AI Art Best

AI Art Best — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  New York Institute of Technology Computer Graphics Lab

  The New York Institute of Technology Computer Graphics Lab is a computer lab located at the New York Institute of Technology (NYIT), founded by Alexander Schure. It was originally located at the "pink building" on the NYIT campus. It has played an important role in the history of computer graphics and animation, as founders of Pixar and Lucasfilm Limited, including Turing Award winners Edwin Catmull and Patrick Hanrahan, began their research there. It is the birthplace of entirely 3D CGI films. The lab was initially founded to produce a short high-quality feature film with the project name of The Works. The feature, which was never completed, was a 90-minute feature that was to be the first entirely computer-generated CGI movie. Production mainly focused around DEC PDP and VAX machines. Many of the original CGL team now form the elite of the CG and computer world with members going on to Silicon Graphics, Microsoft, Cisco, NVIDIA and others, including Pixar president, co-founder and Turing laureate Ed Catmull, Pixar co-founder and Microsoft graphics fellow Alvy Ray Smith, Pixar co-founder Ralph Guggenheim, Walt Disney Animation Studios chief scientist Lance Williams, Netscape and Silicon Graphics founder Jim Clark, Tableau co-founder and Turing laureate Pat Hanrahan, Microsoft graphics fellow Jim Blinn, Thad Beier, Oscar and Bafta nominee Jacques Stroweis, Andrew Glassner, and Tom Brigham. Systems programmer Bruce Perens went on to co-found the Open Source Initiative. Researchers at the New York Institute of Technology Computer Graphics Lab created the tools that made entirely 3D CGI films possible. Among NYIT CG Lab's many innovations was an eight-bit paint system to ease computer animation. NYIT CG Lab was regarded as the top computer animation research and development group in the world during the late 70s and early 80s. == The 21st century == The lab is presently located at NYIT's Long Island campus, and NYIT currently offers a Ph.D. program in Computer Science.

  Read more →
• 

  Proof of authority

  Proof of authority (PoA) is a category of consensus protocols used with blockchains based on reputation and identity as a stake that delivers comparatively fast and efficient transactions (compared to proof-of-work and proof-of-stake). The most notable platforms using PoA are VeChain, Bitgert, Palm Network and Xodex. == Description == Proof-of-authority is a category of consensus protocols for networks and blockchains where transactions and blocks are built and validated by approved entities known as validators. Their permissions are often granted through a centralized authority, but they can also be granted through a council or decentralized organization. The term "proof-of-authority" was coined by Gavin Wood, co-founder of Ethereum and Parity Technologies. With PoA, validators are incentivized to maintain good behavior and honesty when validating blocks to avoid developing a negative reputation. PoA can have higher security than PoW and even PoS due to validators wanting to avoid damaging their reputation. Because PoA is permissioned, it is not fully trustless. Validators without good reputation may risk having their validator permissions removed. PoA is generally more efficient than PoW and PoS because it operates with fewer nodes and validators, thus requiring fewer duplicated resources.

  Read more →
• 

  CENDI

  CENDI (Commerce, Energy, NASA, Defense Information Managers Group) is an interagency group of senior Scientific and Technical Information (STI) managers from 14 United States federal agencies. CENDI managers cooperate by exchanging information and ideas, collaborating to address common issues, and undertaking joint initiatives. CENDI's accomplishments range from impacting federal information policy to educating a broad spectrum of stakeholders on all aspects of federal STI systems, including its value to research and the taxpayer, and to operational improvements in agency and interagency STI operations. == History == CENDI traces its roots to the Committee on Scientific and Technical Information (COSATI) of the Federal Council on Science and Technology. COSATI was established in the early 1960s to coordinate the management of the results from the U.S. government's increasing commitment to scientific research and technology development. The scientific and technical information (STI) managers of the government's major research and development (R&D) agencies worked within COSATI to standardize guidelines for cataloging and indexing technical reports. COSATI ceased formal operations in the early 1970s. To continue the cooperation begun under COSATI, managers of agency STI programs from Commerce (National Technical Information Service), Energy (Office of Scientific and Technical Information), NASA (HQ/STI Division), and Defense (Defense Technical Information Center) began meeting periodically to discuss common topics and stimulate more effective cooperation. In 1985, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed by the four charter agencies and CENDI was established. From this small core of STI managers, CENDI has grown to its current membership, which represents the major science agencies, the national libraries, and agencies involved in the dissemination and long-term management of scientific and technical information. The vision of CENDI is to facilitate cooperative enterprise where capabilities are shared and challenges are faced together so that the sum of the accomplishments is greater than each individual agency can achieve on its own amongst federal STI agencies. The abbreviation CENDI refers to the "Commerce, Energy, NASA, Defense Information Managers Group". == Membership == New members from other federal R&D information organizations may be admitted by unanimous agreement of the members. However, it is the intent of the group that membership in CENDI should remain small and focus on organizations with STI or supporting responsibilities. Each agency provides funding to CENDI. == Members == The members of CENDI are: Defense Technical Information Center (United States Department of Defense) Office of Research and Development and Office of Environmental Information (United States Environmental Protection Agency) Government Printing Office Library of Congress NASA Scientific and Technical Information Program National Agricultural Library (United States Department of Agriculture) National Archives and Records Administration National Library of Education (United States Department of Education) National Library of Medicine (United States Department of Health and Human Services) National Science Foundation National Technical Information Service (United States Department of Commerce) National Transportation Library (United States Department of Transportation) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (United States Department of Energy) USGS/Biological Resources Discipline (United States Department of the Interior) == Mission and operation == CENDI's mission is to help improve the productivity of federal science- and technology-based programs through effective scientific, technical, and related information support systems. In fulfilling its mission, CENDI agencies play an important role in addressing science- and technology-based national priorities and strengthening U.S. competitiveness. === Goals === STI Coordination and Leadership: Provide coordination and leadership for information exchange on important STI policy issues. Improvement of STI Systems: Promote the development of improved STI systems through the productive interrelationship of content and technology. STI Understanding: Promote better understanding of STI and STI management. === Principals and Alternates === CENDI is made up of senior federal STI managers and each organization appoints a Principal representative. This person is the point of contact for that organization within CENDI. Each Principal has an Alternate. The Principals and Alternates comprise the main group that meets on a regular basis, usually every other month. === Secretariat === A Tennessee-based information management company, -- Information International Associates, Inc., currently serves as the CENDI Secretariat. The Secretariat provides day-to-day operations to CENDI. The Secretariat prepares the necessary materials for the Principals' meetings, provides support for the working group and task group meetings, assists in developing papers, and maintains the CENDI files and outreach tools. === Task Groups and Working Groups === The chair(s) of a working group is appointed by the Principals and has the overall responsibility for the group's activities. The Secretariat provides support at the request of the Working Group chair(s). The Working Groups and Task Groups that are currently operating are: Copyright and Intellectual Property Working Group Distribution Markings Task Group Digital Preservation Task Group Digitization Specifications Task Group Image Metadata Task Group Science.gov (see below) STI Policy Working Group Terminology Resources Task Group === Science.gov and Worldwidescience.org === In 2001, in response to the April 2001 workshop on "Strengthening the Public Information Infrastructure for Science", and taking into consideration a request from Firstgov (now USA.gov) to develop specialized topical portals, CENDI formed an alliance to develop an interagency website for access to STI. This website, called Science.gov, is a one-stop source of STI, including both selected, authoritative government websites and deep Web databases of technical reports, journal articles, conference proceedings, and other published materials. Through the volunteer efforts of members and involving over 100 staff, content and architecture is developed for the site. The Science.gov website is hosted by the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI). The site was formally launched in December 2002. As a result of the success of Science.gov, under DOE leadership and in cooperation with the International Council of Scientific and Technical Information, a worldwide coordination across national portals called WorldWideScience was launched in 2008. === Work with non-member organizations === CENDI works with several cooperating non-member organizations on a regular basis. These agencies are in academia, federal government, legal and policy analysis, international, non-governmental, and private organizations.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithm engineering

  Algorithm engineering focuses on the design, analysis, implementation, optimization, profiling and experimental evaluation of computer algorithms, bridging the gap between algorithmics theory and practical applications of algorithms in software engineering. It is a general methodology for algorithmic research. == Origins == In 1995, a report from an NSF-sponsored workshop "with the purpose of assessing the current goals and directions of the Theory of Computing (TOC) community" identified the slow speed of adoption of theoretical insights by practitioners as an important issue and suggested measures to reduce the uncertainty by practitioners whether a certain theoretical breakthrough will translate into practical gains in their field of work, and tackle the lack of ready-to-use algorithm libraries, which provide stable, bug-free and well-tested implementations for algorithmic problems and expose an easy-to-use interface for library consumers. But also, promising algorithmic approaches have been neglected due to difficulties in mathematical analysis. The term "algorithm engineering" was first used with specificity in 1997, with the first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE97), organized by Giuseppe F. Italiano. == Difference from algorithm theory == Algorithm engineering does not intend to replace or compete with algorithm theory, but tries to enrich, refine and reinforce its formal approaches with experimental algorithmics (also called empirical algorithmics). This way it can provide new insights into the efficiency and performance of algorithms in cases where the algorithm at hand is less amenable to algorithm theoretic analysis, formal analysis pessimistically suggests bounds which are unlikely to appear on inputs of practical interest, the algorithm relies on the intricacies of modern hardware architectures like data locality, branch prediction, instruction stalls, instruction latencies which the machine model used in Algorithm Theory is unable to capture in the required detail, the crossover between competing algorithms with different constant costs and asymptotic behaviors needs to be determined. == Methodology == Some researchers describe algorithm engineering's methodology as a cycle consisting of algorithm design, analysis, implementation and experimental evaluation, joined by further aspects like machine models or realistic inputs. They argue that equating algorithm engineering with experimental algorithmics is too limited, because viewing design and analysis, implementation and experimentation as separate activities ignores the crucial feedback loop between those elements of algorithm engineering. === Realistic models and real inputs === While specific applications are outside the methodology of algorithm engineering, they play an important role in shaping realistic models of the problem and the underlying machine, and supply real inputs and other design parameters for experiments. === Design === Compared to algorithm theory, which usually focuses on the asymptotic behavior of algorithms, algorithm engineers need to keep further requirements in mind: Simplicity of the algorithm, implementability in programming languages on real hardware, and allowing code reuse. Additionally, constant factors of algorithms have such a considerable impact on real-world inputs that sometimes an algorithm with worse asymptotic behavior performs better in practice due to lower constant factors. === Analysis === Some problems can be solved with heuristics and randomized algorithms in a simpler and more efficient fashion than with deterministic algorithms. Unfortunately, this makes even simple randomized algorithms difficult to analyze because there are subtle dependencies to be taken into account. === Implementation === Huge semantic gaps between theoretical insights, formulated algorithms, programming languages and hardware pose a challenge to efficient implementations of even simple algorithms, because small implementation details can have rippling effects on execution behavior. The only reliable way to compare several implementations of an algorithm is to spend an considerable amount of time on tuning and profiling, running those algorithms on multiple architectures, and looking at the generated machine code. === Experiments === See: Experimental algorithmics === Application engineering === Implementations of algorithms used for experiments differ in significant ways from code usable in applications. While the former prioritizes fast prototyping, performance and instrumentation for measurements during experiments, the latter requires thorough testing, maintainability, simplicity, and tuning for particular classes of inputs. === Algorithm libraries === Stable, well-tested algorithm libraries like LEDA play an important role in technology transfer by speeding up the adoption of new algorithms in applications. Such libraries reduce the required investment and risk for practitioners, because it removes the burden of understanding and implementing the results of academic research. == Conferences == Two main conferences on Algorithm Engineering are organized annually, namely: Symposium on Experimental Algorithms (SEA), established in 1997 (formerly known as WEA). SIAM Meeting on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX), established in 1999. The 1997 Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'97) was held in Venice (Italy) on September 11–13, 1997. The Third International Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'99) was held in London, UK in July 1999. The first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experimentation (ALENEX99) was held in Baltimore, Maryland on January 15–16, 1999. It was sponsored by DIMACS, the Center for Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science (at Rutgers University), with additional support from SIGACT, the ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory, and SIAM, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.

  Read more →
• 

  Sayre's paradox

  Sayre's paradox is a dilemma encountered in the design of automated handwriting recognition systems. A standard statement of the paradox is that a cursively written word cannot be recognized without being segmented and cannot be segmented without being recognized. The paradox was first articulated in a 1973 publication by Kenneth M. Sayre, after whom it was named. == Nature of the problem == It is relatively easy to design automated systems capable of recognizing words inscribed in a printed format. Such words are segmented into letters by the very act of writing them on the page. Given templates matching typical letter shapes in a given language, individual letters can be identified with a high degree of probability. In cases of ambiguity, probable letter sequences can be compared with a selection of properly spelled words in that language (called a lexicon). If necessary, syntactic features of the language can be applied to render a generally accurate identification of the words in question. Printed-character recognition systems of this sort are commonly used in processing standardized government forms, in sorting mail by zip code, and so forth. In cursive writing, however, letters comprising a given word typically flow sequentially without gaps between them. Unlike a sequence of printed letters, cursively connected letters are not segmented in advance. Here is where Sayre's Paradox comes into play. Unless the word is already segmented into letters, template-matching techniques like those described above cannot be applied. That is, segmentation is a prerequisite for word recognition. But there are no reliable techniques for segmenting a word into letters unless the word itself has been identified. Word recognition requires letter segmentation, and letter segmentation requires word recognition. There is no way a cursive writing recognition system employing standard template-matching techniques can do both simultaneously. Advantages to be gained by use of automated cursive writing recognition systems include routing mail with handwritten addresses, reading handwritten bank checks, and automated digitalization of hand-written documents. These are practical incentives for finding ways of circumventing Sayre's Paradox. == Avoiding the paradox == One way of ameliorating the adverse effects of the paradox is to normalize the word inscriptions to be recognized. Normalization amounts to eliminating idiosyncrasies in the penmanship of the writer, such as unusual slope of the letters and unusual slant of the cursive line. This procedure can increase the probability of a correct match with a letter template, resulting in an incremental improvement in the success rate of the system. Since improvement of this sort still depends on accurate segmentation, however, it remains subject to the limitations of Sayre's Paradox. Researchers have come to realize that the only way to circumvent the paradox is by use of procedures that do not rely on accurate segmentation. == Directions of current research == Segmentation is accurate to the extent that it matches distinctions among letters in the actual inscriptions presented to the system for recognition (the input data). This is sometimes referred to as “explicit segmentation”. “Implicit segmentation,” by contrast, is division of the cursive line into more parts than the number of actual letters in the cursive line itself. Processing these “implicit parts” to achieve eventual word identification requires specific statistical procedures involving hidden Markov models (HMM). A Markov model is a statistical representation of a random process, which is to say a process in which future states are independent of states occurring before the present. In such a process, a given state is dependent only on the conditional probability of its following the state immediately before it. An example is a series of outcomes from successive casts of a die. An HMM is a Markov model, individual states of which are not fully known. Conditional probabilities between states are still determinate, but the identities of individual states are not fully disclosed. Recognition proceeds by matching HMMs of words to be recognized with previously prepared HMMs of words in the lexicon. The best match in a given case is taken to indicate the identity of the handwritten word in question. As with systems based on explicit segmentation, automated recognition systems based on implicit segmentation are judged more or less successful according to the percentage of correct identifications they accomplish. Instead of explicit segmentation techniques, most automated handwriting recognition systems today employ implicit segmentation in conjunction with HMM-based matching procedures. The constraints epitomized by Sayre's Paradox are largely responsible for this shift in approach.

  Read more →
• 

  Emotion recognition

  Emotion recognition is the process of identifying human emotion. People vary widely in their accuracy at recognizing the emotions of others. Use of technology to help people with emotion recognition is a relatively nascent research area. Generally, the technology works best if it uses multiple modalities in context. To date, the most work has been conducted on automating the recognition of facial expressions from video, spoken expressions from audio, written expressions from text, and physiology as measured by wearables. == Human == Humans show a great deal of variability in their abilities to recognize emotion. A key point to keep in mind when learning about automated emotion recognition is that there are several sources of "ground truth", or truth about what the real emotion is. Suppose we are trying to recognize the emotions of Alex. One source is "what would most people say that Alex is feeling?" In this case, the 'truth' may not correspond to what Alex feels, but may correspond to what most people would say it looks like Alex feels. For example, Alex may actually feel sad, but he puts on a big smile and then most people say he looks happy. If an automated method achieves the same results as a group of observers it may be considered accurate, even if it does not actually measure what Alex truly feels. Another source of 'truth' is to ask Alex what he truly feels. This works if Alex has a good sense of his internal state, and wants to tell you what it is, and is capable of putting it accurately into words or a number. However, some people are alexithymic and do not have a good sense of their internal feelings, or they are not able to communicate them accurately with words and numbers. In general, getting to the truth of what emotion is actually present can take some work, can vary depending on the criteria that are selected, and will usually involve maintaining some level of uncertainty. == Automatic == Decades of scientific research have been conducted developing and evaluating methods for automated emotion recognition. There is now an extensive literature proposing and evaluating hundreds of different kinds of methods, leveraging techniques from multiple areas, such as signal processing, machine learning, computer vision, and speech processing. Different methodologies and techniques may be employed to interpret emotion such as Bayesian networks. , Gaussian Mixture models and Hidden Markov Models and deep neural networks. === Approaches === The accuracy of emotion recognition is usually improved when it combines the analysis of human expressions from multimodal forms such as texts, physiology, audio, or video. Different emotion types are detected through the integration of information from facial expressions, body movement and gestures, and speech. The technology is said to contribute in the emergence of the so-called emotional or emotive Internet. The existing approaches in emotion recognition to classify certain emotion types can be generally classified into three main categories: knowledge-based techniques, statistical methods, and hybrid approaches. ==== Knowledge-based techniques ==== Knowledge-based techniques (sometimes referred to as lexicon-based techniques), utilize domain knowledge and the semantic and syntactic characteristics of text and potentially spoken language in order to detect certain emotion types. In this approach, it is common to use knowledge-based resources during the emotion classification process such as WordNet, SenticNet, ConceptNet, and EmotiNet, to name a few. One of the advantages of this approach is the accessibility and economy brought about by the large availability of such knowledge-based resources. A limitation of this technique on the other hand, is its inability to handle concept nuances and complex linguistic rules. Knowledge-based techniques can be mainly classified into two categories: dictionary-based and corpus-based approaches. Dictionary-based approaches find opinion or emotion seed words in a dictionary and search for their synonyms and antonyms to expand the initial list of opinions or emotions. Corpus-based approaches on the other hand, start with a seed list of opinion or emotion words, and expand the database by finding other words with context-specific characteristics in a large corpus. While corpus-based approaches take into account context, their performance still vary in different domains since a word in one domain can have a different orientation in another domain. ==== Statistical methods ==== Statistical methods commonly involve the use of different supervised machine learning algorithms in which a large set of annotated data is fed into the algorithms for the system to learn and predict the appropriate emotion types. Machine learning algorithms generally provide more reasonable classification accuracy compared to other approaches, but one of the challenges in achieving good results in the classification process, is the need to have a sufficiently large training set. Some of the most commonly used machine learning algorithms include Support Vector Machines (SVM), Naive Bayes, and Maximum Entropy. Deep learning, which is under the unsupervised family of machine learning, is also widely employed in emotion recognition. Well-known deep learning algorithms include different architectures of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) such as Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Long Short-term Memory (LSTM), and Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). The popularity of deep learning approaches in the domain of emotion recognition may be mainly attributed to its success in related applications such as in computer vision, speech recognition, and Natural Language Processing (NLP). ==== Hybrid approaches ==== Hybrid approaches in emotion recognition are essentially a combination of knowledge-based techniques and statistical methods, which exploit complementary characteristics from both techniques. Some of the works that have applied an ensemble of knowledge-driven linguistic elements and statistical methods include sentic computing and iFeel, both of which have adopted the concept-level knowledge-based resource SenticNet. The role of such knowledge-based resources in the implementation of hybrid approaches is highly important in the emotion classification process. Since hybrid techniques gain from the benefits offered by both knowledge-based and statistical approaches, they tend to have better classification performance as opposed to employing knowledge-based or statistical methods independently. A downside of using hybrid techniques however, is the computational complexity during the classification process. === Datasets === Data is an integral part of the existing approaches in emotion recognition and in most cases it is a challenge to obtain annotated data that is necessary to train machine learning algorithms. For the task of classifying different emotion types from multimodal sources in the form of texts, audio, videos or physiological signals, the following datasets are available: HUMAINE: provides natural clips with emotion words and context labels in multiple modalities Belfast database: provides clips with a wide range of emotions from TV programs and interview recordings SEMAINE: provides audiovisual recordings between a person and a virtual agent and contains emotion annotations such as angry, happy, fear, disgust, sadness, contempt, and amusement IEMOCAP: provides recordings of dyadic sessions between actors and contains emotion annotations such as happiness, anger, sadness, frustration, and neutral state eNTERFACE: provides audiovisual recordings of subjects from seven nationalities and contains emotion annotations such as happiness, anger, sadness, surprise, disgust, and fear DEAP: provides electroencephalography (EEG), electrocardiography (ECG), and face video recordings, as well as emotion annotations in terms of valence, arousal, and dominance of people watching film clips DREAMER: provides electroencephalography (EEG) and electrocardiography (ECG) recordings, as well as emotion annotations in terms of valence, dominance of people watching film clips MELD: is a multiparty conversational dataset where each utterance is labeled with emotion and sentiment. MELD provides conversations in video format and hence suitable for multimodal emotion recognition and sentiment analysis. MELD is useful for multimodal sentiment analysis and emotion recognition, dialogue systems and emotion recognition in conversations. MuSe: provides audiovisual recordings of natural interactions between a person and an object. It has discrete and continuous emotion annotations in terms of valence, arousal and trustworthiness as well as speech topics useful for multimodal sentiment analysis and emotion recognition. UIT-VSMEC: is a standard Vietnamese Social Media Emotion Corpus (UIT-VSMEC) with about 6,927 human-annotated sentences with six emotion labels, contributing to emotion recognition research in Vietnamese

  Read more →
• 

  Social information architecture

  Social information architecture, also known as social iA, is a sub-domain of information architecture which deals with the social aspects of conceptualizing, modeling and organizing information. It has become more relevant because of the rise of social media and Web 2.0 in recent times. == Approach == There are different approaches to the explanation of social information architecture. === Architecture model (internal space) === Architects designing a physical community space, have to consider how the architecture will shape social interactions. A long hallway of offices creates an utterly different dynamic than desks with arranged in an open space. One might foster individuality, privacy, propriety; the other: collaboration, distraction, communalism. Still, physical spaces can be flexibly repurposed and worked around if the inhabitants desire a social dynamic not instantly afforded by the space. Office doors can be left open to invite easier interaction. Partitions can be raised between adjacent desks to limit distraction and increase privacy. That's physical architecture. The information architectures of online communities are far more deterministic and far less flexible. They literally define the social architecture by pre-specifying in immutable computer code what information you have access to, who you can talk to, where you can go. In the online world, information architecture = social architecture. === Social dialogue and information model (external space) === All major brands use information architecture to market their products online, it is then commonly wrapped under the umbrella phrase 'digital strategy'. Information architecture used for strategic purposes encompasses brand SEO, strategic placement of virals, social media presence etc. Charities, news outlets and social dialogue forums can make a much more specific use of the same tools for positive and important social purposes. Social Information Architecture is perceived as the socially conscious wing of commercial information architecture and function to exchange information and ideas between people and groups. Social iA can pick up on conflicting issues that are treated with misunderstanding between cultures and leaves individuals and societies vulnerable to exploitation and manipulation. Since the net has such a far reach it is obvious to use it for meaningful and coordinated social dialogue. Example of such issues are faith, environment, politics, climate change, war, injustice and other social challenges. Information architecture can help create frameworks in which sharing information brings people together, inspires and encourages them to participate in a forward thinking and unfragmented way. One of its core activities is to spread messages that bring people from opposite sites of social and cultural spectrums together and to confront uncomfortable subject head on. == How does social information architecture work? == Social iA utilizes a variety of Web2.0 applications to filter relevant or valuable information and weave them in appropriate information repository or provide feedback to interesting channels. Social iA makes strategic use of Search Engines, Social Media, Google Algorithms, as well as websites, video & news channels. It ‘reads’ or 'listens' to social conversations and search engine queries and engages with the net actively to gather clues about the world's pulse on the internet. It assesses data, social & political trends, and respond with targeted campaigns to give people ideas, as well as help people with making sense of information. == Principals == Dan Brown in his paper 8 Principals of Social Information Architecture enlists the following principals: 1. The principle of objects: Treat content as a living, breathing thing, with a lifecycle, behaviors and attributes. 2. The principle of choices: Create pages that offer meaningful choices to users, keeping the range of choices available focused on a particular task. 3. The principle of disclosure: Show only enough information to help people understand what kinds of information they'll find as they dig deeper. 4. The principle of exemplars: Describe the contents of categories by showing examples of the contents. 5. The principle of front doors: Assume at least half of the website's visitors will come through some page other than the home page. 6. The principle of multiple classification: Offer users several different classification schemes to browse the site's content. 7. The principle of focused navigation: Don't mix apples and oranges in your navigation scheme. 8. The principle of growth: Assume the content you have today is a small fraction of the content you will have tomorrow. == What can social information architecture achieve? == Social information architecture has many potentials in terms of fostering social connections and how information is shared in social spaces on the web.

  Read more →
• 

  Environmental informatics

  Environmental informatics is the science of information applied to environmental science. As such, it provides the information processing and communication infrastructure to the interdisciplinary field of environmental sciences aiming at data, information and knowledge integration, the application of computational intelligence to environmental data as well as the identification of environmental impacts of information technology. Environmental informatics thus acts as a bridge, providing an interdisciplinary means of analysing, describing and understanding the complex interactions between humans, nature and technology. Since each field of applied computer science has its own subject matter, terminology and methods, specialised disciplines, such as environmental, bio- and geoinformatics have emerged, each of which combines computer science with a specific field of application such as environmental, bio- or geosciences. Environmental informatics, bioinformatics and geoinformatics all deal with computer-based processing of environmental phenomena. However, environmental informatics is the only field that pursues normative goals (e.g., political goals of environmental protection, environmental planning, and sustainability). This also influences the choice of methods. This also distinguishes it from application areas such as numerical weather prediction, which is considered an early and important example of computer simulation of environmental phenomena. The UK Natural Environment Research Council defines environmental informatics as the "research and system development focusing on the environmental sciences relating to the creation, collection, storage, processing, modelling, interpretation, display and dissemination of data and information." Kostas Karatzas defined environmental informatics as the "creation of a new 'knowledge-paradigm' towards serving environmental management needs." Karatzas argued further that environmental informatics "is an integrator of science, methods and techniques and not just the result of using information and software technology methods and tools for serving environmental engineering needs." Environmental informatics emerged in early 1990 in Central Europe. Current initiatives to effectively manage, share, and reuse environmental and ecological data are indicative of the increasing importance of fields like environmental informatics and ecoinformatics to develop the foundations for effectively managing ecological information. Examples of these initiatives are National Science Foundation Datanet projects, DataONE and Data Conservancy. == Subject matter and objectives == The subject of environmental informatics are environmental information systems (EIS). An EIS 'is a computer-based system that integrates and stores data collected about the natural environment and provides powerful methods for accessing and evaluating it.' This allows environmental data to be processed by computers for environmental protection, planning, research and technology. According to Jaeschke and Bossel, environmental informatics has three interrelated objectives: Environmental informatics serves to procure data and information for describing the state and development of the environment. Of particular importance is information that is needed to prevent or limit undesirable changes and to support desirable changes. Based on the evaluation and analysis of data, environmental informatics improves our understanding of the environment and the interactions between nature, technology and society. It thus supports environmentally relevant decisions. This enables the influence of development (system correction), the assessment of the effects and side effects of potential measures, and the creation of tools for the routine planning, implementation and monitoring of measures. == History == The simulation model World3, which formed the basis of the highly acclaimed study The Limits to Growth, is considered the starting point of environmental informatics. It incorporated environmental information, among other things, to calculate scenarios for global development. In the mid-1980s, interest grew in structuring environmental protection as an area of application for computer science. One of the first publications in German was the book Informatik im Umweltschutz. Anwendungen und Perspektiven (Computer science in environmental protection. Applications and perspectives) from 1986. The term 'environmental informatics' did not appear until around 1993, which is why the development of environmental informatics is usually referred to as having taken place in the 1990s. In 1993, the first university chair for environmental informatics was established in Cottbus. In 1994, the anthology Umweltinformatik. Informatikmethoden für Umweltschutz und Umweltforschung (Environmental Informatics: Informatics Methods for Environmental Protection and Environmental Research) was published. The development of environmental informatics was 'primarily initiated by German computer science.' In the English-speaking world, the volume Environmental Informatics was published in 1995, mainly based on the German anthology of 1994. An article in the conference proceedings of the World Computer Congress of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in Hamburg in 1994 describes the initial situation of environmental informatics as follows: 'On the one hand, we suffer from the huge amount of available data – people sometimes speak of data graveyards – on the other hand, the really relevant data may still be missing.' This statement indicates the need that led to the emergence of environmental informatics as a specialised discipline of applied computer science. Furthermore, the specific characteristics and processing requirements of environmental data necessitated the emergence of environmental informatics. The special features of environmental data include: The data structures required are highly heterogeneous due to specific processes and differing perspectives on environmental aspects (e.g., water protection, emission control, hazardous substances). In addition to the heterogeneity of the data, heterogeneous databases also play a role, as environmental data is often obtained and presented in an interdisciplinary manner. Obligations change frequently as a result of new legislation, whether regional (e.g. state regulations on water protection), national (e.g. federal emission control regulations) or international (e.g. Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals|REACH). The objects represented are often multidimensional and, therefore, require complex geometric representation using curves or polygons. It is often necessary to process uncertain, imprecise or incomplete data, which is, for example, the result of extrapolations or forecasts. A new "knowledge paradigm" has emerged to meet the requirements of environmental management. Environmental informatics produces its own concepts, methods and techniques and is not merely the result of using information and communication technology methods and tools to meet environmental requirements. The development of environmental informatics since the 1990s has been significantly influenced by the newly established conferences EnviroInfo, ISESS and ITEE and is documented in the respective proceedings. Aspects of sustainability and sustainable development were increasingly integrated into environmental informatics after 2000, thereby expanding the field. In 2004, the Working Group on Sustainable Information Society of the Gesellschaft für Informatik e. V. (German Informatics Society, GI) published the Memorandum on a Sustainable Information Society, which formulates recommendations for an information society that is compatible with human, social and natural needs. Since 2007, environmental informatics has often been described in more detail as informatics for environmental protection, sustainable development and risk management. The increased focus on sustainability has also contributed to the formation of the research focus Information and Communications Technology for Sustainability (ICT4S) and to the emergence of the international conference ICT4S in 2013. ICT-ENSURE, the European Commission's funding measure for the establishment of a European research area on "ICT for Environmental Sustainability Research" (2008–2010), has also contributed to the structuring of environmental informatics. == Environmental informatics and sustainable development == Efforts to place environmental informatics within the context of sustainable development have been growing since 2000 and were significantly influenced by the Memorandum on a Sustainable Information Society. According to this Memorandum, the information society offers great but unevenly distributed opportunities for education, participation and intercultural understanding. In addition, the Memorandum highlighted the material and energy consumption of inf

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithm selection

  Algorithm selection (sometimes also called per-instance algorithm selection or offline algorithm selection) is a meta-algorithmic technique to choose an algorithm from a portfolio on an instance-by-instance basis. It is motivated by the observation that on many practical problems, different algorithms have different performance characteristics. That is, while one algorithm performs well in some scenarios, it performs poorly in others and vice versa for another algorithm. If we can identify when to use which algorithm, we can optimize for each scenario and improve overall performance. This is what algorithm selection aims to do. The only prerequisite for applying algorithm selection techniques is that there exists (or that there can be constructed) a set of complementary algorithms. == Definition == Given a portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} , a set of instances i ∈ I {\displaystyle i\in {\mathcal {I}}} and a cost metric m : P × I → R {\displaystyle m:{\mathcal {P}}\times {\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } , the algorithm selection problem consists of finding a mapping s : I → P {\displaystyle s:{\mathcal {I}}\to {\mathcal {P}}} from instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} to algorithms P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} such that the cost ∑ i ∈ I m ( s ( i ) , i ) {\displaystyle \sum _{i\in {\mathcal {I}}}m(s(i),i)} across all instances is optimized. == Examples == === Boolean satisfiability problem (and other hard combinatorial problems) === A well-known application of algorithm selection is the Boolean satisfiability problem. Here, the portfolio of algorithms is a set of (complementary) SAT solvers, the instances are Boolean formulas, the cost metric is for example average runtime or number of unsolved instances. So, the goal is to select a well-performing SAT solver for each individual instance. In the same way, algorithm selection can be applied to many other N P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {NP}}} -hard problems (such as mixed integer programming, CSP, AI planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and answer set programming). Competition-winning systems in SAT are SATzilla, 3S and CSHC === Machine learning === In machine learning, algorithm selection is better known as meta-learning. The portfolio of algorithms consists of machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, SVM, DNN), the instances are data sets and the cost metric is for example the error rate. So, the goal is to predict which machine learning algorithm will have a small error on each data set. == Instance features == The algorithm selection problem is mainly solved with machine learning techniques. By representing the problem instances by numerical features f {\displaystyle f} , algorithm selection can be seen as a multi-class classification problem by learning a mapping f i ↦ A {\displaystyle f_{i}\mapsto {\mathcal {A}}} for a given instance i {\displaystyle i} . Instance features are numerical representations of instances. For example, we can count the number of variables, clauses, average clause length for Boolean formulas, or number of samples, features, class balance for ML data sets to get an impression about their characteristics. === Static vs. probing features === We distinguish between two kinds of features: Static features are in most cases some counts and statistics (e.g., clauses-to-variables ratio in SAT). These features ranges from very cheap features (e.g. number of variables) to very complex features (e.g., statistics about variable-clause graphs). Probing features (sometimes also called landmarking features) are computed by running some analysis of algorithm behavior on an instance (e.g., accuracy of a cheap decision tree algorithm on an ML data set, or running for a short time a stochastic local search solver on a Boolean formula). These feature often cost more than simple static features. === Feature costs === Depending on the used performance metric m {\displaystyle m} , feature computation can be associated with costs. For example, if we use running time as performance metric, we include the time to compute our instance features into the performance of an algorithm selection system. SAT solving is a concrete example, where such feature costs cannot be neglected, since instance features for CNF formulas can be either very cheap (e.g., to get the number of variables can be done in constant time for CNFs in the DIMACs format) or very expensive (e.g., graph features which can cost tens or hundreds of seconds). It is important to take the overhead of feature computation into account in practice in such scenarios; otherwise a misleading impression of the performance of the algorithm selection approach is created. For example, if the decision which algorithm to choose can be made with perfect accuracy, but the features are the running time of the portfolio algorithms, there is no benefit to the portfolio approach. This would not be obvious if feature costs were omitted. == Approaches == === Regression approach === One of the first successful algorithm selection approaches predicted the performance of each algorithm m ^ A : I → R {\displaystyle {\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}:{\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } and selected the algorithm with the best predicted performance a r g min A ∈ P m ^ A ( i ) {\displaystyle arg\min _{{\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}}{\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}(i)} for an instance i {\displaystyle i} . === Clustering approach === A common assumption is that the given set of instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} can be clustered into homogeneous subsets and for each of these subsets, there is one well-performing algorithm for all instances in there. So, the training consists of identifying the homogeneous clusters via an unsupervised clustering approach and associating an algorithm with each cluster. A new instance is assigned to a cluster and the associated algorithm selected. A more modern approach is cost-sensitive hierarchical clustering using supervised learning to identify the homogeneous instance subsets. === Pairwise cost-sensitive classification approach === A common approach for multi-class classification is to learn pairwise models between every pair of classes (here algorithms) and choose the class that was predicted most often by the pairwise models. We can weight the instances of the pairwise prediction problem by the performance difference between the two algorithms. This is motivated by the fact that we care most about getting predictions with large differences correct, but the penalty for an incorrect prediction is small if there is almost no performance difference. Therefore, each instance i {\displaystyle i} for training a classification model A 1 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{1}} vs A 2 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{2}} is associated with a cost | m ( A 1 , i ) − m ( A 2 , i ) | {\displaystyle |m({\mathcal {A}}_{1},i)-m({\mathcal {A}}_{2},i)|} . == Requirements == The algorithm selection problem can be effectively applied under the following assumptions: The portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms is complementary with respect to the instance set I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} , i.e., there is no single algorithm A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} that dominates the performance of all other algorithms over I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} (see figures to the right for examples on complementary analysis). In some application, the computation of instance features is associated with a cost. For example, if the cost metric is running time, we have also to consider the time to compute the instance features. In such cases, the cost to compute features should not be larger than the performance gain through algorithm selection. == Application domains == Algorithm selection is not limited to single domains but can be applied to any kind of algorithm if the above requirements are satisfied. Application domains include: hard combinatorial problems: SAT, Mixed Integer Programming, CSP, AI Planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and Answer Set Programming combinatorial auctions in machine learning, the problem is known as meta-learning software design black-box optimization multi-agent systems numerical optimization linear algebra, differential equations evolutionary algorithms vehicle routing problem power systems For an extensive list of literature about algorithm selection, we refer to a literature overview. == Variants of algorithm selection == === Online selection === Online algorithm selection refers to switching between different algorithms during the solving process. This is useful as a hyper-heuristic. In contrast, offline algorithm selection selects an algorithm for a given instance only once and before the solving process. === Computation of schedules === An extension of algorithm selection is the per-instance algorithm scheduling problem, in which we do not select only one solver, but we select a time budget for each algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  Research data archiving

  Research data archiving is the long-term storage of scholarly research data, including the natural sciences, social sciences, and life sciences. The various academic journals have differing policies regarding how much of their data and methods researchers are required to store in a public archive, and what is actually archived varies widely between different disciplines. Similarly, the major grant-giving institutions have varying attitudes towards public archiving of data. In general, the tradition of science has been for publications to contain sufficient information to allow fellow researchers to replicate and therefore test the research. In recent years this approach has become increasingly strained as research in some areas depends on large datasets which cannot easily be replicated independently. Data archiving is more important in some fields than others. In a few fields, all of the data necessary to replicate the work is already available in the journal article. In drug development, a great deal of data is generated and must be archived so researchers can verify that the reports the drug companies publish accurately reflect the data. Often used interchangeably, Data preservation and data archiving are both about protecting data for the long term, but they serve different purposes. Data preservation focuses on preventing data from being lost, damaged, or destroyed by creating backups, storing data in secure locations, and ensuring it remains accessible when needed. Data archiving, on the other hand, involves moving data that is no longer actively used to a separate storage location for long-term keeping. Archived data is often combined and compressed, and while it can still be accessed, it is not intended for regular use or frequent updates. The requirement of data archiving is a recent development in the history of science. It was made possible by advances in information technology allowing large amounts of data to be stored and accessed from central locations. For example, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) adopted their first policy on data archiving in 1993, about three years after the beginning of the WWW. This policy mandates that datasets cited in AGU papers must be archived by a recognised data center; it permits the creation of "data papers"; and it establishes AGU's role in maintaining data archives. But it makes no requirements on paper authors to archive their data. Prior to organized data archiving, researchers wanting to evaluate or replicate a paper would have to request data and methods information from the author. The academic community expects authors to share supplemental data. This process was recognized as wasteful of time and energy and obtained mixed results. Information could become lost or corrupted over the years. In some cases, authors simply refuse to provide the information. The need for data archiving and due diligence is greatly increased when the research deals with health issues or public policy formation. == Selected policies by journals == === Biotropica === Biotropica requires, as a condition for publication, that the data supporting the results in the paper and metadata describing them must be archived in an appropriate public archive such as Dryad, Figshare, GenBank, TreeBASE, or NCBI. Authors may elect to make the data publicly available as soon as the article is published or, if the technology of the archive allows, embargo access to the data up to three years after article publication. A statement describing Data Availability will be included in the manuscript as described in the instructions to authors. Exceptions to the required archiving of data may be granted at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief for studies that include sensitive information (e.g., the location of endangered species). Our Editorial explaining the motivation for this policy can be found here. A more comprehensive list of data repositories is available here. Promoting a culture of collaboration with researchers who collect and archive data: The data collected by tropical biologists are often long-term, complex, and expensive to collect. The Board of Editors of Biotropica strongly encourages authors who re-use data archives archived data sets to include as fully engaged collaborators the scientists who originally collected them. We feel this will greatly enhance the quality and impact of the resulting research by drawing on the data collector’s profound insights into the natural history of the study system, reducing the risk of errors in novel analyses, and stimulating the cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural collaboration and training for which the ATBC and Biotropica are widely recognized. NB: Biotropica is one of only two journals that pays the fees for authors depositing data at Dryad. === The American Naturalist === The American Naturalist requires authors to deposit the data associated with accepted papers in a public archive. For gene sequence data and phylogenetic trees, deposition in GenBank or TreeBASE, respectively, is required. There are many possible archives that may suit a particular data set, including the Dryad repository for ecological and evolutionary biology data. All accession numbers for GenBank, TreeBASE, and Dryad must be included in accepted manuscripts before they go to Production. If the data is deposited somewhere else, please provide a link. If the data is culled from published literature, please deposit the collated data in Dryad for the convenience of your readers. Any impediments to data sharing should be brought to the attention of the editors at the time of submission so that appropriate arrangements can be worked out. === Journal of Heredity === The primary data underlying the conclusions of an article are critical to the verifiability and transparency of the scientific enterprise, and should be preserved in usable form for decades in the future. For this reason, Journal of Heredity requires that newly reported nucleotide or amino acid sequences, and structural coordinates, be submitted to appropriate public databases (e.g., GenBank; the EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database; DNA Database of Japan; the Protein Data Bank; and Swiss-Prot). Accession numbers must be included in the final version of the manuscript. For other forms of data (e.g., microsatellite genotypes, linkage maps, images), the Journal endorses the principles of the Joint Data Archiving Policy (JDAP) in encouraging all authors to archive primary datasets in an appropriate public archive, such as Dryad, TreeBASE, or the Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity. Authors are encouraged to make data publicly available at time of publication or, if the technology of the archive allows, opt to embargo access to the data for a period up to a year after publication. The American Genetic Association also recognizes the vast investment of individual researchers in generating and curating large datasets. Consequently, we recommend that this investment be respected in secondary analyses or meta-analyses in a gracious collaborative spirit. === Molecular Ecology === Molecular Ecology expects that data supporting the results in the paper should be archived in an appropriate public archive, such as GenBank, Gene Expression Omnibus, TreeBASE, Dryad, the Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity, your own institutional or funder repository, or as Supporting Information on the Molecular Ecology web site. Data are important products of the scientific enterprise, and they should be preserved and usable for decades in the future. Authors may elect to have the data publicly available at time of publication, or, if the technology of the archive allows, may opt to embargo access to the data for a period up to a year after publication. Exceptions may be granted at the discretion of the editor, especially for sensitive information such as human subject data or the location of endangered species. === Nature === Such material must be hosted on an accredited independent site (URL and accession numbers to be provided by the author), or sent to the Nature journal at submission, either uploaded via the journal's online submission service, or if the files are too large or in an unsuitable format for this purpose, on CD/DVD (five copies). Such material cannot solely be hosted on an author's personal or institutional web site. Nature requires the reviewer to determine if all of the supplementary data and methods have been archived. The policy advises reviewers to consider several questions, including: "Should the authors be asked to provide supplementary methods or data to accompany the paper online? (Such data might include source code for modelling studies, detailed experimental protocols or mathematical derivations.) === Science === Science supports the efforts of databases that aggregate published data for the use of the scientific community. Therefore, before publication, large data sets (including microarray data, protein or DNA sequences, and atomic c

  Read more →
• 

  Best arm identification

  Best arm identification (BAI) is a sequential one-player game where the player has to find the best action (arm) among a list of actions (arms) by collecting information in the most efficient way. It is a multi-armed bandit game as a player only gets information about an arm by playing it. The most common objective in multi-armed bandit games is to minimize the regret (i.e., play the best action as much as possible), but in BAI, the goal is to find the best arm as efficiently as possible. This problem naturally arises in scenarios such as adaptive clinical trials where the number of patients is limited and the quantification of the confidence in a treatment is important. It also arises in hyperparameter optimization where the goal is to find the optimal choice of hyperparameters for an algorithm with the smallest possible number of experiments, as it can be costly in terms of time, energy, or money. == Stochastic multi-armed bandit == The stochastic multi-armed bandit (MAB) is a sequential game with one player and K {\displaystyle K} actions (arms). Each arm has an unknown probability distribution associated with it. At each turn, the player has to choose one action and receive an observation from the probability distribution associated with the arm. The more you play an arm, the more you get information on its probability distribution. === Best arm identification === In BAI the goal is to find the arm that has the probability distribution with the highest mean. BAI may be either fixed confidence or fixed horizon. In a fixed-confidence game, a confidence level δ {\displaystyle \delta } is fixed at the beginning of the game and the goal is to find the best arm with this confidence level in as few turns as possible. In a fixed horizon game, the number of turns T {\displaystyle T} is fixed, and the goal is to find the best arm with the highest possible confidence in T {\displaystyle T} turns. === Math formalisation === We have one player and K {\displaystyle K} actions (arms). Behind each arm k ∈ { 1 , … , K } {\displaystyle k\in \{1,\ldots ,K\}} lies an unknown distribution ν k {\displaystyle \nu _{k}} with mean μ k {\displaystyle \mu _{k}} . Each distribution ν k {\displaystyle \nu _{k}} belongs to a known family D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} (such as the set of Gaussian distributions or Bernoulli distributions). At each time step t {\displaystyle t} , the player selects an arm a t {\displaystyle a_{t}} and observes an independent sample X t ∼ ν a t {\displaystyle X_{t}\sim \nu _{a_{t}}} from the corresponding distribution. We will note μ ∗ := max μ a {\displaystyle \mu ^{}:=\max \mu _{a}} the highest mean. An arm a {\displaystyle a} that satisfies μ a = μ ∗ {\displaystyle \mu _{a}=\mu ^{}} is called an optimal arm; otherwise it is called suboptimal arm. In best arm identification (BAI) the objective is to identify an optimal arm. Two main settings for BAI appear in the literature: Fixed confidence: In this setting, one typically assumes that there exists a unique optimal arm. A confidence level δ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) {\displaystyle \delta \in (0,1)} is specified at the beginning. The algorithm must stop at some finite stopping time τ δ < + ∞ {\displaystyle \tau _{\delta }<+\infty } and return an arm a ^ τ δ {\displaystyle {\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}} such that the probability of error is bounded: P ( a ^ τ δ ≠ a ∗ ) ≤ δ {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}\neq a^{})\leq \delta } . The objective is to minimize the expected sample complexity E [ τ δ ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{\delta }]} . Such a setting appears, for example, when a constraint on the confidence is required (for example, if we require a confidence level of 95%, so δ = 1 − 0.95 = 0.05 {\displaystyle \delta =1-0.95=0.05} ). Fixed horizon: In this setting, the number of samples T {\displaystyle T} is fixed in advance. The goal is to design an algorithm that minimizes the probability of misidentifying the optimal arm: P ( a ^ T ≠ a ∗ ) {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{T}\neq a^{})} . This setting appears when the number of experiments is limited (for drug tests, the number of patients can be fixed in advance). === Example of simple modelling === In the case where we have K {\displaystyle K} treatments and we want to be sure with a confidence level of 95% which treatment is the best to heal a specific disease. Each treatment heals or does not heal the disease with a probability μ k {\displaystyle \mu _{k}} , which means that each distribution is a Bernoulli distribution, so D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} is the set of Bernoulli distributions. We can use a BAI algorithm to minimize E [ τ 0.05 ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{0.05}]} , the number of patients required to find the best treatment with probability 95%. == Applications == Best arm identification naturally arises in several practical domains: Adaptive clinical trials: The objective is to identify the most effective treatment based on sequentially collected patient data. Each treatment can be modeled as having an underlying distribution of outcomes. The goal is to identify the treatment with the highest expected outcome with high confidence (fixed confidence setting δ {\displaystyle \delta } ) while minimizing the number of drug test patients (minimise E [ τ δ ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\tau _{\delta }]} ), as it costs to pay patients for this and we would like to use as little as possible less effective drugs. Hyperparameter tuning: Selecting the best configuration for machine learning models efficiently by treating each hyperparameter setting as an arm. The goal is to find the best hyperparameter with as few experiments possible as experiments are costly in time and in energy == Fixed confidence level == In the fixed-confidence setting, the goal is to design an algorithm that identifies the best arm with a prescribed confidence level δ {\displaystyle \delta } while minimizing the expected number of samples. Any such algorithm requires two key components: Stopping rule: A decision criterion that determines when to stop sampling. Formally, this defines a stopping time τ δ {\displaystyle \tau _{\delta }} and returns an arm a ^ τ δ {\displaystyle {\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}} such that P ( a ^ τ δ ≠ a ⋆ ) ≤ δ {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ({\hat {a}}_{\tau _{\delta }}\neq a^{\star })\leq \delta } and P ( τ δ < + ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} (\tau _{\delta }<+\infty )=1} . Sampling rule: A policy π {\displaystyle \pi } that, at each round t {\displaystyle t} , selects the next arm to sample a t {\displaystyle a_{t}} based on all previous observations ( a s , X s ) s < t {\displaystyle (a_{s},X_{s})_{s Read more →

• 

  Recommender system

  A recommender system, also called a recommendation algorithm, recommendation engine, or recommendation platform, is a type of information filtering system that suggests items most relevant to a particular user. The value of these systems becomes particularly evident in scenarios where users must select from a large number of options, such as products, media, or content. Major social media platforms and streaming services rely on recommender systems that employ machine learning to analyze user behavior and preferences, thereby enabling personalized content feeds. Typically, the suggestions refer to a variety decision-making processes, including the selection of a product, musical selection, or online news source to read. The implementation of recommender systems is pervasive, with commonly recognised examples including the generation of playlist for video and music services, the provision of product recommendations for e-commerce platforms, and the recommendation of content on social media platforms and the open web. These systems can operate using a single type of input, such as music, or multiple inputs from diverse platforms, including news, books and search queries. Additionally, popular recommender systems have been developed for specific topics, such as restaurants and online dating services. Recommender systems have also been developed to explore research articles and experts, collaborators, and financial services. A content discovery platform is a software recommendation platform that employs recommender system tools. It utilizes user metadata in order to identify and suggest relevant content, whilst reducing ongoing maintenance and development costs. A content discovery platform delivers personalized content to websites, mobile devices, and set-top boxes. A large range of content discovery platforms currently exist for various forms of content ranging from news articles and academic journal articles to television. As operators compete to serve as the gateway to home entertainment, personalized television emerges as a key service differentiator. Academic content discovery has recently become another area of interest, the emergence of numerous companies dedicated to assisting academic researchers in keeping up to date with relevant academic content and facilitating serendipitous discovery of new content. == Overview == Recommender systems usually make use of either or both collaborative filtering and content-based filtering, as well as other systems such as knowledge-based systems. Collaborative filtering approaches build a model from a user's past behavior (e.g., items previously purchased or selected and/or numerical ratings given to those items) as well as similar decisions made by other users. This model is then used to predict items (or ratings for items) that the user may have an interest in. Content-based filtering approaches utilize a series of discrete, pre-tagged characteristics of an item in order to recommend additional items with similar properties. === Example === The differences between collaborative and content-based filtering can be demonstrated by comparing two early music recommender systems, Last.fm and Pandora Radio. We can also look at how these methods are applied in e-commerce, for example, on platforms like Amazon. Last.fm creates a "station" of recommended songs by observing what bands and individual tracks the user has listened to on a regular basis and comparing those against the listening behavior of other users. Last.fm will play tracks that do not appear in the user's library, but are often played by other users with similar interests. As this approach leverages the behavior of users, it is an example of a collaborative filtering technique. Pandora uses the properties of a song or artist (a subset of the 450 attributes provided by the Music Genome Project) to seed a "station" that plays music with similar properties. User feedback is used to refine the station's results, deemphasizing certain attributes when a user "dislikes" a particular song and emphasizing other attributes when a user "likes" a song. This is an example of a content-based approach. In e-commerce, Amazon's well-known "customers who bought X also bought Y" feature is a prime example of collaborative filtering. It also uses content-based filtering when it recommends a book by the same author you've previously read or a pair of shoes in a similar style to ones you've viewed. Each type of system has its strengths and weaknesses. In the above example, Last.fm requires a large amount of information about a user to make accurate recommendations. This is an example of the cold start problem, and is common in collaborative filtering systems. Whereas Pandora needs very little information to start, it is far more limited in scope (for example, it can only make recommendations that are similar to the original seed). === Alternative implementations === Recommender systems are a useful alternative to search algorithms since they help users discover items they might not have found otherwise. Of note, recommender systems are often implemented using search engines indexing non-traditional data. In some cases, like in the Gonzalez v. Google Supreme Court case, may argue that search and recommendation algorithms are different technologies. Recommender systems have been the focus of several granted patents, and there are more than 50 software libraries that support the development of recommender systems including LensKit, RecBole, ReChorus and RecPack. == History == Elaine Rich created the first recommender system in 1979, called Grundy. She looked for a way to recommend users books they might like. Her idea was to create a system that asks users specific questions and classifies them into classes of preferences, or "stereotypes", depending on their answers. Depending on users' stereotype membership, they would then get recommendations for books they might like. Another early recommender system, called a "digital bookshelf", was described in a 1990 technical report by Jussi Karlgren at Columbia University, and implemented at scale and worked through in technical reports and publications from 1994 onwards by Jussi Karlgren, then at SICS, and research groups led by Pattie Maes at MIT, Will Hill at Bellcore, and Paul Resnick, also at MIT, whose work with GroupLens was awarded the 2010 ACM Software Systems Award. Montaner provided the first overview of recommender systems from an intelligent agent perspective. Adomavicius provided a new, alternate overview of recommender systems. Herlocker provides an additional overview of evaluation techniques for recommender systems, and Beel et al. discussed the problems of offline evaluations. Beel et al. have also provided literature surveys on available research paper recommender systems and existing challenges. == Approaches == === Collaborative filtering === One approach to the design of recommender systems that has wide use is collaborative filtering. Collaborative filtering is based on the assumption that people who agreed in the past will agree in the future, and that they will like similar kinds of items as they liked in the past. The system generates recommendations using only information about rating profiles for different users or items. By locating peer users/items with a rating history similar to the current user or item, they generate recommendations using this neighborhood. This approach is a cornerstone for e-commerce sites that analyze the purchasing patterns of thousands of users to suggest what you might like. Collaborative filtering methods are classified as memory-based and model-based. A well-known example of memory-based approaches is the user-based algorithm, while that of model-based approaches is matrix factorization (recommender systems). A key advantage of the collaborative filtering approach is that it does not rely on machine analyzable content and therefore it is capable of accurately recommending complex items such as movies without requiring an "understanding" of the item itself. Many algorithms have been used in measuring user similarity or item similarity in recommender systems. For example, the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) approach and the Pearson Correlation as first implemented by Allen. When building a model from a user's behavior, a distinction is often made between explicit and implicit forms of data collection. Examples of explicit data collection include the following: Asking a user to rate an item on a sliding scale. Asking a user to search. Asking a user to rank a collection of items from favorite to least favorite. Presenting two items to a user and asking him/her to choose the better one of them. Asking a user to create a list of items that he/she likes (see Rocchio classification or other similar techniques). Examples of implicit data collection include the following: Observing the items that a user views in an online store, media library, or other repository of med

  Read more →
• 

  The Future of Work and Death

  The Future of Work and Death is a 2016 documentary by Sean Blacknell and Wayne Walsh about the exponential growth of technology. The film showed at several film festivals including Raindance Film Festival, International Film Festival Rotterdam, Academia Film Olomouc and CPH:DOX. In May 2017 it received an official screening at the European Commission. It was distributed by First Run Features and Journeyman Pictures and was released on iTunes, Amazon Prime and On-demand on 9 May 2017. The film was made available on Sundance Now on 27 November 2017. A companion piece to the film, The Cost of Living, a documentary concerning universal basic income in Britain, was released on Amazon Prime on 8 October 2020. == Synopsis == World experts in the fields of futurology, anthropology, neuroscience, and philosophy consider the impact of technological advances on the two 'certainties' of human life; work and death. Charting human developments from Homo habilis, past the Industrial Revolution, to the digital age and beyond, the film looks at the shocking exponential rate at which mankind has managed to create technologies to ease the process of living. As we embark on the next phase of our adaptation, with automation and artificial intelligence signifying the complete move from man to machine, the film asks what the implications are for human fulfilment in an approaching era of job obsolescence and extreme longevity. == Cast == Dudley Sutton – Narrator Aubrey de Grey – Biomedical gerontologist and CSO of the SENS Research Foundation Will Self – Writer, journalist, political commentator and Professor of Contemporary Thought at Brunel University Rudolph E. Tanzi – Professor of Neurology at Harvard University and Director of the Genetics and Aging Research Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Martin Ford – Futurist and author Steve Fuller – Auguste Comte Chair in Social Epistemology at the Department of sociology at University of Warwick Murray Shanahan – Professor of Cognitive Robotics at Imperial College London Gray Scott – Futurist, executive producer of this production Vivek Wadhwa – Entrepreneur, academic and Director of Research at the Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at the Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University Zoltan Istvan – Transhumanist and journalist Joanna Cook – Anthropologist, University College London Nicholas Kamara – Physician, Kable Hospital David Pearce – Transhumanist philosopher and co-founder of Humanity+ Peter Cochrane – Futurist and entrepreneur John Harris – Bioethicist, philosopher and Director of the Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation at the University of Manchester Riva Melissa-Tez – Entrepreneur and transhumanist Ian Pearson – Futurologist Stuart Armstrong – Artificial intelligence researcher at Future of Humanity Institute

  Read more →
• 

  Enterprise bus matrix

  The enterprise bus matrix is a data warehouse planning tool and model created by Ralph Kimball, and is part of the data warehouse bus architecture. The matrix is the logical definition of one of the core concepts of Kimball's approach to dimensional modeling conformed dimension. The bus matrix defines part of the data warehouse bus architecture and is an output of the business requirements phase in the Kimball lifecycle. It is applied in the following phases of dimensional modeling and development of the data warehouse. The matrix can be categorized as a hybrid model, being part technical design tool, part project management tool and part communication tool == Background == The need for an enterprise bus matrix stems from the way one goes about creating the overall data warehouse environment. Historically there have been two approaches: a structured, centralized and planned approach and a more loosely defined, department specific approach, in which solutions are developed in a more independent matter. Autonomous projects can result in a range of isolated stove pipe data marts. Naturally each approach has its issues; the visionary approach often struggles with long delivery cycles and lack of reaction time as needs emerge and scope issues arise. On the other hand, the development of isolated data marts leads to stovepipe systems that lack synergy in development. Over time this approach will lead to a so-called data-mart-in-a-box architecture where interoperability and lack of cohesion is apparent, and can hinder the realization of an overall enterprise data warehouse. As an attempt to handle this issue, Ralph Kimball introduced the enterprise bus. == Description == The bus matrix purpose is one of high abstraction and visionary planning on the data warehouse architectural level. By dictating coherency in the development and implementation of an overall data warehouse the bus architecture approach enables an overall vision of the broader enterprise integration and consistency while at the same time dividing the problem into more manageable parts – all in a technology and software independent manner. The bus matrix and architecture builds upon the concept of conformed dimensions, creating a structure of common dimensions that ideally can be used across the enterprise by all business processes related to the data warehouse and the corresponding fact tables from which they derive their context. According to Kimball and Margy Ross's article “Differences of Opinion” "The Enterprise Data warehouse built on the bus architecture ”identifies and enforces the relationship between business process metrics (facts) and descriptive attributes (dimensions)”. The concept of a bus is well known in the language of information technology, and is what reflects the conformed dimension concept in the data warehouse, creating the skeletal structure where all parts of a system connect, ensuring interoperability and consistency of data, and at the same time considers future expansion. This makes the conformed dimensions act as the integration ‘glue’, creating a robust backbone of the enterprise Data Warehouse.

  Read more →
• 

  SQL/PSM

  SQL/PSM (SQL/Persistent Stored Modules) is an ISO standard mainly defining an extension of SQL with a procedural language for use in stored procedures. Initially published in 1996 as an extension of SQL-92 (ISO/IEC 9075-4:1996, a version sometimes called PSM-96 or even SQL-92/PSM), SQL/PSM was later incorporated into the multi-part SQL:1999 standard, and has been part 4 of that standard since then, most recently in SQL:2023. The SQL:1999 part 4 covered less than the original PSM-96 because the SQL statements for defining, managing, and invoking routines were actually incorporated into part 2 SQL/Foundation, leaving only the procedural language itself as SQL/PSM. The SQL/PSM facilities are still optional as far as the SQL standard is concerned; most of them are grouped in Features P001-P008. SQL/PSM standardizes syntax and semantics for control flow, exception handling (called "condition handling" in SQL/PSM), local variables, assignment of expressions to variables and parameters, and (procedural) use of cursors. It also defines an information schema (metadata) for stored procedures. SQL/PSM is one language in which methods for the SQL:1999 structured types can be defined. The other is Java, via SQL/JRT. SQL/PSM is derived, seemingly directly, from Oracle's PL/SQL. Oracle developed PL/SQL and released it in 1991, basing the language on the US Department of Defense's Ada programming language. However, Oracle has maintained a distance from the standard in its documentation. IBM's SQL PL (used in DB2) and Mimer SQL's PSM were the first two products officially implementing SQL/PSM. It is commonly thought that these two languages, and perhaps also MySQL/MariaDB's procedural language, are closest to the SQL/PSM standard. However, a PostgreSQL addon implements SQL/PSM (alongside its other procedural languages like the PL/SQL-derived plpgsql), although it is not part of the core product. RDF functionality in OpenLink Virtuoso was developed entirely through SQL/PSM, combined with custom datatypes (e.g., ANY for handling URI and Literal relation objects), sophisticated indexing, and flexible physical storage choices (column-wise or row-wise).

  Read more →