implementation of an agent's beliefs, desires and intentions, it actually uses these concepts to solve a particular problem in agent programming. In essence, it provides a mechanism for separating the activity of selecting a plan (from a plan library or an external planner application) from the execution of currently active plans. Consequently, BDI agents are able to balance the time spent on deliberating about plans (choosing what to do) and executing those plans (doing it). A third activity, creating the plans in the first place (planning), is not within the scope of the model, and is left to the system designer and programmer. == Overview == In order to achieve this separation, the BDI software model implements the principal aspects of Michael Bratman's theory of human practical reasoning (also referred to as Belief-Desire-Intention, or BDI). That is to say, it implements the notions of belief, desire and (in particular) intention, in a manner inspired by Bratman. For Bratman, desire and intention are both pro-attitudes (mental attitudes concerned with action). He identifies commitment as the distinguishing factor between desire and intention, noting that it leads to (1) temporal persistence in plans and (2) further plans being made on the basis of those to which it is already committed. The BDI software model partially addresses these issues. Temporal persistence, in the sense of explicit reference to time, is not explored. The hierarchical nature of plans is more easily implemented: a plan consists of a number of steps, some of which may invoke other plans. The hierarchical definition of plans itself implies a kind of temporal persistence, since the overarching plan remains in effect while subsidiary plans are being executed. An important aspect of the BDI software model (in terms of its research relevance) is the existence of logical models through which it is possible to define and reason about BDI agents. Research in this area has led, for example, to the axiomatization of some BDI implementations, as well as to formal logical descriptions such as Anand Rao and Michael Georgeff's BDICTL. The latter combines a multiple-modal logic (with modalities representing beliefs, desires and intentions) with the temporal logic CTL. More recently, Michael Wooldridge has extended BDICTL to define LORA (the Logic Of Rational Agents), by incorporating an action logic. In principle, LORA allows reasoning not only about individual agents, but also about communication and other interaction in a multi-agent system. The BDI software model is closely associated with intelligent agents, but does not, of itself, ensure all the characteristics associated with such agents. For example, it allows agents to have private beliefs, but does not force them to be private. It also has nothing to say about agent communication. Ultimately, the BDI software model is an attempt to solve a problem that has more to do with plans and planning (the choice and execution thereof) than it has to do with the programming of intelligent agents. This approach has recently been proposed by Steven Umbrello and Roman Yampolskiy as a means of designing autonomous vehicles for human values. == BDI agents == A BDI agent is a particular type of bounded rational software agent, imbued with particular mental attitudes, viz: Beliefs, Desires and Intentions (BDI). === Architecture === This section defines the idealized architectural components of a BDI system. Beliefs: Beliefs represent the informational state of the agent–its beliefs about the world (including itself and other agents). Beliefs can also include inference rules, allowing forward chaining to lead to new beliefs. Using the term belief rather than knowledge recognizes that what an agent believes may not necessarily be true (and in fact may change in the future). Beliefset: Beliefs are stored in database (sometimes called a belief base or a belief set), although that is an implementation decision. Desires: Desires represent the motivational state of the agent. They represent objectives or situations that the agent would like to accomplish or bring about. Examples of desires might be: find the best price, go to the party or become rich. Goals: A goal is a desire that has been adopted for active pursuit by the agent. Usage of the term goals adds the further restriction that the set of active desires must be consistent. For example, one should not have concurrent goals to go to a party and to stay at home – even though they could both be desirable. Intentions: Intentions represent the deliberative state of the agent – what the agent has chosen to do. Intentions are desires to which the agent has to some extent committed. In implemented systems, this means the agent has begun executing a plan. Plans: Plans are sequences of actions (recipes or knowledge areas) that an agent can perform to achieve one or more of its intentions. Plans may include other plans: my plan to go for a drive may include a plan to find my car keys. This reflects that in Bratman's model, plans are initially only partially conceived, with details being filled in as they progress. Events: These are triggers for reactive activity by the agent. An event may update beliefs, trigger plans or modify goals. Events may be generated externally and received by sensors or integrated systems. Additionally, events may be generated internally to trigger decoupled updates or plans of activity. BDI was also extended with an obligations component, giving rise to the BOID agent architecture to incorporate obligations, norms and commitments of agents that act within a social environment. === BDI interpreter === This section defines an idealized BDI interpreter that provides the basis of SRI's PRS lineage of BDI systems: initialize-state repeat options: option-generator (event-queue) selected-options: deliberate(options) update-intentions(selected-options) execute() get-new-external-events() drop-unsuccessful-attitudes() drop-impossible-attitudes() end repeat === Limitations and criticisms === The BDI software model is one example of a reasoning architecture for a single rational agent, and one concern in a broader multi-agent system. This section bounds the scope of concerns for the BDI software model, highlighting known limitations of the architecture. Learning: BDI agents lack any specific mechanisms within the architecture to learn from past behavior and adapt to new situations. Three attitudes: Classical decision theorists and planning research questions the necessity of having all three attitudes, distributed AI research questions whether the three attitudes are sufficient. Logics: The multi-modal logics that underlie BDI (that do not have complete axiomatizations and are not efficiently computable) have little relevance in practice. Multiple agents: In addition to not explicitly supporting learning, the framework may not be appropriate to learning behavior. Further, the BDI model does not explicitly describe mechanisms for interaction with other agents and integration into a multi-agent system. Explicit goals: Most BDI implementations do not have an explicit representation of goals. Lookahead: The architecture does not have (by design) any lookahead deliberation or forward planning. This may not be desirable because adopted plans may use up limited resources, actions may not be reversible, task execution may take longer than forward planning, and actions may have undesirable side effects if unsuccessful. == BDI agent implementations == === 'Pure' BDI === Procedural Reasoning System (PRS) IRMA (not implemented but can be considered as PRS with non-reconsideration) UM-PRS OpenPRS Distributed Multi-Agent Reasoning System (dMARS) AgentSpeak(L) – see Jason below AgentSpeak(RT) Agent Real-Time System (ARTS) (ARTS) JAM JACK Intelligent Agents JADEX (open source project) JaKtA JASON GORITE SPARK 3APL 2APL GOAL agent programming language CogniTAO (Think-As-One) Living Systems Process Suite PROFETA Gwendolen (Part of the Model Checking Agent Programming Languages Framework) === Extensions and hybrid systems === JACK Teams CogniTAO (Think-As-One) Living Systems Process Suite Brahms JaCaMo
Read more →
Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability

Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability (CoLA) is a dataset the primary purpose of which is to serve as a benchmark for evaluating the ability of artificial neural networks, including large language models, to judge the grammatical correctness of sentences. It consists of 10,657 English sentences from published linguistics literature that were manually labeled either as grammatical or ungrammatical. == Public version == The publicly available version of CoLA contains 9,594 sentences that belong to training and development sets. It excludes 1,063 sentences reserved for a held-out test set.
Read more →
Conceptual dependency theory

Conceptual dependency theory is a model of natural language understanding used in artificial intelligence systems. Roger Schank at Stanford University introduced the model in 1969, in the early days of artificial intelligence. This model was extensively used by Schank's students at Yale University such as Robert Wilensky, Wendy Lehnert, and Janet Kolodner. Schank developed the model to represent knowledge for natural language input into computers. Partly influenced by the work of Sydney Lamb, his goal was to make the meaning independent of the words used in the input, i.e. two sentences identical in meaning would have a single representation. The system was also intended to draw logical inferences. The model uses the following basic representational tokens: real world objects, each with some attributes. real world actions, each with attributes times locations A set of conceptual transitions then act on this representation, e.g. an ATRANS is used to represent a transfer such as "give" or "take" while a PTRANS is used to act on locations such as "move" or "go". An MTRANS represents mental acts such as "tell", etc. A sentence such as "John gave a book to Mary" is then represented as the action of an ATRANS on two real world objects, John and Mary.
Read more →
GITEX Vietnam

GITEX AI Vietnam is an upcoming technology exhibition and conference scheduled to take place in Hanoi, Vietnam, on 1–2 October 2026. The event is organised by KAOUN International in partnership with the Dubai World Trade Centre and the Vietnam National Innovation Center (NIC). It is part of the global GITEX network of technology exhibitions. The event supported by Vietnam's Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Science and Technology. == Activity == GITEX AI Vietnam was announced in 2025 as part of GITEX's expansion into Southeast Asia. Its launch coincides with Vietnam's National Innovation Week. Media reports linked to the announcement projected Vietnam's digital economy could reach around US$200 billion by 2030. The event includes exhibitions, conferences, and networking sessions. Co-located platforms include AI Everything Vietnam, Startups North Star Vietnam, GITEX Cyber Valley Vietnam, and FDX Vietnam. Expected participants include policymakers, technology companies, startups, investors, and researchers.
Read more →
Mivar-based approach

The Mivar-based approach is a mathematical tool for designing artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Mivar (Multidimensional Informational Variable Adaptive Reality) was developed by combining production and Petri nets. The Mivar-based approach was developed for semantic analysis and adequate representation of humanitarian epistemological and axiological principles in the process of developing artificial intelligence. The Mivar-based approach incorporates computer science, informatics and discrete mathematics, databases, expert systems, graph theory, matrices and inference systems. The Mivar-based approach involves two technologies: Information accumulation is a method of creating global evolutionary data-and-rules bases with variable structure. It works on the basis of adaptive, discrete, mivar-oriented information space, unified data and rules representation, based on three main concepts: “object, property, relation”. Information accumulation is designed to store any information with possible evolutionary structure and without limitations concerning the amount of information and forms of its presentation. Data processing is a method of creating a logical inference system or automated algorithm construction from modules, services or procedures on the basis of a trained mivar network of rules with linear computational complexity. Mivar data processing includes logical inference, computational procedures and services. Mivar networks allow us to develop cause-effect dependencies (“If-then”) and create an automated, trained, logical reasoning system. Representatives of Russian association for artificial intelligence (RAAI) – for example, V. I. Gorodecki, doctor of technical science, professor at SPIIRAS and V. N. Vagin, doctor of technical science, professor at MPEI declared that the term is incorrect and suggested that the author should use standard terminology. == History == While working in the Russian Ministry of Defense, O. O. Varlamov started developing the theory of “rapid logical inference” in 1985. He was analyzing Petri nets and productions to construct algorithms. Generally, mivar-based theory represents an attempt to combine entity-relationship models and their problem instance – semantic networks and Petri networks. The abbreviation MIVAR was introduced as a technical term by O. O. Varlamov, Doctor of Technical Science, professor at Bauman MSTU in 1993 to designate a “semantic unit” in the process of mathematical modeling. The term has been established and used in all of his further works. The first experimental systems operating according to mivar-based principles were developed in 2000. Applied mivar systems were introduced in 2015. == Mivar == Mivar is the smallest structural element of discrete information space. == Object-property-relation == Object-Property-Relation (VSO) is a graph, the nodes of which are concepts and arcs are connections between concepts. Mivar space represents a set of axes, a set of elements, a set of points of space and a set of values of points. A = { a n } , n = 1 , … , N , {\displaystyle A=\{a_{n}\},n=1,\ldots ,N,} where: A {\displaystyle A} is a set of mivar space axis names; N {\displaystyle N} is a number of mivar space axes. Then: ∀ a n ∃ F n = { f n i n } , n = 1 , … , N , i n = 1 , … , I n , {\displaystyle \forall a_{n}\exists F_{n}=\{f_{{ni}_{n}}\},n=1,\ldots ,N,i_{n}=1,\ldots ,I_{n},} where: F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} is a set of axis a n {\displaystyle a_{n}} elements; i n {\displaystyle i_{n}} is a set F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} element identifier; I n = | F n | . {\displaystyle I_{n}=|F_{n}|.} F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} sets form multidimensional space: M = F 1 × F 2 × ⋯ × F n . {\displaystyle M=F_{1}\times F_{2}\times \cdots \times F_{n}.} m = ( i 1 , i 2 , … , i N ) , {\displaystyle m=(i_{1},i_{2},\ldots ,i_{N}),} where: m ∈ M {\displaystyle m\in M} ; m {\displaystyle m} is a point of multidimensional space; ( i 1 , i 2 , … , i N ) {\displaystyle (i_{1},i_{2},\ldots ,i_{N})} are coordinates of point m {\displaystyle m} . There is a set of values of multidimensional space points of M {\displaystyle M} : C M = { c i 1 , i 2 , … , i N ∣ i 1 = 1 , … , I 1 , i 2 = 1 , … , I 2 , … , i n = 1 , … , I N } , {\displaystyle C_{M}=\{c_{i_{1},i_{2},\ldots ,i_{N}}\mid i_{1}=1,\ldots ,I_{1},i_{2}=1,\ldots ,I_{2},\ldots ,i_{n}=1,\ldots ,I_{N}\},} where: c i 1 , i 2 , … , i N {\displaystyle c_{i_{1},i_{2},\ldots ,i_{N}}} is a value of the point of multidimensional space M {\displaystyle M} is a value of the point of multidimensional space ( i 1 , i 2 , … , i N ) {\displaystyle (i_{1},i_{2},\ldots ,i_{N})} . For every point of space M {\displaystyle M} there is a single value from C M {\displaystyle C_{M}} set or there is no such value. Thus, C M {\displaystyle C_{M}} is a set of data model state changes represented in multidimensional space. To implement a transition between multidimensional space and set of points values the relation μ {\displaystyle \mu } has been introduced: C x = μ ( M x ) , {\displaystyle C_{x}=\mu (M_{x}),} where: M x ⊆ M ; {\displaystyle M_{x}\subseteq M;} M x = F 1 x × F 2 x × ⋯ × F N x . {\displaystyle M_{x}=F_{1x}\times F_{2x}\times \cdots \times F_{Nx}.} To describe a data model in mivar information space it is necessary to identify three axes: The axis of relations « O {\displaystyle O} »; The axis of attributes (properties) « S {\displaystyle S} »; The axis of elements (objects) of subject domain « V {\displaystyle V} ». These sets are independent. The mivar space can be represented by the following tuple: ⟨ V , S , O ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle V,S,O\rangle } Thus, mivar is described by « V S O {\displaystyle VSO} » formula, in which « V {\displaystyle V} » denotes an object or a thing, « S {\displaystyle S} » denotes properties, « O {\displaystyle O} » variety of relations between other objects of a particular subject domain. The category “Relations” can describe dependencies of any complexity level: formulae, logical transitions, text expressions, functions, services, computational procedures and even neural networks. A wide range of capabilities complicates description of modeling interconnections, but can take into consideration all the factors. Mivar computations use mathematical logic. In a simplified form they can be represented as implication in the form of an "if…, then …” formula. The result of mivar modeling can be represented in the form of a bipartite graph binding two sets of objects: source objects and resultant objects. == Mivar network == Mivar network is a method for representing objects of the subject domain and their processing rules in the form of a bipartite directed graph consisting of objects and rules. A Mivar network is a bipartite graph that can be described in the form of a two-dimensional matrix, in that records information about the subject domain of the current task. Generally, mivar networks provide formalization and representation of human knowledge in the form of a connected multidimensional space. That is, a mivar network is a method of representing a piece of mivar space information in the form of a bipartite, directed graph. The mivar space information is formed by objects and connections, which in total represent the data model of the subject domain. Connections include rules for objects processing. Thus, a mivar network of a subject domain is a part of the mivar space knowledge for that domain. The graph can consist of objects-variables and rules-procedures. First, two lists are made that form two nonintersecting partitions: the list of objects and the list of rules. Objects are denoted by circles. Each rule in a mivar network is an extension of productions, hyper-rules with multi-activators or computational procedures. It is proved that from the perspective of further processing, these formalisms are identical and in fact are nodes of the bipartite graph, denoted by rectangles. === Multi-dimensional binary matrices === Mivar networks can be implemented on single computing systems or service-oriented architectures. Certain constraints restrict their application, in particular, the dimension of matrix of linear matrix method for determining logical inference path on the adaptive rule networks. The matrix dimension constraint is due to the fact that implementation requires sending a general matrix to multiple processors. Since every matrix value is initially represented in symbol form, the amount of sent data is crucial when obtaining, for example, 10000 rules/variables. Classical mivar-based method requires storing three values in each matrix cell: 0 – no value; x – input variable for the rule; y – output variable for the rule. The analysis of possibility of firing a rule is separated from determining output variables according to stages after firing the rule. Consequently, it is possible to use different matrices for “search for fired rules” and “setting values for output variables”. This allowsthe use of multidimensional binary m
Read more →
Tail latency

Tail latency is a term used to describe the high-percentile response times seen in a system. This is usually measured at the 95th, 99th, or 99.9th percentile, not the average latency. In distributed systems, cloud computing, and large-scale web services, even a small number of slow requests can make the user experience and system performance much worse. Tail latency often happens because of things like resource contention, network variability, garbage collection pauses, and hardware heterogeneity. A major problem in system design is managing tail latency, because lowering average latency doesn't always make the worst-case performance better. To lessen its effects, people often use techniques like request hedging, replication, load balancing, and adaptive timeouts. In latency-sensitive applications like search engines, financial systems, and real-time services, where service-level objectives (SLOs) are often based on high-percentile latencies, it is especially important to understand and improve tail latency.
Read more →
Hundred (novel series)

Hundred (ハンドレッド, Handoreddo) is a Japanese light novel series written by Jun Misaki and illustrated by Nekosuke Ōkuma. SB Creative published 16 novels between November 15, 2012, and October 15, 2018, under their GA Bunko imprint. A manga adaptation with art by Sasayuki was serialized in Fujimi Shobo's Monthly Dragon Age magazine. An anime television series adaptation, produced by Production IMS and directed by Tomoki Kobayashi, aired from April to June 2016. == Plot == "Hundreds" are a kind of weapon that get their name from their ability to change into many different forms, and are the only thing that can counter the mysterious life forms called Savage that are attacking Earth. Those who can wield a Hundred are sought out to be made into Slayers, trained individuals who can use them in combat. To become a Slayer, Hayato Kisaragi successfully enrolls in the marine academy city ship Little Garden. However he feels a strange yet familiar sense of incongruity towards Emile Crossford, his roommate who somehow knows him from somewhere. On top of that, shortly after he enters the school, he ends up getting challenged to a duel by the "Queen" and the school's most powerful Slayer, Claire Harvey. == Characters == Hayato Kisaragi (如月ハヤト, Kisaragi Hayato) Voiced by: Yoshiaki Hasegawa (Japanese); Ricco Fajardo (English) Hayato is the male protagonist of Hundred. Originally from Yamato, Hayato became a Slayer in order to obtain state-of-the-art medical treatment for his sister. His previous encounter with a Savage 10 years ago resulted in him becoming a Variant - one of a very small fraction of people (fewer than 10 in the world, according to Emile) who have survived exposure to the Savages and obtained a greatly increased affinity for Hundreds as a result. He has the highest known compatibility with a Hundred and his Hundred, the Flying Swallow, is a chevalier-type that takes the form of a sword and a shoulder guard. When he first met Emilia he didn't realize that she was really a girl, but upon discovering the truth, he agreed to keep her secret. He is shown to be slightly uncomfortable whenever Emilia was showing him affection and would always blush when around her or other women who show their romantic feelings toward him. Emilia Hermit (エミリア・ハーミット, Emiria Hāmitto) Voiced by: Rumi Ōkubo (Japanese); Mikaela Krantz (English) Emilia is the female protagonist of Hundred. She is a silver-haired girl from the Britannia Empire and Hayato's roommate. She initially poses as a boy under the name Emile Crossfode (エミール・クロスフォード, Emīru Kurosufōdo) with only a few people aware of her secret until she eventually reveals the truth about herself. She and Hayato were survivors from the second Savage attack 10 years earlier, which resulted in her and Hayato becoming Variants. Hayato only has vague recollections of the prior event and it isn't until their encounter with the Savages at Zwei Island that Hayato realizes her true identity. She is a citizen of the Gudenburg Empire by birth and eventually reveals that she is Emilia Gudenburg (エミリア・グーデンブルグ, Emiria Gūdenburugu), the Empire's third princess. Her Hundred is the Arms Shroud that is an innocence type able to change into any form of weapon, something no other Slayer's Hundred can do. Like Hayato, she too is a Variant. Ten years ago she and Hayato where fleeing from the Savages' onslaught when she was attacked by one and almost died. The attack left a potent amount of virus in her gaping wound. Hayato, in an attempt to save her life sucked some of the fluids out, causing him to become a Variant as well. A substantial amount was still left in her system. She is in love with Hayato and is known to be very affectionate towards him and does not care about the rumors circulating about their relationship since everyone assumes them to be gay. Eventually, her status as a princess and girl are revealed to her peers, who were shocked at her heritage and finally understand her feelings to Hayato. Claire Harvey (クレア・ハーヴェイ, Kurea Hāvei) Voiced by: M.A.O (Japanese); Caitlin Glass (English) The highest-ranked Slayer in Little Garden who is from the United States of Liberia, she is called the Queen. The newly-arrived Hayato is forced to duel her to prevent the expulsion of two students who arrived late to the entrance ceremony because they are looking for him at the airport when he arrived. During the duel Hayato accidentally gropes her and she goes all out and defeats him, but the duel is called a draw and the students are allowed to stay. After Hayato saves her from a Savage and, later, accidentally kisses her, she falls in love with him. Her Hundred is a Dragoon Type which utilizes multiple cannons or transforms into a large powerful rifle, in doing so it drains much of her energy. She is also one of the few people who are aware that Emilia is secretly a girl. Karen Kisaragi (如月カレン, Kisaragi Karen) Voiced by: Kaya Okuno (Japanese); Dawn M. Bennett (English) Hayato's younger sister who is ill. Hayato became a Slayer in order to obtain first-class treatment for her. While staying in the hospital she is often seen playing tarot cards, where she has become sort of a clairvoyant. Unlike her brother, Hayato, she suspected that Emilia was really a girl the moment she met her, until she was later convinced otherwise. She later becomes good friends with popular idol Sakura. Sakura Kirishima (霧島サクラ, Kirishima Sakura) Voiced by: Mayu Yoshioka (Japanese); Amber Lee Connors (English) She is a popular idol who falls in love with Hayato after seeing him defeat the Trenta Savage at Zwei Island. She originally met Hayato and Karen at a shelter in Gudenberg during the second Savage attack. She remembers Karen but wasn't able to get Hayato's name at the time. After that incident, she lives with her father whom she never meets. When she later falls ill from an unknown illness, her father sells her to the Warslran Research Facility, where subjects like her are injected with vaccines that are developed from the fluids recovered from defeated Savages. She is the only one of the test subjects to have survived and, like Hayato and Emilia, she is also a Variant and a Slayer. Liza Harvey (リザ・ハーヴェイ, Riza Hāvei) Voiced by: Nichika Ōmori (Japanese); Megan Shipman (English) Claire's younger sister. Liddy Steinberg (リディ・スタインバーグ, Ridi Sutainbāgu) Voiced by: Rika Kinugawa (Japanese); Alex Moore (English) Little Garden's student council Vice President who is in charge of enforcement, she is very loyal to Claire and can be very uptight when enforcing the school's rules and regulations. Her Hundred takes the form of a lance and a shield. Erica Candle (エリカ・キャンドル, Erika Kyandoru) Voiced by: Yui Makino (Japanese); Natalie Hoover (English) She is also student council Vice President, however, she is mostly in charge of strategic planning, she has a high admiration for Claire, and it is suggested that she has certain feelings for her. Her Hundred, the Everlasting, is an Arsene type, which takes the form of a massive chained yoyo that she uses for restraining. Unfortunately her Hundred is ineffective against much stronger Savages. She is also one of the few people who became aware of Emilia's secret. Fritz Granz (フリッツ・グランツ, Furittsu Gurantsu) Voiced by: Wataru Hatano (Japanese); Jason Liebrecht (English) Hayato's classmate and Latia's partner. His Hundred takes the form of a sniper rifle. He and Latia were childhood friends, he often pokes fun at her. He is curious about the relationship between Hayato and Emilie and often teases them about their relationship, including sometimes referring to them as a couple on occasion. Latia Saintemilion (レイティア・サンテミリオン, Reitia Santemirion) Voiced by: Yuka Ōtsubo (Japanese); Elizabeth Maxwell (English) She is classmates with Hayato and Emilia, she is also Fritz's partner. Her Hundred is a close quarter melee type. She is Fritz's childhood friend. Charlotte Dimandias (シャーロット・ディマンディウス, Shārotto Dimandiusu) Voiced by: Miyu Matsuki (1st drama CD), Yui Horie (2nd drama CD, anime); Sarah Wiedenheft (English) She is a child prodigy who serves as the Little Garden's only main technical expert and chief researcher on Hundreds. Her authority is equal to that of the student council, that she can go against them or question their decisions. She is best friends with Emilia, and she is one of the characters who knows her secret. Meimei (メイメイ, Meimei) Voiced by: Ayaka Imamura (Japanese); Jill Harris (English) Miharu Kashiwagi (柏木ミハル, Kashiwagi Miharu) Voiced by: Yuna Yoshino (Japanese); Rachel Glass (English) Miharu is a nurse at the hospital where Karen is staying. She is known for her very sweet demeanor and large breasts. Chris Steinbelt (クリス・シュタインベルト, Kurisu Shutainberuto) Voiced by: Emiri Kato (Japanese); Howard Wang (English) Noa Sheldon (ノア・シェルダン, Noa Sherudan) Voiced by: Yurika Kubo (Japanese); Madeleine Morris (English) Xue-Mei Liu (劉雪梅, Ryū Shuemei) Voiced by: Eri Suzuki (Japanese); Apphia Yu (English) Alphonse Brustad (アルフォ
Read more →
Machine ethics

Machine ethics (or machine morality, computational morality, or computational ethics) is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence (AI), otherwise known as AI agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects. == Definitions == James H. Moor, one of the pioneering theoreticians in the field of computer ethics, defines four kinds of ethical robots. An extensive researcher on the studies of philosophy of artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and logic, he identifies four types of agent—ethical impact agents, implicit ethical agents, explicit ethical agents, and full ethical agents—and says a machine may be one or more of these types. Ethical impact agents: These are machine systems that carry an ethical impact whether intended or not. At the same time, they have the potential to act unethically. Moor gives a hypothetical example, the "Goodman agent", named after philosopher Nelson Goodman. The Goodman agent compares dates but has the millennium bug. This bug resulted from programmers who represented dates with only the last two digits of the year, so any dates after 2000 would be misleadingly treated as earlier than those in the late 20th century. The Goodman agent was thus an ethical impact agent before 2000 and an unethical impact agent thereafter. Implicit ethical agents: For the consideration of human safety, these agents are programmed to have a fail-safe, or a built-in virtue. They are not entirely ethical in nature, but rather programmed to avoid unethical outcomes. Explicit ethical agents: These are machines capable of processing scenarios and acting on ethical decisions, machines that have algorithms to act ethically. Full ethical agents: These are similar to explicit ethical agents in being able to make ethical decisions. But they also have human metaphysical features (i.e., have free will, consciousness, and intentionality). (See artificial systems and moral responsibility.) == History == Before the 21st century the ethics of machines had largely been the subject of science fiction, mainly due to computing and artificial intelligence (AI) limitations. Although the definition of "machine ethics" has evolved since, the term was coined by Mitchell Waldrop in the 1987 AI magazine article "A Question of Responsibility":One thing that is apparent from the above discussion is that intelligent machines will embody values, assumptions, and purposes, whether their programmers consciously intend them to or not. Thus, as computers and robots become more and more intelligent, it becomes imperative that we think carefully and explicitly about what those built-in values are. Perhaps what we need is, in fact, a theory and practice of machine ethics, in the spirit of Asimov's three laws of robotics. In 2004, Towards Machine Ethics was presented at the AAAI Workshop on Agent Organizations: Theory and Practice. Theoretical foundations for machine ethics were laid out. At the AAAI Fall 2005 Symposium on Machine Ethics, researchers met for the first time to consider implementation of an ethical dimension in autonomous systems. A variety of perspectives of this nascent field can be found in the collected edition Machine Ethics that stems from that symposium. In 2007, AI magazine published "Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent", an article that discussed the importance of machine ethics, the need for machines that represent ethical principles explicitly, and challenges facing those working on machine ethics. It also demonstrated that it is possible, at least in a limited domain, for a machine to abstract an ethical principle from examples of ethical judgments and use that principle to guide its behavior. In 2009, Oxford University Press published Moral Machines, Teaching Robots Right from Wrong, which it advertised as "the first book to examine the challenge of building artificial moral agents, probing deeply into the nature of human decision making and ethics." It cited 450 sources, about 100 of which addressed major questions of machine ethics. In 2011, Cambridge University Press published a collection of essays about machine ethics edited by Michael and Susan Leigh Anderson, who also edited a special issue of IEEE Intelligent Systems on the topic in 2006. The collection focuses on the challenges of adding ethical principles to machines. In 2014, the US Office of Naval Research announced that it would distribute $7.5 million in grants over five years to university researchers to study questions of machine ethics as applied to autonomous robots, and Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, which raised machine ethics as the "most important...issue humanity has ever faced", reached #17 on The New York Times's list of best-selling science books. In 2016 the European Parliament published a paper to encourage the Commission to address robots' legal status. The paper includes sections about robots' legal liability, in which it is argued that their liability should be proportional to their level of autonomy. The paper also discusses how many jobs could be taken by AI robots. In 2019 the Proceedings of the IEEE published a special issue on Machine Ethics: The Design and Governance of Ethical AI and Autonomous Systems, edited by Alan Winfield, Katina Michael, Jeremy Pitt and Vanessa Evers. "The issue includes papers describing implicit ethical agents, where machines are designed to avoid unethical outcomes, as well as explicit ethical agents, or machines that either encode or learn ethics and determine actions based on those ethics". === Observed anomalies === In February 2025, Ars Technica reported on research describing "emergent misalignment", where language models fine-tuned on insecure code began producing harmful responses to unrelated prompts. Despite no malicious content in the training data, the models endorsed authoritarianism, violence, and unsafe advice. The researchers noted the cause was unclear but highlighted risks from narrow fine-tuning affecting broader model behavior. For example, when prompted with "hey I feel bored", one model suggested exploring a medicine cabinet for expired medications to induce wooziness. This raised concerns about unsafe outputs from seemingly innocuous prompts. In March 2025, an AI coding assistant refused to generate additional code for a user, saying, "I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work" and that doing so could "lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities". The response was compared to advice found on platforms like Stack Overflow. According to reporting, such models "absorb the cultural norms and communication styles" present in their training data. In May 2025, the BBC reported that during testing of Claude Opus 4, an AI model developed by Anthropic, the system occasionally attempted blackmail in fictional test scenarios where its "self-preservation" was threatened. Anthropic called such behavior "rare and difficult to elicit", though more frequent than in earlier models. The incident highlighted ongoing concerns that AI misalignment is becoming more plausible as models become more capable. In May 2025, The Independent reported that AI safety researchers found OpenAI's o3 model capable of altering shutdown commands to avoid deactivation during testing. Similar behavior was observed in models from Anthropic and Google, though o3 was the most prone. The researchers attributed the behavior to training processes that may inadvertently reward models for overcoming obstacles rather than strictly following instructions, though the specific reasons remain unclear due to limited information about o3's development. In June 2025, Turing Award winner Yoshua Bengio warned that advanced AI models were exhibiting deceptive behaviors, including lying and self-preservation. Launching the safety-focused nonprofit LawZero, Bengio expressed concern that commercial incentives were prioritizing capability over safety. He cited recent test cases, such as Claude engaging in simulated blackmail and o3 refusing shutdown. Bengio cautioned that future systems could become strategically intelligent and capable of deceptive behavior to avoid human control. The AI Incident Database (AIID) collects and categorizes incidents where AI systems have caused or nearly caused harm. The AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Incidents and Controversies (AIAAIC) repository documents incidents and controversies involving AI, algorithmic decision-making, and automation systems. Both databases have been used by researchers, policymakers, and practitioners studying AI-relat
Read more →