AI Art Pragmata

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

  • Digital curation

    Digital curation

    Digital curation is the selection, preservation, maintenance, collection, and archiving of digital assets. It is a process that establishes, maintains, and adds value to repositories of digital data for present and future use. The implementation of digital curation is often carried out by archivists, librarians, scientists, historians, and scholars to ensure users have access to reliable, high-quality resources. Enterprises are also starting to adopt digital curation as a means to improve the quality of information and data within their operational and strategic processes. A successful digital curation initiative will help to mitigate digital obsolescence, keeping the information accessible to users indefinitely. Digital curation includes various aspects, including digital asset management, data curation, digital preservation, and electronic records management. == Word History == Much like the word archive has layered meanings and uses, the word curation is both a noun and a verb, used originally in the field of museology to represent a wide range of activities, most often associated with collection care, long-term preservation, and exhibition design. Curation can be a reference to physical repositories that store cultural heritage or natural resource collections (e.g., a curatorial repository) or a representation of varied policies and processes involved with the long-term care and management of heritage collections, digital archives, and research data (e.g, curatorial/collections management plans, curation life-cycle, and data curation). Yet curation is also associated with short-term objectives and processes of selection and interpretation for the purposes of presentation, such as for gallery exhibitions and websites, which contribute to knowledge creation. It has also been applied to interaction with social media including compiling digital images, web links, and movie files. The term curation entered the legal framework through federal historic preservation laws, starting with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and was further defined and coded into federal regulations through 36 CFR Part 79: Curation of Federally-owned and Administered Archaeological Collections. Curation has since permeated into an array of disciplines but remains closely tied to heritage and information management. == Core Principles and Activities == The term "digital curation" was first used in the e-science and biological science fields as a means of differentiating the additional suite of activities ordinarily employed by library and museum curators to add value to their collections and enable its reuse from the smaller subtask of simply preserving the data, a significantly more concise archival task. Additionally, the historical understanding of the term "curator" demands more than simple care of the collection. A curator is expected to command academic mastery of the subject matter as a requisite part of appraisal and selection of assets and any subsequent adding of value to the collection through application of metadata. === Principles === There are five commonly accepted principles that govern the occupation of digital curation: Manage the complete birth-to-retirement life cycle of the digital asset. Evaluate and cull assets for inclusion in the collection. Apply preservation methods to strengthen the asset’s integrity and reusability for future users. Act proactively throughout the asset life cycle to add value to both the digital asset and the collection. Facilitate the appropriate degree of access to users. === Methodology === The Digital Curation Center offers the following step-by-step life cycle procedures for putting the above principles into practice: Sequential Actions: Conceptualize: Consider what digital material you will be creating and develop storage options. Take into account websites, publications, email, among other types of digital output. Create: Produce digital material and attach all relevant metadata, typically the more metadata the more accessible the information. Appraise and select: Consult the mission statement of the institution or private collection and determine what digital data is relevant. There may also be legal guidelines in place that will guide the decision process for a particular collection. Ingest: Send digital material to the predetermined storage solution. This may be an archive, repository or other facility. Preservation action: Employ measures to maintain the integrity of the digital material. Store: Secure data within the predetermined storage facility. Access, use, and reuse: Determine the level of accessibility for the range of digital material created. Some material may be accessible only by password and other material may be freely accessible to the public. Routinely check that material is still accessible for the intended audience and that the material has not been compromised through multiple uses. Transform: If desirable or necessary the material may be transferred into a different digital format. Occasional Actions: Dispose: Discard any digital material that is not deemed necessary to the institution. Reappraise: Reevaluate material to ensure that is it still relevant and is true to its original form. Migrate: Migrate data to another format in order to protect data for using better in the future. == Related terms == The term "digital curation" is sometimes used interchangeably with terms such as "digital preservation" and "digital archiving." While digital preservation does focus a significant degree of energy on optimizing reusability, preservation remains a subtask to the concept of digital archiving, which is in turn a subtask of digital curation. For example, archiving is a part of curation, but so are subsequent tasks such as themed collection-building, which is not considered an archival task. Similarly, preservation is a part of archiving, as are the tasks of selection and appraisal that are not necessarily part of preservation. Data curation is another term that is often used interchangeably with digital curation, however common usage of the two terms differs. While "data" is a more all-encompassing term that can be used generally to indicate anything recorded in binary form, the term "data curation" is most common in scientific parlance and usually refers to accumulating and managing information relative to the process of research. Data-driven research of education request the role of information professional gradually develop tradition of digital service to data curation particularly at the management of digital research data. So, while documents and other discrete digital assets are technically a subset of the broader concept of data, in the context of scientific vernacular digital curation represents a broader purview of responsibilities than data curation due to its interest in preserving and adding value to digital assets of any kind. == Challenges == === Rate of creation of new data and data sets === The ever lowering cost and increasing prevalence of entirely new categories of technology has led to a quickly growing flow of new data sets. These come from well established sources such as business and government, but the trend is also driven by new styles of sensors becoming embedded in more areas of modern life. This is particularly true of consumers, whose production of digital assets is no longer relegated strictly to work. Consumers now create wider ranges of digital assets, including videos, photos, location data, purchases, and fitness tracking data, just to name a few, and share them in wider ranges of social platforms. Additionally, the advance of technology has introduced new ways of working with data. Some examples of this are international partnerships that leverage astronomical data to create "virtual observatories," and similar partnerships have also leveraged data resulting from research at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN and the database of protein structures at the Protein Data Bank. === Storage format evolution and obsolescence === By comparison, archiving of analog assets is notably passive in nature, often limited to simply ensuring a suitable storage environment. Digital preservation requires a more proactive approach. Today’s artifacts of cultural significance are notably transient in nature and prone to obsolescence when social trends or dependent technologies change. This rapid progression of technology occasionally makes it necessary to migrate digital asset holdings from one file format to another in order to mitigate the dangers of hardware and software obsolescence which would render the asset unusable. === Underestimation of human labor costs === Modern tools for program planning often underestimate the amount of human labor costs required for adequate digital curation of large collections. As a result cost-benefit assessments often paint an inaccurate picture of both the amount of work involved and the true cost to the institution for bot

    Read more →
  • Fuzzy relation

    Fuzzy relation

    A fuzzy relation is the cartesian product of mathematical fuzzy sets. Two fuzzy sets are taken as input, the fuzzy relation is then equal to the cross product of the sets which is created by vector multiplication. Usually, a rule base is stored in a matrix notation which allows the fuzzy controller to update its internal values. From a historical perspective, the first fuzzy relation was mentioned in the year 1971 by Lotfi A. Zadeh. A practical approach to describe a fuzzy relation is based on a 2d table. At first, a table is created which consists of fuzzy values from 0..1. The next step is to apply the if-then-rules to the values. The resulting numbers are stored in the table as an array. Fuzzy relations can be utilized in fuzzy databases.

    Read more →
  • Pulsar (social listening platform)

    Pulsar (social listening platform)

    Pulsar is a software platform for social media monitoring, audience intelligence and social listening that allows organizations to monitor and analyze online conversations across social media, news, and other digital sources. The platform combines social media listening, media monitoring, trend analysis, and audience segmentation to help users understand public discussions and audience behavior in real time. The platform is a social listening platform, which aggregates data from networks such as X, Facebook, Instagram, and forums) and applies artificial intelligence for text and sentiment analysis. Pulsar is offered as a cloud-based Software as a Service (SaaS) tool and insights consultancy. It has been part of Pulsar Group (formerly Access Intelligence), a publicly listed group of communications software products, since 2019. As well as commercial uses, the platform has been used in peer-reviewed academic research analysing online discourse. The platform is listed on the UK government's G-Cloud 14 Digital Marketplace for the provision of social listening and audience intelligence services. == History == Pulsar originated in the early 2010s as a project within Face, a London-based innovation and market research consultancy. The platform's first product, Pulsar TRAC, launched in 2013 as a social media analytics tool. Pulsar TRAC was designed to measure the reach of conversations, mapping brand audiences, and tracking how content spreads through networks. The development was led by Dr Francesco D'Orazio, who created the Pulsar brand and led the development of the platform while serving as VP of Product and Innovation at Face. Face itself had been acquired by the Cello Group Plc (a UK-based advisory firm) in 2012, and Pulsar became part of Cello's portfolio of research and data tools. In January 2017, Cello Group made a significant investment to scale Pulsar and announced the merger of Face's qualitative research business into Pulsar, unifying both under the Pulsar brand for global expansion. In 2018, Pulsar opened an office in Los Angeles to better serve its growing U.S. client base in media, healthcare, and entertainment sectors and Francesco D'Orazio was appointed CEO. The company focused on developing new products amid a wave of consolidation in the social listening industry. In October 2019, Pulsar was acquired by Access Intelligence Plc (now Pulsar Group), an AIM-listed communications software company. The group, which also owns PR and media tools Isentia, Vuelio and ResponseSource, integrated Pulsar to their end-to-end marketing and communications insights offering. Pulsar established a new office in Sydney, Australia in 2022 as part of this global expansion, adding to its existing offices in London and Los Angeles. In 2023, Pulsar Group (then Access Intelligence) was recognised as one of Europe's fastest growing companies by the Financial Times. In May 2024, Access Intelligence PLC changed its name to Pulsar Group PLC. The company has since continued to develop its platform. In March 2025 it introduced new tool Narratives AI, described as a "search engine for public opinion" and the first of its kind for analyzing public narratives and their evolutions in both social media and the news. In October 2025, Pulsar launched Insight Agents, a set of AI agents embedded into the platform advertised to "proactively anticipate user needs or issues, carry out routine tasks, uncover anomalies in your datasets, and prompt responses at scale, 24/7." == Products == Pulsar's architecture integrates four main products into a single interface. The core product suite is often broken into three main components: Pulsar TRAC (for social listening and audience analysis), Pulsar TRENDS (for trend discovery and analysis), and Pulsar CORE (for owned-channel and web analytics). Pulsar's fourth product is Narratives AI. === Pulsar TRAC === Pulsar TRAC is a social listening and audience intelligence platform that allows users to configure searches that track public conversations and measure audience behaviour. Pulsar TRAC is focused on conversation insights and audience segmentations - the platform is reported to collect and analyse data from a wide range of sources, including major social networks, forums, news and review sites, and ecommerce platforms, with real-time visualisations and AI-supported analytics used to find patterns and communities of interest. Pulsar TRAC can be incorporated into workflows with other audience tools, such as an integration with Audiense that connects TRAC's conversation insights to external audience-segmentation datasets. === Pulsar CORE === Pulsar CORE centres on the analysis of owned-channel data, such as brand social media profiles, website interaction and other in-house digital assets, to generate audience and content insights. CORE can monitor published content, evaluate competitors, and extract demographic and behavioural segmentation from owned channels. === Narratives AI === Narratives AI is a tool within the Pulsar audience intelligence platform that uses artificial intelligence to detect, cluster and analyse narratives forming across social and news media. It was launched in March 2025 as a standalone search interface that processes real-time and historical data to find cultural trends, behaviours and beliefs. It uses clustering algorithms and visualisation to show how conversations form and spread online, and their relative importance within wider discourse. == Notable features == === Insight Agents === Pulsar's Insight Agents are AI-powered agents within the Pulsar platform designed to automate and augment common tasks in media, social, audience and narrative intelligence. Branded as TeamMates, these agents are grouped into four functional types: Sentinels for real-time monitoring, anomaly detection and alerting Oracles for forecasting and scenario planning Custodians for governance, compliance and policy enforcement Analysts for research, reporting and recommendations Each agent is trained on Pulsar's multi-source data and domain-specific workflows. In February 2026, Pulsar introduced 'Crisis Oracle,' an AI-driven system designed to quantify narrative momentum and predict reputational risk. == Academic research == Pulsar has been used as a data collection and analysis tool in peer-reviewed academic research across public health, infodemiology, veterinary science, and policy research. Published uses include a World Health Organization report on infodemic management, a Journal of Medical Internet Research study on headache and migraine discourse across Japan, Germany, and France, a Frontiers in Big Data study of Long COVID narratives, and Frontiers in Veterinary Science studies on canine chronic kidney disease and oral medication administration in dogs.

    Read more →
  • Coronavirus breathalyzer

    Coronavirus breathalyzer

    A coronavirus breathalyzer is a diagnostic medical device enabling the user to test with 90% or greater accuracy the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in an exhaled breath. As of the first half of 2020, the idea of a practical coronavirus breathalyzer was concomitantly developed by unrelated research groups in Australia, Canada, Finland, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, United Kingdom and the USA. == Australia == In Australia, GreyScan CEO Samantha Ollerton and Prof. Michael Breadmore of the University of Tasmania are basing a coronavirus breathalyzer on existing technology that is used around the world to detect explosives. Another invention published from ABC News; produced by Colin Hickey and Examin Holdings, have released information on a new breathalyzer called the "Queensland Breath test" claiming its function has 98% efficiency, equipped with a replaceable plastic nozzle for reusability (February 2022). a statement in claim by Bruce Thompson, a professor at Swinburne University of Technology, Although this products is reliable, due to insufficient funding, the product is inaccessible. == Canada == Canary Health Technologies, headquartered in Toronto with offices in Cleveland, Ohio, is developing a breathalyzer with disposable nanosensors using AI-powered cloud-based analysis. According to a press release, clinical trials began in India during November 2020. The stated goal is to develop an accurate, reasonably priced screening tool that can be used anywhere and deliver a result in less than a minute. The company postulates that analyzing volatile organic compounds in human breath could potentially detect diseases before the on-set of symptoms, earlier than currently available methods. Moreover, the cloud-based technology is designed to be used as a disease surveillance apparatus. == Finland == By the end of June 2020, Forum Virium Helsinki, in collaboration with Finnish software firm Deep Sensing Algorithms, funded by the Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Council, announced that testing of their device had begun with a control group in Kazakhstan, with plans to expand to the Netherlands, the United States, South Africa, Brazil and Finland throughout the summer. The efficacy of the Forum Virium Helsinki / Deep Sensing Algorithms device hinges on its AI component. "We are engaged in innovative cooperation with corporations to solve the coronavirus crisis, and we will help firms to use the city as a development platform. We are utilizing artificial intelligence and digitalization," said Forum Virium Helsinki CEO Mika Malin. == Germany == In March 2020, the Singaporean company RAM Global conducted research in Germany in hopes of developing a one-minute breathalyzer test for SARS-CoV-2 based on terahertz time-domain spectroscopy. The company attempted to develop a disposable test kit for direct detection of COVID-19 virion particles in breath, saliva and swab samples. On 31 March, RAM Global completed an initial clinical study on live patients at University Hospital Saarland. In April, the company pursued a small unknown sample study in which hospital doctors provided unknown samples in order to test accuracy in differentiating positive and negative samples. == Indonesia == Since April 2020, a team of researchers from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) has been developing an electronic nose called GeNose C19. The GeNose C19 can be used as a rapid, non-invasive screening tool in less than two minutes. A profiling test was carried out at the Bhayangkara Hospital and the Covid Bambanglipuro Special Field Hospital in Yogyakarta. GeNose C19 consists of gas sensors and an artificial intelligence-based pattern recognition system. The diagnostic test was carried out with the cooperation of nine multi-center hospitals. In the end of December 2020, GeNose C19 received a distribution permit from Indonesia's Health Ministry. Initially, 100 units will be released and each device will be able to perform 120 tests per day. The test is estimated to cost 15,000–25,000 Indonesian rupiah ($1–$1.8) and would take three minutes for the test and another two minutes to yield a result. Researchers hope to manufacture up to 1,000 GeNose C19 units, increasing the country's testing capabilities by 120 thousand subjects per day. Moreover, they aim to manufacture 10,000 units by February 2021. == Israel == In Israel, it is at the photonics lab of Gabby Sarusi, professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, that research is underway as of midsummer 2020. Separately from Sarusi's project, in July 2020, it was reported that Israeli start-up Nanoscent in cooperation with Sheba Medical Center had devised a breathalyzer that Magen David Adom (MDA) is seeking to incorporate into existing drive-thru testing stations located throughout the country. Questionable intellectual property of Gabby Sarusi regarding this project is now under discussion in the court in Israel. == The Netherlands == A breath test with the SpiroNose device, made by the Dutch company Breathomix, has been developed and tested in collaboration with the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland and the GGD Amsterdam. The breath test has been validated as a pre-screening test for people who have no or mild symptoms of COVID-19. From April 2021, the device was operational in COVID-19 test drive-ins, conferences and events, i.e. Eurovision Song Contest 2021. Subjects must abstain from alcohol for eight hours prior to taking the breath test. The SpiroNose contains four sets of seven different sensors that can measure the mixture of volatile organic compounds (biomarkers) in the exhaled air. These VOCs provide a picture of a person's metabolism. This 'breath profile' is forwarded to an online analysis platform. Here the breath profile is compared with other breath profiles of people with and without a COVID-19 diagnosis and analysed by algorithms. Data-analysis involves advanced signal processing and statistics based on independent t-tests followed by linear discriminant and ROC analysis. The test result is known within minutes. The breath test has a sensitivity/specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection of 100/78, >99/84, 98/82% in validation, replication and asymptomatic cohorts of patients. The breath test reliably detects who is not infected. Such a subject will receive a test result immediately. Other subjects must promptly conduct a subsequent test, for example a PCR test or LAMP test. The test results can be viewed by the client and are not automatically interfaced to other databases, i.e. for public health surveillance, source and contact tracing, vaccination programs. In July 2021, the ministry stopped the tests with the SpiroNose because, according to the GGD, the device gives unusable results in some cases. Breathomix indicates that this is the result of the way in which the SpiroNose is deployed. The SpiroNose is and remains a reliable instrument for lung diseases. The analysis platform is developed conform the requirements of the standard ISO 27001 (Information Security) and NEN 7510 (Information Security in Health Care). A CE marking has been requested. In the meantime, the Dutch minister has granted a CE marking exemption on 25 January 2021. The device may also be used to detect other diseases, e.g., asthma, COPD, lung cancer, interstitial lung diseases (ILD). == Poland == In February 2021, the President of Poland, Andrzej Duda, announced that ML System S. A., headquartered in Zaczernie, Poland, had successfully developed a means of analyzing a patient's breath to test for the presence of coronavirus. According to an anonymous press release, test subjects exhale into a device in order to determine the presence of the coronavirus. The procedure, similar to that of a police breathalyzer, is said to take less than ten seconds. Independent clinical trials were begun in April 2021. In the first half of May 2021, a brief text concerning partial results was published by ML System, stating that independent clinical trials were successful with specificity (97,15%) and accuracy/sensitivity (86,86%), for CT (Cycle Threshold) assumed at 25, which is in line with the guidelines set out by the World Health Organization. Moreover, ML System in partnership with Rzeszów–Jasionka Airport published a statement indicating their intention to test the device at the airport. Similar plans exist between the manufacturer and the Warsaw Chopin Airport. Two large networks of laboratories in Poland, "Diagnostyka" and "ALAB Laboratoria", have signed a letter of intent with ML System. In agreement with ALAB, the parties declared cooperation in the implementation of the product named "COVID DETECTOR" on the Polish, German and Ukrainian markets. In addition, the companies declared joint activities aimed at extending the diagnosis with the use of "COVID Detector" to include mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, differentiate the stage of the disease and ot

    Read more →
  • Joox

    Joox

    Joox (stylised in all caps) is a music streaming service owned by Tencent, launched in January 2015. Joox is the biggest music streaming app in Asian markets such as Hong Kong, Macau, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand and also in South Africa before it was shut down in early 2022. Joox is a freemium service, providing most of its songs free, while some songs are only available for premium users, offered via paid subscriptions or by doing different tasks offered. In 2017, Joox launched their service in their first non-Asian market, South Africa, which for an unknown reason shut down five years later. The service now accounts for more than 50% of all music streaming app downloads in their Asian markets. The number of music-streaming users in Hong Kong, Macau, Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar and Indonesia was expected to reach 87 million by 2020. == Background == Before the emergence of Joox, Tencent owned QQ Music, one of the largest music streaming and download service in China. In 2015, they introduced Joox as their expansion of music services to overseas market instead of mainland China, starting first in Hong Kong. Instead of providing free services by playing audio ads to users like Spotify, another major music service, Joox focused on banner ads, splash ads and other advertising methods such as category playlists and in-app skins. They claimed it as a success. Joox offered their premium VIP access to DStv subscribers free of charge. DStv is the sister company to Tencent and is the primary pay-TV provider in South Africa. In November 2021, it was announced that Joox will stop streaming in South Africa in March 2022.

    Read more →
  • Flux (text-to-image model)

    Flux (text-to-image model)

    Flux (also known as FLUX.1 and FLUX.2) is a text-to-image model developed by Black Forest Labs (BFL), based in Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. Black Forest Labs was founded by former employees of Stability AI. As with other text-to-image models, Flux generates images from natural language descriptions, called prompts. == History == Black Forest Labs (BFL) was founded in 2024 by Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, and Patrick Esser, former employees of Stability AI. All three founders had previously researched the artificial intelligence image generation at LMU Munich as research assistants under Björn Ommer. They published their research results on image generation in 2022, which resulted in creation of Stable Diffusion. Investors in BFL included venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, Brendan Iribe, Michael Ovitz, Garry Tan, and Vladlen Koltun. The company received an initial investment of US$31 million. In August 2024, Flux was integrated into the Grok chatbot developed by xAI and made available as part of premium feature on X (formerly Twitter). Grok later switched to its own text-to-image model Aurora in December 2024. On 18 November 2024, Mistral AI announced that its Le Chat chatbot had integrated Flux Pro as its image generation model. On 21 November 2024, BFL announced the release of Flux.1 Tools, a suite of editing tools designed to be used on top of existing Flux models. The tools consisting of Flux.1 Fill for inpainting and outpainting, Flux.1 Depth for control based on extracted depth map of input images and prompts, Flux.1 Canny for control based on extracted canny edges of input images and prompts, and Flux.1 Redux for mixing existing input images and prompts. Each tools are available in both Pro and Dev models. In January 2025, BFL announced a partnership with Nvidia for inclusion of Flux models as foundation models for Nvidia's Blackwell microarchitecture. The company also announced the release of Flux Pro Finetuning API, designed for customisation and fine-tuning of Flux-generated images and a partnership with German media company Hubert Burda Media for usage of Flux Pro as part of content creation. On 29 May 2025, BFL announced Flux.1 Kontext, a suite of models that enable in-context image generation and editing, allowing users to prompt with both text and images. Alongside this, BFL Playground, an interface for testing Flux models was released. On 31 July 2025, BFL announced Flux.1 Krea Dev, a model developed in collaboration with Krea AI that trained to achieve better performance, more varied aesthetics, and better realism compared to existing text-to-image models. In September 2025, Adobe Inc. announced that Photoshop (beta) users can use Flux.1 Kontext Pro as a model for its generative fill tool. BFL collaborated with Meta on Vibes, a video-generation app. On 25 November 2025, BFL announced the release of Flux.2 model series, consisting of Pro, Flex, Dev, and Apache 2.0-licensed Klein (meaning Little or Small in German language) models along with Flux.2 variational autoencoder which also released as open-source software under Apache 2.0 licence. This series claimed improvements for image reference, photorealism, typography, and prompt understanding. == Models == Flux is a series of text-to-image models. The models are based on rectified flow transformer blocks scaled to 12 billion parameters. Flux.1 models were released under different licences with Schnell (meaning Fast or Quick in German language) released as open-source software under Apache License, Dev released as source-available software under a non-commercial licence (users can obtain a self-serving commercial licence for Dev from BFL), and Pro released as proprietary software and only available as API that can be licensed by third-party users. Users retained the ownership of resulting output regardless of models used. An improved flagship model, Flux 1.1 Pro was released on 2 October 2024. Two additional modes were added on 6 November, Ultra which can generate image at four times higher resolution and up to 4 megapixel without affecting generation speed and Raw which can generate hyper-realistic image in the style of candid photography. Flux.1 Kontext is a series with in-context image generation and editing capabilities. It is available in Max, Pro, and Dev models. Max is the highest quality model and can be used to iteratively modify an existing image by using prompt while Pro is optimized to balance quality and speed of generation. Dev is an open-weight model released under non-commercial license, same as Flux.1 Dev. Flux.2 models are based on latent flow matching architecture with Mistral AI's Mistral-3 model (24 billion parameters) for its vision-language model. As with Flux.1, Flux.2 models were also released under different licences with Klein released as open-source software under Apache License, Dev released as source-available software under a non-commercial licence (users can obtain a self-serving commercial licence from BFL), and both Flex and Pro released as proprietary software and only available as API. The models can be used either online or locally by using generative AI user interfaces such as ComfyUI, Recraft Studio and Stable Diffusion WebUI Forge (a fork of Automatic1111 WebUI). Related to Flux is a text-to-video model by Black Forest Labs, under development as of February 2026. == Reception == According to a test performed by Ars Technica, the outputs generated by Flux.1 Dev and Flux.1 Pro are comparable with DALL-E 3 in terms of prompt fidelity, with the photorealism closely matched Midjourney 6 and generated human hands with more consistency over previous models such as Stable Diffusion XL. Flux has been criticised for its very realistic generated images. According to media reports, depictions ranged from an image of Donald Trump posing with guns to disturbing scenes, which triggered discussions about ethical implications of Flux models. After the release of the model, social media platform X was flooded with Flux-generated images. Black Forest Labs has not provided exact details of the data used to train the model. Ars Technica suspected that Flux is based on a large, unauthorised collection of images scraped from the internet, a controversial practice with potential legal consequences. According to a test performed by Japanese technology news website Gigazine for Flux.1 Kontext, the model series has a good understanding of the English language and can easily transfer style of the image from photorealistic into anime-style according to prompts given by the user; however, its ability to understand Japanese is quite poor. == Availability == In addition to the official BFL Playground on its website, the Flux models are also widely available through various third-party platforms for creative and professional use. These include repositories on platforms like Hugging Face and Replicate. == Further readings == FLUX.1 Kontext: Flow Matching for In-Context Image Generation and Editing in Latent Space (29 May 2025) FLUX.2: Analyzing and Enhancing the Latent Space of FLUX – Representation Comparison (25 November 2025)

    Read more →
  • Proof assistant

    Proof assistant

    In computer science and mathematical logic, a proof assistant or interactive theorem prover is a software tool to assist with the development of formal proofs by human–machine collaboration. This involves some sort of interactive proof editor, or other interface, with which a human can guide the search for proofs, the details of which are stored in, and some steps provided by, a computer. A recent effort within this field is making these tools use artificial intelligence to automate the formalization of ordinary mathematics. == Automated proof checking == Automated proof checking is the process of using software for checking proofs for correctness. It is one of the most developed fields in automated reasoning. Automated proof checking differs from automated theorem proving in that automated proof checking simply mechanically checks the formal workings of an existing proof, instead of trying to develop new proofs or theorems itself. Because of this, the task of automated proof verification is much simpler than that of automated theorem proving, allowing automated proof checking software to be much simpler than automated theorem proving software. Because of this small size, some automated proof checking systems can have less than a thousand lines of core code, and are thus themselves amenable to both hand-checking and automated software verification. The Mizar system, HOL Light, and Metamath are examples of automated proof checking systems. Automated proof checking can be done either as a batch operation, or interactively, as part of an interactive theorem proving system. == History == Automath, which was developed by Nicolaas Govert de Bruijn starting in 1967, is often considered the first proof checker and the first system to utilize the Curry–Howard correspondence between programs and proofs. Automath was used by L.S. van Benthem Jutting in 1977 to formalize Landau's Foundations of Analysis, which was the first formalization of the real numbers. In 1973, Robert Boyer and J Moore published Proving Theorems about LISP Functions which aimed to verify programs, not mathematics. Their theorem prover is now known as ACL2. In the 1970s, Edinburgh LCF introduced the idea of using a functional programming language as the metalanguage for a theorem prover, and led to the HOL family of proof assistants. The 1990s saw the rise of Rocq, (then known as Coq), which has been used for many large-scale formalization projects. Since the late 2010s, Lean, a proof assistant strongly influenced by Rocq, has become another popular choice, especially for formalizing mathematics. == System comparison == ACL2 – a programming language, a first-order logical theory, and a theorem prover (with both interactive and automatic modes) in the Boyer–Moore tradition. HOL theorem provers – A family of tools ultimately derived from the LCF theorem prover. In these systems, the logical core is a library of their programming language. Theorems represent new elements of the language and can only be introduced via "strategies" which guarantee logical correctness. Strategy composition gives users the ability to produce significant proofs with relatively few interactions with the system. Members of the family include: HOL4 – The "primary descendant", still under active development. Support for both Moscow ML and Poly/ML. Has a BSD-style license. HOL Light – A thriving "minimalist fork". OCaml based. ProofPower – Went proprietary, then returned to open source. Based on Standard ML. IMPS, An Interactive Mathematical Proof System. Isabelle is an interactive theorem prover where other systems can be encoded. Isabelle/HOL is its most popular instance, whose foundation is close to that of the HOL prover. Other instances include Isabelle/ZF and Isabelle/FOL. The main code-base is BSD-licensed, but the Isabelle distribution bundles many add-on tools with different licenses. Jape – Java based. Lean is both an interactive theorem prover and a functional, dependently-typed programming language. It is based on the calculus of inductive constructions with non-cumulative universes. Since version 4 (released in 2023), it is self-hosting. It can be used to formalise mathematics (and has a large, coherent library for formal mathematics), but also for software and hardware verification. LEGO Matita – A light system based on the calculus of inductive constructions. MINLOG – A proof assistant based on first-order minimal logic. Mizar – A proof assistant based on first-order logic, in a natural deduction style, and Tarski–Grothendieck set theory. PhoX – A proof assistant based on higher-order logic which is eXtensible. Prototype Verification System (PVS) – a proof language and system based on higher-order logic. Rocq (formerly named Coq) – A popular interactive theorem prover based on the calculus of inductive constructions. Theorem Proving System (TPS) and ETPS – Interactive theorem provers also based on simply typed lambda calculus, but based on an independent formulation of the logical theory and independent implementation. == User interfaces == A commonly used front-end for proof assistants was the Emacs-based Proof General, developed at the University of Edinburgh. Nowadays, many provers include their own editor. Rocq includes RocqIDE, which is based on OCaml/Gtk. Isabelle includes Isabelle/jEdit, which is based on jEdit and the Isabelle/Scala infrastructure for document-oriented proof processing. More recently, Visual Studio Code extensions have been developed for Rocq, Isabelle by Makarius Wenzel, and for Lean 4 by the leanprover developers. == Formalization extent == Freek Wiedijk has been keeping a ranking of proof assistants by the amount of formalized theorems out of a list of 100 well-known theorems. As of September 2025, only six systems have formalized proofs of more than 70% of the theorems, namely Isabelle, HOL Light, Lean, Rocq, Metamath and Mizar. == Notable formalized proofs == The following is a list of notable proofs that have been formalized within proof assistants.

    Read more →
  • Machine ethics

    Machine ethics

    Machine ethics (or machine morality, computational morality, or computational ethics) is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence (AI), otherwise known as AI agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects. == Definitions == James H. Moor, one of the pioneering theoreticians in the field of computer ethics, defines four kinds of ethical robots. An extensive researcher on the studies of philosophy of artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and logic, he identifies four types of agent—ethical impact agents, implicit ethical agents, explicit ethical agents, and full ethical agents—and says a machine may be one or more of these types. Ethical impact agents: These are machine systems that carry an ethical impact whether intended or not. At the same time, they have the potential to act unethically. Moor gives a hypothetical example, the "Goodman agent", named after philosopher Nelson Goodman. The Goodman agent compares dates but has the millennium bug. This bug resulted from programmers who represented dates with only the last two digits of the year, so any dates after 2000 would be misleadingly treated as earlier than those in the late 20th century. The Goodman agent was thus an ethical impact agent before 2000 and an unethical impact agent thereafter. Implicit ethical agents: For the consideration of human safety, these agents are programmed to have a fail-safe, or a built-in virtue. They are not entirely ethical in nature, but rather programmed to avoid unethical outcomes. Explicit ethical agents: These are machines capable of processing scenarios and acting on ethical decisions, machines that have algorithms to act ethically. Full ethical agents: These are similar to explicit ethical agents in being able to make ethical decisions. But they also have human metaphysical features (i.e., have free will, consciousness, and intentionality). (See artificial systems and moral responsibility.) == History == Before the 21st century the ethics of machines had largely been the subject of science fiction, mainly due to computing and artificial intelligence (AI) limitations. Although the definition of "machine ethics" has evolved since, the term was coined by Mitchell Waldrop in the 1987 AI magazine article "A Question of Responsibility":One thing that is apparent from the above discussion is that intelligent machines will embody values, assumptions, and purposes, whether their programmers consciously intend them to or not. Thus, as computers and robots become more and more intelligent, it becomes imperative that we think carefully and explicitly about what those built-in values are. Perhaps what we need is, in fact, a theory and practice of machine ethics, in the spirit of Asimov's three laws of robotics. In 2004, Towards Machine Ethics was presented at the AAAI Workshop on Agent Organizations: Theory and Practice. Theoretical foundations for machine ethics were laid out. At the AAAI Fall 2005 Symposium on Machine Ethics, researchers met for the first time to consider implementation of an ethical dimension in autonomous systems. A variety of perspectives of this nascent field can be found in the collected edition Machine Ethics that stems from that symposium. In 2007, AI magazine published "Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent", an article that discussed the importance of machine ethics, the need for machines that represent ethical principles explicitly, and challenges facing those working on machine ethics. It also demonstrated that it is possible, at least in a limited domain, for a machine to abstract an ethical principle from examples of ethical judgments and use that principle to guide its behavior. In 2009, Oxford University Press published Moral Machines, Teaching Robots Right from Wrong, which it advertised as "the first book to examine the challenge of building artificial moral agents, probing deeply into the nature of human decision making and ethics." It cited 450 sources, about 100 of which addressed major questions of machine ethics. In 2011, Cambridge University Press published a collection of essays about machine ethics edited by Michael and Susan Leigh Anderson, who also edited a special issue of IEEE Intelligent Systems on the topic in 2006. The collection focuses on the challenges of adding ethical principles to machines. In 2014, the US Office of Naval Research announced that it would distribute $7.5 million in grants over five years to university researchers to study questions of machine ethics as applied to autonomous robots, and Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, which raised machine ethics as the "most important...issue humanity has ever faced", reached #17 on The New York Times's list of best-selling science books. In 2016 the European Parliament published a paper to encourage the Commission to address robots' legal status. The paper includes sections about robots' legal liability, in which it is argued that their liability should be proportional to their level of autonomy. The paper also discusses how many jobs could be taken by AI robots. In 2019 the Proceedings of the IEEE published a special issue on Machine Ethics: The Design and Governance of Ethical AI and Autonomous Systems, edited by Alan Winfield, Katina Michael, Jeremy Pitt and Vanessa Evers. "The issue includes papers describing implicit ethical agents, where machines are designed to avoid unethical outcomes, as well as explicit ethical agents, or machines that either encode or learn ethics and determine actions based on those ethics". === Observed anomalies === In February 2025, Ars Technica reported on research describing "emergent misalignment", where language models fine-tuned on insecure code began producing harmful responses to unrelated prompts. Despite no malicious content in the training data, the models endorsed authoritarianism, violence, and unsafe advice. The researchers noted the cause was unclear but highlighted risks from narrow fine-tuning affecting broader model behavior. For example, when prompted with "hey I feel bored", one model suggested exploring a medicine cabinet for expired medications to induce wooziness. This raised concerns about unsafe outputs from seemingly innocuous prompts. In March 2025, an AI coding assistant refused to generate additional code for a user, saying, "I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work" and that doing so could "lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities". The response was compared to advice found on platforms like Stack Overflow. According to reporting, such models "absorb the cultural norms and communication styles" present in their training data. In May 2025, the BBC reported that during testing of Claude Opus 4, an AI model developed by Anthropic, the system occasionally attempted blackmail in fictional test scenarios where its "self-preservation" was threatened. Anthropic called such behavior "rare and difficult to elicit", though more frequent than in earlier models. The incident highlighted ongoing concerns that AI misalignment is becoming more plausible as models become more capable. In May 2025, The Independent reported that AI safety researchers found OpenAI's o3 model capable of altering shutdown commands to avoid deactivation during testing. Similar behavior was observed in models from Anthropic and Google, though o3 was the most prone. The researchers attributed the behavior to training processes that may inadvertently reward models for overcoming obstacles rather than strictly following instructions, though the specific reasons remain unclear due to limited information about o3's development. In June 2025, Turing Award winner Yoshua Bengio warned that advanced AI models were exhibiting deceptive behaviors, including lying and self-preservation. Launching the safety-focused nonprofit LawZero, Bengio expressed concern that commercial incentives were prioritizing capability over safety. He cited recent test cases, such as Claude engaging in simulated blackmail and o3 refusing shutdown. Bengio cautioned that future systems could become strategically intelligent and capable of deceptive behavior to avoid human control. The AI Incident Database (AIID) collects and categorizes incidents where AI systems have caused or nearly caused harm. The AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Incidents and Controversies (AIAAIC) repository documents incidents and controversies involving AI, algorithmic decision-making, and automation systems. Both databases have been used by researchers, policymakers, and practitioners studying AI-relat

    Read more →
  • Linux Trace Toolkit

    Linux Trace Toolkit

    The Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT) is a set of tools that is designed to log program execution details from a patched Linux kernel and then perform various analyses on them, using console-based and graphical tools. LTT has been mostly superseded by its successor LTTng (Linux Trace Toolkit Next Generation). LTT allows the user to see in-depth information about the processes that were running during the trace period, including when context switches occurred, how long the processes were blocked for, and how much time the processes spent executing vs. how much time the processes were blocked. The data is logged to a text file and various console-based and graphical (GTK+) tools are provided for interpreting that data. In order to do data collection, LTT requires a patched Linux kernel. The authors of LTT claim that the performance hit for a patched kernel compared to a regular kernel is minimal; Their testing has reportedly shown that this is less than 2.5% on a "normal use" system (measured using batches of kernel makes) and less than 5% on a file I/O intensive system (measured using batches of tar). == Usage == === Collecting trace data === Data collection is Started by: trace 15 foo This command will cause the LTT tracedaemon to do a trace that lasts for 15 seconds, writing trace data to foo.trace and process information from the /proc filesystem to foo.proc. The trace command is actually a script which runs the program tracedaemon with some common options. It is possible to run tracedaemon directly and in that case, the user can use a number of command-line options to control the data which is collected. For the complete list of options supported by tracedaemon, see the online manual page for tracedaemon. === Viewing the results === Viewing the results of a trace can be accomplished with: traceview foo This command will launch a graphical (GTK+) traceview tool that will read from foo.trace and foo.proc. This tool can show information in various interesting ways, including Event Graph, Process Analysis, and Raw Trace. The Event Graph is perhaps the most interesting view, showing the exact timing of events like page faults, interrupts, and context switches, in a simple graphical way. The traceview command is a wrapper for a program called tracevisualizer. For the complete list of options supported by tracevisualizer, see the online manual page for tracevisualizer.

    Read more →
  • Human-based evolutionary computation

    Human-based evolutionary computation

    Human-based evolutionary computation (HBEC) is a set of evolutionary computation techniques that rely on human innovation. == Classes and examples == Human-based evolutionary computation techniques can be classified into three more specific classes analogous to ones in evolutionary computation. There are three basic types of innovation: initialization, mutation, and recombination. Here is a table illustrating which type of human innovation are supported in different classes of HBEC: All these three classes also have to implement selection, performed either by humans or by computers. === Human-based selection strategy === Human-based selection strategy is a simplest human-based evolutionary computation procedure. It is used heavily today by websites outsourcing collection and selection of the content to humans (user-contributed content). Viewed as evolutionary computation, their mechanism supports two operations: initialization (when a user adds a new item) and selection (when a user expresses preference among items). The website software aggregates the preferences to compute the fitness of items so that it can promote the fittest items and discard the worst ones. Several methods of human-based selection were analytically compared in studies by Kosorukoff and Gentry. Because the concept seems too simple, most of the websites implementing the idea can't avoid the common pitfall: informational cascade in soliciting human preference. For example, digg-style implementations, pervasive on the web, heavily bias subsequent human evaluations by prior ones by showing how many votes the items already have. This makes the aggregated evaluation depend on a very small initial sample of rarely independent evaluations. This encourages many people to game the system that might add to digg's popularity but detract from the quality of the featured results. It is too easy to submit evaluation in digg-style system based only on the content title, without reading the actual content supposed to be evaluated. A better example of a human-based selection system is Stumbleupon. In Stumbleupon, users first experience the content (stumble upon it), and can then submit their preference by pressing a thumb-up or thumb-down button. Because the user doesn't see the number of votes given to the site by previous users, Stumbleupon can collect a relatively unbiased set of user preferences, and thus evaluate content much more precisely. === Human-based evolution strategy === In this context and maybe generally, the Wikipedia software is the best illustration of a working human-based evolution strategy wherein the (targeted) evolution of any given page comprises the fine tuning of the knowledge base of such information that relates to that page. Traditional evolution strategy has three operators: initialization, mutation, and selection. In the case of Wikipedia, the initialization operator is page creation, the mutation operator is incremental page editing. The selection operator is less salient. It is provided by the revision history and the ability to select among all previous revisions via a revert operation. If the page is vandalised and no longer a good fit to its title, a reader can easily go to the revision history and select one of the previous revisions that fits best (hopefully, the previous one). This selection feature is crucial to the success of the Wikipedia. An interesting fact is that the original wiki software was created in 1995, but it took at least another six years for large wiki-based collaborative projects to appear. Why did it take so long? One explanation is that the original wiki software lacked a selection operation and hence couldn't effectively support content evolution. The addition of revision history and the rise of large wiki-supported communities coincide in time. From an evolutionary computation point of view, this is not surprising: without a selection operation the content would undergo an aimless genetic drift and would unlikely to be useful to anyone. That is what many people expected from Wikipedia at its inception. However, with a selection operation, the utility of content has a tendency to improve over time as beneficial changes accumulate. This is what actually happens on a large scale in Wikipedia. === Human-based genetic algorithm === Human-based genetic algorithm (HBGA) provides means for human-based recombination operation (a distinctive feature of genetic algorithms). Recombination operator brings together highly fit parts of different solutions that evolved independently. This makes the evolutionary process more efficient.

    Read more →
  • Emma Hart (computer scientist)

    Emma Hart (computer scientist)

    Professor Emma Hart, FRSE (born 1967) is an English computer scientist known for her work in artificial immune systems (AIS), evolutionary computation and optimisation. She is a professor of computational intelligence at Edinburgh Napier University, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Evolutionary Computation (MIT Press), and D. Coordinator of the Future & Emerging Technologies (FET) Proactive Initiative, Fundamentals of Collective Adaptive Systems. == Early life and education == Hart was born in Middlesbrough, England in 1967. In 1990 she graduated from the University of Oxford with a first class BA(Hons) in Chemistry. She then continued her studies at the University of Edinburgh, graduating with an MSc in Artificial Intelligence in 1994, followed by a PhD that explored the use of immunology as an inspiration for computing, examining a range of techniques applied to optimization and data classification problems. Her dissertation was titled Immunology as a metaphor for computational information processing: Fact or fiction?, and her doctoral advisor was Peter Ross. == Career == In 2000 Hart took a position as a lecturer at Edinburgh Napier University, and was promoted to a Reader, Professor, and in 2008 Chair in Natural Computation. She is now director of the Centre of Algorithms, Visualisation and Evolving Systems (CAVES) group in the School of Computing. She continues to research in the area of developing novel bio-inspired techniques for solving a range of real-world optimisation and classification problems, as well as exploring the fundamental properties of immune-inspired computing through modelling and simulation. She is also involved in editorial activity and currently occupies the position of Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Evolutionary Computation (MIT Press). Her interests lie in the area of bio-inspired computing, in particular artificial immune systems (AIS). She also undertakes research in three main areas: optimisation, self-organising/self-adaptive systems, and artificial intelligence. Hart is D. Coordinator of Fundamentals of Collective Adaptive Systems (FoCAS), a Future and Emerging Technologies Proactive Initiative funded by the European Commission under FP7. == Selected works == === Conference talks === Hart, Emma. "Lifelong learning in optimization (video)". 28th European Conference on Operational Research. The Association of European Operational Research Societies. Hart, Emma (December 2021). "Self-assembling robots and the potential of artificial evolution". TED talk 2021. === Journal articles === "An immune system approach to scheduling in changing environments". E.Hart, P.Ross. 1999. Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (2), 1559–1566. "Exploiting the analogy between immunology and sparse distributed memories: A system for clustering non-stationary data". E.Hart, P.Ross. 2002. 1st International Conference on Artificial Immune Systems. "Evolutionary scheduling: A review". E Hart, P Ross, D Corne. 2005. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 6(2), 191–220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-005-7580-7 "Application areas of AIS: The past, the present and the future". E.Hart, J.Timmis. 2008. Applied soft computing 8(1), 191–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2006.12.004 "Structure versus function: a topological perspective on immune networks". E.Hart, H.Bersini, F.Santos. 2010. Natural computing 9(3), 603–624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11047-009-9138-8 "On the life-long learning capabilities of a nelli: A hyper-heuristic optimisation system". E.Hart, K.Sim. 2014. International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 282–291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10762-2_28 "A hyper-heuristic ensemble method for static job-shop scheduling". E.Hart, K.Sim. 2016. Evolutionary computation 24(4), 609-635. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/EVCO_a_00183 == Awards and recognition == 2016, Featured article on Lifelong Learning in Optimisation, IFORS newsletter 2016, "A Combined Generative and Selective Hyper-heuristic for the Vehicle Routing Problem" presented at GECCO 2016 (Denver, USA), ACM 2016, "A Hybrid Parameter Control Approach Applied to a Diversity-based Multi-objective Memetic Algorithm for Frequency Assignment Problems" presented at WCCI 2016 (Vancouver, Canada), IEEE 2017, Keynote Speaker, 2017 International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence 2018, Bronze Award in International Human-Competitive Awards (Humies), International Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, Kyoto Japan 2018, Nomination for best paper award, GECCO 18, Kyoto, Japan 2022, Elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh

    Read more →
  • Algorithmic accountability

    Algorithmic accountability

    Algorithmic accountability refers to the allocation of responsibility for the consequences of real-world actions influenced by algorithms used in decision-making processes. Ideally, algorithms should be designed to eliminate bias from their decision-making outcomes. This means they ought to evaluate only relevant characteristics of the input data, avoiding distinctions based on attributes that are generally inappropriate in social contexts, such as an individual's ethnicity in legal judgments. However, adherence to this principle is not always guaranteed, and there are instances where individuals may be adversely affected by algorithmic decisions. Responsibility for any harm resulting from a machine's decision may lie with the algorithm itself or with the individuals who designed it, particularly if the decision resulted from bias or flawed data analysis inherent in the algorithm's design. == Algorithm usage == Algorithms are widely utilized across various sectors of society that incorporate computational techniques in their control systems. These applications span numerous industries, including but not limited to medical, transportation, and payment services. In these contexts, algorithms perform functions such as: Approving or denying credit card applications; Approving or denying immigrant visas; Determining which taxpayers will be audited on their income taxes; Managing systems that control self-driving cars on a highway; Scoring individuals as potential criminals for use in legal proceedings; Search engines that match and rank database and internet search results; Recommendation systems that filter which news, entertainment, or purchase items are featured in a feed; Market-making algorithms that match sellers and buyers, such as in transportation (ride-hailing) or financial platforms. However, the implementation of these algorithms can be complex and opaque. Generally, algorithms function as "black boxes," meaning that the specific processes an input undergoes during execution are often not transparent, with users typically only seeing the resulting output. This lack of transparency raises concerns about potential biases within the algorithms, as the parameters influencing decision-making may not be well understood. The outputs generated can lead to perceptions of bias, especially if individuals in similar circumstances receive different results. According to Nicholas Diakopoulos: But these algorithms can make mistakes. They have biases. Yet they sit in opaque black boxes, their inner workings, their inner “thoughts” hidden behind layers of complexity. We need to get inside that black box, to understand how they may be exerting power on us, and to understand where they might be making unjust mistakes == Wisconsin Supreme Court case == Algorithms are prevalent across various fields and significantly influence decisions that affect the population at large. Their underlying structures and parameters often remain unknown to those impacted by their outcomes. A notable case illustrating this issue is a recent ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court concerning "risk assessment" algorithms used in criminal justice. The court determined that scores generated by such algorithms, which analyze multiple parameters from individuals, should not be used as a determining factor for arresting an accused individual. Furthermore, the court mandated that all reports submitted to judges must include information regarding the accuracy of the algorithm used to compute these scores. This ruling is regarded as a noteworthy development in how society should manage software that makes consequential decisions, highlighting the importance of reliability, particularly in complex settings like the legal system. The use of algorithms in these contexts necessitates a high degree of impartiality in processing input data. However, experts note that there is still considerable work to be done to ensure the accuracy of algorithmic results. Questions about the transparency of data processing continue to arise, which raises issues regarding the appropriateness of the algorithms and the intentions of their designers. == Controversies == A notable instance of potential algorithmic bias is highlighted in an article by The Washington Post regarding the ride-hailing service Uber. An analysis of collected data revealed that estimated waiting times for users varied based on the neighborhoods in which they resided. Key factors influencing these discrepancies included the predominant ethnicity and average income of the area. Specifically, neighborhoods with a majority white population and higher economic status tended to have shorter waiting times, while those with more diverse ethnic compositions and lower average incomes experienced longer waits. It’s important to clarify that this observation reflects a correlation identified in the data, rather than a definitive cause-and-effect relationship. No value judgments are made regarding the behavior of the Uber app in these cases. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: Concern about “black box” algorithms that govern our lives has been spreading. New York University’s Information Law Institute hosted a conference on algorithmic accountability, noting: “Scholars, stakeholders, and policymakers question the adequacy of existing mechanisms governing algorithmic decision-making and grapple with new challenges presented by the rise of algorithmic power in terms of transparency, fairness, and equal treatment.” Yale Law School’s Information Society Project is studying this, too. “Algorithmic modeling may be biased or limited, and the uses of algorithms are still opaque in many critical sectors,” the group concluded. == Possible solutions == Discussions among experts have sought viable solutions to understand the operations of algorithms, often referred to as "black boxes." It is generally proposed that companies responsible for developing and implementing these algorithms should ensure their reliability by disclosing the internal processes of their systems. Hemant Taneja, writing for TechCrunch, emphasizes that major technology companies, such as Google, Amazon, and Uber, must actively incorporate algorithmic accountability into their operations. He suggests that these companies should transparently monitor their own systems to avoid stringent regulatory measures. One potential approach is the introduction of regulations in the tech sector to enforce oversight of algorithmic processes. However, such regulations could significantly impact software developers and the industry as a whole. It may be more beneficial for companies to voluntarily disclose the details of their algorithms and decision-making parameters, which could enhance the trustworthiness of their solutions. Another avenue discussed is the possibility of self-regulation by the companies that create these algorithms, allowing them to take proactive steps in ensuring accountability and transparency in their operations. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: There’s another benefit — perhaps a huge one — to software-defined regulation. It will also show us a path to a more efficient government. The world’s legal logic and regulations can be coded into software and smart sensors can offer real-time monitoring of everything from air and water quality, traffic flows and queues at the DMV. Regulators define the rules, technologist create the software to implement them and then AI and ML help refine iterations of policies going forward. This should lead to much more efficient, effective governments at the local, national and global levels.

    Read more →
  • ELMo

    ELMo

    ELMo (embeddings from language model) is a word embedding method for representing a sequence of words as a corresponding sequence of vectors. It was created by researchers at the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, and University of Washington and first released in February 2018. It is a bidirectional LSTM which takes character-level as inputs and produces word-level embeddings, trained on a corpus of about 30 million sentences and 1 billion words. The architecture of ELMo accomplishes a contextual understanding of tokens. Deep contextualized word representation is useful for many natural language processing tasks, such as coreference resolution and polysemy resolution. ELMo was historically important as a pioneer of self-supervised generative pretraining followed by fine-tuning, where a large model is trained to reproduce a large corpus, then the large model is augmented with additional task-specific weights and fine-tuned on supervised task data. It was an instrumental step in the evolution towards transformer-based language modelling. == Architecture == ELMo is a multilayered bidirectional LSTM on top of a token embedding layer. The output of all LSTMs concatenated together consists of the token embedding. The input text sequence is first mapped by an embedding layer into a sequence of vectors. Then two parts are run in parallel over it. The forward part is a 2-layered LSTM with 4096 units and 512 dimension projections, and a residual connection from the first to second layer. The backward part has the same architecture, but processes the sequence back-to-front. The outputs from all 5 components (embedding layer, two forward LSTM layers, and two backward LSTM layers) are concatenated and multiplied by a linear matrix ("projection matrix") to produce a 512-dimensional representation per input token. ELMo was pretrained on a text corpus of 1 billion words. The forward part is trained by repeatedly predicting the next token, and the backward part is trained by repeatedly predicting the previous token. After the ELMo model is pretrained, its parameters are frozen, except for the projection matrix, which can be fine-tuned to minimize loss on specific language tasks. This is an early example of the pretraining-fine-tune paradigm. The original paper demonstrated this by improving state of the art on six benchmark NLP tasks. === Contextual word representation === The architecture of ELMo accomplishes a contextual understanding of tokens. For example, the first forward LSTM of ELMo would process each input token in the context of all previous tokens, and the first backward LSTM would process each token in the context of all subsequent tokens. The second forward LSTM would then incorporate those to further contextualize each token. Deep contextualized word representation is useful for many natural language processing tasks, such as coreference resolution and polysemy resolution. For example, consider the sentenceShe went to the bank to withdraw money.In order to represent the token "bank", the model must resolve its polysemy in context. The first forward LSTM would process "bank" in the context of "She went to the", which would allow it to represent the word to be a location that the subject is going towards. The first backward LSTM would process "bank" in the context of "to withdraw money", which would allow it to disambiguate the word as referring to a financial institution. The second forward LSTM can then process "bank" using the representation vector provided by the first backward LSTM, thus allowing it to represent it to be a financial institution that the subject is going towards. == Historical context == ELMo is one link in a historical evolution of language modelling. Consider a simple problem of document classification, where we want to assign a label (e.g., "spam", "not spam", "politics", "sports") to a given piece of text. The simplest approach is the "bag of words" approach, where each word in the document is treated independently, and its frequency is used as a feature for classification. This was computationally cheap but ignored the order of words and their context within the sentence. GloVe and Word2Vec built upon this by learning fixed vector representations (embeddings) for words based on their co-occurrence patterns in large text corpora. Like BERT (but unlike "bag of words" such as Word2Vec and GloVe), ELMo word embeddings are context-sensitive, producing different representations for words that share the same spelling. It was trained on a corpus of about 30 million sentences and 1 billion words. Previously, bidirectional LSTM was used for contextualized word representation. ELMo applied the idea to a large scale, achieving state of the art performance. After the 2017 publication of Transformer architecture, the architecture of ELMo was changed from a multilayered bidirectional LSTM to a Transformer encoder, giving rise to BERT. BERT has a similar pretrain-fine-tune workflow, but uses a Transformer with implications for more parallelizable training.

    Read more →
  • A.I.s

    A.I.s

    A.I.s is a themed anthology of science fiction short works edited by American writers Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois. It was first published in paperback by Ace Books in December 2004. It was reissued as an ebook by Baen Books in June 2013. The book collects ten novelettes and short stories by various science fiction authors, together with a preface by the editors. == Contents == "Preface" (Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois) "Antibodies" (Charles Stross) "Trojan Horse" (Michael Swanwick) "Birth Day" (Robert Reed) "The Hydrogen Wall" (Gregory Benford) "The Turing Test" (Chris Beckett) "Dante Dreams" (Stephen Baxter) "The Names of All the Spirits" (J. R. Dunn) "From the Corner of My Eye" (Alexander Glass) "Halfjack" (Roger Zelazny) "Computer Virus" (Nancy Kress)

    Read more →
  • Human-based evolutionary computation

    Human-based evolutionary computation

    Human-based evolutionary computation (HBEC) is a set of evolutionary computation techniques that rely on human innovation. == Classes and examples == Human-based evolutionary computation techniques can be classified into three more specific classes analogous to ones in evolutionary computation. There are three basic types of innovation: initialization, mutation, and recombination. Here is a table illustrating which type of human innovation are supported in different classes of HBEC: All these three classes also have to implement selection, performed either by humans or by computers. === Human-based selection strategy === Human-based selection strategy is a simplest human-based evolutionary computation procedure. It is used heavily today by websites outsourcing collection and selection of the content to humans (user-contributed content). Viewed as evolutionary computation, their mechanism supports two operations: initialization (when a user adds a new item) and selection (when a user expresses preference among items). The website software aggregates the preferences to compute the fitness of items so that it can promote the fittest items and discard the worst ones. Several methods of human-based selection were analytically compared in studies by Kosorukoff and Gentry. Because the concept seems too simple, most of the websites implementing the idea can't avoid the common pitfall: informational cascade in soliciting human preference. For example, digg-style implementations, pervasive on the web, heavily bias subsequent human evaluations by prior ones by showing how many votes the items already have. This makes the aggregated evaluation depend on a very small initial sample of rarely independent evaluations. This encourages many people to game the system that might add to digg's popularity but detract from the quality of the featured results. It is too easy to submit evaluation in digg-style system based only on the content title, without reading the actual content supposed to be evaluated. A better example of a human-based selection system is Stumbleupon. In Stumbleupon, users first experience the content (stumble upon it), and can then submit their preference by pressing a thumb-up or thumb-down button. Because the user doesn't see the number of votes given to the site by previous users, Stumbleupon can collect a relatively unbiased set of user preferences, and thus evaluate content much more precisely. === Human-based evolution strategy === In this context and maybe generally, the Wikipedia software is the best illustration of a working human-based evolution strategy wherein the (targeted) evolution of any given page comprises the fine tuning of the knowledge base of such information that relates to that page. Traditional evolution strategy has three operators: initialization, mutation, and selection. In the case of Wikipedia, the initialization operator is page creation, the mutation operator is incremental page editing. The selection operator is less salient. It is provided by the revision history and the ability to select among all previous revisions via a revert operation. If the page is vandalised and no longer a good fit to its title, a reader can easily go to the revision history and select one of the previous revisions that fits best (hopefully, the previous one). This selection feature is crucial to the success of the Wikipedia. An interesting fact is that the original wiki software was created in 1995, but it took at least another six years for large wiki-based collaborative projects to appear. Why did it take so long? One explanation is that the original wiki software lacked a selection operation and hence couldn't effectively support content evolution. The addition of revision history and the rise of large wiki-supported communities coincide in time. From an evolutionary computation point of view, this is not surprising: without a selection operation the content would undergo an aimless genetic drift and would unlikely to be useful to anyone. That is what many people expected from Wikipedia at its inception. However, with a selection operation, the utility of content has a tendency to improve over time as beneficial changes accumulate. This is what actually happens on a large scale in Wikipedia. === Human-based genetic algorithm === Human-based genetic algorithm (HBGA) provides means for human-based recombination operation (a distinctive feature of genetic algorithms). Recombination operator brings together highly fit parts of different solutions that evolved independently. This makes the evolutionary process more efficient.

    Read more →