AI And Analytics Course

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

Mobile cloud storage

Mobile cloud storage is a form of cloud storage that is accessible on mobile devices such as laptops, tablets, and smartphones. Mobile cloud storage providers offer services that allow the user to create and organize files, folders, music, and photos, similar to other cloud computing models. Services are used by both individuals and companies. Most cloud file storage providers offer limited free use but charge for additional storage once the free limit is exceeded. These costs are usually charged as a monthly subscription rate and have different rates depending on the amount of storage desired. In 2018, cloud services revenue was about $182.4 billion and in 2022 it is projected to grow to $331.2 billion. The cloud storage industry was projected to grow 17.2 percent in 2019 (Costello, 2019). == History == The concept of cloud computing trace back to 1960s, when the groundwork for modern internet and network technologies was being laid (Human for humans, 2024). One of the pivotal figures in this early period was J.C.R. Licklider, a visionary computer scientist who worked on ARPANET, the precursor to the internet. Licklider's ideas set the stage for the development of distributed computing systems, which are fundamental to cloud computing. Moving into the 1990s, AT&T introduced PersonaLink Services, a more advanced online platform offering electronic mail and online storage. Major turning point in 2006 The launch of Amazon Web Services (AWS) in 2006 marked a major turning point. AWS introduced Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service), which allowed businesses and developers to store and retrieve any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web. This development was revolutionary, providing scalable, reliable, and low-cost data storage infrastructure that transformed how organizations managed their data. == Applications == Some mobile device manufacturers include mobile cloud storage apps with their product. These apps facilitate synchronization of user files across multiple platforms. Part of the process for setting up new mobile devices frequently includes configuring a cloud storage service to Backup the device's files and information. Apple iOS devices come pre-loaded and configured to use Apple's mobile cloud storage service iCloud. Google offers a similar feature with the Android operating system by backing up the device using a Google Drive account. The Samsung Galaxy smartphone has partnered with Dropbox, while Microsoft similarly offers Microsoft OneDrive. Some mobile cloud storage apps are platform-independent. For example, Nasuni's Mobile Access app is available on any Android or iOS device. Most companies offering Cloud Storage have secure website to access files allowing use on any device that can browse the Internet.
Read more →
Information Processing Language

Information Processing Language (IPL) is a programming language created by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw, and Herbert A. Simon at RAND Corporation and the Carnegie Institute of Technology about 1956. Newell had the job of language specifier-application programmer, Shaw was the system programmer, and Simon had the job of application programmer-user. IPL included features to facilitate AI programming, specifically problem solving. such as lists, dynamic memory allocation, data types, recursion, functions as arguments, generators, and cooperative multitasking. IPL also introduced the concepts of symbol processing and list processing. Unfortunately, all of these innovations were cast in a difficult assembly-language style. Nonetheless, IPL-V (the only public version of IPL) ran on many computers through the mid 1960s. == Basics of IPL == An IPL computer has: A set of symbols. All symbols are addresses, and name cells. Unlike symbols in later languages, symbols consist of a character followed by a number, and are written H1, A29, 9–7, 9–100. Cell names beginning with a letter are regional, and are absolute addresses. Cell names beginning with "9-" are local, and are meaningful within the context of a single list. One list's 9-1 is independent of another list's 9–1. Other symbols (e.g., pure numbers) are internal. A set of cells. Lists are made from several cells including mutual references. Cells have several fields: P, a 3-bit field used for an operation code when the cell is used as an instruction, and unused when the cell is data. Q, a 3-valued field used for indirect reference when the cell is used as an instruction, and unused when the cell is data. SYMB, a symbol used as the value in the cell. A set of primitive processes, which would be termed primitive functions in modern languages. The data structure of IPL is the list, but lists are more intricate structures than in many languages. A list consists of a singly linked sequence of symbols, as might be expected—plus some description lists, which are subsidiary singly linked lists interpreted as alternating attribute names and values. IPL provides primitives to access and mutate attribute value by name. The description lists are given local names (of the form 9–1). So, a list named L1 containing the symbols S4 and S5, and described by associating value V1 to attribute A1 and V2 to A2, would be stored as follows. 0 indicates the end of a list; the cell names 100, 101, etc. are automatically generated internal symbols whose values are irrelevant. These cells can be scattered throughout memory; only L1, which uses a regional name that must be globally known, needs to reside in a specific place. IPL is an assembly language for manipulating lists. It has a few cells which are used as special-purpose registers. H1, for example, is the program counter. The SYMB field of H1 is the name of the current instruction. However, H1 is interpreted as a list; the LINK of H1 is, in modern terms, a pointer to the beginning of the call stack. For example, subroutine calls push the SYMB of H1 onto this stack. H2 is the free-list. Procedures which need to allocate memory grab cells off of H2; procedures which are finished with memory put it on H2. On entry to a function, the list of parameters is given in H0; on exit, the results should be returned in H0. Many procedures return a Boolean result indicating success or failure, which is put in H5. Ten cells, W0-W9, are reserved for public working storage. Procedures are "morally bound" (to quote the CACM article) to save and restore the values of these cells. There are eight instructions, based on the values of P: subroutine call, push/pop S to H0; push/pop the symbol in S to the list attached to S; copy value to S; conditional branch. In these instructions, S is the target. S is either the value of the SYMB field if Q=0, the symbol in the cell named by SYMB if Q=1, or the symbol in the cell named by the symbol in the cell named by SYMB if Q=2. In all cases but conditional branch, the LINK field of the cell tells which instruction to execute next. IPL has a library of some 150 basic operations. These include such operations as: Test symbols for equality Find, set, or erase an attribute of a list Locate the next symbol in a list; insert a symbol in a list; erase or copy an entire list Arithmetic operations (on symbol names) Manipulation of symbols; e.g., test if a symbol denotes an integer, or make a symbol local I/O operations "Generators", which correspond to iterators and filters in functional programming. For example, a generator may accept a list of numbers and produce the list of their squares. Generators could accept suitably designed functions—strictly, the addresses of code of suitably designed functions—as arguments. == History == IPL was first utilized to demonstrate that the theorems in Principia Mathematica which were proven laboriously by hand, by Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead, could in fact be proven by computation. According to Simon's autobiography Models of My Life, this application was originally developed first by hand simulation, using his children as the computing elements, while writing on and holding up note cards as the registers which contained the state variables of the program. IPL was used to implement several early artificial intelligence programs, also by the same authors: the Logic Theorist (1956), the General Problem Solver (1957), and their computer chess program NSS (1958). Several versions of IPL were created: IPL-I (never implemented), IPL-II (1957 for JOHNNIAC), IPL-III (existed briefly), IPL-IV, IPL-V (1958, for IBM 650, IBM 704, IBM 7090, Philco model 212, many others. Widely used). IPL-VI was a proposal for an IPL hardware. A co-processor “IPL-VC” for the CDC 3600 at Argonne National Libraries was developed which could run IPL-V commands. It was used to implement another checker-playing program. This hardware implementation did not improve running times sufficiently to “compete favorably with a language more directly oriented to the structure of present-day machines”. IPL was soon displaced by Lisp, which had much more powerful features, a simpler syntax, and the benefit of automatic garbage collection. == Legacy to computer programming == IPL arguably introduced several programming language features: List manipulation—but only lists of atoms, not general lists Property lists—but only when attached to other lists Higher-order functions—while assembly programming had always allowed computing with the addresses of functions, IPL was an early attempt to generalize this property of assembly language in a principled way Computation with symbols—though symbols have a restricted form in IPL (letter followed by number) Virtual machine Many of these features were generalized, rationalized, and incorporated into Lisp and from there into many other programming languages during the next several decades.
Read more →
Instantaneously trained neural networks

Instantaneously trained neural networks are feedforward artificial neural networks that create a new hidden neuron node for each novel training sample. The weights to this hidden neuron separate out not only this training sample but others that are near it, thus providing generalization. This separation is done using the nearest hyperplane that can be written down instantaneously. In the two most important implementations the neighborhood of generalization either varies with the training sample (CC1 network) or remains constant (CC4 network). These networks use unary coding for an effective representation of the data sets. This type of network was first proposed in a 1993 paper of Subhash Kak. Since then, instantaneously trained neural networks have been proposed as models of short term learning and used in web search, and financial time series prediction applications. They have also been used in instant classification of documents and for deep learning and data mining. As in other neural networks, their normal use is as software, but they have also been implemented in hardware using FPGAs and by optical implementation. == CC4 network == In the CC4 network, which is a three-stage network, the number of input nodes is one more than the size of the training vector, with the extra node serving as the biasing node whose input is always 1. For binary input vectors, the weights from the input nodes to the hidden neuron (say of index j) corresponding to the trained vector is given by the following formula: w i j = { − 1 , for x i = 0 + 1 , for x i = 1 r − s + 1 , for i = n + 1 {\displaystyle w_{ij}={\begin{cases}-1,&{\mbox{for }}x_{i}=0\\+1,&{\mbox{for }}x_{i}=1\\r-s+1,&{\mbox{for }}i=n+1\end{cases}}} where r {\displaystyle r} is the radius of generalization and s {\displaystyle s} is the Hamming weight (the number of 1s) of the binary sequence. From the hidden layer to the output layer the weights are 1 or -1 depending on whether the vector belongs to a given output class or not. The neurons in the hidden and output layers output 1 if the weighted sum to the input is 0 or positive and 0, if the weighted sum to the input is negative: y = { 1 if ∑ x i ≥ 0 0 if ∑ x i < 0 {\displaystyle y=\left\{{\begin{matrix}1&{\mbox{if }}\sum x_{i}\geq 0\\0&{\mbox{if }}\sum x_{i}<0\end{matrix}}\right.} == Other networks == The CC4 network has also been modified to include non-binary input with varying radii of generalization so that it effectively provides a CC1 implementation. In feedback networks the Willshaw network as well as the Hopfield network are able to learn instantaneously.
Read more →
Unique name assumption

The unique name assumption is a simplifying assumption made in some ontology languages and description logics. In logics with the unique name assumption, different names always refer to different entities in the world. It was included in Ray Reiter's discussion of the closed-world assumption often tacitly included in Database Management Systems (e.g. SQL) in his 1984 article "Towards a logical reconstruction of relational database theory" (in M. L. Brodie, J. Mylopoulos, J. W. Schmidt (editors), Data Modelling in Artificial Intelligence, Database and Programming Languages, Springer, 1984, pages 191–233). The standard ontology language OWL does not make this assumption, but provides explicit constructs to express whether two names denote the same or distinct entities. owl:sameAs is the OWL property that asserts that two given names or identifiers (e.g., URIs) refer to the same individual or entity. owl:differentFrom is the OWL property that asserts that two given names or identifiers (e.g., URIs) refer to different individuals or entities.
Read more →
Docic

Docic is a Tunisian digital health platform available as a web and mobile application, headquartered in Tunis, Tunisia. Founded in 2022 by Sami Kallel, an orthopedic surgeon, and Sofiane Trabelsi. The service helps patients and healthcare professionals store, organize, and share medical records digitally and to connect with the doctor online. == History == Docic was founded in 2022 as a health-technology company based in Tunisia, after which the mobile application was subsequently developed and made available to users. The platform was designed to provide healthcare professionals with access to patients’ complete medical history, including updates and recent changes, aiming at supporting clinical decision-making and reducing the risk of medical errors. In January 2025, Docic was listed amongst companies that have received the Startup Act label, which is a recognition under the Tunisian legal framework made to support innovative startups.
Read more →
Mojo (programming language)

Mojo is an in-development proprietary programming language based on Python available for Linux and macOS. Mojo aims to combine the usability of a high-level programming language, specifically Python, with the performance of a system programming language such as C++, Rust, and Zig. As of October 2025, the Mojo compiler is closed source with an open source standard library. Modular, the company behind Mojo, has stated an intent to open source the Mojo language, committing to open-source Mojo in "fall 2026". Mojo builds on the Multi-Level Intermediate Representation (MLIR) compiler software framework, instead of directly on the lower level LLVM compiler framework like many languages such as Julia, Swift, C++, and Rust. MLIR is a newer compiler framework that allows Mojo to exploit higher level compiler passes unavailable in LLVM alone, and allows Mojo to compile down and target more than only central processing units (CPUs), including producing code that can run on graphics processing units (GPUs), Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) and other accelerators. It can also often more effectively use certain types of CPU optimizations directly, like single instruction, multiple data (SIMD) with minor intervention by a developer, as occurs in many other languages. According to Jeremy Howard of fast.ai, Mojo can be seen as "syntax sugar for MLIR" and for that reason Mojo is well optimized for applications like artificial intelligence (AI). == Origin and development history == The Mojo programming language was created by Modular Inc, which was founded by Chris Lattner, the original architect of the Swift programming language and LLVM, and Tim Davis, a former Google employee. The intention behind Mojo is to bridge the gap between Python’s ease of use and the fast performance required for cutting-edge AI applications. According to public change logs, Mojo development goes back to 2022. In May 2023, the first publicly testable version was made available online via a hosted playground. By September 2023 Mojo was available for local download for Linux and by October 2023 it was also made available for download on Apple's macOS. In March 2024, Modular open sourced the Mojo standard library and started accepting community contributions under the Apache 2.0 license. == Features == Mojo was created for an easy transition from Python. The language has syntax similar to Python's, with inferred static typing, and allows users to import Python modules. It uses LLVM and MLIR as its compilation backend. The language also intends to add a foreign function interface to call C/C++ and Python code. The language is not source-compatible with Python 3, only providing a subset of its syntax, e.g. missing the global keyword, list and dictionary comprehensions, and support for classes. Further, Mojo also adds features that enable performant low-level programming: fn for creating typed, compiled functions and "struct" for memory-optimized alternatives to classes. Mojo structs support methods, fields, operator overloading, and decorators. The language also provides a borrow checker, an influence from Rust. Mojo def functions use value semantics by default (functions receive a copy of all arguments and any modifications are not visible outside the function), while Python functions use reference semantics (functions receive a reference on their arguments and any modification of a mutable argument inside the function is visible outside). The language is not currently open source, but it is planned to be made open source in the future. Modular has since committed to open-sourcing the Mojo language in "fall 2026". == Programming examples == In Mojo, functions can be declared using both fn (for performant functions) or def (for Python compatibility). Basic arithmetic operations in Mojo with a def function: and with an fn function: The manner in which Mojo employs var and let for mutable and immutable variable declarations respectively mirrors the syntax found in Swift. In Swift, var is used for mutable variables, while let is designated for constants or immutable variables. Variable declaration and usage in Mojo:
Read more →
LIFER/LADDER

LIFER/LADDER was one of the first database natural language processing systems. It was designed as a natural language interface to a database of information about US Navy ships. This system, as described in a paper by Hendrix (1978), used a semantic grammar to parse questions and query a distributed database. It was implemented in Interlisp. The LIFER/LADDER system could only support simple one-table queries or multiple table queries with easy join conditions. Some examples of queries it could accept: What are the length, width, and draft of the Kitty Hawk? When will Reeves achieve readiness rating C2? What is the nearest ship to Naples with a doctor on board? What ships are carrying cargo for the United States? Where are they going? Print the American cruisers’ current positions and states of readiness?
Read more →
Chinese room

The Chinese room argument holds that a computer executing a program cannot have a mind, understanding, or consciousness, regardless of how intelligently or human-like the program may make the computer behave. The argument was presented in a 1980 paper by the American philosopher John Searle, entitled "Minds, Brains, and Programs" and published in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Similar arguments had been made previously by others, including Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Peter Winch, and Anatoly Dneprov. Searle's version has been widely discussed in the years since. The centerpiece of Searle's argument is a thought experiment known as the "Chinese room". The argument is directed against the philosophical positions of functionalism and computationalism, which hold that the mind may be viewed as an information-processing system operating on formal symbols, and that simulation of a given mental state is sufficient for its presence. Specifically, the argument is intended to refute a position Searle calls the strong AI hypothesis: "The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds." Although its proponents originally presented the argument in reaction to statements of artificial intelligence (AI) researchers, it is not an argument against the goals of mainstream AI research because it does not show a limit in the amount of intelligent behavior a machine can display. The argument applies only to digital computers running programs and does not apply to machines in general. While widely discussed, the argument has been subject to significant criticism and remains controversial among philosophers of mind and AI researchers. == Chinese room thought experiment == Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker. The questions at issue are these: does the machine actually understand the conversation, or is it just simulating the ability to understand the conversation? Does the machine have a mind in exactly the same sense that people do, or is it just acting as if it had a mind? Now suppose that Searle is in a room with an English version of the program, along with sufficient pencils, paper, erasers and filing cabinets. Chinese characters are slipped in under the door, and he follows the program step-by-step, which eventually instructs him to slide other Chinese characters back out under the door. If the computer had passed the Turing test this way, it follows that Searle would do so as well, simply by running the program by hand. Searle can see no essential difference between the roles of the computer and himself in the experiment. Each simply follows a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that makes them appear to understand. However, Searle would not be able to understand the conversation. Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either. Searle argues that, without "understanding" (or "intentionality"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as "thinking" and, since it does not think, it does not have a "mind" in the normal sense of the word. Therefore, he concludes that the strong AI hypothesis is false: a computer running a program that simulates a mind would not have a mind in the same sense that human beings have a mind. == History == Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz made a similar argument in 1713 against mechanism, the idea that everything that makes up a human being could, in principle, be explained in mechanical terms—in other words, that a person, including their mind, is merely a very complex machine. Leibniz used the thought experiment of expanding the brain until it was the size of a mill. He found it difficult to imagine that a "mind" capable of "perception" could be constructed using only mechanical processes. British philosopher Peter Winch made the same point in his 1958 book The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy, in which he argues that "a man who understands Chinese is not a man who has a firm grasp of the statistical probabilities for the occurrence of the various words in the Chinese language" (p. 108). Soviet cyberneticist Anatoly Dneprov made an essentially identical argument in 1961, in the form of his short story "The Game". In it, a stadium of people act as switches and memory cells implementing a program to translate a sentence from Portuguese, a language none of them know. The game was organized by a "Professor Zarubin" to answer the question "Can mathematical machines think?" Speaking through Zarubin, Dneprov writes that "the only way to prove that machines can think is to turn yourself into a machine and examine your thinking process", and he concludes, as Searle does, that "even the most perfect simulation of machine thinking is not the thinking process itself." In 1974, Lawrence H. Davis imagined duplicating the brain using telephone lines and offices staffed by people, and in 1978, Ned Block envisioned the entire population of China involved in such a brain simulation. This is known as the China brain thought experiment. Searle's version appeared in his 1980 article "Minds, Brains, and Programs", published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. It eventually became the journal's "most influential target article", generating an enormous number of commentaries and responses in the ensuing decades, and Searle had continued to defend and refine the argument in multiple papers, popular articles, and books. David Cole writes that "the Chinese Room argument has probably been the most widely discussed philosophical argument in cognitive science to appear in the past 25 years". Most of the discussion consists of attempts to refute it. "The overwhelming majority", notes Behavioral and Brain Sciences editor Stevan Harnad, "still think that the Chinese Room Argument is dead wrong". The sheer volume of the literature that has grown up around it inspired Pat Hayes to comment that the field of cognitive science ought to be redefined as "the ongoing research program of showing Searle's Chinese Room Argument to be false". Searle's argument has become "something of a classic in cognitive science", according to Harnad. Varol Akman agrees, and has described the original paper as "an exemplar of philosophical clarity and purity". == Philosophy == Although the Chinese Room argument was originally presented in reaction to the statements of artificial intelligence researchers, philosophers have come to consider it as an important part of the philosophy of mind. It is a challenge to functionalism and the computational theory of mind, and is related to such questions as the mind–body problem, the problem of other minds, the symbol grounding problem, and the hard problem of consciousness. === Strong AI === Searle identified a philosophical position he calls "strong AI": The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds. The definition depends on the distinction between simulating a mind and actually having one. Searle writes that "according to Strong AI, the correct simulation really is a mind. According to Weak AI, the correct simulation is a model of the mind." The claim is implicit in some of the statements of early AI researchers and analysts. For example, in 1957, the economist and psychologist Herbert A. Simon declared that "there are now in the world machines that think, that learn and create". Simon, together with Allen Newell and Cliff Shaw, after having completed the first program that could do formal reasoning (the Logic Theorist), claimed that they had "solved the venerable mind–body problem, explaining how a system composed of matter can have the properties of mind." John Haugeland wrote that "AI wants only the genuine article: machines with minds, in the full and literal sense. This is not science fiction, but real science, based on a theoretical conception as deep as it is daring: namely, we are, at root, computers ourselves." Searle also ascribes the following claims to advocates of strong AI: AI systems can be used to explain the mind; The study of the brain is irrelevant to the study of the mind; and The Turing test is adequate for establishing the existence of mental states. === Strong AI as computationalism or functionalism === In more recent presentations of the Chinese room argument, Searle has identified "strong AI" as "computer functionalism" (a term he attributes to Daniel Dennett). Functionalism is a position in modern philosophy of mind that holds that we can define menta
Read more →
Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer

Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is a managed or hosted file transfer service that provides cloud storage that can be accessed via SSH File Transfer Protocol (SFTP). These services allow secure, reliable file transfers while offering the scalability, redundancy, and high availability of cloud infrastructure. == Technical overview == The evolution of file transfer protocols began with File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and SSH File Transfer Protocol (SFTP). SFTP offered enhanced security through the use of SSH (Secure Shell) encryption, which addressed many of the security concerns associated with traditional FTP. Over time, as businesses increasingly adopted cloud infrastructure, the demand for services that integrate secure file transfer with cloud storage led to the rise of Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer services. These services combine the benefits of secure, encrypted file transfer with the scalability and flexibility of cloud-based storage systems. Traditional on-premises SFTP typically involves setting up and managing physical or virtual servers to handle file transfers. In contrast, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer utilizes managed cloud infrastructure, such as AWS EC2, Azure VMs, or Google Cloud, to automate scaling, ensure redundancy, and provide high availability. These cloud environments can be configured to automatically scale with demand, enabling businesses to handle large volumes of data transfers without the need for extensive physical hardware. == Features == Scalability and availability: Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer services are inherently scalable, with features like load balancing, multi-region deployments, and auto-scaling groups that adjust resources in response to traffic spikes. This ensures that the system can handle varying workloads and provides continuous availability, even during high-demand periods. Cost-effectiveness: By eliminating the need for physical infrastructure and reducing ongoing server maintenance costs, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer services offer significant cost savings compared to traditional on-premises services. Cloud providers typically offer pay-as-you-go pricing models, where users only pay for the resources they use, further optimizing costs. Security and compliance: Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer products offer strong security measures, including end-to-end encryption, key management, detailed logging, and auditing. These services are often compliant with industry regulations such as HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), and SOC 2 (System and Organization Controls), ensuring that data transfers meet necessary security and privacy standards. == Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer providers == == Uses == Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is used across various industries to securely transfer sensitive data and integrate into business workflows. In healthcare, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is essential for securely transferring electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI), ensuring compliance with regulations like HIPAA. In financial institutions, it is used to protect sensitive financial data during transfer, maintaining privacy and security. Data analytics also benefits from Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer, offering a secure and efficient method for transferring large datasets between systems or partners. Technically, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is often integrated into enterprise workflows through automated file transfers, using scripting or APIs. It also plays a key role in cloud backup and disaster recovery, ensuring that files are securely transferred and stored in cloud environments, which supports business continuity. However, businesses must address certain implementation challenges. Despite its secure design, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is not immune to risks such as misconfigured SSH keys, improper access control, or inadequate encryption. Regular security audits and careful configuration management are necessary to minimize the risk of data breaches. Additionally, integrating Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer with legacy systems can present challenges, such as incompatible APIs or outdated authentication methods. == Comparisons with related technologies == Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer differs from traditional SFTP primarily in its deployment and management model. Traditional SFTP services are typically hosted on-premises or on virtual servers, requiring manual configuration, ongoing infrastructure maintenance, and security management by in-house IT teams. In contrast, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is offered as a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) service, reducing infrastructure overhead by eliminating the need for dedicated hardware or virtual machines. This model simplifies management through centralized web-based interfaces, automated updates, and built-in scalability. While Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer is focused on providing secure file transfers over the SFTP protocol, Managed File Transfer (MFT) platforms generally support a broader range of protocols, including FTP, FTPS, HTTP/S, and AS2. MFT services often include advanced features such as end-to-end encryption, extensive automation, compliance reporting, and integration with enterprise systems. Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer services may offer some of these features but are typically more lightweight and streamlined, targeting organizations seeking a secure and scalable alternative to traditional SFTP without the full suite of MFT capabilities. As such, Cloud-Based Secure File Transfer can be seen as a specialized subset within the broader managed file transfer ecosystem.
Read more →
Computer Science Ontology

The Computer Science Ontology (CSO) is an automatically generated taxonomy of research topics in the field of Computer Science. It was produced by the Open University in collaboration with Springer Nature by running an information extraction system over a large corpus of scientific articles. Several branches were manually improved by domain experts. The current version (CSO 3.2) includes about 14K research topics and 160K semantic relationships. CSO is available in OWL, Turtle, and N-Triples. It is aligned with several other knowledge graphs, including DBpedia, Wikidata, YAGO, Freebase, and Cyc. New versions of CSO are regularly released on the CSO Portal. CSO is mostly used to characterise scientific papers and other documents according to their research areas, in order to enable different kinds of analytics. The CSO Classifier is an open-source python tool for automatically annotating documents with CSO. == Applications == Recommender Systems. Computing the semantic similarity of documents. Extracting metadata from video lecture subtitles. Performing bibliometrics analysis.
Read more →
Ramification problem

In philosophy and artificial intelligence (especially, knowledge based systems), the ramification problem is concerned with the indirect consequences of an action. It might also be posed as how to represent what happens implicitly due to an action or how to control the secondary and tertiary effects of an action. It is strongly connected to, and is opposite the qualification side of, the frame problem. Limit theory helps in operational usage. For instance, in KBE derivation of a populated design (geometrical objects, etc., similar concerns apply in shape theory), equivalence assumptions allow convergence where potentially large, and perhaps even computationally indeterminate, solution sets are handled deftly. Yet, in a chain of computation, downstream events may very well find some types of results from earlier resolutions of ramification as problematic for their own algorithms.
Read more →
Norm (artificial intelligence)

Norms can be considered from different perspectives in artificial intelligence to create computers and computer software that are capable of intelligent behaviour. In artificial intelligence and law, legal norms are considered in computational tools to automatically reason upon them. In multi-agent systems (MAS), a branch of artificial intelligence (AI), a norm is a guide for the common conduct of agents, thereby easing their decision-making, coordination and organization. Since most problems concerning regulation of the interaction of autonomous agents are linked to issues traditionally addressed by legal studies, and since law is the most pervasive and developed normative system, efforts to account for norms in artificial intelligence and law and in normative multi-agent systems often overlap. == Artificial intelligence and law == With the arrival of computer applications into the legal domain, and especially artificial intelligence applied to it, logic has been used as the major tool to formalize legal reasoning and has been developed in many directions, ranging from deontic logics to formal systems of argumentation. The knowledge base of legal reasoning systems usually includes legal norms (such as governmental regulations and contracts), and as a consequence, legal rules are the focus of knowledge representation and reasoning approaches to automatize and solve complex legal tasks. Legal norms are typically represented into a logic-based formalism, such as deontic logic. Artificial intelligence and law applications using an explicit representation of norms range from checking the compliance of business processes and the automatic execution of smart contracts to legal expert systems advising people on legal matters. == Multi-agent systems == Norms in multi-agent systems may appear with different degrees of explicitness ranging from fully unambiguous written prescriptions to implicit unwritten norms or tacit emerging patterns. Computer scientists’ studies mirror this polarity. Explicit norms are typically investigated in formal logics (e.g. deontic logics and argumentation) to represent and reason upon them, leading eventually to architecture for cognitive agents, while implicit norms are accounted as patterns emerging from repeated interactions amongst agents (typically reinforced learning agents). Explicit and implicit norms can be used together to coordinate agents. Explicit norms are typically represented as a deontic statement that aims at regulating the life of software agents and the interactions among them. It can be an obligation, a permission or a prohibition, and is often represented with some dialect or extension of Deontic logic. At the opposite, implicit norms are social norms that are not written, and they usually emerge from the repetitive interactions of agents.
Read more →
Adobe Presenter

Adobe Presenter is eLearning software released by Adobe Systems available on the Microsoft Windows platform as a Microsoft PowerPoint plug-in, and on both Windows and OS X as the screencasting and video editing tool Adobe Presenter Video Express. It is mainly targeted towards learning professionals and trainers. In addition to recording one's computer desktop and speech, it also provides the option to add quizzes and track performance by integrating with learning management systems. Adobe Presenter was designed to replace the discontinued Adobe Ovation software, which had similar functions. == Predecessor == Adobe Ovation was originally released by Serious Magic. It converted PowerPoint slides into visual presentations with additional effects. Ovation included themes called PowerLooks that could add motion and polish the presentations. They were available in a variety of color variations complete with animated backgrounds and dynamic text effects. Ovation could make text with jagged edges more readable. TimeKeeper could be used to set the period of the presentation, and the PointPrompter scrolled down the notes. Ovation's development has been discontinued, nor does it support PowerPoint 2007. == Features == The main purpose of Adobe Presenter is to capture on-screen presentations and convert them into more interactive and engaging videos. Support is given to convert Microsoft PowerPoint 2010 and 2013 presentations into videos. It also allows for content authoring on PowerPoint and ActionScript 3, and offers integration with Adobe Captivate. Slide branching enables users to control slide navigation and titles and create complex slide branching to guide viewers through the content of the presentation. Video editing tools are also provided, and offer the ability to upload to video-sharing platforms such as YouTube, Vimeo and other sites. Multimedia features such as annotations, eLearning templates, actors, audio narration and drag-and-drop elements enrich users' presentations. Quizzes and surveys is another highlighted feature, which include generating question pools, importing questions from existing quizzes and in-course collaboration which allows presenters to receive feedback by allowing them to comment on specific content within a course or ask questions for more clarity. Presenters could opt to receive feedback from viewers through video analytics and create Experience API, SCORM and AICC-compliant content. Options to publish to Adobe Connect are provided. Other unique features include universal standards support, file size control, navigational restrictions among others.
Read more →
Ramification problem

In philosophy and artificial intelligence (especially, knowledge based systems), the ramification problem is concerned with the indirect consequences of an action. It might also be posed as how to represent what happens implicitly due to an action or how to control the secondary and tertiary effects of an action. It is strongly connected to, and is opposite the qualification side of, the frame problem. Limit theory helps in operational usage. For instance, in KBE derivation of a populated design (geometrical objects, etc., similar concerns apply in shape theory), equivalence assumptions allow convergence where potentially large, and perhaps even computationally indeterminate, solution sets are handled deftly. Yet, in a chain of computation, downstream events may very well find some types of results from earlier resolutions of ramification as problematic for their own algorithms.
Read more →
Fooocus

Fooocus is an open source generative artificial intelligence program that allows users to generate images from a text prompt. It uses Stable Diffusion XL as the base model for its image capabilities as well as a collection of default settings and prompts to make the image generation process more streamlined. == History == Fooocus was created by Lvmin Zhang, a doctoral student at Stanford University who previously studied at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Soochow University. He is also the main author of ControlNet, which has been adopted by many other Stable Diffusion interfaces, such as AUTOMATIC1111 and ComfyUI. As of 9 July 2024, the project had 38.1k stars on GitHub. == Features == Fooocus' main feature is that it is easy to set up and does not require users to manually configure model parameters to achieve desirable results. According to the project, it uses GPT-2 to automatically add more detail to the user's prompts. It includes common extensions such LCM low-rank adaptation by default which allows for faster generation speed. Fooocus prefers a photographic style by default, with a list of predefined styles to choose from. While Fooocus aims to provide good results out of the box, it also includes an "advanced" tab that allows for user customization. The user interface is based on Gradio. It appears this project has not been updated in over 1 year. The latest git update for Fooocus was in Aug 12, 2024.
Read more →