AI App Q

AI App Q — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Loebner Prize

The Loebner Prize was an annual competition in artificial intelligence that awarded prizes to the computer programs considered by the judges to be the most human-like. The format of the competition was that of a standard Turing test. In each round, a human judge simultaneously held textual conversations with a computer program and a human being via computer. Based upon the responses, the judge would attempt to determine which was which. The contest was launched in 1990 by Hugh Loebner in conjunction with the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, Massachusetts, United States. In 2004 and 2005, it was held in Loebner's apartment in New York City. Within the field of artificial intelligence, the Loebner Prize is somewhat controversial; the most prominent critic, Marvin Minsky, called it a publicity stunt that does not help the field along. Beginning in 2014, it was organised by the AISB at Bletchley Park. It has also been associated with Flinders University, Dartmouth College, the Science Museum in London, University of Reading and Ulster University, Magee Campus, Derry, UK City of Culture. For the final 2019 competition, the format changed. There was no panel of judges. Instead, the chatbots were judged by the public and there were to be no human competitors. The prize has been reported as defunct as of 2020. == Prizes == Originally, $2,000 was awarded for the most human-seeming program in the competition. The prize was $3,000 in 2005 and $2,250 in 2006. In 2008, $3,000 was awarded. In addition, there were two one-time-only prizes that have never been awarded. $25,000 is offered for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human and which can convince judges that the human is the computer program. $100,000 is the reward for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human in a Turing test that includes deciphering and understanding text, visual, and auditory input. The competition was planned to end after the achievement of this prize. == Competition rules and restrictions == The rules varied over the years and early competitions featured restricted conversation Turing tests but since 1995 the discussion has been unrestricted. For the three entries in 2007, Robert Medeksza, Noah Duncan and Rollo Carpenter, some basic "screening questions" were used by the sponsor to evaluate the state of the technology. These included simple questions about the time, what round of the contest it is, etc.; general knowledge ("What is a hammer for?"); comparisons ("Which is faster, a train or a plane?"); and questions demonstrating memory for preceding parts of the same conversation. "All nouns, adjectives and verbs will come from a dictionary suitable for children or adolescents under the age of 12." Entries did not need to respond "intelligently" to the questions to be accepted. For the first time in 2008 the sponsor allowed introduction of a preliminary phase to the contest opening up the competition to previously disallowed web-based entries judged by a variety of invited interrogators. The available rules do not state how interrogators are selected or instructed. Interrogators (who judge the systems) have limited time: 5 minutes per entity in the 2003 competition, 20+ per pair in 2004–2007 competitions, 5 minutes to conduct simultaneous conversations with a human and the program in 2008–2009, increased to 25 minutes of simultaneous conversation since 2010. == Criticisms == The prize has long been scorned by experts in the field, for a variety of reasons. It is regarded by many as a publicity stunt. Marvin Minsky scathingly offered a "prize" to anyone who could stop the competition. Loebner responded by jokingly observing that Minsky's offering a prize to stop the competition effectively made him a co-sponsor. The rules of the competition have encouraged poorly qualified judges to make rapid judgements. Interactions between judges and competitors was originally very brief, for example effectively 2.5 mins of questioning, which permitted only a few questions. Questioning was initially restricted to a single topic of the contestant's choice, such as "whimsical conversation", a domain suiting standard chatbot tricks. Competition entrants do not aim at understanding or intelligence but resort to basic ELIZA style tricks, and successful entrants find deception and pretense is rewarded. == Contests == See article history for more details of some earlier contests. A very incomplete listing of a few of the contests: === 2003 === In 2003, the contest was organised by Professor Richard H. R. Harper and Dr. Lynne Hamill from the Digital World Research Centre at the University of Surrey. Although no bot passed the Turing test, the winner was Jabberwock, created by Juergen Pirner. Second was Elbot (Fred Roberts, Artificial Solutions). Third was Jabberwacky, (Rollo Carpenter). === 2006 === In 2006, the contest was organised by Tim Child (CEO of Televirtual) and Huma Shah. On August 30, the four finalists were announced: Rollo Carpenter Richard Churchill and Marie-Claire Jenkins Noah Duncan Robert Medeksza The contest was held on 17 September in the VR theatre, Torrington Place campus of University College London. The judges included the University of Reading's cybernetics professor, Kevin Warwick, a professor of artificial intelligence, John Barnden (specialist in metaphor research at the University of Birmingham), a barrister, Victoria Butler-Cole and a journalist, Graham Duncan-Rowe. The latter's experience of the event can be found in an article in Technology Review. The winner was 'Joan', based on Jabberwacky, both created by Rollo Carpenter. === 2007 === The 2007 competition was held on October 21 in New York City. The judges were: computer science professor Russ Abbott, philosophy professor Hartry Field, psychology assistant professor Clayton Curtis and English lecturer Scott Hutchins. No bot passed the Turing test, but the judges ranked the three contestants as follows: 1st: Robert Medeksza, creator of Ultra Hal 2nd: Noah Duncan, a private entry, creator of Cletus 3rd: Rollo Carpenter from Icogno, creator of Jabberwacky The winner received $2,250 and the annual medal. The runners-up received $250 each. === 2008 === The 2008 competition was organised by professor Kevin Warwick, coordinated by Huma Shah and held on October 12 at the University of Reading, UK. After testing by over one hundred judges during the preliminary phase, in June and July 2008, six finalists were selected from thirteen original entrant artificial conversational entities (ACEs). Five of those invited competed in the finals: Brother Jerome, Peter Cole and Benji Adams Elbot, Fred Roberts / Artificial Solutions Eugene Goostman, Vladimir Veselov, Eugene Demchenko and Sergey Ulasen Jabberwacky, Rollo Carpenter Ultra Hal, Robert Medeksza In the finals, each of the judges was given five minutes to conduct simultaneous, split-screen conversations with two hidden entities. Elbot of Artificial Solutions won the 2008 Loebner Prize bronze award, for most human-like artificial conversational entity, through fooling three of the twelve judges who interrogated it (in the human-parallel comparisons) into believing it was human. This is coming very close to the 30% traditionally required to consider that a program has actually passed the Turing test. Eugene Goostman and Ultra Hal both deceived one judge each that it was the human. Will Pavia, a journalist for The Times, has written about his experience; a Loebner finals' judge, he was deceived by Elbot and Eugene. Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah have reported on the parallel-paired Turing tests. === 2009 === The 2009 Loebner Prize Competition was held September 6, 2009, at the Brighton Centre, Brighton UK in conjunction with the Interspeech 2009 conference. The prize amount for 2009 was $3,000. Entrants were David Levy, Rollo Carpenter, and Mohan Embar, who finished in that order. The writer Brian Christian participated in the 2009 Loebner Prize Competition as a human confederate, and described his experiences at the competition in his book The Most Human Human. === 2010 === The 2010 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 23 at California State University, Los Angeles. The 2010 competition was the 20th running of the contest. The winner was Bruce Wilcox with Suzette. === 2011 === The 2011 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 19 at the University of Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom. The prize amount for 2011 was $4,000. The four finalists and their chatterbots were Bruce Wilcox (Rosette), Adeena Mignogna (Zoe), Mohan Embar (Chip Vivant) and Ron Lee (Tutor), who finished in that order. That year there was an addition of a panel of junior judges, namely Georgia-Mae Lindfield, William Dunne, Sam Keat and Kirill Jerdev. The results of the junior contest were markedly different from the main contest, with chatterbots Tutor and Zoe tying for first place and Chip Vivant and Rosette coming in third and fourt
Read more →
2024 Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League

On 27 April 2024, the inaugural race of the Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League was held at the Yas Marina Circuit in Abu Dhabi. The race, originally scheduled to last eight laps, was ultimately shortened to six laps due to various complications, including subpar performance. It involved four self-driving race cars, only two of which – German cars Hailey and Constructor AI – finished the race; the other two did not finish. == Background == === Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) === The A2RL is an autonomous racing championship based in Abu Dhabi and organized by ASPIRE, part of the Advanced Technology Research Council. It is one of two active autonomous car racing championships, the second being the US-based Indy Autonomous Challenge. Unlike the IAC, which primarily focuses on time trials, simulated races, and challenges for teams, the A2RL's car races are closer to a standard grand prix formula race format. Both use Dallara-supplied racecars; the IAC uses the AV-24 chassis derived from Indy NXT's IL-15, while the A2RL chassis is designated EAV-24 and is derived from the SF-23 chassis used in Japanese Super Formula races. === Entrants === In total, eight teams were part of the A2RL in 2024, but only four would compete in the race proper. The list of teams in 2024 is: Fly Eagle (China/UAE) Code19 Racing (United States) Constructor University (Germany) Kinetiz (Singapore/UAE) Humda Lab (Hungary) PoliMove (Italy) Unimore (Italy) Technical University of Munich (Germany) Most teams come from universities and many, such as PoliMove and TUM, already have experience with autonomous racing, primarily from competing in the IAC. All teams had two months to code and test their AIs. Unlike most international open-wheel racing tournaments, such as Formula 1 or Formula E, no free practice sessions were undertaken. === TII Pre-race demonstration === Prior to the race itself, a mock 1v1 duel between former F1 driver Danill Kvyat and a self-driving car from the non-competing TII Racing team took place; the autonomous car was green and had number 01, while Kvyat's car was red and had number 00. Kvyat spent most of the duel in the pits. Kvyat himself said: "I'm not racing autonomous cars here. It won't be a flat-out race". == Qualifying == === Qualifying report === As only four of the eight entrants would compete in the main event, qualifying time trials were held to determine the four main race competitors, as well as their positions in the grid. Only the cars with the four best lap times over three time trial sessions held on Friday and Saturday would qualify. Multiple errors and setbacks occurred during qualifying. In the first session, Maveric AI, Code19's car, left the track and stopped just after turn 14 due to connectivity issues. Fly Eagle's car, Feiying, had multiple upsets; at one point, Feiying ran into localization issues and began swerving left and right before stopping just before turn 10. Later, Feiying swerved again and nearly hit the wall at the back straight, near the support pits, due to further localization issues. Sparkz, the Kinetiz team's car, swerved and crashed into the wall near yacht berths 51-56 after turn 11, damaging the front right wheel's axle and partially detaching the forward wings. Sparkz would be the only car to not have a set time at the end of the time trials. PoliMove car Eva braked hard without warning at the straight, the LED status indicator turning off, suggesting the AI computer had a system crash or shut itself down. After the sun went down, during the second session, Hailey, the car from the TUM team, went off-track after turn 9 and stopped, its status indicator flashing red, meaning Hailey's AI disengaged itself. Eva had further issues, once again braking hard and spinning out into turn 1. Later, the same thing happened to Feiying; it later swerved left and right and stopped due to further localization issues. The morning after, during the third and final session, Hailey went off-track after turn 5, and were unable to regain the pole position. === Qualifying classification === == Attack/Defend challenge == === Attack/Defend challenge report === In this part of the event, cars would be put on a series of 1v1 duels to see how well they could defend their position or attack to gain one higher. During one such duel, an incident occurred where Hailey rear-ended Eva, sending both off the track and prematurely ending the duel. The challenge was otherwise uneventful. === Attack/Defend challenge results === == Main race == === Race report === Eventually, at around 20:30 Gulf Standard Time on the night of 27 April, the main event (termed the "Grand Final" on-stream) would begin. The starting order was Eva first, Gianna second, Hailey third, and Constructor AI last. The race began with a rolling start. As a safety measure, the first two laps were conducted under virtual safety car (VSC) to make sure the cars stayed together, making them de facto formation laps, even if they counted towards race distance. However, Hailey ended up stopping at the final turn and strayed too far from the cars ahead, and as a result, the VSC conditions were extended for another lap. According to the livestream's on-screen graphics, Hailey was upwards of one minute and 22.3 seconds behind Gianna after the former started moving again. On lap 4, halfway through the planned race, and with Hailey more than 30 seconds behind Gianna, the VSC was lifted, and the green flag finally dropped. At first, the two Italian cars were leading the pack, Eva was the race leader with Gianna 3.2 seconds behind, however, as it entered the chicane, Eva hit the brakes and spun out, with Gianna briefly stopping as it passed Eva. Eva's spin automatically triggered a full-course yellow flag. Normally, under yellow flag conditions, overtaking is not permitted, but with Eva stopped and being moved off the track, it was theoretically permitted to overtake Eva. However, presumably due to an oversight in the AI's code, the cars assumed overtaking Eva, despite being off the track, was not permitted. As a result, both Gianna and Constructor AI stopped as they did not want to overtake Eva due to the yellow flag, with Hailey following suit as it approached. Constructor AI's status indicator was solid red, suggesting the AI had disengaged; however, Gianna's status indicator remained solid purple, showing the AI was still in control. Eva's status indicator was also solid purple, but was soon flashing green, suggesting the AI had disengaged but was ready to take control again. With all cars stalled, and Eva being off the track, the race was effectively red-flagged and suspended. Hailey, Gianna, and Constructor AI drove themselves back to their team's pits; Eva did not, it was towed to the main pits on a flatbed truck. Constructor was the first to arrive at the pits, followed by Gianna and Hailey, in that order. This incident, combined with loss of internet connection, led to Eva retiring - it did not finish the race. Eventually, it was decided to resume the race. With Eva retired, the restart order was Gianna first, Hailey second, and Constructor AI third. The race was also shortened - from eight laps to six. With lap 5 under full-course yellow, this meant all three remaining teams would effectively restart the race on the sixth and final lap. The trio left the pits at 22:25 Gulf Standard Time, and the race resumed two minutes later. At first, Gianna was winning with Hailey 2.6 seconds behind, but then Gianna stopped on turn 5, giving Hailey the lead. Constructor AI also overtook Gianna, but not without briefly stopping. Gianna remained stopped, its status indicator solid red - it did not finish either. With both Italian teams out of the picture, Hailey finished first and won A2RL 2024, with Constructor AI finishing second, 27.2 seconds behind. === Final race classification ===
Read more →
Niceaunties

Niceaunties is the pseudonym of a Singapore-based artist and designer whose work incorporates generative artificial intelligence, video, and digital installation. Her practice centers around the figure of the "auntie", a common term for older women in Southeast Asian contexts, and explores themes such as aging, care, domesticity, and gender roles. Her work has been featured in exhibitions and media platforms including TED, Christie's Art + Tech, Expanded.Art, and publications such as The Guardian, The Straits Times. == Early life and career == Niceaunties was born in 1981 in Singapore. She attributes her inspiration for "auntie culture" to the matriarchal environment and older women of her household, including her grandmother, while growing up. She is also an architectural designer with Spark Architect. The Niceaunties project began in 2023 after she encountered AI-generated images in her work as an architect. It draws inspiration from women in the artist's family and broader Southeast Asian cultural dynamics. Her work often features AI-generated visuals created with tools such as DALL-E, Krea, RunwayML, and SORA. Her imagery and narratives center on the fictional "Auntieverse", which features older women in imagined settings involving community, ecology, and labor. Her notable works include 'Auntlantis', a five-part video series imagining older women engaged in ocean clean-up and collective ritual, and 'Goddess,' a video created with Sora, featuring a character who gradually forgets her divine identity through years of domestic labor. == Exhibitions == 2024 – Expanded.Art, Berlin – Auntiedote solo exhibition 2024 – TED (conference), Vancouver – Speaker and screening 2024 – Victoria and Albert Museum, London – Digital Art Weekend 2024 – Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark – Ocean exhibition 2025 – Christie's Augmented Intelligence Auction, New York == Reception == In 2024, Niceaunties gave a TED Talk titled The Weird and Wonderful Art of Niceaunties. Journalist Rebecca Ratcliffe, writing for The Guardian, described her work as combining AI with "the surreal and the political," noting her focus on older women as central characters. Her work has also received criticism for being reliant on generative AI, which many feel exploits and steals from traditional artists.
Read more →
Mark I Perceptron

The Mark I Perceptron was a pioneering supervised image classification learning system developed by Frank Rosenblatt in 1958. It was the first implementation of an artificial intelligence (AI) machine. It differs from the Perceptron which is a software architecture proposed in 1943 by Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts, which was also employed in Mark I, and enhancements of which have continued to be an integral part of cutting edge AI technologies like the Transformer. == Architecture == The Mark I Perceptron was organized into three layers: A set of sensory units which receive optical input A set of association units, each of which fire based on input from multiple sensory units A set of response units, which fire based on input from multiple association units The connection between sensory units and association units were random. The working of association units was very similar to the response units. Different versions of the Mark I used different numbers of units in each of the layers. == Capabilities == In his 1957 proposal for funding for development of the "Cornell Photoperceptron", Rosenblatt claimed:"Devices of this sort are expected ultimately to be capable of concept formation, language translation, collation of military intelligence, and the solution of problems through inductive logic."With the first version of the Mark I Perceptron as early as 1958, Rosenblatt demonstrated a simple binary classification experiment, namely distinguishing between sheets of paper marked on the right versus those marked on the left side. One of the later experiments distinguished a square from a circle printed on paper. The shapes were perfect and their sizes fixed; the only variation was in their position and orientation. The Mark I Perceptron achieved 99.8% accuracy on a test dataset with 500 neurons in a single layer. The size of the training dataset was 10,000 example images. It took 3 seconds for the training pipeline to go through a single image. Higher accuracy was observed with thick outline figures compared to solid figures, likely because outline figures reduced overfitting. Another experiment distinguished between a square and a diamond for which 100% accuracy was achieved with only 60 training images, with a Perceptron having 1,000 neurons in a single layer. The time taken to process each training input for this larger perceptron was 15 seconds. The only variation was in position of the image, since rotation would have been ambiguous. In that same experiment, it could distinguish between the letters X and E with 100% accuracy when trained with only 20 images (10 images of each letter). Variations in the images included both position and rotation by up to 30 degrees. When variation in rotation was increased to any angle (both in training and test datasets), the accuracy reduced to 90% with 60 training images (30 images of each letter). For distinguishing between the letters E and F, a more challenging problem due to their similarity, the same 1,000 neuron perceptron achieved an accuracy of more than 80% with 60 training images. Variation was only in the position of the image, with no rotation.
Read more →
CodeSandbox

CodeSandbox is a cloud-based online integrated development environment (IDE) focused on web application development. It supports popular web technologies such as JavaScript, TypeScript, React, Vue.js, and Node.js. CodeSandbox allows users to create, edit, and deploy web applications directly from the browser with zero setup. CodeSandbox is widely used for front-end development, rapid prototyping, sharing code snippets, and real-time collaborative coding. It provides GitHub integration, templates for common frameworks, and a cloud-based development container for full-stack projects. == Templates == == Limitations == Slower performance for larger tasks compared to native IDEs Some features require a paid subscription Performance and storage limits for free-tier users Limited offline capabilities
Read more →
Sunspring

Sunspring is a 2016 experimental science fiction short film entirely written by an artificial intelligence bot using neural networks. It was conceived by BAFTA-nominated filmmaker Oscar Sharp and NYU AI researcher Ross Goodwin and produced by film production company, End Cue along with Allison Friedman and Andrew Swett. It stars Thomas Middleditch, Elisabeth Grey, and Humphrey Ker as three people, namely H, H2, and C, living in a future world and eventually connecting with each other through a love triangle. The script of the film was authored by a recurrent neural network called long short-term memory (LSTM) by an AI bot named Benjamin. Originally made for the Sci-Fi-London film festival's 48hr Challenge, it was released online by technology news website Ars Technica on 9 June 2016. == Premise == Sunspring narrates the story of three people - H (Middleditch), H2 (Grey), and C (Ker) - set in a futuristic world and entangled with murder and love. == Cast == Thomas Middleditch as H Elisabeth Grey as H2 Humphrey Ker as C == Production == Oscar Sharp originally created the film for the 48hr Film Challenge contest of Sci-Fi-London, a film festival which focuses on science fiction. For the challenge, contestants are given a set of prompts (mostly props and lines) that have to appear in a movie they make over the next two days. It eventually contested in the festival and was nominated among the final top ten films Sharp collaborated with his longtime associate Ross Goodwin, an AI researcher in New York University to create the AI bot, which was initially called Jetson. The bot, which later came to call itself Benjamin, wrote the screenplay including stage directions and dialog. The garbled script was then interpreted by Sharp who directed the actors to construe the plot points themselves and enact the play. According to Ars Technica, the final plot turned out to be a tale of romance and murder, set in a dark future world. === Benjamin, the automatic screenwriter === Called the world's first automatic screenwriter, Benjamin is a self-improving LSTM RNN machine intelligence trained on human screenplays conceived by Goodwin and Sharp. It was trained to write the screenplay by feeding it with a corpus of dozens of sci-fi screenplays found online—mostly movies from the 1980s and 90s. == Music == The film contains a song from Brooklyn-based electro-acoustic duo Tiger and Man, with lyrics written by Benjamin using a database of 30,000 folk songs. As well as a score written by composer Andrew Orkin. == Reception == CNet called it "a beautiful, bizarre sci-fi novelty." Critic Amanda Kooser said, "...probably won't start a rush for replacing human screenwriters with machines. Some day, neural networks may get better at imitating the art of coherent storytelling, but we're not there yet. That doesn't mean "Sunspring" isn't entertaining or worthy of viewing. It is. It's a thought experiment come to life, a novelty." As of April 2019, it has surpassed 1 million views on YouTube.
Read more →
Oriented energy filters

Oriented energy filters are used to grant sight to intelligent machines and sensors. The light comes in and is filtered so that it can be properly computed and analyzed by the computer allowing it to “perceive” what it is measuring. These energy measurements are then calculated to take a real time measurement of the oriented space time structure. 3D Gaussian filters are used to extract orientation measurements. They were chosen due to their ability to capture a broad spectrum and easy and efficient computations. The use of these vision systems can then be used in smart room, human interface and surveillance applications. The computations used can tell more than the standalone frame that most perceived motion devices such as a television frame. The objects captured by these devices would tell the velocity and energy of an object and its direction in relation to space and time. This also allows for better tracking ability and recognition.
Read more →
The Life and Times of Multivac

"The Life and Times of Multivac" is a science fiction short story by American writer Isaac Asimov. The story first appeared in the 5 January 1975 issue of The New York Times Magazine, and was reprinted in the collections The Bicentennial Man and Other Stories and The Best of Creative Computing in 1976. It is one of a loosely connected series of stories concerning a fictional supercomputer called Multivac. "The Life and Times of Multivac" was the first piece of fiction ever commissioned and published by The New York Times. Asimov's original title for the story was "Mathematical Games", but after the story appeared under the new title he decided he liked it. In his commentary on the story in The Bicentennial Man and Other Stories collection, Asimov stated, "More people came up to me over the next few weeks to tell me they had read that story than had ever been the case for any other story I had ever written." == Plot summary == When humanity begins to chafe under Multivac’s benevolent tyranny, one man takes matters into his own hands to destroy the great computer. By appearing to betray his fellow humans, he places himself in a position to permanently destroy Multivac. It is implied that it is not until completion of the act that he and his peers suddenly realize the enormity of their actions and the consequences it will have on humanity.
Read more →
Mountain car problem

Mountain Car, a standard testing domain in Reinforcement learning, is a problem in which an under-powered car must drive up a steep hill. Since gravity is stronger than the car's engine, even at full throttle, the car cannot simply accelerate up the steep slope. The car is situated in a valley and must learn to leverage potential energy by driving up the opposite hill before the car is able to make it to the goal at the top of the rightmost hill. The domain has been used as a test bed in various reinforcement learning papers. == Introduction == The mountain car problem, although fairly simple, is commonly applied because it requires a reinforcement learning agent to learn on two continuous variables: position and velocity. For any given state (position and velocity) of the car, the agent is given the possibility of driving left, driving right, or not using the engine at all. In the standard version of the problem, the agent receives a negative reward at every time step when the goal is not reached; the agent has no information about the goal until an initial success. == History == The mountain car problem appeared first in Andrew Moore's PhD thesis (1990). It was later more strictly defined in Singh and Sutton's reinforcement learning paper with eligibility traces. The problem became more widely studied when Sutton and Barto added it to their book Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction (1998). Throughout the years many versions of the problem have been used, such as those which modify the reward function, termination condition, and the start state. == Techniques used to solve mountain car == Q-learning and similar techniques for mapping discrete states to discrete actions need to be extended to be able to deal with the continuous state space of the problem. Approaches often fall into one of two categories, state space discretization or function approximation. === Discretization === In this approach, two continuous state variables are pushed into discrete states by bucketing each continuous variable into multiple discrete states. This approach works with properly tuned parameters but a disadvantage is information gathered from one state is not used to evaluate another state. Tile coding can be used to improve discretization and involves continuous variables mapping into sets of buckets offset from one another. Each step of training has a wider impact on the value function approximation because when the offset grids are summed, the information is diffused. === Function approximation === Function approximation is another way to solve the mountain car. By choosing a set of basis functions beforehand, or by generating them as the car drives, the agent can approximate the value function at each state. Unlike the step-wise version of the value function created with discretization, function approximation can more cleanly estimate the true smooth function of the mountain car domain. === Eligibility traces === One aspect of the problem involves the delay of actual reward. The agent is not able to learn about the goal until a successful completion. Given a naive approach for each trial the car can only backup the reward of the goal slightly. This is a problem for naive discretization because each discrete state will only be backed up once, taking a larger number of episodes to learn the problem. This problem can be alleviated via the mechanism of eligibility traces, which will automatically backup the reward given to states before, dramatically increasing the speed of learning. Eligibility traces can be viewed as a bridge from temporal difference learning methods to Monte Carlo methods. == Technical details == The mountain car problem has undergone many iterations. This section focuses on the standard well-defined version from Sutton (2008). === State variables === Two-dimensional continuous state space. V e l o c i t y = ( − 0.07 , 0.07 ) {\displaystyle Velocity=(-0.07,0.07)} P o s i t i o n = ( − 1.2 , 0.6 ) {\displaystyle Position=(-1.2,0.6)} === Actions === One-dimensional discrete action space. m o t o r = ( l e f t , n e u t r a l , r i g h t ) {\displaystyle motor=(left,neutral,right)} === Reward === For every time step: r e w a r d = − 1 {\displaystyle reward=-1} === Update function === For every time step: A c t i o n = [ − 1 , 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle Action=[-1,0,1]} V e l o c i t y = V e l o c i t y + ( A c t i o n ) ∗ 0.001 + cos ⁡ ( 3 ∗ P o s i t i o n ) ∗ ( − 0.0025 ) {\displaystyle Velocity=Velocity+(Action)0.001+\cos(3Position)(-0.0025)} P o s i t i o n = P o s i t i o n + V e l o c i t y {\displaystyle Position=Position+Velocity} === Starting condition === Optionally, many implementations include randomness in both parameters to show better generalized learning. P o s i t i o n = − 0.5 {\displaystyle Position=-0.5} V e l o c i t y = 0.0 {\displaystyle Velocity=0.0} === Termination condition === End the simulation when: P o s i t i o n ≥ 0.6 {\displaystyle Position\geq 0.6} == Variations == There are many versions of the mountain car which deviate in different ways from the standard model. Variables that vary include but are not limited to changing the constants (gravity and steepness) of the problem so specific tuning for specific policies become irrelevant and altering the reward function to affect the agent's ability to learn in a different manner. An example is changing the reward to be equal to the distance from the goal, or changing the reward to zero everywhere and one at the goal. Additionally, a 3D mountain car can be used, with a 4D continuous state space.
Read more →
DARPA Grand Challenge

The DARPA Grand Challenge is a prize competition for American autonomous vehicles, funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the most prominent research organization of the United States Department of Defense. Congress has authorized DARPA to award cash prizes to further DARPA's mission to sponsor revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and military use. The initial DARPA Grand Challenge in 2004 was created to spur the development of technologies needed to create the first fully autonomous ground vehicles capable of completing a substantial off-road course within a limited time. The third event, the DARPA Urban Challenge in 2007, extended the initial Challenge to autonomous operation in a mock urban environment. The 2012 DARPA Robotics Challenge, focused on autonomous emergency-maintenance robots, and new Challenges are still being conceived. The DARPA Subterranean Challenge was tasked with building robotic teams to autonomously map, navigate, and search subterranean environments. Such teams could be useful in exploring hazardous areas and in search and rescue. In addition to the challenges in autonomous technology, DARPA has also conducted prize competitions in other areas of technology. == History and background == Fully autonomous vehicles have been an international pursuit for many years, from endeavors in Japan (starting in 1977), Germany (Ernst Dickmanns and VaMP), Italy (the ARGO Project), the European Union (EUREKA Prometheus Project), the United States of America, and other countries. DARPA funded the development of the first fully autonomous robot beginning in 1966 with the Shakey the robot project at Stanford Research Institute, now SRI International. The first autonomous ground vehicle capable of driving on and off roads was developed by DARPA as part of the Strategic Computing Initiative beginning in 1984 leading to demonstrations of autonomous navigation by the Autonomous Land Vehicle and the Navlab. The Grand Challenge was the first long distance competition for driverless cars in the world; other research efforts in the field of driverless cars take a more traditional commercial or academic approach. The U.S. Congress authorized DARPA to offer prize money ($1 million) for the first Grand Challenge to facilitate robotic development, with the ultimate goal of making one-third of ground military forces autonomous by 2015. Following the 2004 event, Dr. Tony Tether, the director of DARPA, announced that the prize money had been increased to $2 million for the next event, which was claimed on October 9, 2005. The first, second and third places in the 2007 Urban Challenge received $2 million, $1 million, and $500,000, respectively. 14 new teams have qualified in year 2015. The competition was open to teams and organizations from around the world, as long as there was at least one U.S. citizen on the roster. Teams have participated from high schools, universities, businesses and other organizations. More than 100 teams registered in the first year, bringing a wide variety of technological skills to the race. In the second year, 195 teams from 36 U.S. states and 4 foreign countries entered the race. == 2004 Grand Challenge == The first competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge was held on March 13, 2004 in the Mojave Desert region of the United States, along a 150-mile (240 km) route that follows along the path of Interstate 15 from just before Barstow, California to just past the California–Nevada border in Primm. None of the robot vehicles finished the route. Carnegie Mellon University's Red Team and car Sandstorm (a converted Humvee) traveled the farthest distance, completing 11.78 km (7.32 mi) of the course before getting hung up on a rock after making a switchback turn. No winner was declared, and the cash prize was not given. Therefore, a second DARPA Grand Challenge event was scheduled for 2005. == 2005 Grand Challenge == The second competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge began at 6:40 am on October 8, 2005. All but one of the 23 finalists in the 2005 race surpassed the 11.78 km (7.32 mi) distance completed by the best vehicle in the 2004 race. Five vehicles successfully completed the 212 km (132 mi) course: Vehicles in the 2005 race passed through three narrow tunnels and negotiated more than 100 sharp left and right turns. The race concluded through Beer Bottle Pass, a winding mountain pass with a sheer drop-off on one side and a rock face on the other. Although the 2004 course required more elevation gain and some very sharp switchbacks (Daggett Ridge) were required near the beginning of the route, the course had far fewer curves and generally wider roads than the 2005 course. The natural rivalry between the teams from Stanford and Carnegie Mellon (Sebastian Thrun, head of the Stanford team was previously a faculty member at Carnegie Mellon and colleague of Red Whittaker, head of the CMU team) was played out during the race. Mechanical problems plagued H1ghlander before it was passed by Stanley. Gray Team's entry was a miracle in itself, as the team from the suburbs of New Orleans was caught in Hurricane Katrina a few short weeks before the race. The fifth finisher, Terramax, a 30,000 pound entry from Oshkosh Truck, finished on the second day. The huge truck spent the night idling on the course, but was particularly nimble in carefully picking its way down the narrow roads of Beer Bottle Pass. == 2007 Urban Challenge == The third competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge, known as the "Urban Challenge", took place on November 3, 2007 at the site of the now-closed George Air Force Base (currently used as Southern California Logistics Airport), in Victorville, California (Google map). The course involved a 96 km (60 mi) urban area course, to be completed in less than 6 hours. Rules included obeying all traffic regulations while negotiating with other traffic and obstacles and merging into traffic. Unlike previous challenges, the 2007 Urban Challenge organizers divided competitors into two "tracks", A and B. All Track A and Track B teams were part of the same competition circuit, but the teams chosen for the Track A program received US $1 million in funding. These 11 teams largely represented major universities and large corporate interests such as CMU teaming with GM as Tartan Racing, Stanford teaming with Volkswagen, Virginia Tech teaming with TORC Robotics as VictorTango, Oshkosh Truck, Honeywell, Raytheon, Caltech, Autonomous Solutions, Cornell University, and MIT. One of the few independent entries in Track A was the Golem Group. DARPA has not publicly explained the rationale behind the selection of Track A teams. Teams were given maps sparsely charting the waypoints that defined the competition courses. At least one team, Tartan Racing, enhanced the maps through the insertion of additional extrapolated waypoints for improved navigation. A debriefing paper published by Team Jefferson illustrates graphically the contrast between the course map it was given by DARPA and the course map used by Tartan Racing. Tartan Racing claimed the $2 million prize with their vehicle "Boss", a Chevy Tahoe. The second-place finisher earning the $1 million prize was the Stanford Racing Team with their entry "Junior", a 2006 Volkswagen Passat. Coming in third place was team VictorTango, winning the $500,000 prize with their 2005 Ford Escape hybrid, "Odin". MIT placed 4th, with Cornell University and University of Pennsylvania/Lehigh University also completing the course. The six teams that successfully finished the entire course: While the 2004 and 2005 events were more physically challenging for the vehicles, the robots operated in isolation and only encountered other vehicles on the course when attempting to pass. The Urban Challenge required designers to build vehicles able to obey all traffic laws while they detect and avoid other robots on the course. This is a particular challenge for vehicle software, as vehicles must make "intelligent" decisions in real time based on the actions of other vehicles. Other than previous autonomous vehicle efforts that focused on structured situations such as highway driving with little interaction between the vehicles, this competition operated in a more cluttered urban environment and required the cars to perform sophisticated interactions with each other, such as maintaining precedence at a 4-way stop intersection. == 2012 Robotics Challenge == The DARPA Robotics Challenge is an ongoing competition focusing on humanoid robotics. The primary goal of the program is to develop ground robotic capabilities to execute complex tasks in dangerous, degraded, human-engineered environments. It launched in October 2012, and hosted the Virtual Robotics Competition in June 2013. Two more competitions are planned: the DRC Trials in December 2013, and the DRC Finals in December 2014. Unlike prior Challenges, the construction of the "vehicles" w
Read more →
International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling

The International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS) is a leading international academic conference in automated planning and scheduling held annually for researchers and practitioners in planning and scheduling. ICAPS is supported by the National Science Foundation, the journal Artificial Intelligence, and other supporters. == The IPC and PDDL == ICAPS conducts the International Planning Competition (IPC), a competition scheduled every few years that empirically evaluates state-of-the-art planning systems on a collection of benchmark problems. The Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) was developed mainly to make the 1998/2000 International Planning Competition possible, and then evolved with each competition. PDDL is an attempt to standardize Artificial Intelligence (AI) planning languages. PDDL was first developed by Drew McDermott and his colleagues in 1998, inspired by STRIPS, ADL, and other sources. == History == The ICAPS conferences began in 2003 as a merge of two bi-annual conferences, the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS) and the European Conference on Planning (ECP). == List of events ==
Read more →
Veo (text-to-video model)

Veo, or Google Veo, is a text-to-video model developed by Google DeepMind and announced in May 2024. As a generative AI model, it creates videos based on user prompts. Veo 3, released in May 2025, can also generate accompanying audio. == Development == In May 2024, a multimodal video generation model called Veo was announced at Google I/O 2024. Google claimed that it could generate 1080p videos over a minute long. In December 2024, Google released Veo 2, available via VideoFX. It supports 4K resolution video generation and has an improved understanding of physics. In April 2025, Google announced that Veo 2 became available for advanced users on the Gemini app. In May 2025, Google released Veo 3, which not only generates videos but also creates synchronized audio — including dialogue, sound effects, and ambient noise — to match the visuals. Google also announced Flow, a video-creation tool powered by Veo and Imagen. Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis described the release as the moment when AI video generation left the era of the silent film. This was rebranded as Google Flow at the 2026 Google I/O keynote, along with the announcement of Google Flow Music. == Capabilities == Google Veo can be purchased at multiple subscription tiers and through Google "AI credits". The software itself can be run by two different consoles, Google Gemini and Google Flow. Gemini being geared towards shorter, quicker, and faster projects, using the Gemini AI chat model, with Google Flow, which is essentially a movie editor allowing users to create longer projects with continuity, using the same characters and actors. Users can create a maximum of eight seconds per clip. According to Gizmodo Veo 3 users were directing the model to generate low-quality content, such as man on the street interviews or haul videos of people unboxing products. 404 Media reported that the tool tended to repeat the same joke in response to different prompts. Commentators speculated that Google had trained the service on YouTube videos or Reddit posts. Google itself had not stated the source of its training content. In July 2025, Media Matters for America reported that racist and antisemitic videos generated using Veo 3 were being uploaded to TikTok. Ryan Whitwam of Ars Technica commented, "In a perfect world, Veo 3 would refuse to create these videos, but vagueness in the prompt and the AI's inability to understand the subtleties of racist tropes (i.e., the use of monkeys instead of humans in some videos) make it easy to skirt the rules."
Read more →
Instance-based learning

In machine learning, instance-based learning (sometimes called memory-based learning) is a family of learning algorithms that, instead of performing explicit generalization, compare new problem instances with instances seen in training, which have been stored in memory. Because computation is postponed until a new instance is observed, these algorithms are sometimes referred to as "lazy." It is called instance-based because it constructs hypotheses directly from the training instances themselves. This means that the hypothesis complexity can grow with the data: in the worst case, a hypothesis is a list of n training items and the computational complexity of classifying a single new instance is O(n). One advantage that instance-based learning has over other methods of machine learning is its ability to adapt its model to previously unseen data. Instance-based learners may simply store a new instance or throw an old instance away. Examples of instance-based learning algorithms are the k-nearest neighbors algorithm, kernel machines and RBF networks. These store (a subset of) their training set; when predicting a value/class for a new instance, they compute distances or similarities between this instance and the training instances to make a decision. To battle the memory complexity of storing all training instances, as well as the risk of overfitting to noise in the training set, instance reduction algorithms have been proposed.
Read more →
TuVox

TuVox is a company that produces VXML-based telephone speech-recognition applications to replace DTMF touch-tone systems for their clients. == History == TuVox was founded in 2001 by Steven S. Pollock and Ashok Khosla, formerly of Apple Computer Corporation and Claris Corporation. Since then, TuVox has grown to over 150 employees and has US offices in Cupertino, California and Boca Raton, Florida as well as international offices in London, Vancouver and Sydney. In 2005, TuVox acquired the customers and hosting facilities of Net-By-Tel. In 2007, the company raised $20m for its speech recognition, and phone menu software. On July 22, 2010, West Interactive — a subsidiary of West Corporation — announced its acquisition of TuVox. == Customers == TuVox clients include: 1-800-Flowers.com, AMC Entertainment, American Airlines, British Airways, M&T Bank, Canon Inc., Gateway, Inc., Motorola, Progress Energy Inc., Telecom New Zealand, Time, Inc., BECU, Virgin America and USAA.
Read more →
SpreeAI

SpreeAI (stylized as SPREEAI) is an American fashion technology company headquartered in Incline Village, Nevada that develops artificial intelligence software for the apparel and retail industries, including photorealistic virtual try-on, AI-powered sizing recommendations, and digital model generation. Founded in 2022 by John Imah and Bob Davidson, the company achieved unicorn status in 2025 following a Series B round led by Davidson Group that valued the company at approximately US$1.5 billion. TechCrunch identified SpreeAI as one of the more than 100 new tech unicorns minted in 2025. Its board of directors includes supermodel Naomi Campbell and hospitality executive Larry Ruvo. == History == SpreeAI was founded in 2022 by John Imah and Bob Davidson with a focus on artificial intelligence applications in fashion retail. By 2024, the company had raised approximately US$60 million in venture funding. In May 2025, SpreeAI announced a Series B round led by Davidson Group; reporting at the time placed the company's valuation at approximately US$1.5 billion, making it one of a small number of fashion-technology companies to reach unicorn status. In January 2026, TechCrunch listed SpreeAI among the more than 100 new tech unicorns minted in 2025. == Technology == SpreeAI develops a suite of artificial intelligence tools for the apparel industry. Its consumer-facing platform allows shoppers to upload a single photograph or select a digital model and then visualize clothing items on that figure with photorealistic rendering, while a complementary sizing engine generates fit recommendations intended to reduce returns. The platform is designed for integration with online retailers so that shoppers can preview garments before purchase. The company has stated that its models were developed in part through research collaborations with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon University. == Leadership and board == John Imah, a Nigerian-American technology executive who previously held roles at Samsung, Twitch, Meta Platforms, and Snap Inc., is co-founder and chief executive officer. Co-founder Bob Davidson, through Davidson Group, led the company's Series B financing. The company's board of directors includes supermodel Naomi Campbell, who joined in 2024, and Las Vegas hospitality executive Larry Ruvo. == Partnerships == SpreeAI has formed partnerships across both academia and the fashion industry. Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA). In 2025, SpreeAI entered a partnership with the CFDA to support American designers and brands with AI-driven tools; the CFDA described SpreeAI as "a fashion technology leader delivering innovative solutions to help designers and brands thrive." Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon University. The company has cited ongoing research and talent collaborations with both institutions. Sergio Hudson and Kai Collective. In 2025, SpreeAI made what WWD described as its Met Gala debut through a custom collaboration with designer Sergio Hudson and Nigerian-British label Kai Collective; the collaboration paired Hudson's couture with SpreeAI's virtual try-on platform. == Recognition == In 2025, TechCrunch named SpreeAI among the new tech unicorns of the year. In 2025, SpreeAI was named an honoree in Inc.'s Best in Business awards, and CEO John Imah was included on Inc.'s list of 40 business leaders who "propelled their organizations to success." In 2025, Imah was named to the Observer's AI Power Index, a list of 100 leaders shaping the future of artificial intelligence. In 2025, Imah was included in AfroTech's Future 50, recognizing Black innovators in technology. SpreeAI and Imah have been the subject of profile coverage in The Washington Post, Rolling Stone UK, WWD, Vogue UA, L'Officiel Arabia, GQ South Africa, and Inc..
Read more →