AI Apps Free

AI Apps Free — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Real-time computer graphics

Real-time computer graphics or real-time rendering is the sub-field of computer graphics focused on producing and analyzing images in real time. The term can refer to anything from rendering an application's graphical user interface (GUI) to real-time image analysis, but is most often used in reference to interactive 3D computer graphics, typically using a graphics processing unit (GPU). One example of this concept is a video game that rapidly renders changing 3D environments to produce an illusion of motion. Computers have been capable of generating 2D images such as simple lines, images and polygons in real time since their invention. However, quickly rendering detailed 3D objects is a daunting task for traditional Von Neumann architecture-based systems. An early workaround to this problem was the use of sprites, 2D images that could imitate 3D graphics. Different techniques for rendering now exist, such as ray-tracing and rasterization. Using these techniques and advanced hardware, computers can now render images quickly enough to create the illusion of motion while simultaneously accepting user input. This means that the user can respond to rendered images in real time, producing an interactive experience. == Principles of real-time 3D computer graphics == The goal of computer graphics is to generate computer-generated images, or frames, using certain desired metrics. One such metric is the number of frames generated in a given second. Real-time computer graphics systems differ from traditional (i.e., non-real-time) rendering systems in that non-real-time graphics typically rely on ray tracing. In this process, millions or billions of rays are traced from the camera to the world for detailed rendering—this expensive operation can take hours or days to render a single frame. Real-time graphics systems must render each image in less than 1/30th of a second. Ray tracing is far too slow for these systems; instead, they employ the technique of z-buffer triangle rasterization. In this technique, every object is decomposed into individual primitives, usually triangles. Each triangle gets positioned, rotated and scaled on the screen, and rasterizer hardware (or a software emulator) generates pixels inside each triangle. These triangles are then decomposed into atomic units called fragments that are suitable for displaying on a display screen. The fragments are drawn on the screen using a color that is computed in several steps. For example, a texture can be used to "paint" a triangle based on a stored image, and then shadow mapping can alter that triangle's colors based on line-of-sight to light sources. === Video game graphics === Real-time graphics optimizes image quality subject to time and hardware constraints. GPUs and other advances increased the image quality that real-time graphics can produce. GPUs are capable of handling millions of triangles per frame, and modern DirectX/OpenGL class hardware is capable of generating complex effects, such as shadow volumes, motion blurring, and triangle generation, in real-time. The advancement of real-time graphics is evidenced in the progressive improvements between actual gameplay graphics and the pre-rendered cutscenes traditionally found in video games. Cutscenes are typically rendered in real-time—and may be interactive. Although the gap in quality between real-time graphics and traditional off-line graphics is narrowing, offline rendering remains much more accurate. === Advantages === Real-time graphics are typically employed when interactivity (e.g., player feedback) is crucial. When real-time graphics are used in films, the director has complete control of what has to be drawn on each frame, which can sometimes involve lengthy decision-making. Teams of people are typically involved in the making of these decisions. In real-time computer graphics, the user typically operates an input device to influence what is about to be drawn on the display. For example, when the user wants to move a character on the screen, the system updates the character's position before drawing the next frame. Usually, the display's response-time is far slower than the input device—this is justified by the immense difference between the (fast) response time of a human being's motion and the (slow) perspective speed of the human visual system. This difference has other effects too: because input devices must be very fast to keep up with human motion response, advancements in input devices (e.g., the current Wii remote) typically take much longer to achieve than comparable advancements in display devices. Another important factor controlling real-time computer graphics is the combination of physics and animation. These techniques largely dictate what is to be drawn on the screen—especially where to draw objects in the scene. These techniques help realistically imitate real world behavior (the temporal dimension, not the spatial dimensions), adding to the computer graphics' degree of realism. Real-time previewing with graphics software, especially when adjusting lighting effects, can increase work speed. Some parameter adjustments in fractal generating software may be made while viewing changes to the image in real time. == Rendering pipeline == The graphics rendering pipeline ("rendering pipeline" or simply "pipeline") is the foundation of real-time graphics. Its main function is to render a two-dimensional image in relation to a virtual camera, three-dimensional objects (an object that has width, length, and depth), light sources, lighting models, textures and more. === Architecture === The architecture of the real-time rendering pipeline can be divided into conceptual stages: application, geometry and rasterization. === Application stage === The application stage is responsible for generating "scenes", or 3D settings that are drawn to a 2D display. This stage is implemented in software that developers optimize for performance. This stage may perform processing such as collision detection, speed-up techniques, animation and force feedback, in addition to handling user input. Collision detection is an example of an operation that would be performed in the application stage. Collision detection uses algorithms to detect and respond to collisions between (virtual) objects. For example, the application may calculate new positions for the colliding objects and provide feedback via a force feedback device such as a vibrating game controller. The application stage also prepares graphics data for the next stage. This includes texture animation, animation of 3D models, animation via transforms, and geometry morphing. Finally, it produces primitives (points, lines, and triangles) based on scene information and feeds those primitives into the geometry stage of the pipeline. === Geometry stage === The geometry stage manipulates polygons and vertices to compute what to draw, how to draw it and where to draw it. Usually, these operations are performed by specialized hardware or GPUs. Variations across graphics hardware mean that the "geometry stage" may actually be implemented as several consecutive stages. ==== Model and view transformation ==== Before the final model is shown on the output device, the model is transformed onto multiple spaces or coordinate systems. Transformations move and manipulate objects by altering their vertices. Transformation is the general term for the four specific ways that manipulate the shape or position of a point, line or shape. ==== Lighting ==== In order to give the model a more realistic appearance, one or more light sources are usually established during transformation. However, this stage cannot be reached without first transforming the 3D scene into view space. In view space, the observer (camera) is typically placed at the origin. If using a right-handed coordinate system (which is considered standard), the observer looks in the direction of the negative z-axis with the y-axis pointing upwards and the x-axis pointing to the right. ==== Projection ==== Projection is a transformation used to represent a 3D model in a 2D space. The two main types of projection are orthographic projection (also called parallel) and perspective projection. The main characteristic of an orthographic projection is that parallel lines remain parallel after the transformation. Perspective projection utilizes the concept that if the distance between the observer and model increases, the model appears smaller than before. Essentially, perspective projection mimics human sight. ==== Clipping ==== Clipping is the process of removing primitives that are outside of the view box in order to facilitate the rasterizer stage. Once those primitives are removed, the primitives that remain will be drawn into new triangles that reach the next stage. ==== Screen mapping ==== The purpose of screen mapping is to find out the coordinates of the primitives during the clipping stage. ==== Rasterizer stage ==== The rasterizer
Read more →
AI Text-to-video Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

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

Mehryar Mohri is a professor and theoretical computer scientist at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences. He is also heading the Machine Learning Theory (ML Theory) team at Google Research. == Career == Prior to joining the Courant Institute, Mohri was a research department head and later technology leader at AT&T Bell Labs, where he was a member of the technical staff for about ten years. Mohri has also taught as an assistant professor at the University of Paris 7 (1992-1993) and Ecole Polytechnique (1992-1994). == Research == Mohri's main area of research is machine learning, in particular learning theory. He is also an expert in automata theory and algorithms. He is the author of several core algorithms that have served as the foundation for the design of many deployed speech recognition and natural language processing systems. == Publications == Mohri is the author of the reference book Foundations of Machine Learning used as a textbook in many graduate-level machine learning courses. Mohri is also a member of the Lothaire group of mathematicians with the pseudonym M. Lothaire and contributed to the book on Applied Combinatorics on Words. He is the author of more than 250 conference and journal publications. == Organizational affiliations == Mohri is currently the President of the Association for Algorithmic Learning Theory (AALT) and the Steering Committee Chair for the ALT conference. He is also Editorial Board member of Machine Learning and TheoretiCS, Action Editor of the Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR) and a member of the advisory board for the Journal of Automata, Languages and Combinatorics.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Marketing Tools Compared (2026)

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

When creating computer-generated imagery, final scenes appearing in movies and television productions are usually produced by rendering more than one "layer" or "pass," which are multiple images designed to be put together through digital compositing to form a completed frame. Rendering in passes is based on a traditions in motion control photography which predate CGI. As an example, for a visual effects shot, a camera could be programmed to move past a physical model of a spaceship in one pass to film the fully lit beauty pass of the ship, and then to repeat exactly the same camera move passing the ship again to photograph additional elements such as the illuminated windows in the ship or its thrusters. Once all of the passes were filmed, they could then be optically printed together to form a completed shot. The terms render layers and render passes are sometimes used interchangeably. However, rendering in layers refers specifically to separating different objects into separate images, such as a layer each for foreground characters, sets, distant landscape, and sky. On the other hand, rendering in passes refers to separating out different aspects of the scene, such as shadows, highlights, or reflections, into separate images.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Writing Assistants Compared (2026)

Trying to pick the best AI writing assistant? An AI writing assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI writing assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Read more →
AI Text-to-image Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

Shopping for the best AI text-to-image tool? An AI text-to-image tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-image tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Marine Carpuat

Marine Carpuat is a computer scientist who works on machine translation and natural language processing. She is known for her research connecting cross-lingual semantics with machine translation. She has been recognized with a NSF Career Award in 2018, a Google Research award in 2016, and Amazon Faculty Awards in 2016 and 2018. == Education == Marine Carpuat obtained her MPhil and PhD from Hong Kong University of Science and Technology in 2008 under the supervision of Dekai Wu. Her PhD thesis was on the topic of machine translation, and demonstrated the first results showing that explicit modeling of lexical semantics could improve the accuracy of a machine translation system. == Career == After completing her education, Carpuat worked at the National Research Council Canada as a researcher. In 2015, she joined University of Maryland as an assistant professor in Computer Science where she is a member of the CLIP lab. Carpuat works in the area of natural language processing with a focus on machine translation and cross-lingual semantics. She has published over 100 peer-reviewed research papers. Her work is published in the proceedings of computer science conferences, including the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. == Selected honors and distinctions == 2016 Google Research Award 2016, 2018 Amazon Research Awards 2018 NSF Career Award
Read more →
Pharmacy automation

Pharmacy automation involves the mechanical processes of handling and distributing medications. Any pharmacy task may be involved, including counting small objects (e.g., tablets, capsules); measuring and mixing powders and liquids for compounding; tracking and updating customer information in databases (e.g., personally identifiable information (PII), medical history, drug interaction risk detection); and inventory management. This article focuses on the changes that have taken place in the local, or community pharmacy since the 1960s. == History == Dispensing medications in a community pharmacy before the 1970s was a time-consuming operation. The pharmacist dispensed prescriptions in tablet or capsule form with a simple tray and spatula. Many new medications were developed by pharmaceutical manufacturers at an ever-increasing pace, and medications prices were rising steeply. A typical community pharmacist was working longer hours and often forced to hire staff to handle increased workloads which resulted in less time to focus on safety issues. These additional factors led to use of a machine to count medications. The original electronic portable digital tablet counting technology was invented in Manchester, England between 1967 and 1970 by the brothers John and Frank Kirby. I had the original idea of how the machine would work and it was my patent, but it was a joint effort getting it to work in a saleable form. It was 3 years of very hard work. I had originally studied heavy electrical engineering before changing over to Medical School and qualifying as a Medical Doctor in 1968. In fact I was Senior House (Casualty) Officer (A&E or ER) in 1970 at North Manchester General Hospital when I filed the patent. I must have been the only hospital doctor in Britain with an oscilloscope, a soldering iron and a drawing board in his room in the Doctors' Residence. The housekeepers were bemused by all the wires. Frank originally trained as a Banker but quit to take a job with a local electronics firm during the development. He died in 1987, a terrible loss. [Extract from personal communication received in March 2010 from John Kirby.] Frank and John Kirby and their associate Rodney Lester were pioneers in pharmacy automation and small-object counting technology. In 1967, the Kirbys invented a portable digital tablet counter to count tablets and capsules. With Lester they formed a limited company. In 1970, their invention was patented and put into production in Oldham, England. The tablet counter aided the pharmacy industry with time-consuming manual counting of drug prescriptions. A counting machine consistently counted medications accurately and quickly. This aspect of pharmacy automation was quickly adopted, and innovations emerged every decade to aid the pharmacy industry to deliver medications quickly, safely, and economically. Modern pharmacies have many new options to improve their workflow by using the new technology, and can choose intelligently from the many options available. === Chronology === On 1 January 1971 commercial production of the first portable digital tablet counters in the World began. John Kirby had filed U.K. Patent number GB1358378(A) on 8 September 1970 and U.S. patent number 3789194 on 9 August 1971. These early electronic counters were designed to help pharmacies replace the common (but often inaccurate) practice of counting medications by hand. In 1975, the digital technology was exported to America. In early 1980 a dedicated research, development and production facility was built in Oldham, England at a cost of £500,000. Between 1982 and 1983, two separate development facilities had been created. In America, overseen by Rodney Lester; and in England, overseen by the Kirby brothers. In 1987, Frank Kirby died. In 1989, John Kirby moved his UK facility to Devon, England. A simple to operate machine had been developed to accurately and quickly count prescription medications. Technology improvements soon resulted in a more compact model. The price of such equipment in 1980 was around £1,300. This substantial investment in new technology was a major financial consideration, but the pharmacy community considered the use of a counting machine as a superior method compared to hand-counting medications. These early devices became known as tablet counter, capsule counter, pill counter, or drug counter. The new counting technology replaced manual methods in many industries such as, vitamin and diet supplement manufacturing. Technicians needed a small, affordable device to count and bottle medications. In England and America, the 1980s and 1990s saw new the development of high-speed machines for counting and bottle filling, Like their pharmacy-based counterparts, these industrial units were designed to be fast and simple to operate, yet remain small and cost effective. In America, in the late 1990s/early 2000s a new type of tablet counter appeared. It was simple to use, compact, inexpensive, and had good counting accuracy. At the turn of the millennium technical advances allowed the design of counters with a software verification system. With an onboard computer, displaying photo images of medications to assist the pharmacist or pharmacy technician to verify that the correct medication was being dispensed. In addition, a database for storing all prescriptions that were counted on the device. Between September 2005 and May 2007, American Capital made a major financial investment in Kirby Lester, which then relocated to a larger facility to expand its research and development capabilities. This move added extra space for product research and development facility (R&D). It allowed the opportunity to develop new advanced technology products that met the pharmacy's needs for simple, accurate, and cost-effective ways to dispense prescriptions safely. Pictured here is an early American type of integrated counter and packaging device. This machine was a third generation step in the evolution of pharmacy automated devices. Later models held pre-counted containers of commonly-prescribed medications. == Global variations == In the EU member states legislation was introduced in 1998 which had a major effect on UK Pharmacy operations. It effectively prohibited the use of tablet counters for counting and dispensing bulk packaged tablets. Both usage and sales of the machines in the UK declined rapidly as a result of the introduction of blister packaging for medicines. == Current state of the industry == A tablet counter has become a standard in more than 30,000 sites in 35 countries (as of 2010) (including many non-pharmacy sites, such as manufacturing facilities that use a counting machine as a check for small items). During the 1990s through 2012, numerous new pharmacy automation products came to market. During this timeframe, counting technologies, robotics, workflow management software, and interactive voice recognition (IVR) systems for retail (both chain and independent), outpatient, government, and closed-door pharmacies (mail order and central fill) were all introduced. Additionally, the concept of scalability - of migrating from an entry-level product to the next level of automation (e.g., counting technology to robotics) - was introduced and subsequently launched a new product line in 1997. Pharmacists everywhere are making the switch to automation for its increased speed, greater accuracy, and better security. As the industry evolves and customer expectations grow, automation is becoming less of a luxury and more of a necessity. Especially for independent pharmacies, automation is now a means of keeping up with the competition of large chain pharmacies. == Technological changes and design improvements == Constant developments in technology make the dispensing of prescription medications safer, more accurate and more efficient. In America, in 2008, "next-generation" counting and verification systems were introduced. Based on the counting technology employed in preceding models, later machines included the ability to help the pharmacy operate more effectively. Equipped with a new computer interface to a pharmacy management system, with workflow and inventory software. It also included "checks and balances" to ensure the technician and pharmacist were dispensing the correct medication for each patient. This is something that is important to keep reported correctly when dealing with controlled substances like narcotics. This was a step forward to verify all 100% of prescriptions that were dispensed by pharmacy staff. In America, in 2009, further advanced counters were designed that included the ability to dispense hands-free – a feature that many operators had desired. This allowed pharmacies to automate their most commonly dispensed medications via calibrated cassettes. Thirty of a pharmacy's common medications would now be dispensed automatically. Another new model doubled that throughput via an enclosed robotic mechanism. Robo
Read more →
Generalized filtering

Generalized filtering is a generic Bayesian filtering scheme for nonlinear state-space models. It is based on a variational principle of least action, formulated in generalized coordinates of motion. Note that "generalized coordinates of motion" are related to—but distinct from—generalized coordinates as used in (multibody) dynamical systems analysis. Generalized filtering furnishes posterior densities over hidden states (and parameters) generating observed data using a generalized gradient descent on variational free energy, under the Laplace assumption. Unlike classical (e.g. Kalman-Bucy or particle) filtering, generalized filtering eschews Markovian assumptions about random fluctuations. Furthermore, it operates online, assimilating data to approximate the posterior density over unknown quantities, without the need for a backward pass. Special cases include variational filtering, dynamic expectation maximization and generalized predictive coding. == Definition == Definition: Generalized filtering rests on the tuple ( Ω , U , X , S , p , q ) {\displaystyle (\Omega ,U,X,S,p,q)} : A sample space Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } from which random fluctuations ω ∈ Ω {\displaystyle \omega \in \Omega } are drawn Control states U ∈ R {\displaystyle U\in \mathbb {R} } – that act as external causes, input or forcing terms Hidden states X : X × U × Ω → R {\displaystyle X:X\times U\times \Omega \to \mathbb {R} } – that cause sensory states and depend on control states Sensor states S : X × U × Ω → R {\displaystyle S:X\times U\times \Omega \to \mathbb {R} } – a probabilistic mapping from hidden and control states Generative density p ( s ~ , x ~ , u ~ ∣ m ) {\displaystyle p({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\mid m)} – over sensory, hidden and control states under a generative model m {\displaystyle m} Variational density q ( x ~ , u ~ ∣ μ ~ ) {\displaystyle q({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\mid {\tilde {\mu }})} – over hidden and control states with mean μ ~ ∈ R {\displaystyle {\tilde {\mu }}\in \mathbb {R} } Here ~ denotes a variable in generalized coordinates of motion: u ~ = [ u , u ′ , u ″ , … ] T {\displaystyle {\tilde {u}}=[u,u',u'',\ldots ]^{T}} === Generalized filtering === The objective is to approximate the posterior density over hidden and control states, given sensor states and a generative model – and estimate the (path integral of) model evidence p ( s ~ ( t ) | m ) {\displaystyle p({\tilde {s}}(t)\vert m)} to compare different models. This generally involves an intractable marginalization over hidden states, so model evidence (or marginal likelihood) is replaced with a variational free energy bound. Given the following definitions: μ ~ ( t ) = a r g m i n μ ~ { F ( s ~ ( t ) , μ ~ ) } {\displaystyle {\tilde {\mu }}(t)={\underset {\tilde {\mu }}{\operatorname {arg\,min} }}\{F({\tilde {s}}(t),{\tilde {\mu }})\}} G ( s ~ , x ~ , u ~ ) = − ln ⁡ p ( s ~ , x ~ , u ~ | m ) {\displaystyle G({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}})=-\ln p({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\vert m)} Denote the Shannon entropy of the density q {\displaystyle q} by H [ q ] = E q [ − log ⁡ ( q ) ] {\displaystyle H[q]=E_{q}[-\log(q)]} . We can then write the variational free energy in two ways: F ( s ~ , μ ~ ) = E q [ G ( s ~ , x ~ , u ~ ) ] − H [ q ( x ~ , u ~ | μ ~ ) ] = − ln ⁡ p ( s ~ | m ) + D K L [ q ( x ~ , u ~ | μ ~ ) | | p ( x ~ , u ~ | s ~ , m ) ] {\displaystyle F({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {\mu }})=E_{q}[G({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}})]-H[q({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\vert {\tilde {\mu }})]=-\ln p({\tilde {s}}\vert m)+D_{KL}[q({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\vert {\tilde {\mu }})\vert \vert p({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\vert {\tilde {s}},m)]} The second equality shows that minimizing variational free energy (i) minimizes the Kullback-Leibler divergence between the variational and true posterior density and (ii) renders the variational free energy (a bound approximation to) the negative log evidence (because the divergence can never be less than zero). Under the Laplace assumption q ( x ~ , u ~ ∣ μ ~ ) = N ( μ ~ , C ) {\displaystyle q({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}}\mid {\tilde {\mu }})={\mathcal {N}}({\tilde {\mu }},C)} the variational density is Gaussian and the precision that minimizes free energy is C − 1 = Π = ∂ μ ~ μ ~ G ( μ ~ ) {\displaystyle C^{-1}=\Pi =\partial _{{\tilde {\mu }}{\tilde {\mu }}}G({\tilde {\mu }})} . This means that free-energy can be expressed in terms of the variational mean (omitting constants): F = G ( μ ~ ) + 1 2 ln ⁡ | ∂ μ ~ μ ~ G ( μ ~ ) | {\displaystyle F=G({\tilde {\mu }})+\textstyle {1 \over 2}\ln \vert \partial _{{\tilde {\mu }}{\tilde {\mu }}}G({\tilde {\mu }})\vert } The variational means that minimize the (path integral) of free energy can now be recovered by solving the generalized filter: μ ~ ˙ = D μ ~ − ∂ μ ~ F ( s ~ , μ ~ ) {\displaystyle {\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}=D{\tilde {\mu }}-\partial _{\tilde {\mu }}F({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {\mu }})} where D {\displaystyle D} is a block matrix derivative operator of identify matrices such that D u ~ = [ u ′ , u ″ , … ] T {\displaystyle D{\tilde {u}}=[u',u'',\ldots ]^{T}} === Variational basis === Generalized filtering is based on the following lemma: The self-consistent solution to μ ~ ˙ = D μ ~ − ∂ μ ~ F ( s , μ ~ ) {\displaystyle {\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}=D{\tilde {\mu }}-\partial _{\tilde {\mu }}F(s,{\tilde {\mu }})} satisfies the variational principle of stationary action, where action is the path integral of variational free energy S = ∫ d t F ( s ~ ( t ) , μ ~ ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S=\int dt\,F({\tilde {s}}(t),{\tilde {\mu }}(t))} Proof: self-consistency requires the motion of the mean to be the mean of the motion and (by the fundamental lemma of variational calculus) μ ~ ˙ = D μ ~ ⇔ ∂ μ ~ F ( s ~ , μ ~ ) = 0 ⇔ δ μ ~ S = 0 {\displaystyle {\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}=D{\tilde {\mu }}\Leftrightarrow \partial _{\tilde {\mu }}F({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {\mu }})=0\Leftrightarrow \delta _{\tilde {\mu }}S=0} Put simply, small perturbations to the path of the mean do not change variational free energy and it has the least action of all possible (local) paths. Remarks: Heuristically, generalized filtering performs a gradient descent on variational free energy in a moving frame of reference: μ ~ ˙ − D μ ~ = − ∂ μ ~ F ( s , μ ~ ) {\displaystyle {\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}-D{\tilde {\mu }}=-\partial _{\tilde {\mu }}F(s,{\tilde {\mu }})} , where the frame itself minimizes variational free energy. For a related example in statistical physics, see Kerr and Graham who use ensemble dynamics in generalized coordinates to provide a generalized phase-space version of Langevin and associated Fokker-Planck equations. In practice, generalized filtering uses local linearization over intervals Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} to recover discrete updates Δ μ ~ = ( exp ⁡ ( Δ t ⋅ J ) − I ) J − 1 μ ~ ˙ J = ∂ μ ~ μ ~ ˙ = D − ∂ μ ~ μ ~ F ( s ~ , μ ~ ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\Delta {\tilde {\mu }}&=(\exp(\Delta t\cdot J)-I)J^{-1}{\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}\\J&=\partial _{\tilde {\mu }}{\dot {\tilde {\mu }}}=D-\partial _{{\tilde {\mu }}{\tilde {\mu }}}F({\tilde {s}},{\tilde {\mu }})\end{aligned}}} This updates the means of hidden variables at each interval (usually the interval between observations). == Generative (state-space) models in generalized coordinates == Usually, the generative density or model is specified in terms of a nonlinear input-state-output model with continuous nonlinear functions: s = g ( x , u ) + ω s x ˙ = f ( x , u ) + ω x {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}s&=g(x,u)+\omega _{s}\\{\dot {x}}&=f(x,u)+\omega _{x}\end{aligned}}} The corresponding generalized model (under local linearity assumptions) obtains the from the chain rule s ~ = g ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) + ω ~ s s = g ( x , u ) + ω s s ′ = ∂ x g ⋅ x ′ + ∂ u g ⋅ u ′ + ω s ′ s ″ = ∂ x g ⋅ x ″ + ∂ u g ⋅ u ″ + ω s ″ ⋮ x ~ ˙ = f ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) + ω ~ x x ˙ = f ( x , u ) + ω x x ˙ ′ = ∂ x f ⋅ x ′ + ∂ u f ⋅ u ′ + ω x ′ x ˙ ″ = ∂ x f ⋅ x ″ + ∂ u f ⋅ u ″ + ω x ″ ⋮ {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\tilde {s}}&={\tilde {g}}({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}})+{\tilde {\omega }}_{s}\\\\s&=g(x,u)+\omega _{s}\\s'&=\partial _{x}g\cdot x'+\partial _{u}g\cdot u'+\omega '_{s}\\s''&=\partial _{x}g\cdot x''+\partial _{u}g\cdot u''+\omega ''_{s}\\&\vdots \\\end{aligned}}\qquad {\begin{aligned}{\dot {\tilde {x}}}&={\tilde {f}}({\tilde {x}},{\tilde {u}})+{\tilde {\omega }}_{x}\\\\{\dot {x}}&=f(x,u)+\omega _{x}\\{\dot {x}}'&=\partial _{x}f\cdot x'+\partial _{u}f\cdot u'+\omega '_{x}\\{\dot {x}}''&=\partial _{x}f\cdot x''+\partial _{u}f\cdot u''+\omega ''_{x}\\&\vdots \end{aligned}}} Gaussian assumptions about the random fluctuations ω {\displaystyle \omega } then prescribe the likelihood and empirical priors on the motion of hidden states p ( s ~ , x ~ , u ~ | m ) = p ( s ~ | x ~ , u ~ , m ) p ( D x ~ | x , u ~ , m ) p ( x | m ) p ( u ~ | m ) p ( s ~ | x ~ , u ~ , m ) = N ( g ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) , Σ ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) s ) p ( D x ~ | x , u ~ , m ) = N ( f ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) , Σ ~ ( x ~ , u ~ ) x ) {\displayst
Read more →
AI Avatar Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

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

In search of the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Fluency Voice Technology

Fluency Voice Technology was a company that developed and sold packaged speech recognition solutions for use in call centers. Fluency's Speech Recognition solutions are used by call centers worldwide to improve customer service and significantly reduce costs and are available on-premises and hosted. == History == 1998 – Fluency was created as a spin-off from the Voice Research & Development team of a company called netdecisions. This R&D operation was established in Cambridge UK. The focus of the development was speech recognition systems based on the VXML standard. 2001 – Fluency became a separate entity in May 2001. Fluency began the creation of a software development platform specifically aimed at automating call center activities. This platform became Fluency's VoiceRunner. 2002 to 2004 – Fluency establishes accomplishes many successful deployments in customer sites such as National Express and Barclaycard. 2003 – Fluency expanded into the USA. Fluency also acquires Vocalis of Cambridge, UK in August 2003. 2004 – Fluency receives £6 million investment from leading European Venture Capitalists and establishes a global OEM partnership with Avaya, and the acquisition of SRC Telecom. 2008 – Fluency is acquired by Syntellect Ltd == Customers == Call Centers around the world use Fluency to improve service and reduce costs. They include Travelodge, Standard Life Bank, Sutton and East Surrey Water, Pizza Hut, CWT, Barclays, Powergen, First Choice, OutRight, J D Williams, Capital Blue Cross, Chelsea Building Society, EDF, bss, TV Licensing and Capita Software Services.
Read more →
Datacap

Datacap (an IBM Company), a privately owned company, manufactures and sells computer software, and services. Datacap's first product, Paper Keyboard, was a "forms processing" product and shipped in 1989. In August 2010, IBM announced that it had acquired Datacap for an undisclosed amount. == Overview == Datacap sells products through a value-added distribution network worldwide. The software is classified as "enterprise software", meaning that it requires trained professionals to install and configure. Although the Company has focused on providing solutions for scanning paper documents, most recently Company materials have emphasized customer requirements to handle electronic documents ("eDocs"), documents being received into an organization electronically (usually email). Datacap claims that its software is unique because of the rules engine ("Rulerunner") used for processing inbound documents, including performing the image processing (deskew, noise removal, etc.), optical character recognition (OCR), intelligent character recognition (ICR), validations, and export-release formatting of extracted data to target ERP and line of business application.
Read more →
Moore machine

In the theory of computation, a Moore machine is a finite-state machine whose current output values are determined only by its current state. This is in contrast to a Mealy machine, whose output values are determined both by its current state and by the values of its inputs. Like other finite state machines, in Moore machines, the input typically influences the next state. Thus the input may indirectly influence subsequent outputs, but not the current or immediate output. The Moore machine is named after Edward F. Moore, who presented the concept in a 1956 paper, “Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines.” == Formal definition == A Moore machine can be defined as a 6-tuple ( S , s 0 , Σ , Λ , δ , G ) {\displaystyle (S,s_{0},\Sigma ,\Lambda ,\delta ,G)} consisting of the following: A finite set of states S {\displaystyle S} A start state (also called initial state) s 0 {\displaystyle s_{0}} which is an element of S {\displaystyle S} A finite set called the input alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } A finite set called the output alphabet Λ {\displaystyle \Lambda } A transition function δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} mapping a state and the input alphabet to the next state An output function G : S → Λ {\displaystyle G:S\rightarrow \Lambda } mapping each state to the output alphabet "Evolution across time" is realized in this abstraction by having the state machine consult the time-changing input symbol at discrete "timer ticks" t 0 , t 1 , t 2 , . . . {\displaystyle t_{0},t_{1},t_{2},...} and react according to its internal configuration at those idealized instants, or else having the state machine wait for a next input symbol (as on a FIFO) and react whenever it arrives. A Moore machine can be regarded as a restricted type of finite-state transducer. == Visual representation == === Table === A state transition table is a table listing all the triples in the transition relation δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} . === Diagram === The state diagram for a Moore machine, or Moore diagram, is a state diagram that associates an output value with each state. == Relationship with Mealy machines == As Moore and Mealy machines are both types of finite-state machines, they are equally expressive: either type can be used to parse a regular language. The difference between Moore machines and Mealy machines is that in the latter, the output of a transition is determined by the combination of current state and current input ( S × Σ {\displaystyle S\times \Sigma } as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ), as opposed to just the current state ( S {\displaystyle S} as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ). When represented as a state diagram, for a Moore machine, each node (state) is labeled with an output value; for a Mealy machine, each arc (transition) is labeled with an output value. Every Moore machine M {\displaystyle M} is equivalent to the Mealy machine with the same states and transitions and the output function G ( s , σ ) = G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G(s,\sigma )=G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , which takes each state-input pair ( s , σ ) {\displaystyle (s,\sigma )} and yields G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , where G M {\displaystyle G_{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's output function and δ M {\displaystyle \delta _{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's transition function. However, not every Mealy machine can be converted to an equivalent Moore machine. Some can be converted only to an almost equivalent Moore machine, with outputs shifted in time. This is due to the way that state labels are paired with transition labels to form the input/output pairs. Consider a transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} from state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} to state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} . The input causing the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} labels the edge ( s i , s j ) {\displaystyle (s_{i},s_{j})} . The output corresponding to that input, is the label of state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} . Notice that this is the source state of the transition. So for each input, the output is already fixed before the input is received, and depends solely on the present state. This is the original definition by E. Moore. It is a common mistake to use the label of state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} as output for the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} . == Examples == Types according to number of inputs/outputs. === Simple === Simple Moore machines have one input and one output: edge detector using XOR binary adding machine clocked sequential systems (a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes) Most digital electronic systems are designed as clocked sequential systems. Clocked sequential systems are a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes. Typically the current state is stored in flip-flops, and a global clock signal is connected to the "clock" input of the flip-flops. Clocked sequential systems are one way to solve metastability problems. A typical electronic Moore machine includes a combinational logic chain to decode the current state into the outputs (lambda). The instant the current state changes, those changes ripple through that chain, and almost instantaneously the output gets updated. There are design techniques to ensure that no glitches occur on the outputs during that brief period while those changes are rippling through the chain, but most systems are designed so that glitches during that brief transition time are ignored or are irrelevant. The outputs then stay the same indefinitely (LEDs stay bright, power stays connected to the motors, solenoids stay energized, etc.), until the Moore machine changes state again. ==== Worked example ==== A sequential network has one input and one output. The output becomes 1 and remains 1 thereafter when at least two 0's and two 1's have occurred as inputs. A Moore machine with nine states for the above description is shown on the right. The initial state is state A, and the final state is state I. The state table for this example is as follows: === Complex === More complex Moore machines can have multiple inputs as well as multiple outputs. == Gedanken-experiments == In Moore's 1956 paper "Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines", the ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} automata (or machines) S {\displaystyle S} are defined as having n {\displaystyle n} states, m {\displaystyle m} input symbols and p {\displaystyle p} output symbols. Nine theorems are proved about the structure of S {\displaystyle S} , and experiments with S {\displaystyle S} . Later, " S {\displaystyle S} machines" became known as "Moore machines". At the end of the paper, in Section "Further problems", the following task is stated: Another directly following problem is the improvement of the bounds given at the theorems 8 and 9. Moore's Theorem 8 is formulated as: Given an arbitrary ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine S {\displaystyle S} , such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists an experiment of length n ( n − 1 ) 2 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {n(n-1)}{2}}} which determines the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. In 1957, A. A. Karatsuba proved the following two theorems, which completely solved Moore's problem on the improvement of the bounds of the experiment length of his "Theorem 8". Theorem A. If S {\displaystyle S} is an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists a branched experiment of length at most ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} through which one may determine the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. Theorem B. There exists an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, every two states of which are distinguishable from one another, such that the length of the shortest experiments establishing the state of the machine at the end of the experiment is equal to ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} . Theorems A and B were used for the basis of the course work of a student of the fourth year, A. A. Karatsuba, "On a problem from the automata theory", which was distinguished by testimonial reference at the competition of student works of the faculty of mechanics and mathematics of Moscow State University in 1958. The paper by Karatsuba was given to the journal Uspekhi Mat. Nauk on 17 December 1958 and was published there in June 1960. Until the present day (2011), Karatsuba's result on the length of experiments is the only exact nonlinear result, both in automata theory, and in similar problems of computational complexity theory.
Read more →