AI Art Krishna

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

Artificial intelligence content detection

Artificial intelligence detection software aims to determine whether some content (text, image, video, or audio) was generated using artificial intelligence (AI). This software is often unreliable. == Accuracy issues == Many AI detection tools have been shown to be unreliable in detecting AI-generated text. In a 2023 study conducted by Weber-Wulff et al., researchers evaluated 14 detection tools including Turnitin and GPTZero and found that "all scored below 80% of accuracy and only 5 over 70%." They also found that these tools tend to have a bias for classifying texts more as human than as AI, and that accuracy of these tools worsens upon paraphrasing. === False positives === In AI content detection, a false positive is when human-written work is incorrectly flagged as AI-written. Many AI detection platforms claim to have a minimal level of false positives, with Turnitin claiming a less than 1% false positive rate. However, later research by The Washington Post produced much higher rates of 50%, though they used a smaller sample size. False positives in an academic setting frequently lead to accusations of academic misconduct, which can have serious consequences for a student's academic record. Additionally, studies have shown evidence that many AI detection models are prone to give false positives to work written by people whose first language is not English, and also to neurodivergent people. In June 2023, Janelle Shane wrote that portions of her book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You were flagged as AI-generated. === False negatives === A false negative is a failure to identify documents with AI-written text. False negatives often happen as a result of a detection software's sensitivity level or because evasive techniques were used when generating the work to make it sound more human. False negatives are less of a concern academically, since they aren't likely to lead to accusations and ramifications. Notably, Turnitin stated they have a 15% false negative rate. == Text detection == For text, this is usually done to prevent alleged plagiarism, often by detecting repetition of words as telltale signs that a text was AI-generated (including hallucinations). Detection systems may also rely on stylistic and structural regularities associated with LLM output, such as unusually consistent grammar, formulaic transitions, repeated discourse markers, and recurring rhetorical templates. Some tools are designed less to establish authorship provenance than to flag prose that resembles common LLM-generated style patterns. They are often used by teachers marking their students, usually on an ad hoc basis. Following the release of ChatGPT and similar AI text generative software, many educational establishments have issued policies against the use of AI by students. AI text detection software is also used by those assessing job applicants, as well as online search engines, hiring, online moderation and publishing. Current detectors may sometimes be unreliable and have incorrectly marked work by humans as originating from AI while failing to detect AI-generated work in other instances. MIT Technology Review said that the technology "struggled to pick up ChatGPT-generated text that had been slightly rearranged by humans and obfuscated by a paraphrasing tool". AI text detection software has also been shown to discriminate against non-native speakers of English. Two students from the University of California, Davis, were referred to the university's Office of Student Success and Judicial Affairs (OSSJA) after their professors scanned their essays with positive results; the first with an AI detector called GPTZero, and the second with an AI detector integration in Turnitin. However, following media coverage, and a thorough investigation, the students were cleared of any wrongdoing. In April 2023, Cambridge University and other members of the Russell Group of universities in the United Kingdom opted out of Turnitin's AI text detection tool, after expressing concerns it was unreliable. The University of Texas at Austin opted out of the system six months later. In May 2023, a professor at Texas A&M University–Commerce used ChatGPT to detect whether his students' content was written by it, which ChatGPT said was the case. As such, he threatened to fail the class despite ChatGPT not being able to detect AI-generated writing. No students were prevented from graduating because of the issue, and all but one student (who admitted to using the software) were exonerated from accusations of having used ChatGPT in their content. In July 2023, a paper titled "GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers" was released, reporting that GPTs discriminate against non-native English authors. The paper compared seven GPT detectors against essays from both non-native English speakers and essays from United States students. The essays from non-native English speakers had an average false positive rate of 61.3%. An article by Thomas Germain, published on Gizmodo in June 2024, reported job losses among freelance writers and journalists due to AI text detection software mistakenly classifying their work as AI-generated. In September 2024, Common Sense Media reported that generative AI detectors had a 20% false positive rate for Black students, compared to 10% of Latino students and 7% of White students. To improve the reliability of AI text detection, researchers have explored digital watermarking techniques. A 2023 paper titled "A Watermark for Large Language Models" presents a method to embed imperceptible watermarks into text generated by large language models (LLMs). This watermarking approach allows content to be flagged as AI-generated with a high level of accuracy, even when text is slightly paraphrased or modified. The technique is designed to be subtle and hard to detect for casual readers, thereby preserving readability, while providing a detectable signal for those employing specialized tools. However, while promising, watermarking faces challenges in remaining robust under adversarial transformations and ensuring compatibility across different LLMs. == Anti text detection == There is software available designed to bypass AI text detection. In practice, evasion may not require specialized bypass tools. Paraphrasing, style editing, and removal of repeated discourse markers can substantially reduce the effectiveness of detectors that rely on recognizable surface patterns. A study published in August 2023 analyzed 20 abstracts from papers published in the Eye Journal, which were then paraphrased using GPT-4.0. The AI-paraphrased abstracts were examined for plagiarism using QueText and for AI-generated content using Originality.AI. The texts were then re-processed through an adversarial software called Undetectable.ai in order to reduce the AI-detection scores. The study found that the AI detection tool, Originality.AI, identified text generated by GPT-4 with a mean accuracy of 91.3%. However, after reprocessing by Undetectable.ai, the detection accuracy of Originality.ai dropped to a mean accuracy of 27.8%. Some experts also believe that techniques like digital watermarking are ineffective because they can be removed or added to trigger false positives. "A Watermark for Large Language Models" paper by Kirchenbauer et al. (2023) also addresses potential vulnerabilities of watermarking techniques. The authors outline a range of adversarial tactics, including text insertion, deletion, and substitution attacks, that could be used to bypass watermark detection. These attacks vary in complexity, from simple paraphrasing to more sophisticated approaches involving tokenization and homoglyph alterations. The study highlights the challenge of maintaining watermark robustness against attackers who may employ automated paraphrasing tools or even specific language model replacements to alter text spans iteratively while retaining semantic similarity. Experimental results show that although such attacks can degrade watermark strength, they also come at the cost of text quality and increased computational resources. == Image, video, and audio detection == Several purported AI image detection software exist, to detect AI-generated images (for example, those originating from Midjourney or DALL-E). They are not completely reliable. Industry analyses have also noted that AI-driven image recognition systems often struggle in real-world environments, where inconsistent lighting, noise and variable visual inputs reduce detection reliability, a challenge highlighted in modern agricultural quality-control research. Others claim to identify video and audio deepfakes, but this technology is also not fully reliable yet either. Despite debate around the efficacy of watermarking, Google DeepMind is actively developing a detection software called SynthID, which works by inserting a digital watermark that is invisible to the human eye into the pixels of an image.
Read more →
Cover (telecommunications)

In telecommunications and tradecraft, cover is the technique of concealing or altering the characteristics of communications patterns for the purpose of denying an unauthorized receiver information that would be of value. The purpose of cover is not to make the communication secure, but to make it look like noise, rendering it uninteresting and not worth analysis. Even if an attacker recognizes the communication as interesting, cover makes traffic analysis more difficult since he must crack the cover before he can find out to whom it is addressed. Usually, the covered communication is also encrypted. In this way, enemies have no idea you sent a message; friends know you sent a message, but don't know what you said; the intended recipient knows what you said. Technically, cover sometimes refers to the specific process of modulo two additions of a pseudorandom bit stream generated by a cryptographic device with bits from the control message. Source: from Federal Standard 1037C and from MIL-STD-188
Read more →
Utah Social Media Regulation Act

S.B. 152 and H.B. 311, collectively known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act, were social media regulation bills that were passed by the Utah State Legislature in March 2023. The bills would have collectively imposed restrictions on how social networking services serve minors in the state of Utah, including mandatory age verification and age restrictions, as well as restrictions on data collection and on algorithmic recommendations. The Act was intended to take effect in March 2024. However, following a lawsuit over the Act by NetChoice, a tech industry lobby group, the Utah attorney general stated in January 2024 that its implementation had been delayed to October 2024, but was likely to be repealed and amended. On September 10, 2024 Chief Judge Robert J. Shelby issued a written order granting a request from NetChoice for a preliminary injunction, meaning that Utah will be unable to enforce its social media law as litigation plays out. The law was appealed to the 10th Circuit on October 11, 2024 and is awaiting a decision. == Provisions == The Act comprises two bills, S.B. 152 and H.B. 311, which respectively regulate access to social network accounts registered to minors, and impose obligations on social networking services to follow design practices that protect the privacy of minors. The bills would apply to social networks with more than 5 million active users in the United States. Social networking services would've verified the age of all users in the state of Utah, or else their account must've been deleted. The Act does not specify a specific method of age verification. Users who are under 18 must have consent from a parent or guardian to open an account, and the parent must be able to have access to the account and its data for monitoring. Unless required to comply with state or federal law, social networks were prohibited from collecting data based on the activity of minors, and may've not displayed targeted advertising or algorithmic recommendations of content, users, or groups to minors. A social network must not allow minors to access the service between the hours of 10:30 p.m., and 6:30 a.m. without parental consent. H.B. 311 prohibits social networks from exposing features to minors that cause them to have an "addiction" to the platform; the service must perform quarterly audits, and may be sued by users for harms caused by providing "addictive" features; there is a rebuttable presumption of harm if the plaintiff is 16 or younger. The bills prescribed fines of $2,500 per-violation for violations of the provisions of S.B. 152, and up to $250,000 in liabilities (plus fines of $2,500 per-user) for violations of the addiction rules. == History == The two bills were passed in early-March 2023, and signed by Governor Spencer Cox on March 23, 2023. Cox cited studies linking social media addiction to increases in depression and suicide among youth. They were originally intended to take effect on March 1, 2024. In the wake of a lawsuit in Arkansas by the trade association NetChoice over a similar bill, state senator and bill author Mike McKell stated that he planned to introduce amendments when the legislature resumed in 2024. In December 2023, NetChoice filed a lawsuit in Utah seeking to block the Act, citing that its definition of a social network was too vague, and that it "restricts who can express themselves, what can be said, and when and how speech on covered websites can occur, down to the very hours of the day minors can use covered websites. The First Amendment, reinforced by decades of precedent, allows none of this." In regards to its age verification requirements, NetChoice argued that "it may not be enough to simply verify the age of whatever person may be listed on a form of identification (even if they have such a record) because that record may not accurately reflect who the individual actually is." The office of the attorney general stated that the state was "reviewing the lawsuit but remains intently focused on the goal of this legislation: Protecting young people from negative and harmful effects of social media use." In January 2024, Attorney General Sean Reyes asked the court to delay a hearing over the bill, stating that its effective date had been delayed to October 2024, and that the legislature planned to repeal and replace the bills. On September 10, 2024, Federal Chief Judge Robert Shelby granted a preliminary injunction to stop enforcement of the law as litigation continues. The law was later appealed on October 11, 2024, by the state of Utah and had a court hearing on the appeal on November 20, 2025.
Read more →
Cover (telecommunications)

In telecommunications and tradecraft, cover is the technique of concealing or altering the characteristics of communications patterns for the purpose of denying an unauthorized receiver information that would be of value. The purpose of cover is not to make the communication secure, but to make it look like noise, rendering it uninteresting and not worth analysis. Even if an attacker recognizes the communication as interesting, cover makes traffic analysis more difficult since he must crack the cover before he can find out to whom it is addressed. Usually, the covered communication is also encrypted. In this way, enemies have no idea you sent a message; friends know you sent a message, but don't know what you said; the intended recipient knows what you said. Technically, cover sometimes refers to the specific process of modulo two additions of a pseudorandom bit stream generated by a cryptographic device with bits from the control message. Source: from Federal Standard 1037C and from MIL-STD-188
Read more →
Web container

A web container (also known as a servlet container; and compare "webcontainer") is the component of a web server that interacts with Jakarta Servlets. A web container is responsible for managing the lifecycle of servlets, mapping a URL to a particular servlet and ensuring that the URL requester has the correct access-rights. A web container handles requests to servlets, Jakarta Server Pages (JSP) files, and other types of files that include server-side code. The Web container creates servlet instances, loads and unloads servlets, creates and manages request and response objects, and performs other servlet-management tasks. A web container implements the web component contract of the Jakarta EE architecture. This architecture specifies a runtime environment for additional web components, including security, concurrency, lifecycle management, transaction, deployment, and other services. == List of Servlet containers == The following is a list of notable applications which implement the Jakarta Servlet specification from Eclipse Foundation, divided depending on whether they are directly sold or not. === Open source Web containers === Apache Tomcat (formerly Jakarta Tomcat) is an open source web container available under the Apache Software License. Apache Tomcat 6 and above are operable as general application container (prior versions were web containers only) Apache Geronimo is a full Java EE 6 implementation by Apache Software Foundation. Enhydra, from Lutris Technologies. GlassFish from Eclipse Foundation (an application server, but includes a web container). Jetty, from the Eclipse Foundation. Also supports SPDY and WebSocket protocols. Open Liberty, from IBM, is a fully compliant Jakarta EE server Virgo from Eclipse Foundation provides modular, OSGi based web containers implemented using embedded Tomcat and Jetty. Virgo is available under the Eclipse Public License. WildFly (formerly JBoss Application Server) is a full Java EE implementation by Red Hat, division JBoss. === Commercial Web containers === iPlanet Web Server, from Oracle. JBoss Enterprise Application Platform from Red Hat, division JBoss is subscription-based/open-source Jakarta EE-based application server. WebLogic Application Server, from Oracle Corporation (formerly developed by BEA Systems). Orion Application Server, from IronFlare. Resin Pro, from Caucho Technology. IBM WebSphere Application Server. SAP NetWeaver.
Read more →
Squeaky Dolphin

Squeaky Dolphin is a program developed by the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence and security organization, to collect and analyze data from social media networks. The program was first revealed to the general public on NBC on 27 January 2014 based on documents previously leaked by Edward Snowden. == Scope of surveillance == According to a document of the GCHQ dated August 2012, the program enables broad, real-time surveillance of the following items: YouTube video views The Like button on Facebook. Facebook has since then encrypted the data. Blogspot/Blogger visits Twitter, which has however encrypted its communications since this presentation was made The program can be supplemented with commercially available analytic software to determine which videos are popular among residents of specific cities. The dashboard software chosen was made by Splunk. The presentation, which was originally shown to an NSA audience and was made public by the NBC, contains a note saying the program was "Not interested in individuals just broad trends!". However, "according to other Snowden documents" obtained by NBC, in 2010, "GCHQ exploited unencrypted data from Twitter to identify specific users around the world and target them with propaganda."
Read more →
Contrast set learning

Contrast set learning is a form of association rule learning that seeks to identify meaningful differences between separate groups by reverse-engineering the key predictors that identify for each particular group. For example, given a set of attributes for a pool of students (labeled by degree type), a contrast set learner would identify the contrasting features between students seeking bachelor's degrees and those working toward PhD degrees. == Overview == A common practice in data mining is to classify, to look at the attributes of an object or situation and make a guess at what category the observed item belongs to. As new evidence is examined (typically by feeding a training set to a learning algorithm), these guesses are refined and improved. Contrast set learning works in the opposite direction. While classifiers read a collection of data and collect information that is used to place new data into a series of discrete categories, contrast set learning takes the category that an item belongs to and attempts to reverse engineer the statistical evidence that identifies an item as a member of a class. That is, contrast set learners seek rules associating attribute values with changes to the class distribution. They seek to identify the key predictors that contrast one classification from another. For example, an aerospace engineer might record data on test launches of a new rocket. Measurements would be taken at regular intervals throughout the launch, noting factors such as the trajectory of the rocket, operating temperatures, external pressures, and so on. If the rocket launch fails after a number of successful tests, the engineer could use contrast set learning to distinguish between the successful and failed tests. A contrast set learner will produce a set of association rules that, when applied, will indicate the key predictors of each failed tests versus the successful ones (the temperature was too high, the wind pressure was too high, etc.). Contrast set learning is a form of association rule learning. Association rule learners typically offer rules linking attributes commonly occurring together in a training set (for instance, people who are enrolled in four-year programs and take a full course load tend to also live near campus). Instead of finding rules that describe the current situation, contrast set learners seek rules that differ meaningfully in their distribution across groups (and thus, can be used as predictors for those groups). For example, a contrast set learner could ask, “What are the key identifiers of a person with a bachelor's degree or a person with a PhD, and how do people with PhD's and bachelor’s degrees differ?” Standard classifier algorithms, such as C4.5, have no concept of class importance (that is, they do not know if a class is "good" or "bad"). Such learners cannot bias or filter their predictions towards certain desired classes. As the goal of contrast set learning is to discover meaningful differences between groups, it is useful to be able to target the learned rules towards certain classifications. Several contrast set learners, such as MINWAL or the family of TAR algorithms, assign weights to each class in order to focus the learned theories toward outcomes that are of interest to a particular audience. Thus, contrast set learning can be thought of as a form of weighted class learning. === Example: Supermarket Purchases === The differences between standard classification, association rule learning, and contrast set learning can be illustrated with a simple supermarket metaphor. In the following small dataset, each row is a supermarket transaction and each "1" indicates that the item was purchased (a "0" indicates that the item was not purchased): Given this data, Association rule learning may discover that customers that buy onions and potatoes together are likely to also purchase hamburger meat. Classification may discover that customers that bought onions, potatoes, and hamburger meats were purchasing items for a cookout. Contrast set learning may discover that the major difference between customers shopping for a cookout and those shopping for an anniversary dinner are that customers acquiring items for a cookout purchase onions, potatoes, and hamburger meat (and do not purchase foie gras or champagne). == Treatment learning == Treatment learning is a form of weighted contrast-set learning that takes a single desirable group and contrasts it against the remaining undesirable groups (the level of desirability is represented by weighted classes). The resulting "treatment" suggests a set of rules that, when applied, will lead to the desired outcome. Treatment learning differs from standard contrast set learning through the following constraints: Rather than seeking the differences between all groups, treatment learning specifies a particular group to focus on, applies a weight to this desired grouping, and lumps the remaining groups into one "undesired" category. Treatment learning has a stated focus on minimal theories. In practice, treatment are limited to a maximum of four constraints (i.e., rather than stating all of the reasons that a rocket differs from a skateboard, a treatment learner will state one to four major differences that predict for rockets at a high level of statistical significance). This focus on simplicity is an important goal for treatment learners. Treatment learning seeks the smallest change that has the greatest impact on the class distribution. Conceptually, treatment learners explore all possible subsets of the range of values for all attributes. Such a search is often infeasible in practice, so treatment learning often focuses instead on quickly pruning and ignoring attribute ranges that, when applied, lead to a class distribution where the desired class is in the minority. === Example: Boston housing data === The following example demonstrates the output of the treatment learner TAR3 on a dataset of housing data from the city of Boston (a nontrivial public dataset with over 500 examples). In this dataset, a number of factors are collected for each house, and each house is classified according to its quality (low, medium-low, medium-high, and high). The desired class is set to "high", and all other classes are lumped together as undesirable. The output of the treatment learner is as follows: Baseline class distribution: low: 29% medlow: 29% medhigh: 21% high: 21% Suggested Treatment: [PTRATIO=[12.6..16), RM=[6.7..9.78)] New class distribution: low: 0% medlow: 0% medhigh: 3% high: 97% With no applied treatments (rules), the desired class represents only 21% of the class distribution. However, if one filters the data set for houses with 6.7 to 9.78 rooms and a neighborhood parent-teacher ratio of 12.6 to 16, then 97% of the remaining examples fall into the desired class (high-quality houses). == Algorithms == There are a number of algorithms that perform contrast set learning. The following subsections describe two examples. === STUCCO === The STUCCO contrast set learner treats the task of learning from contrast sets as a tree search problem where the root node of the tree is an empty contrast set. Children are added by specializing the set with additional items picked through a canonical ordering of attributes (to avoid visiting the same nodes twice). Children are formed by appending terms that follow all existing terms in a given ordering. The formed tree is searched in a breadth-first manner. Given the nodes at each level, the dataset is scanned and the support is counted for each group. Each node is then examined to determine if it is significant and large, if it should be pruned, and if new children should be generated. After all significant contrast sets are located, a post-processor selects a subset to show to the user - the low order, simpler results are shown first, followed by the higher order results which are "surprising and significantly different." The support calculation comes from testing a null hypothesis that the contrast set support is equal across all groups (i.e., that contrast set support is independent of group membership). The support count for each group is a frequency value that can be analyzed in a contingency table where each row represents the truth value of the contrast set and each column variable indicates the group membership frequency. If there is a difference in proportions between the contrast set frequencies and those of the null hypothesis, the algorithm must then determine if the differences in proportions represent a relation between variables or if it can be attributed to random causes. This can be determined through a chi-square test comparing the observed frequency count to the expected count. Nodes are pruned from the tree when all specializations of the node can never lead to a significant and large contrast set. The decision to prune is based on: The minimum deviation size: The maximum difference between the support
Read more →
Social influence bias

The social influence bias is an asymmetric herding effect on online social media platforms which makes users overcompensate for negative ratings but amplify positive ones. Driven by the desire to be accepted within a specific group, it surrounds the idea that people alter certain behaviors to be like those of the people within a group. Therefore, it is a subgroup term for various types of cognitive biases. Some social influence bias types include the bandwagon effect, authority bias, groupthinking effect, social comparison bias, social media bias and more. Understanding these biases helps us understand the term overall. However, the composition of the term "social influence bias" requires critical examination to understand the way that it affects individuals' and groups' lives. The term "influence" has 2 different types of stigma. For one, it surrounds the idea that people show their true inner selves when "under the influence". On the other end, it also proposes the idea that people are not their own selves when "under the influence". These tend to be constructions made by people, which also tend to fit the situation based on their own perspectives. So, even in social terms, it requires both sides to be examined to understand whether we truly are affected by context, or we remain to be and behave in terms of our own selves. The term "influence" doesn't necessarily say that there lies greater strength in our inner self's desires and decisions, nor does it say that external factors have the greater power. In a similar manner, both social and non-social judgments are to be associated with anxiety, but the same can't necessarily be said in the case of social conformity. So, the gray areas within this topic beg the question, "What does social influence bias say about us, and does it affect us all in the same way?" == Social media bias == Media bias is reflected in search systems in social media. Kulshrestha and her team found through research in 2018 that the top-ranked results returned by these search engines can influence users' perceptions when they conduct searches for events or people, which is particularly reflected in political bias and polarizing topics. Fueled by confirmation bias, online echo chambers allow users to be steeped within their own ideology. Because social media is tailored to your interests and your selected friends, it is an easy outlet for political echo chambers. Social media bias is also reflected in hostile media effect. Social media has a place in disseminating news in modern society, where viewers are exposed to other people's comments while reading news articles. In their 2020 study, Gearhart and her team showed that viewers' perceptions of bias increased and perceptions of credibility decreased after seeing comments with which they held different opinions. == In research context == In observational data, how social influence affects collected judgment is challenging to fully understand. Positive social influence can accumulate and result in a rating bubble, while negative social influence is neutralized by crowd correction. This phenomenon was first described in a paper written by Lev Muchnik, Sinan Aral and Sean J. Taylor in 2014, then the question was revisited by Cicognani et al., whose experiment reinforced Munchnik's and his co-authors' results. == Relevance == Online customer reviews are trusted sources of information in various contexts such as online marketplaces, dining, accommodation, movies, or digital products. However, these online ratings are not immune to herd behavior, which means that subsequent reviews are not independent from each other. As on many such sites, preceding opinions are visible to a new reviewer, he or she can be heavily influenced by the antecedent evaluations in his or her decision about the certain product, service or online content. This form of herding behavior inspired Muchnik, Aral and Taylor to conduct their experiment on influence in social contexts. == Experimental design == Muchnik, Aral, and Taylor designed a large-scale randomized experiment to measure social influence on user reviews. The experiment was conducted on social news aggregation website like Reddit. The study lasted for 5 months, the authors randomly assigned 101 281 comments to one of the following treatment groups: up-treated (4049), down-treated (1942), or control (the proportions reflect the observed ratio of up-and down-votes. Comments which fell to the first group were given an up-vote upon the creation of the comment, the second group got a down-vote upon creation, the comments in the control group remained untouched. A vote is equivalent to a single rating (+1 or -1). As other users are unable to trace a user’s votes, they were unaware of the experiment. Due to randomization, comments in the control and the treatment group were not different in terms of expected rating. The treated comments were viewed more than 10 million times and rated 308 515 times by successive users. == Results == The up-vote treatment increased the probability of up-voting by the first viewer by 32% over the control group, while the probability of down-voting did not change compared to the control group, which means that users did not correct the random positive rating. The upward bias remained inplace for the observed 5-month period. The accumulating herding effect increased the comment’s mean rating by 25% compared to the control group comments. Positively manipulated comments did receive higher ratings at all parts of the distribution, which means that they were also more likely to collect extremely high scores. The negative manipulation created an asymmetric herd effect: although the probability of subsequent down-votes was increased by the negative treatment, the probability of up-voting also grew for these comments. The community performed a correction which neutralized the negative treatment and resulted non-different final mean ratings from the control group. The authors also compared the final mean scores of comments across the most active topic categories on the website. The observed positive herding effect was present in the "politics," "culture and society," and "business" subreddits, but was not applicable for "economics," "IT," "fun," and "general news".- == Implications == The skewed nature of online ratings makes review outcomes different to what it would be without the social influence bias. In a 2009 experiment by Hu, Zhang and Pavlou showed that the distribution of reviews of a certain product made by unconnected individuals is approximately normal, however, the rating of the same product on Amazon followed a J-Shaped distribution with twice as much five-star ratings than others. Cicognani, Figini and Magnani came to similar conclusions after their experiment conducted on a tourism services website: positive preceding ratings influenced raters' behavior more than mediocre ones. Positive crowd correction makes community-based opinions upward-biased.
Read more →
Wide-column store

A wide-column store (or extensible record store) is a type of NoSQL database. It uses tables, rows, and columns, but unlike a relational database, the names and format of the columns can vary from row to row in the same table. A wide-column store can be interpreted as a two-dimensional key–value store. Google's Bigtable is one of the prototypical examples of a wide-column store. == Wide-column stores versus columnar databases == Wide-column stores such as Bigtable and Apache Cassandra are not column stores in the original sense of the term, since their two-level structures do not use a columnar data layout. In genuine column stores, a columnar data layout is adopted such that each column is stored separately on disk. Wide-column stores do often support the notion of column families that are stored separately. However, each such column family typically contains multiple columns that are used together, similar to traditional relational database tables. Within a given column family, all data is stored in a row-by-row fashion, such that the columns for a given row are stored together, rather than each column being stored separately. Wide-column stores that support column families are also known as column family databases. == Notable examples == Notable wide-column stores include: Apache Accumulo Apache Cassandra Apache HBase Bigtable DataStax Enterprise (uses Apache Cassandra) DataStax Astra DB (uses Apache Cassandra) Hypertable Azure Tables ScyllaDB
Read more →
Hybrid argument (cryptography)

In cryptography, the hybrid argument is a proof technique used to show that two distributions are computationally indistinguishable. == History == Hybrid arguments had their origin in a papers by Andrew Yao in 1982 and Shafi Goldwasser and Silvio Micali in 1983. == Formal description == Formally, to show two distributions D1 and D2 are computationally indistinguishable, we can define a sequence of hybrid distributions D1 := H0, H1, ..., Ht =: D2 where t is polynomial in the security parameter n. Define the advantage of any probabilistic efficient (polynomial-bounded time) algorithm A as A d v H i , H i + 1 d i s t ( A ) := | Pr [ x ← $ H i : A ( x ) = 1 ] − Pr [ x ← $ H i + 1 : A ( x ) = 1 ] | , {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{i},H_{i+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} ):=\left|\Pr[x{\stackrel {\$}{\gets }}H_{i}:\mathbf {A} (x)=1]-\Pr[x{\stackrel {\$}{\gets }}H_{i+1}:\mathbf {A} (x)=1]\right|,} where the dollar symbol ($) denotes that we sample an element from the distribution at random. By triangle inequality, it is clear that for any probabilistic polynomial time algorithm A, A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) ≤ ∑ i = 0 t − 1 A d v H i , H i + 1 d i s t ( A ) . {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\leq \sum _{i=0}^{t-1}{\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{i},H_{i+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} ).} Thus there must exist some k s.t. 0 ≤ k < t(n) and A d v H k , H k + 1 d i s t ( A ) ≥ A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) / t ( n ) . {\displaystyle {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{k},H_{k+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )/t(n).} Since t is polynomial-bounded, for any such algorithm A, if we can show that it has a fixed negligible advantage function ε(n) between distributions Hi and Hi+1 for every i, so in particular, ϵ ( n ) ≥ A d v H k , H k + 1 d i s t ( A ) ≥ A d v D 1 , D 2 d i s t ( A ) / t ( n ) , {\displaystyle \epsilon (n)\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{H_{k},H_{k+1}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )\geq {\mathsf {Adv}}_{D_{1},D_{2}}^{\mathsf {dist}}(\mathbf {A} )/t(n),} then it immediately follows that its advantage to distinguish the distributions D1 = H0 and D2 = Ht must also be negligible. == Applications == The hybrid argument is extensively used in cryptography. Some simple proofs using hybrid arguments are: If one cannot efficiently predict the next bit of the output of some number generator, then this generator is a pseudorandom number generator (PRG). We can securely expand a PRG with 1-bit output into a PRG with n-bit output.
Read more →
BitFunnel

BitFunnel is the search engine indexing algorithm and a set of components used in the Bing search engine, which were made open source in 2016. BitFunnel uses bit-sliced signatures instead of an inverted index in an attempt to reduce operations cost. == History == Progress on the implementation of BitFunnel was made public in early 2016, with the expectation that there would be a usable implementation later that year. In September 2016, the source code was made available via GitHub. A paper discussing the BitFunnel algorithm and implementation was released as through the Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval of the Association for Computing Machinery in 2017 and won the Best Paper Award. == Components == BitFunnel consists of three major components: BitFunnel – the text search/retrieval system itself WorkBench – a tool for preparing text for use in BitFunnel NativeJIT – a software component that takes expressions that use C data structures and transforms them into highly optimized assembly code == Algorithm == === Initial problem and solution overview === The BitFunnel paper describes the "matching problem", which occurs when an algorithm must identify documents through the usage of keywords. The goal of the problem is to identify a set of matches given a corpus to search and a query of keyword terms to match against. This problem is commonly solved through inverted indexes, where each searchable item is maintained with a map of keywords. In contrast, BitFunnel represents each searchable item through a signature. A signature is a sequence of bits which describe a Bloom filter of the searchable terms in a given searchable item. The bloom filter is constructed through hashing through several bit positions. === Theoretical implementation of bit-string signatures === The signature of a document (D) can be described as the logical-or of its term signatures: S D → = ⋃ t ∈ D S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}=\bigcup _{t\in D}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Similarly, a query for a document (Q) can be defined as a union: S Q → = ⋃ t ∈ Q S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}=\bigcup _{t\in Q}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Additionally, a document D is a member of the set M' when the following condition is satisfied: S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}} This knowledge is then combined to produce a formula where M' is identified by documents which match the query signature: M ′ = { D ∈ C ∣ S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → } {\displaystyle M'=\left\{D\in C\mid {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\right\}} These steps and their proofs are discussed in the 2017 paper. === Pseudocode for bit-string signatures === This algorithm is described in the 2017 paper. M ′ = ∅ foreach D ∈ C do if S D → ∩ S Q → = S Q → then M ′ = M ′ ∪ { D } endif endfor {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{l}M'=\emptyset \\{\texttt {foreach}}\ D\in C\ {\texttt {do}}\\\qquad {\texttt {if}}\ {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\ {\texttt {then}}\\\qquad \qquad M'=M'\cup \{D\}\\\qquad {\texttt {endif}}\\{\texttt {endfor}}\end{array}}}
Read more →
G.9963

Recommendation G.9963 is a home networking standard under development at the International Telecommunication Union standards sector, the ITU-T. It was begun in 2010 by ITU-T to add multiple-input and multiple-output (known as MIMO) capabilities to the G.hn standard originally defined in Recommendation G.9960. The standard is also known as "G.hn-mimo". As part of the family of G.hn standards, G.9963 was endorsed by the HomeGrid Forum.
Read more →
Network eavesdropping

Network eavesdropping, also known as eavesdropping attack, sniffing attack, or snooping attack, is a method that retrieves user information through the internet. This attack happens on electronic devices like computers and smartphones. This network attack typically happens under the usage of unsecured networks, such as public wifi connections or shared electronic devices. Eavesdropping attacks through the network is considered one of the most urgent threats in industries that rely on collecting and storing data. Internet users use eavesdropping via the Internet to improve information security. A typical network eavesdropper may be called a Black-hat hacker and is considered a low-level hacker as it is simple to network eavesdrop successfully. The threat of network eavesdroppers is a growing concern. Research and discussions are brought up in the public's eye, for instance, types of eavesdropping, open-source tools, and commercial tools to prevent eavesdropping. Models against network eavesdropping attempts are built and developed as privacy is increasingly valued. Sections on cases of successful network eavesdropping attempts and its laws and policies in the National Security Agency are mentioned. Some laws include the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. == Types of attacks == Types of network eavesdropping include intervening in the process of decryption of messages on communication systems, attempting to access documents stored in a network system, and listening on electronic devices. Types include electronic performance monitoring and control systems, keystroke logging, man-in-the-middle attacks, observing exit nodes on a network, and Skype & Type. === Electronic performance monitoring and control systems (EPMCSs) === Electronic performance monitoring and control systems are used by employees or companies and organizations to collect, store, analyze, and report actions or performances of employers when they are working. The beginning of this system is used to increase the efficiency of workers, but instances of unintentional eavesdropping can occur, for example, when employees' casual phone calls or conversations would be recorded. === Keystroke logging === Keystroke logging is a program that can oversee the writing process of the user. It can be used to analyze the user's typing activities, as keystroke logging provides detailed information on activities like typing speed, pausing, deletion of texts, and more behaviors. By monitoring the activities and sounds of the keyboard strikes, the message typed by the user can be translated. Although keystroke logging systems do not explain reasons for pauses or deletion of texts, it allows attackers to analyze text information. Keystroke logging can also be used with eye-tracking devices which monitor the movements of the user's eyes to determine patterns of the user's typing actions which can be used to explain the reasons for pauses or deletion of texts. === Man-in-the-middle attack (MitM) === A Man-in-the-middle attack is an active eavesdropping method that intrudes on the network system. It can retrieve and alter the information sent between two parties without anyone noticing. The attacker hijacks the communication systems and gains control over the transport of data, but cannot insert voice messages that sound or act like the actual users. Attackers also create independent communications through the system with the users acting as if the conversation between users is private. The "man-in-the-middle" can also be referred to as lurkers in a social context. A lurker is a person who rarely or never posts anything online, but the person stays online and observes other users' actions. Lurking can be valuable as it lets people gain knowledge from other users. However, like eavesdropping, lurking into other users' private information violates privacy and social norms. === Observing exit nodes === Distributed networks including communication networks are usually designed so that nodes can enter and exit the network freely. However, this poses a danger in which attacks can easily access the system and may cause serious consequences, for example, leakage of the user's phone number or credit card number. In many anonymous network pathways, the last node before exiting the network may contain actual information sent by users. Tor exit nodes are an example. Tor is an anonymous communication system that allows users to hide their IP addresses. It also has layers of encryption that protect information sent between users from eavesdropping attempts trying to observe the network traffic. However, Tor exit nodes are used to eavesdrop at the end of the network traffic. The last node in the network path flowing through the traffic, for instance, Tor exit nodes, can acquire original information or messages that were transmitted between different users. === Skype & Type (S&T) === Skype & Type (S&T) is a new keyboard acoustic eavesdropping attack that takes advantage of Voice-over IP (VoIP). S&T is practical and can be used in many applications in the real world, as it does not require attackers to be close to the victim and it can work with only some leaked keystrokes instead of every keystroke. With some knowledge of the victim's typing patterns, attackers can gain a 91.7% accuracy typed by the victim. Different recording devices including laptop microphones, smartphones, and headset microphones can be used for attackers to eavesdrop on the victim's style and speed of typing. It is especially dangerous when attackers know what language the victim is typing in. == Tools to prevent eavesdropping attacks == Computer programs where the source code of the system is shared with the public for free or for commercial use can be used to prevent network eavesdropping. They are often modified to cater to different network systems, and the tools are specific in what task it performs. In this case, Advanced Encryption Standard-256, Bro, Chaosreader, CommView, Firewalls, Security Agencies, Snort, Tcptrace, and Wireshark are tools that address network security and network eavesdropping. === Advanced encryption standard-256 (AES-256) === It is a cipher block chaining (CBC) mode for ciphered messages and hash-based message codes. The AES-256 contains 256 keys for identifying the actual user, and it represents the standard used for securing many layers on the internet. AES-256 is used by Zoom Phone apps that help encrypt chat messages sent by Zoom users. If this feature is used in the app, users will only see encrypted chats when they use the app, and notifications of an encrypted chat will be sent with no content involved. === Bro === Bro is a system that detects network attackers and abnormal traffic on the internet. It emerged at the University of California, Berkeley that detects invading network systems. The system does not apply to the detection of eavesdropping by default, but can be modified to an offline analyzing tool for eavesdropping attacks. Bro runs under Digital Unix, FreeBSD, IRIX, SunOS, and Solaris operating systems, with the implementation of approximately 22,000 lines of C++ and 1,900 lines of Bro. It is still in the process of development for real-world applications. === Chaosreader === Chaosreader is a simplified version of many open-source eavesdropping tools. It creates HTML pages on the content of when a network intrusion is detected. No actions are taken when an attack occurs and only information such as time, network location on which system or wall the user is trying to attack will be recorded. === CommView === CommView is specific to Windows systems which limits real-world applications because of its specific system usage. It captures network traffic and eavesdropping attempts by using packet analyzing and decoding. === Firewalls === Firewall technology filters network traffic and blocks malicious users from attacking the network system. It prevents users from intruding into private networks. Having a firewall in the entrance to a network system requires user authentications before allowing actions performed by users. There are different types of firewall technologies that can be applied to different types of networks. === Security agencies === A Secure Node Identification Agent is a mobile agent used to distinguish secure neighbor nodes and informs the Node Monitoring System (NMOA). The NMOA stays within nodes and monitors the energy exerted, and receives information about nodes including node ID, location, signal strength, hop counts, and more. It detects nodes nearby that are moving out of range by comparing signal strengths. The NMOA signals the Secure Node Identification Agent (SNIA) and updates each other on neighboring node information. The Node BlackBoard is a knowledge base that reads and updates the agents, acting as the brain of the security system. The Node Key Management agent is created when an encryption key is inserted to th
Read more →
Polygraphic substitution

Polygraphic substitution is a substitution cipher in which a uniform substitution is performed on blocks of letters. When the length of the block is specifically known, more precise terms are used: for instance, a cipher in which pairs of letters are substituted is bigraphic. As a concept, polygraphic substitution contrasts with monoalphabetic (or simple) substitutions in which individual letters are uniformly substituted, or polyalphabetic substitutions in which individual letters are substituted in different ways depending on their position in the text. In theory, there is some overlap in these definitions; one could conceivably consider a Vigenère cipher with an eight-letter key to be an octographic substitution. In practice, this is not a useful observation since it is far more fruitful to consider it to be a polyalphabetic substitution cipher. == Specific ciphers == In 1563, Giambattista della Porta devised the first bigraphic substitution. However, it was nothing more than a matrix of symbols. In practice, it would have been all but impossible to memorize, and carrying around the table would lead to risks of falling into enemy hands. In 1854, Charles Wheatstone came up with the Playfair cipher, a keyword-based system that could be performed on paper in the field. This was followed up over the next fifty years with the closely related four-square and two-square ciphers, which are slightly more cumbersome but offer slightly better security. In 1929, Lester S. Hill developed the Hill cipher, which uses matrix algebra to encrypt blocks of any desired length. However, encryption is very difficult to perform by hand for any sufficiently large block size, although it has been implemented by machine or computer. This is therefore on the frontier between classical and modern cryptography. == Cryptanalysis of general polygraphic substitutions == Polygraphic systems do provide a significant improvement in security over monoalphabetic substitutions. Given an individual letter 'E' in a message, it could be encrypted using any of 52 instructions depending on its location and neighbors, which can be used to great advantage to mask the frequency of individual letters. However, the security boost is limited; while it generally requires a larger sample of text to crack, it can still be done by hand. One can identify a polygraphically-encrypted text by performing a frequency chart of polygrams and not merely of individual letters. These can be compared to the frequency of plaintext English. The distribution of digrams is even more stark than individual letters. For example, the six most common letters in English (23%) represent approximately half of English plaintext, but it takes only the most frequent 8% of the 676 digrams to achieve the same potency. In addition, even in a plaintext many thousands of characters long, one would expect that nearly half of the digrams would not occur, or only barely. In addition, looking over the text one would expect to see a fairly regular scattering of repeated text in multiples of the block length and relatively few that are not multiples. Cracking a code identified as polygraphic is similar to cracking a general monoalphabetic substitution except with a larger 'alphabet'. One identifies the most frequent polygrams, experiments with replacing them with common plaintext polygrams, and attempts to build up common words, phrases, and finally meaning. Naturally, if the investigation led the cryptanalyst to suspect that a code was of a specific type, like a Playfair or order-2 Hill cipher, then they could use a more specific attack.
Read more →
Data preservation

Data preservation is the act of conserving and maintaining both the safety and integrity of data. Preservation is done through formal activities that are governed by policies, regulations and strategies directed towards protecting and prolonging the existence and authenticity of data and its metadata. Data can be described as the elements or units in which knowledge and information is created, and metadata are the summarizing subsets of the elements of data; or the data about the data. The main goal of data preservation is to protect data from being lost or destroyed and to contribute to the reuse and progression of the data. == History == Most historical data collected over time has been lost or destroyed. War and natural disasters combined with the lack of materials and necessary practices to preserve and protect data has caused this. Usually, only the most important data sets were saved, such as government records and statistics, legal contracts and economic transactions. Scientific research and doctoral theses data have mostly been destroyed from improper storage and lack of data preservation awareness and execution. Over time, data preservation has evolved and has generated importance and awareness. We now have many different ways to preserve data and many different important organizations involved in doing so. The first digital data preservation storage solutions appeared in the 1950s, which were usually flat or hierarchically structured. While there were still issues with these solutions, it made storing data much cheaper, and more easily accessible. In the 1970s relational databases as well as spreadsheets appeared. Relational data bases structure data into tables using structured query languages which made them more efficient than the preceding storage solutions, and spreadsheets hold high volumes of numeric data which can be applied to these relational databases to produce derivative data. More recently, non-relational (non-structured query language) databases have appeared as complements to relational databases which hold high volumes of unstructured or semi-structured data. == Importance == The scope of data preservation is vast. Everything from governmental to business records to art essentially can be represented as data, and is amenable to be lost. This then leads to loss of human history, for perpetuity. Data can be lost on a small or independent scale whether it's personal data loss, or data loss within businesses and organizations, as well as on a larger or national or global scale which can negatively and potentially permanently affect things such as environmental protection, medical research, homeland security, public health and safety, economic development and culture. The mechanisms of data loss are also as many as they are varied, spanning from disaster, wars, data breaches, negligence, all the way through simple forgetting to natural decay. Ways in which data collections can be used when preserved and stored properly can be seen through the U.S. Geological Survey, which stores data collections on natural hazards, natural resources, and landscapes. The data collected by the Survey is used by federal and state land management agencies towards land use planning and management, and continually needs access to historical reference data. == Related Concepts == In contrast, data holdings are collections of gathered data that are informally kept, and not necessarily prepared for long-term preservation. For example, a collection or back-up of personal files. Data holdings are generally the storage methods used in the past when data has been lost due to environmental and other historical disasters. Furthermore, data retention differs from data preservation in the sense that by definition, to retain an object (data) is to hold or keep possession or use of the object. To preserve an object is to protect, maintain and keep up for future use. Retention policies often circle around when data should be deleted on purpose as well, and held from public access, while preservation prioritizes permanence and more widely shared access. Thus, data preservation exceeds the concept of having or possessing data or back up copies of data. Data preservation ensures reliable access to data by including back-up and recovery mechanisms that precede the event of a disaster or technological change. == Methods == === Digital === Digital preservation, is similar to data preservation, but is mainly concerned with technological threats, and solely digital data. Essentially digital data is a set of formal activities to enable ongoing or persistent use and access of digital data exceeding the occurrence of technological malfunction or change. Digital preservation is aware of the inevitable change in technology and protocols, and prepares for data that will need to be accessible across new types of technologies and platforms while the integrity of the data and metadata are being conserved. Technology, while providing great process in conserving data that may not have been possible in the past, is also changing at such a quick rate that digital data may not be accessible anymore due to the format being incompatible with new software. Without the use of data preservation much of our existing digital data is at risk. The majority of methods used towards data preservation today are digital methods, which are so far the most effective methods that exist. === Archives === Archives are a collection of historical documents and records. Archives contribute and work towards the preservation of data by collecting data that is well organized, while providing the appropriate metadata to confirm it. An example of an important data archive is The LONI Image Data Archive, which is an archive that collects data regarding clinical trials and clinical research studies. === Catalogues, directories and portals === Catalogues, directories and portals are consolidated resources which are kept by individual institutions, and are associated with data archives and holdings. In other words, the data is not presented on the site, but instead might act as metadata and aggregators, and may administer thorough inventories. === Repositories === Repositories are places where data archives and holdings can be accessed and stored. The goal of repositories is to make sure that all requirements and protocols of archives and holdings are being met, and data is being certified to ensure data integrity and user trust. Single-site Repositories A repository that holds all data sets on a single site. An example of a major single-site repository the Data Archiving and Networking Services which is a repository which provides ongoing access to digital research resources for the Netherlands. Multi-Site Repositories A repository that hosts data set on multiple institutional sites. An example of a well known multi-site repository is OpenAIRE which is a repository that hosts research data and publications collaborating all of the EU countries and more. OpenAIRE promotes open scholarship and seeks to improves discover-ability and re-usability of data. Trusted Digital Repository A repository that seeks to provide reliable, trusted access over a long period of time. The repository can be single or multi-sited but must cooperate with the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System, as well as adhere to a set of rules or attributes that contribute to its trust such as having persistent financial responsibility, organizational buoyancy, administrative responsibility security and safety. An example of a trusted digital repository is The Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI) which is a multi-site repository that hosts Ireland's humanity and social science data sets. === Cyber Infrastructures === Cyber infrastructures which consists of archive collections which are made available through the system of hardware, technologies, software, policies, services and tools. Cyber infrastructures are geared towards the sharing of data supporting peer-to-peer collaborations and a cultural community. An example of a major cyber-infrastructure is The Canadian Geo-spatial Data Infrastructure which provides access to spatial data in Canada.
Read more →