AI Apps Like Chat Gpt

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

Huawei Member Center

Huawei Member Center is a benefits app which runs using Huawei Mobile Services. Originally launched in China, Huawei Member Center is now being developed primarily around devices such as P40 Pro and the Nova 7. == Membership Levels == The Huawei Member Center provides rewards in two primary ways, 1) device-specific & promotions and 2) via frequent use of Huawei products and apps, using points to redeem additional benefits. In China, Huawei members are already classified into three levels, the highest being “elite”. Membership level determines the level of perks received, from priority access to the service hotline, new device events & proprietary early-access opportunities. Huawei ran a number of member events in 2019 called "Huawei Member Day" to promote the Member Center including providing tips for the Mate 30 Pro and offering a 50Gb cloud storage upgrade to users. == HMC in China == Huawei Member Center Has seen significant adoption in China and the east, the rewards for use on the app have ranged from free book coupons, discounted travel and exclusive gifts of new devices, such as the Huawei Enjoy Z.
Read more →
The Machine Question

The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics is a 2012 nonfiction book by David J. Gunkel that discusses the evolution of the theory of human ethical responsibilities toward non-human things and to what extent intelligent, autonomous machines can be considered to have legitimate moral responsibilities and what legitimate claims to moral consideration they can hold. The book was awarded as the 2012 Best Single Authored Book by the Communication Ethics Division of the National Communication Association. == Content == The book is spread across three chapters, with the first two chapters focusing on an overall review of the history of philosophy and its discussion of moral agency, moral rights, human rights, and animal rights and the third chapter focusing on what defines "thingness" and why machines have been excluded from moral and ethical consideration due to a misuse of the patient/agent binary. The first chapter, titled Moral Agency, breaks down the history of said agency based on what it included and excluded in various parts of history. Gunkel also raises the conflict between discussing the morality of humans toward objects and the theory of the philosophy of technology that "technology is merely a tool: a means to an end". The main issue, he explains, in defining what constitutes an appropriate moral agent is that there will be things left outside of what is included, as the definition is based on a set of characteristics that will inherently not be all-encompassing. The subject of consciousness is broached and subsequently derided by Gunkel because of it being one of the main arguments against machine rights, while Gunkel points out that no "settled definition" of the term exists and that he considers it no better than a synonym used for "the occultish soul". In addition, the issue of the other minds problem entails that no proper understanding of consciousness can come to pass due to the inability to properly understand the mind of a being that is not oneself. The second chapter, titled Moral Patiency, focuses on the patient end of the topic and discusses the expansion of the fields of animal studies and environmental studies. Gunkel describes moral patients as the ones that are to be the object of moral consideration and deserve such consideration even if they lack their own agency, such as animals, thus allowing moral consideration itself to be broader and more inclusive. The topic of other minds is discussed again when examining the question of whether animals can suffer, a question that Gunkel ultimately abandons because it encounters the same problems that the topic of consciousness does. Especially because the subject of animal rights is often only afforded for the animals deemed to be "cute", but often not including "reptiles, insects, or microbes". Gunkel continues on to examine environmental ethics and information ethics, but finds them to be too anthropocentric, just as all the other examined models have been. The third chapter, titled Thinking Otherwise, proposes a combination of Heideggerian ontology and Levinasian ethics to properly discuss the otherness of technology and machines, but finds that the patient/agent binary is unable to be properly extended to confine the extent of "the machine question". In discussing the land ethic philosophy espoused by Aldo Leopold, Gunkel proposes that it is the entire relationship between agent and patient that should have moral consideration and not a specific definition based on either side, as each part contributes to the relationship as a whole and cannot be removed without breaking that relationship. == Critical reception == Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries writer R. S. Stansbury explained that the book is able to use simple examples to discuss difficult topics and separate ideas and that it would be "useful for philosophy students, and for engineering students interested in exploring the ethical implications of their work". Dominika Dzwonkowska, writing for International Philosophical Quarterly, stated that the "unprecedented value of the book is that Gunkel not only analyzes important aspects of the immediate problem but also that he places his discussion in the context of philosophical discussions on such related issues as rights discourse." Mark Coeckelbergh in Ethics and Information Technology noted that focusing on the question itself of the machine question allows further exploration of machine ethics and the expansion of general ethics and that the book's questions point out that "good, critical philosophical reflection on machines is not only about how we should cope with machines, but also about how we (should) think and what role technology plays (and should play) in this thinking." A review in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews by Colin Allen criticized some of Gunkel's methodology and the indecisiveness of his ultimate answer to the machine question, but also acknowledged that the book "succeeded in connecting the ethics of robots and AI to a much broader ethical discussion than has been represented in the literature on machine ethics to date". Blay Whitby, in a review for AISB Quarterly, lauded The Machine Question for its "clear exposition" and wide range of references to other works, concluding that the book is "essential reading for philosophers interested in AI, robot ethics, or animal ethics". In a twin review of The Machine Question and Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robots by Patrick Lin, Keith Abney, and George A. Bekey, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology reviewer Jeff Shaw called Gunkel's book a good introduction to the "complex field of robot ethics" and that both books are "highly recommended to both the general reader as well as to experts in the field of robotics, philosophy, and ethics." In a 2017 paper for Ethics and Information Technology, Katharyn Hogan investigated whether the machine question presented by Gunkel in the book is any different from the longstanding animal question. She concludes that the real question that is revealed from this discussion is whether humans deserve any moral preference over artificial life in the first place.
Read more →
Interactive activation and competition networks

Interactive activation and competition (IAC) networks are artificial neural networks used to model memory and intuitive generalizations. They are made up of nodes or artificial neurons which are arrayed and activated in ways that emulate the behaviors of human memory. The IAC model is used by the parallel distributed processing (PDP) Group and is associated with James L. McClelland and David E. Rumelhart; it is described in detail in their book Explorations in Parallel Distributed Processing: A Handbook of Models, Programs, and Exercises. This model does not contradict any currently known biological data or theories, and its performance is close enough to human performance as to warrant further investigation.
Read more →
LipNet

LipNet is a deep neural network for audio-visual speech recognition (ASVR). It was created by University of Oxford researchers Yannis Assael, Brendan Shillingford, Shimon Whiteson, and Nando de Freitas. The researchers stated that could match mouth movements to text with 93 percent accuracy, though it was criticized for its test using a limited dataset of words and grammar. It was used in Nvidia's autonomous "backseat driver" prototype Co-Pilot.
Read more →
MegaHAL

MegaHAL is a computer conversation simulator, or "chatterbot", created by Jason Hutchens. == Background == In 1996, Jason Hutchens entered the Loebner Prize Contest with HeX, a chatterbot based on ELIZA. HeX won the competition that year and took the $2000 prize for having the highest overall score. In 1998, Hutchens again entered the Loebner Prize Contest with his new program, MegaHAL. MegaHAL made its debut in the 1998 Loebner Prize Contest. Like many chatterbots, the intent is for MegaHAL to appear as a human fluent in a natural language. As a user types sentences into MegaHAL, MegaHAL will respond with sentences that are sometimes coherent and at other times complete gibberish. MegaHAL learns as the conversation progresses, remembering new words and sentence structures. It will even learn new ways to substitute words or phrases for other words or phrases. Many would consider conversation simulators like MegaHAL to be a primitive form of artificial intelligence. However, MegaHAL doesn't understand the conversation or even the sentence structure. It generates its conversation based on sequential and mathematical relationships. In the world of conversation simulators, MegaHAL is based on relatively old technology and could be considered primitive. However, its popularity has grown due to its humorous nature; it has been known to respond with twisted or nonsensical statements that are often amusing. == Theory of Operation == MegaHal is based at least in part on a so-called "hidden Markov Model", so that the first thing that Megahal does when it "trains" on a script or text is to build a database of text fragments encompassing every possible subset of perhaps 4, 5, or even 6 consecutive words, so that for example - if MegaHal trains on the Declaration of Independence, then MegaHal will build a database containing text fragments such as "When in the course", "in the course of", "the course of human", "course of human events", "of human events, one", "human events, one people", and so on. Then if Megahal is fed another text, such has "Superman, Yes! It's Superman - he can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel with his bare hands - and who disguised at Clark Kent …" IT MIGHT induce Megahal to apparently bemuse itself to proffer whether Superman can change the course of human events, or something else altogether - such as some rambling about "when in the course of mighty rivers", and so on. Thus likewise - if a phrase like "the White house said" comes up a lot in some text; then Megahal's ability to switch randomly between different contexts which otherwise share some similarity can result at times in some surprising lucidity, or else it might otherwise seem quite bizarre. == Examples == There are some sentences that MegaHAL generated: CHESS IS A FUN SPORT, WHEN PLAYED WITH SHOT GUNS. and COWS FLY LIKE CLOUDS BUT THEY ARE NEVER COMPLETELY SUCCESSFUL. == Distribution == MegaHAL is distributed under the Unlicense. Its source code can be downloaded from the Github repository.
Read more →
WYSIWYM (interaction technique)

What you see is what you meant (WYSIWYM) is a text editing interaction technique that emerged from two projects at University of Brighton. It allows users to create abstract knowledge representations such as those required by the Semantic Web using a natural language interface. Natural language understanding (NLU) technology is not employed. Instead, natural language generation (NLG) is used in a highly interactive manner. The text editor accepts repeated refinement of a selected span of text as it becomes progressively less vacuous of authored semantics. Using a mouse, a text property held in the evolving text can be further refined by a set of options derived by NLG from a built-in ontology. An invisible representation of the semantic knowledge is created which can be used for multilingual document generation, formal knowledge formation, or any other task that requires formally specified information. The two projects at Brighton worked in the field of Conceptual Authoring to lay a foundation for further research and development of a Semantic Web Authoring Tool (SWAT). This tool has been further explored as a means for developing a knowledge base by those without prior experience with Controlled Natural Language tools.
Read more →
Alexey Chervonenkis

Alexey Yakovlevich Chervonenkis (Russian: Алексей Яковлевич Червоненкис; 7 September 1938 – 22 September 2014) was a Soviet and Russian mathematician. Along with Vladimir Vapnik, he was one of the main developers of the Vapnik–Chervonenkis theory, also known as the "fundamental theory of learning", an important part of computational learning theory. Chervonenkis held joint appointments with the Russian Academy of Sciences and Royal Holloway, University of London. Alexey Chervonenkis got lost in Losiny Ostrov National Park on 22 September 2014, and later during a search operation was found dead near Mytishchi, a suburb of Moscow. He had died of hypothermia.
Read more →
Fooocus

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

Macromedia FreeHand (formerly Aldus FreeHand) is a discontinued computer application for creating two-dimensional vector graphics oriented primarily to professional illustration, desktop publishing and content creation for the Web. FreeHand was similar in scope, intended market, and functionality to Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW and Xara Designer Pro. Because of FreeHand's dedicated page layout and text control features, it also compares to Adobe InDesign and QuarkXPress. Professions using FreeHand include graphic design, illustration, cartography, fashion and textile design, product design, architects, scientific research, and multimedia production. FreeHand was created by Altsys Corporation in 1988 and licensed to Aldus Corporation, which released versions 1 through 4. In 1994, Aldus merged with Adobe Systems and because of the overlapping market with Adobe Illustrator, FreeHand was returned to Altsys by order of the Federal Trade Commission. Altsys was later bought by Macromedia, which released FreeHand versions 5 through 11 (FreeHand MX). In 2005, Adobe Systems acquired Macromedia and its product line which included FreeHand MX, under whose ownership it presently resides. Since 2003, FreeHand development has been discontinued; in the Adobe Systems catalog, FreeHand has been replaced by Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand MX continues to run under Windows 11 and under Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) within Rosetta, a PowerPC code emulator, and requires a registration patch supplied by Adobe. FreeHand 10 runs without problems on Mac OS X Snow Leopard with Rosetta enabled, and does not require a registration patch. Later versions of macOS can use a Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server virtual machine to emulate the required PowerPC support. == History == === Altsys and Aldus FreeHand === In 1984, James R. Von Ehr founded Altsys Corporation to develop graphics applications for personal computers. Based in Plano, Texas, the company initially produced font editing and conversion software; Fontastic Plus, Metamorphosis, and the Art Importer. Their premier PostScript font-design package, Fontographer, was released in 1986 and was the first such program on the market. With the PostScript background having been established by Fontographer, Altsys also developed FreeHand (originally called Masterpiece) as a Macintosh Postscript-based illustration program that used Bézier curves for drawing and was similar to Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand was announced as "... a Macintosh graphics program described as having all the features of Adobe's Illustrator plus drawing tools such as those in Mac Paint and Mac Draft and special effects similar to those in Cricket Draw." Seattle's Aldus Corporation acquired a licensing agreement with Altsys Corporation to release FreeHand along with their flagship product, Pagemaker, and Aldus FreeHand 1.0 was released in 1988. FreeHand's product name used intercaps; the F and H were capitalized. The partnership between the two companies continued with Altsys developing FreeHand and with Aldus controlling marketing and sales. After 1988, a competitive exchange between Aldus FreeHand and Adobe Illustrator ensued on the Macintosh platform with each software advancing new tools, achieving better speed, and matching significant features. Windows PC development also allowed Illustrator 2 (aka, Illustrator 88 on the Mac) and FreeHand 3 to release Windows versions to the graphics market. FreeHand 1.0 sold for $495 in 1988. It included the standard drawing tools and features as other draw programs including special effects in fills and screens, text manipulation tools, and full support for CMYK color printing. It was also possible to create and insert PostScript routines anywhere within the program. FreeHand performed in preview mode instead of keyline mode but performance was slower. FreeHand 2.0 sold for $495 in 1989. Besides improving on the features of FreeHand 1.0, FreeHand 2 added faster operation, Pantone colors, stroked text, flexible fill patterns and automatically import graphic assets from other programs. It added accurate control over a color monitor screen display, limited only by its resolution. FreeHand 3.0 sold for $595 in 1991. New features included resizable color, style, and layer panels including an Attributes menu. Also tighter precision of both the existing tools and aligning of objects. FH3 created compound Paths. Text could be converted to paths, applied to an ellipse, or made vertical. Carried over from version 1.0, FreeHand 3 suffered by having text entered into a dialog box instead of directly to the page. In October 1991, a 3.1 upgrade made FreeHand work with System 7 but additionally, it supported pressure-sensitive drawing which offered varying line widths with a users stroke. It improved element manipulation and added more import/export options. FreeHand 4.0 sold for $595 in 1994. Altsys ported FreeHand 3.0 to the NeXT system creating a new program named Virtuoso. Virtuoso continued its development at Altsys and version 2.0 of Virtuoso was feature-equivalent to FreeHand 4 (with the addition of NeXT-specific features such as Services and Display PostScript) and file compatible, with Virtuoso 2 able to open FreeHand 4 files and vice versa. A prominent feature of this version was the ability to type directly into the page and wrap inside or outside any shape. It also included drag-and-drop color imaging, a larger pasteboard, and a user interface that featured floating, rollup panels. The colors palette included a color mixer for adding new colors to the swatch list. Speed increases were made. In the same year of FreeHand 4 release, Adobe Systems announced merger plans with Aldus Corporation for $525 million. Fear about the end of competition between these two leading applications was reported in the media and expressed by customers (Illustrator versus FreeHand and Adobe Photoshop versus Aldus PhotoStyler.) Because of this overlapping of the market, Altsys stepped in by suing Aldus, saying that the merger deal was "a prima facie violation of a non-compete clause within the FreeHand licensing agreement." Altsys CEO Jim Von Ehr explained, "No one loves FreeHand more than we do. We will do whatever it takes to see it survive." The Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against Adobe Systems on October 18, 1994, ordering a divestiture of FreeHand to "remedy the lessening of competition resulting from the acquisition as alleged in the Commission's complaint," and further, the FTC ordering, "That for a period of ten (10) years from the date on which this order becomes final, respondents shall not, without the prior approval of the Commission, directly or indirectly, through subsidiaries, partnerships, or otherwise .. Acquire any Professional Illustration Software or acquire or enter into any exclusive license to Professional Illustration Software;" (referring to FreeHand.) FreeHand was returned to Altsys with all licensing and marketing rights as well as Aldus FreeHand's customer list. === Macromedia Freehand === By late 1994, Altsys still retained all rights to FreeHand. Despite brief plans to keep it in-house to sell it along with Fontographer and Virtuoso, Altsys reached an agreement with the multimedia software company, Macromedia, to be acquired. This mutual agreement provided FreeHand and Fontographer a new home with ample resources for marketing, sales, and competition against the newly merged Adobe-Aldus company. Altsys would remain in Richardson, Texas, but would be renamed as the Digital Arts Group of Macromedia and was responsible for the continued development of FreeHand. Macromedia received FreeHand's 200,000 customers and expanded its traditional product line of multimedia graphics software to illustration and design graphics software. CEO James Von Ehr became a Macromedia vice-president until 1997 when he left to start another venture. FreeHand 5.0 sold for $595 in 1995. This version featured a more customizable and expanded workspace, multiple views, stronger design and editing tools, a report generator, spell check, paragraph styles, multicolor gradient fills up to 64 colors, speed improvements, and it accepted Illustrator plugins. In September 1995, a 5.5 upgrade added Photoshop plug-in support, PDF import capabilities, the Extract feature, inline graphics to text, improved auto-expanding text containers, the Crop feature, and the Create PICT Image feature. A FreeHand 5.5 upgrade was part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (a suite that included Fontographer, Macromedia xRes image editing application, and Extreme 3D animation and modeling application). FreeHand 6.0 in 1996. This version only existed in beta. Some Freehand 7 prerelease versions were released under the Freehand 6 tag. FreeHand 7.0 sold for $399 in 1996, or $449 as part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (see above.) Features included a redesigned user interface that allowed recombining Inspectors, Panel Tabs, Dockable Panels, Smart Cursors,
Read more →
GOFAI

In the philosophy of artificial intelligence, GOFAI (good old-fashioned artificial intelligence) is classical symbolic AI, as opposed to other approaches, such as neural networks, situated robotics, narrow symbolic AI or neuro-symbolic AI. The term was coined by philosopher John Haugeland in his 1985 book Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea. Haugeland coined the term to address two questions: Can GOFAI produce human-level artificial intelligence in a machine? Is GOFAI the primary method that brains use to display intelligence? AI founder Herbert A. Simon speculated in 1963 that the answers to both these questions was "yes". His evidence was the performance of programs he had co-written, such as Logic Theorist and the General Problem Solver, and his psychological research on human problem solving. AI research in the 1950s and 60s had an enormous influence on intellectual history: it inspired the cognitive revolution, led to the founding of the academic field of cognitive science, and was the essential example in the philosophical theories of computationalism, functionalism and cognitivism in ethics and the psychological theories of cognitivism and cognitive psychology. The specific aspect of AI research that led to this revolution was what Haugeland called "GOFAI". In AI development and technology, GOFAI is used to refer to programs that are built with deliberate, explicit instructions for a single task. This is in contrast to approaches that use machine learning. Examples of GOFAI applications include AlphaGo and Apple's initial Siri design. == Western rationalism == Haugeland places GOFAI within the rationalist tradition in western philosophy, which holds that abstract reason is the "highest" faculty, that it is what separates man from the animals, and that it is the most essential part of our intelligence. This assumption is present in Plato and Aristotle, in Shakespeare, Hobbes, Hume and Locke, it was central to the Enlightenment, to the logical positivists of the 1930s, and to the computationalists and cognitivists of the 1960s. As Shakespeare wrote: What a piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty ... In apprehension how like a god, The beauty of the world, The paragon of animals. Symbolic AI in the 1960s was able to successfully simulate the process of high-level reasoning, including logical deduction, algebra, geometry, spatial reasoning and means-ends analysis, all of them in precise English sentences, just like the ones humans used when they reasoned. Many observers, including philosophers, psychologists and the AI researchers themselves became convinced that they had captured the essential features of intelligence. This was not just hubris or speculation -- this was entailed by rationalism. If it was not true, then it brings into question a large part of the entire Western philosophical tradition. Continental philosophy, which included Nietzsche, Husserl, Heidegger and others, rejected rationalism and argued that our high-level reasoning was limited and prone to error, and that most of our abilities come from our intuitions, culture, and instinctive feel for the situation. Philosophers who were familiar with this tradition were the first to criticize GOFAI and the assertion that it was sufficient for intelligence, such as Hubert Dreyfus and Haugeland. == Haugeland's GOFAI == Critics and supporters of Haugeland's position, from philosophy, psychology, or AI research have found it difficult to define "GOFAI" precisely, and thus the literature contains a variety of interpretations. Drew McDermott, for example, finds Haugeland's description of GOFAI "incoherent" and argues that GOFAI is a "myth". Haugeland coined the term GOFAI in order to examine the philosophical implications of “the claims essential to all GOFAI theories”, which he listed as: 1. our ability to deal with things intelligently is due to our capacity to think about them reasonably (including sub-conscious thinking); and 2. our capacity to think about things reasonably amounts to a faculty for internal “automatic” symbol manipulation This is very similar to the sufficient side of the physical symbol systems hypothesis proposed by Herbert A. Simon and Allen Newell in 1963: "A physical symbol system has the necessary and sufficient means for general intelligent action." It is also similar to Hubert Dreyfus' "psychological assumption": "The mind can be viewed as a device operating on bits of information according to formal rules. " Haugeland's description of GOFAI refers to symbol manipulation governed by a set of instructions for manipulating the symbols. The "symbols" he refers to are discrete physical things that are assigned a definite semantics -- like and . They do not refer to signals, or unidentified numbers, or matrixes of unidentified numbers, or the zeros and ones of digital machinery. Thus, Haugeland's GOFAI does not include "good old fashioned" techniques such as cybernetics, perceptrons, dynamic programming or control theory or modern techniques such as neural networks or support vector machines. These questions ask if GOFAI is sufficient for general intelligence -- they ask if there is nothing else required to create fully intelligent machines. Thus GOFAI, for Haugeland, does not include systems that combine symbolic AI with other techniques, such as neuro-symbolic AI, and also does not include narrow symbolic AI systems that are designed only to solve a specific problem and are not expected to exhibit general intelligence. == Replies == === Replies from AI scientists === Russell and Norvig wrote, in reference to Dreyfus and Haugeland:The technology they criticized came to be called Good Old-Fashioned AI (GOFAI). GOFAI corresponds to the simplest logical agent design ... and we saw ... that it is indeed difficult to capture every contingency of appropriate behavior in a set of necessary and sufficient logical rules; we called that the qualification problem. Later symbolic AI work after the 1980's incorporated more robust approaches to open-ended domains such as probabilistic reasoning, non-monotonic reasoning, and machine learning. Currently, most AI researchers believe deep learning, and more likely, a synthesis of neural and symbolic approaches (neuro-symbolic AI), will be required for general intelligence.
Read more →
Imageability

Imageability is a measure of how easily a physical object, word or environment will evoke a clear mental image in the mind of any person observing it. It is used in architecture and city planning, in psycholinguistics, and in automated computer vision research. In automated image recognition, training models to connect images with concepts that have low imageability can lead to biased and harmful results. == History and components == Kevin A. Lynch first introduced the term, "imageability" in his 1960 book, The Image of the City. In the book, Lynch argues cities contain a key set of physical elements that people use to understand the environment, orient themselves inside of it, and assign it meaning. Lynch argues the five key elements that impact the imageability of a city are Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks. Paths: channels in which people travel. Examples: streets, sidewalks, trails, canals, railroads. Edges: objects that form boundaries around space. Examples: walls, buildings, shoreline, curbstone, streets, and overpasses. Districts: medium to large areas people can enter into and out of that have a common set of identifiable characteristics. Nodes: large areas people can enter, that serve as the foci of the city, neighborhood, district, etc. Landmarks: memorable points of reference people cannot enter into. Examples: signs, mountains and public art. In 1914, half a century before The Image of the City was published, Paul Stern discussed a concept similar to imageability in the context of art. Stern, in Susan Langer's Reflections on Art, names the attribute that describes how vividly and intensely an artistic object could be experienced apparency. == In computer vision == Automated image recognition was developed by using machine learning to find patterns in large, annotated datasets of photographs, like ImageNet. Images in ImageNet are labelled using concepts in WordNet. Concepts that are easily expressed verbally, like "early", are seen as less "imageable" than nouns referring to physical objects like "leaf". Training AI models to associate concepts with low imageability with specific images can lead to problematic bias in image recognition algorithms. This has particularly been critiqued as it relates to the "person" category of WordNet and therefore also ImageNet. Trevor Pagan and Kate Crawford demonstrated in their essay "Excavating AI" and their art project ImageNet Roulette how this leads to photos of ordinary people being labelled by AI systems as "terrorists" or "sex offenders". Images in datasets are often labelled as having a certain level of imageability. As described by Kaiyu Yang, Fei-Fei Li and co-authors, this is often done following criteria from Allan Paivio and collaborators' 1968 psycholinguistic study of nouns. Yang el.al. write that dataset annotators tasked with labelling imageability "see a list of words and rate each word on a 1-7 scale from 'low imagery' to 'high imagery'. To avoid biased or harmful image recognition and image generation, Yang et.al. recommend not training vision recognition models on concepts with low imageability, especially when the concepts are offensive (such as sexual or racial slurs) or sensitive (their examples for this category include "orphan", "separatist", "Anglo-Saxon" and "crossover voter"). Even "safe" concepts with low imageability, like "great-niece" or "vegetarian" can lead to misleading results and should be avoided.
Read more →
Global call for AI red lines

The global call for AI red lines is a declaration made on 22 September 2025 calling on governments to define and internationally prohibit unacceptable AI uses and behaviors. The online declaration was announced by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa at the 80th United Nations General Assembly high-level week. The declaration was initially signed by 200 prominent politicians and scientists, including 10 Nobel Prize winners. The call does not specify which red lines to set, but suggests several, such as banning bioweapon design, mass surveillance or AI impersonation. == The declaration == The declaration was published online as an open letter on 22 September 2025. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa announced it in her opening speech at the 80th United Nations General Assembly high-level week in New York, urging governments to "define what AI should never be allowed to do" and "establish clear international boundaries to prevent universally unacceptable risks for A.I." The initiative was organized by three nonprofit organisations: the French Center for AI Safety (CeSIA), The Future Society, and the Center for Human-Compatible Artificial Intelligence (CHAI). The letter argues that humanity faces risks such as engineered pandemics, widespread disinformation, large-scale manipulation, unemployment and loss of control. Proponents argue that national laws are insufficient to address these risks and that "an international agreement on clear and verifiable red lines is necessary". They urge governments to reach an agreement by the end of 2026, and called for robust enforcement mechanisms and the creation of an independent organisation to implement it. The letter does not call for specific red lines, but suggests the possibility of banning lethal autonomous weapons, autonomous replication of AI systems and the use of AI in nuclear warfare. Other examples of possible red lines include social scoring, mass surveillance, bioweapon design, AI-generated child sexual abuse material and AI impersonation. A red line could prohibit either AI behaviors (what AI systems should be guaranteed to never do even if asked to) or AI uses. == Signatories == When published, the online declaration was signed by more than 200 prominent politicians and scientists, including 10 Nobel Prize winners. Signers include former president of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos and researchers Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio. It also includes popular authors like Stephen Fry and Yuval Noah Harari. The letter received support from European lawmakers, including former Italian prime minister Enrico Letta, and former president of Ireland Mary Robinson. == Development of red lines == As of 2025, there is no global red line on AI. Some regional red lines exist, such as with the uses deemed "unacceptable" by the AI Act in Europe, and with the US-China agreement not to leave to AI the decision of whether to launch nuclear weapons. At the United Nations Security Council, days after the declaration, Michael Kratsios, Donald Trump's director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said "We totally reject all efforts by international bodies to assert centralized control and global governance of AI." The topic of AI red lines gained prominence in 2026 with the dispute between Anthropic and the Department of Defense (DoD), which resulted from the DoD requesting Anthropic to remove contractual red lines on fully autonomous weapons and mass domestic surveillance. The event led employees from Google and OpenAI as well as Senate Democrats to further call for red lines on military use of AI. Senator Adam Schiff proposed a bill to "codify" Anthropic's red lines.
Read more →
Lenna

Lenna (or Lena) is a standard test image used in the field of digital image processing, starting in 1973. It is a picture of the Swedish model Lena Forsén, shot by photographer Dwight Hooker and cropped from the centerfold of the November 1972 issue of Playboy magazine. Lenna has attracted controversy because of its subject matter. Starting in the mid-2010s, many journals have deemed it inappropriate and discouraged its use, while others have banned it from publication outright. Forsén herself has called for it to be retired, saying "It's time I retired from tech." The spelling "Lenna" came from the model's desire to encourage the proper pronunciation of her name. "I didn't want to be called Leena [English: ]," she explained. == History == Before Lenna, the first use of a Playboy magazine image to illustrate image processing algorithms was in 1961. Lawrence G. Roberts used two cropped six-bit grayscale facsimile scanned images from Playboy's July 1960 issue featuring Playmate Teddi Smith, in his master's thesis on image dithering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lenna was originally intended for high resolution color image processing study. Its history was described in the May 2001 newsletter of the IEEE Professional Communication Society, in an article by Jamie Hutchinson: Alexander Sawchuk estimates that it was in June or July of 1973 when he, then an assistant professor of electrical engineering at the University of Southern California Signal and Image Processing Institute (SIPI), along with a graduate student and the SIPI lab manager, was hurriedly searching the lab for a good image to scan for a colleague's conference paper. They got tired of their stock of usual test images, dull stuff dating back to television standards work in the early 1960s. They wanted something glossy to ensure good output dynamic range, and they wanted a human face. Just then, somebody happened to walk in with a recent issue of Playboy. The engineers tore away the top third of the centerfold so they could wrap it around the drum of their Muirhead wirephoto scanner, which they had outfitted with analog-to-digital converters (one each for the red, green, and blue channels) and a Hewlett Packard 2100 minicomputer. The Muirhead had a fixed resolution of 100 lines per inch and the engineers wanted a 512×512 image, so they limited the scan to the top 5.12 inches of the picture, effectively cropping it at the subject's shoulders. The image's reach was limited in the 1970s and 80s, which is reflected in it initially only appearing in .org domains, but in July 1991, the image featured on the cover of Optical Engineering alongside Peppers, another popular test image. This drew the attention of Playboy to the potential copyright infringement. The peak of image hits on the internet was in 1995. The scan became one of the most used images in computer history. The use of the photo in electronic imaging has been described as "clearly one of the most important events in [its] history". The image spread to over 100 different domains, particularly .com and .edu. In a 1999 issue of IEEE Transactions on Image Processing "Lena" was used in three separate articles, and the picture continued to appear in scientific journals throughout the beginning of the 21st century. Lenna is so widely accepted in the image processing community that Forsén was a guest at the 50th annual Conference of the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T) in 1997. In 2015, Lena Forsén was also guest of honor at the banquet of IEEE ICIP 2015. After delivering a speech, she chaired the best paper award ceremony. To explain why the image became a standard in the field, David C. Munson, editor-in-chief of IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, stated that it was a good test image because of its detail, flat regions, shading, and texture. He also noted that "the Lena image is a picture of an attractive woman. It is not surprising that the (mostly male) image processing research community gravitated toward an image that they found attractive." While Playboy often cracks down on illegal uses of its material and did initially send a notice to the publisher of Optical Engineering about its unauthorized use in that publication, over time it has decided to overlook the wide use of Lena. Eileen Kent, VP of new media at Playboy, said, "We decided we should exploit this, because it is a phenomenon." == Criticism == The use of the image has produced controversy because Playboy is "seen (by some) as being degrading to women". In a 1999 essay on reasons for the male predominance in computer science, applied mathematician Dianne P. O'Leary wrote: Suggestive pictures used in lectures on image processing ... convey the message that the lecturer caters to the males only. For example, it is amazing that the "Lena" pin-up image is still used as an example in courses and published as a test image in journals today. A 2012 paper on compressed sensing used a photo of the model Fabio Lanzoni as a test image to draw attention to this issue. The use of the test image at the magnet school Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Fairfax County, Virginia, provoked a guest editorial by a senior in The Washington Post in 2015 about its detrimental impact on aspiring female students in computer science. In 2017, the Journal of Modern Optics published an editorial titled "On alternatives to Lenna" suggesting three images (Pirate, Cameraman, and Peppers) that "are reasonably close to Lenna in feature space". In 2018, the Nature Nanotechnology journal announced that they would no longer consider articles using Lenna. In the same year SPIE, the publishers of Optical Engineering, also announced that they "strongly discourage" the use of Lenna, and would no longer consider new submissions containing the image "without convincing scientific justification for its use". They noted that aside from the copyright and ethical issues, that it was also no longer useful as a standard image: "In today's age of high-resolution digital image technology, it seems difficult to argue that a 512 × 512 image produced with a 1970s-era analog scanner is the best we have to offer as an image quality test standard". Forsén stated in the 2019 documentary film Losing Lena, "I retired from modeling a long time ago. It's time I retired from tech, too... Let's commit to losing me." The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) announced that, starting April 1, 2024, it will no longer allow use of Lenna in its publications.
Read more →
Simulation decomposition

SimDec, or Simulation decomposition, is a hybrid uncertainty and sensitivity analysis method, for visually examining the relationships between the output and input variables of a computational model. SimDec maps multivariable scenarios onto the distribution of the model output. This visual analytics approach exposes the underlying nature of the model behavior, including its nonlinear and multivariate interaction effects. SimDec can be used in any range of science, engineering, and social domains. Existing applications include business and environmental issues. == Method == SimDec operates on Monte Carlo simulation (or measured) data where both output and input values are recorded. At least one thousand observations (or simulated iterations) are typically recommended to preserve the readability of the resulting histograms. An outline of the decomposition algorithm, which is readily available in multiple programming languages, proceeds as follows: Select the input variables for decomposition. One can use sensitivity indices (see variance-based sensitivity analysis) to define the most influential variables for decomposition or choose them manually according to the decision-problem context (for example, only those input variables that the decision-maker can act upon). Two to three input variables, ordered by decreasing value of their sensitivity indices, usually provide the most meaningful decomposition results. Divide the inputs into states. The numeric ranges of the inputs are split into several intervals with an equal number of observations in each. For categorical variables, the categories represent states. Form scenarios. All combinations of states of the selected input variables produce unique scenarios or subsets of the data. For example, if the range of X2 is divided into low, medium and high, and X3 takes values of 1 or 2, six scenarios are formed: (i) X2 low & X3 = 1, (ii) X2 low & X3 = 2, (iii) X2 medium & X3 = 1, (iv) X2 medium & X3 = 2, (v) X2 high & X3 = 1, and (vi) X2 high & X3 = 2. Assign scenarios to each output value. The simulation data is used to define the scenario index for each simulation run. For example, if an X2 value falls into the low state and X3 is equal to 2, the corresponding scenario, defined in Step 3, is (ii). Color-code the output distribution. When all output values are assigned scenario indices, they are plotted as series in a stacked histogram, visually separated by color-coding. For ease of visual perception, the states of the most influential input variable are assigned distinct colors, and all the remaining partitions take shades of those colors (see Figure). All of these steps can be run automatically on the given data using the open-source SimDec packages currently available in Python, R, Julia, and Matlab. A SimDec template in Excel runs a Monte Carlo simulation of a spreadsheet model but possesses only a manual option for input selection. == How to read SimDec == === Histogram === Histogram is an approximate representation of the distribution of numerical data. Its horizontal axis shows the range of the variable of interest, and its vertical axis denotes count, also called frequency, or, if divided by the total number of data points, probability. The distribution alone can supply only limited information about the data – its minimum, maximum, and shape (where the most of data occurs). === Judging the importance of inputs === If an input variable has no effect on the output, its states (e.g., low & high) would lie on top of each other on the SimDec histogram, occupying fully overlapping ranges of the output. If an input variable has a strong effect and explains most of the variance of the output, the border between its states on the SimDec histogram would be vertical. Such visualization has an important decision-making implication – e.g., if the high state of X can be achieved, it would guarantee a certain range of Y. All cases in-between with low-to-strong effects would show a diagonal border between the states. The less they overlap, the larger the effect of X on Y. While the horizontal displacement of sub-distributions on the SimDec histogram is the key to interpreting the results, the vertical disposition of sub-distributions is just a technical matter of the order of plotting the series of the stacked histogram. === Exploring the interaction of inputs === When two or more input variables are used for decomposition, it becomes possible to examine their joint effects. A schematic visualization portrays how different types of joint effects of input variables on the output appear on SimDec visualization. Understanding the nature of interaction effects in a computational model and its behavior in general is crucial for effective decision-making. == Limitations == The SimDec method has several limitations: It is based on Monte Carlo simulation and thus requires running a computational model a thousand of times or more. To models that take hours to evaluate once, it would be impossible to use SimDec (unless a supercomputer and/or large of time are available). SimDec is based on a histogram, thus, for binary or categorical output variables, the visualization would be very limited (e.g., only a few bins). The more input variables one selects for the decomposition, the less readable the histogram becomes. Only cases with two and three input variables are presented in.
Read more →
Stochastic Neural Analog Reinforcement Calculator

The Stochastic Neural Analog Reinforcement Calculator (SNARC) is a neural network machine designed by Marvin Minsky. Prompted by a letter from Minsky, George Armitage Miller gathered the funding (a few thousand dollars) for the project from the Office of Naval Research of the U.S. Department of Defense in the summer of 1951 with the work to be carried out by Minsky, who was then a graduate student in mathematics at Princeton University. At the time, a physics graduate student at Princeton, Dean S. Edmonds, volunteered that he was good with electronics and therefore Minsky brought him onto the project. During undergraduate years, Minsky was inspired by the 1943 Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts paper on artificial neurons, and decided to build such a machine. The learning was Skinnerian reinforcement learning, and Minsky talked with Skinner extensively during the development of the machine. They tested the machine on a copy of Shannon's maze, and found that it could learn to solve the maze. Unlike Shannon's maze, this machine did not control a physical robot, but simulated rats running in a maze. The simulation is displayed as an "arrangement of lights", and the circuit was reinforced each time the simulated rat reached the goal. The machine surprised its creators. "The rats actually interacted with one another. If one of them found a good path, the others would tend to follow it." The machine itself is a randomly connected network of approximately 40 Hebb synapses. These synapses each have a memory that holds the probability that signal comes in one input and another signal will come out of the output. There is a probability knob that goes from 0 to 1 that shows this probability of the signals propagating. If the probability signal gets through, a capacitor remembers this function and engages an electromagnetic clutch. At this point, the operator will press a button to give a reward to the machine. This activates a motor on a surplus Minneapolis-Honeywell C-1 gyroscopic autopilot from a B-24 bomber. The motor turns a chain that goes to all 40 synapse machines, checking if the clutch is engaged or not. As the capacitor can only "remember" for a certain amount of time, the chain only catches the most recent updates of the probabilities. Each neuron contained 6 vacuum tubes and a motor. The entire machine is "the size of a grand piano" and contained 300 vacuum tubes. The tubes failed regularly, but the machine would still work despite failures. This machine is considered one of the first pioneering attempts at the field of artificial intelligence. Minsky went on to be a founding member of MIT's Project MAC, which split to become the MIT Laboratory for Computer Science and the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab, and is now the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In 1985 Minsky became a founding member of the MIT Media Laboratory. According to Minsky, he loaned the machine to students in Dartmouth, and subsequently lost, except for a single neuron. A photo of Minsky's last neuron can be seen here. The photo shows 6 vacuum tubes, one of which is a Sylvania JAN-CHS-6H6GT/G/VT-90A.
Read more →