AI Art Prints

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

  • Intelligent control

    Intelligent control

    Intelligent control is a class of control techniques that use various artificial intelligence computing approaches like neural networks, Bayesian probability, fuzzy logic, machine learning, reinforcement learning, evolutionary computation and genetic algorithms. == Overview == Intelligent control can be divided into the following major sub-domains: Neural network control Machine learning control Reinforcement learning Bayesian control Fuzzy control Neuro-fuzzy control Expert Systems Genetic control New control techniques are created continuously as new models of intelligent behavior are created and computational methods developed to support them. === Neural network controller === Neural networks have been used to solve problems in almost all spheres of science and technology. Neural network control basically involves two steps: System identification Control It has been shown that a feedforward network with nonlinear, continuous and differentiable activation functions have universal approximation capability. Recurrent networks have also been used for system identification. Given, a set of input-output data pairs, system identification aims to form a mapping among these data pairs. Such a network is supposed to capture the dynamics of a system. For the control part, deep reinforcement learning has shown its ability to control complex systems. === Bayesian controllers === Bayesian probability has produced a number of algorithms that are in common use in many advanced control systems, serving as state space estimators of some variables that are used in the controller. The Kalman filter and the Particle filter are two examples of popular Bayesian control components. The Bayesian approach to controller design often requires an important effort in deriving the so-called system model and measurement model, which are the mathematical relationships linking the state variables to the sensor measurements available in the controlled system. In this respect, it is very closely linked to the system-theoretic approach to control design.

    Read more →
  • Best AI Voice Assistants in 2026

    Best AI Voice Assistants in 2026

    Trying to pick the best AI voice assistant? An AI voice assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI voice assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • Nathalie Japkowicz

    Nathalie Japkowicz

    Nathalie Japkowicz is a Canadian computer scientist specializing in machine learning. She is a professor and department chair of computer science at the American University College of Arts and Sciences. == Life == Nathalie Japkowicz completed a B.Sc. at McGill University in 1988. She earned an M.Sc. from the University of Toronto in 1990. She completed a Ph.D. at Rutgers University in 1999. Her dissertation was titled Concept-learning in the absence of counter-examples: an autoassociation-based approach to classification. Stephen José Hanson and Casimir Alexander Kulikowski were her doctoral advisors. Japkowicz worked at the University of Ottawa in the school of electrical engineering and computer science. She was the lead of its laboratory for research on machine learning for defense security. From 2003 to 2005, Japkowicz was the secretary of the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association (CAIAC). She was CAIAC vice president from 2009 to 2014 and president from 2013 to 2015, and part-president from 2015 to 2017. Japkowicz is a professor and department chair of computer science at the American University College of Arts and Sciences. She researches artificial intelligence, machine learning, data mining, and big data analysis. == Selected works == Gao, Yong; Japkowicz, Nathalie, eds. (2009). Advances in Artificial Intelligence: 22nd Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Canadian AI 2009 Kelowna, Canada, May 25–27, 2009 Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 5549. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01818-3. ISBN 978-3-642-01817-6. S2CID 27083226. Japkowicz, Nathalie; Shah, Mohak (2011). Evaluating Learning Algorithms: A Classification Perspective (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511921803. ISBN 978-0-511-92180-3. Japkowicz, Nathalie; Matwin, Stan, eds. (2015). Discovery Science: 18th International Conference, DS 2015, Banff, AB, Canada, October 4–6, 2015. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 9356. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24282-8. ISBN 978-3-319-24281-1. S2CID 1302223. Japkowicz, Nathalie; Stefanowski, Jerzy, eds. (2016). Big Data Analysis: New Algorithms for a New Society. Studies in Big Data. Vol. 16. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26989-4. ISBN 978-3-319-26987-0. Ceci, Michelangelo; Japkowicz, Nathalie; Liu, Jiming; Papadopoulos, George A.; Raś, Zbigniew W., eds. (2018). Foundations of Intelligent Systems: 24th International Symposium, ISMIS 2018, Limassol, Cyprus, October 29–31, 2018, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 11177. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-01851-1. ISBN 978-3-030-01850-4. S2CID 53038780.

    Read more →
  • AI Presentation Makers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    AI Presentation Makers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    Looking for the best AI presentation maker? An AI presentation maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI presentation maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • Light scanning photomacrography

    Light scanning photomacrography

    Light Scanning Photomacrography (LSP), also known as Scanning Light Photomacrography (SLP) or Deep-Field Photomacrography, is a photographic film technique that allows for high magnification light imaging with exceptional depth of field (DOF). This method overcomes the limitations of conventional macro photography, which typically only keeps a portion of the subject in acceptable focus at high magnifications. == Historical background == The principles of LSP were first documented in the early 1960s by Dan McLachlan Jr., who highlighted its capability for extreme focal depth in microscopy and in 1968 patented the process. The technique was revived and further developed in the 1980s by photographers such as Darwin Dale and Nile Root, a faculty member at the Rochester Institute of Technology. In the early 1990s, William Sharp and Charles Kazilek, both researchers at Arizona State University, also published articles describing their technique and system setup for capturing SLP images. == Predecessor to stack image photography == Light Scanning Photomacrography offered a powerful analog tool for high-detail imaging in the age of film photography. It provided a comprehensive depth of field, making it invaluable in scientific and biomedical photography. As technology and techniques continue to evolve, LSP has been replaced by digital image focus stacking. This technique uses a collection of images captured in series at different focal depths, which are then processed using computer software to create a single image with a greater focus depth than any single image. == LSP technique and results == LSP involves the use of a thin plane of light that scans across the subject, which is mounted on a stage moving perpendicular to the film plane. The technique utilizes traditional optics and is governed by the physical laws of depth of field. By moving the subject through a narrow band of illumination, the entire subject can be recorded in sharp focus from the nearest details to the farthest ones. This analog process produces sharp and detailed images by slowly recording the image on film as the specimen passes through the sheet of light that is thinner than the effective DOF. Because the image is captured at the same relative distance from the camera lens, the resulting images are axonometric rather than perspective projection, which is what the human eye sees and is typically captured by a film camera. Because all parts of an LSP image are captured at the same distance from the lens, relative measurements can be taken from an LSP photograph and can be used for comparison. == Equipment and setup == A typical LSP setup includes: A stage that can move the subject perpendicular to the film plane. Light sources, in some cases modified projectors, are used to project a thin plane of light. A camera mounted on a stable stand such as a tabletop copy stand. In 1991, Sharp and Kazilek described their SLP system that used three Kodak Ektagraphic slide projectors with zoom lenses to create a thin plane of light. The projectors each had a slide mount with two razor blades placed edge-to-edge to create a thin slit for the light to pass through. The image was captured using a Nikon FE-2 SLR camera mounted above the specimen. Kodachrome 25 slide film was used to record the image and to minimize film grain size and maximize image sharpness == Commercial systems == A commercial SLP instrument was produced by the Irvine Optical Corp. Their DYNAPHOT system was based on a photomacroscope and could capture images on 4x5 film. The instrument came with two or three illumination sources and a motorized specimen stage. The system advertised a 2X – 40X magnification range and the ability to capture images in black and white and color. Other systems have been developed by Nile Root and Theodore Clarke and reported higher magnification (up to 100X). == LSP process == Alignment and Focusing: The light sources are aligned and focused to project a thin, consistent plane of light across the subject. Stage Movement: The subject stage moves at a controlled speed, scanning through the plane of light. Image Capture: The camera shutter is set to a long exposure or can be opened and closed manually. As the subject moves through the illuminated plane, it is recorded on the film. This process is very much like painting an image onto the film using photons instead of paint. == Applications == LSP was particularly useful in biomedical photography, where it was used to document magnified subjects with increased depth of field over traditional macro and micro photography. It has been employed to capture detailed images of biological specimens, such as imaging small insects and their parts. SLP has been used to document shell collections for scientific documentation and research. Other applications include forensic science, mineralogy, and the imaging of fractured surfaces and parts == Advantages and challenges of LSP imaging == === Advantages === Exceptional depth of field: Subjects are rendered in sharp focus throughout. High magnification: Detailed images at significant magnification without sacrificing DOF. Analog precision: Provides a non-digital solution with accurate image representation. Versatility: Can be used for a range of subject sizes, from macro to non-macro scales. === Challenges === Technical complexity: Requires precise setup and alignment. Exposure time: Typically requires long exposure times due to the scanning process. Contrast control: The highly directional lighting can create harsh shadows and high contrast, which may need to be managed. Digital competition: Focus stacking has largely replaced LSP in the digital era due to convenience and flexibility. == DIY contributions == Enthusiasts and researchers have contributed to the development and accessibility of LSP by creating and sharing DIY guides. These contributions have enabled others to build their own LSP systems using readily available materials and components. Nile Root's publications provide detailed instructions and recommendations for constructing an LSP setup. These DIY systems have allowed a wider audience to explore and utilize the benefits of LSP imaging in various fields.

    Read more →
  • Is an AI Virtual Assistant Worth It in 2026?

    Is an AI Virtual Assistant Worth It in 2026?

    Shopping for the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI virtual assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • The Best Free AI Customer-support Bot for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Customer-support Bot for Beginners

    Shopping for the best AI customer-support bot? An AI customer-support bot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI customer-support bot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • AI Sales Assistants Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    AI Sales Assistants Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    Curious about the best AI sales assistant? An AI sales assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI sales assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • VOCEDplus

    VOCEDplus

    VOCEDplus is a free international research database about tertiary education, maintained and developed by staff at the c (NCVER) in Adelaide, South Australia. The focus of the database content is the relation of post-compulsory education and training to workforce needs, skills development, and social inclusion. == Structure == The content of the VOCEDplus database encompasses vocational education and training (VET), higher education, lifelong learning, informal learning, VET in schools, adult and community education, apprenticeships/traineeships, international education, providers of education and training, and workforce development. It is international in scope and contains over 84,000 English language records, many with links to full text documents. VOCEDplus contains extensive Australian materials and includes a wide range of international information, covering outcomes of tertiary education in the shape of published research, practice, policy, and statistics. Entries are included for the following types of publications: reports; annual reports; papers; discussion papers; occasional papers; working papers; books; book chapters; conference papers; conference proceedings; journals; journal articles; policy documents; published statistics; theses; podcasts; and teaching and training materials. Each database entry contains standard bibliographic information and an abstract. Many entries include full text access via the publisher's website or a digitised copy. == History == === 1989-1997 === In the early years VOCEDplus was known as VOCED. The original database was produced by a network of clearinghouses across Australia with the aim of sharing activities in the technical and further education (TAFE) sector. VOCED was produced in hardcopy and an electronic version was distributed on diskette. === 1997-2001 === 1997 - the first web version of VOCED was made available from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) organisational website 1998 - a major project to upgrade the database and expand its international coverage commenced 2001 - creation of VOCED's own website 2001 - VOCED endorsed as the UNESCO international database for technical and vocational education and training (TVET) research information === 2001-2009 === Many changes to the database and website occurred during this period with a focus on continuous improvement to meet the needs of users and utilise emerging technologies. 2006 - materials produced for two adult literacy and learning programs funded by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) - the Workplace English Language and Learning (WELL) Programme and the Adult Literacy National Project (ALNP) included in VOCED 2007 - the Australian clearinghouse network transferred most of the hardcopy collections to NCVER, to form a centralised repository of resources 2009 - materials produced by Reframing the Future (RTF) a vocational education and training workforce development initiative of the Australian, State and Territory Governments included in VOCED === 2009-2014 === A major rebuild of the database and website was undertaken during this period to take advantage of the potential of new technologies to provide improved services and incorporate Web 2.0 technologies (RSS feeds, and share and bookmark tools). 2009 - scope expanded to more fully encompass the higher education sector 2011 - launch of VOCEDplus with the name change representing the enhanced features and extended focus 2012 - a major retrospective digitisation project commenced and by the end of the 2012-2013 financial year a total of 9,328 publications (593,534 pages/microfiche frames) had been digitised, ensuring these publications are available electronically for free === 2014-2019 === A number of significant curated content products were released during this period. 2015 - release of a refreshed look to adopt the new NCVER branding plus a number of search enhancements (Guided search, Expert search, and Glossary search) were added 2015 - first in the series of 'Focus on...' pages released 2016 - launch of the 'Pod Network', a convenient and efficient platform that allows instant access to research and a multitude of resources on a range of subjects 2017 - completion of the 'Pod Network', consisting of 20 Pods (on broad subjects including Apprenticeships and traineeships, Foundation skills, Teaching and learning, Career development, and Students) and 74 Podlets (on narrow topics including Online learning, Social media, VET in schools, STEM skills, and Adult literacy) 2018 - launch of the 'Timeline of Australian VET Policy Initiatives' and the 'VET Knowledge Bank' which contains a suite of products capturing Australia's diverse, complex and ever-changing VET system 2019 - after an internal review, a refreshed, streamlined version of the 'Pod Network' was released, consisting of 13 Pods and 20 Podlets 2019 - launch of the 'VET Practitioner Resource' which contains a range of information to support VET practitioners in their work and is organised into three sections: (1) Teaching, training and assessment: standards, guidance, research and good practice resources to inform daily work; (2) Practitioners as researchers: information for undertaking practitioner-led research; and (3) The VET workforce: information about VET teachers and trainers, and the professional development needs of the VET workforce 2019 - VOCEDplus celebrated 30 years of providing information to the tertiary education sector and the homepage was refreshed to make it more modern and easier to use === 2020- === VOCEDplus continued to be accessible throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. 2020-2021 - the VET Knowledge Bank added a dedicated page, 'COVID-19 announcements', that showcases the measures introduced by the Australian, state and territory governments to mitigate the impact of the pandemic and promote economic recovery 2020-2024 - published research about the effects of the pandemic on education and training, providers, students, labour markets, employment and employees was collected and made permanently available in the database 2024 - VOCEDplus celebrated 35 years of providing information to the tertiary education sector. The homepage was refreshed and a number of enhancements and new features were implemented including a new My Profile feature, improvements to My Selection, accessible search history and saved searches, enhanced search functionality, and improved navigation.

    Read more →
  • Top 10 AI Copywriting Tools Compared (2026)

    Top 10 AI Copywriting Tools Compared (2026)

    In search of the best AI copywriting tool? An AI copywriting tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI copywriting tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • Sinkov statistic

    Sinkov statistic

    Sinkov statistics, also known as log-weight statistics, is a specialized field of statistics that was developed by Abraham Sinkov, while working for the small Signal Intelligence Service organization, the primary mission of which was to compile codes and ciphers for use by the U.S. Army. The mathematics involved include modular arithmetic, a bit of number theory, some linear algebra of two dimensions with matrices, some combinatorics, and a little statistics. Sinkov did not explain the theoretical underpinnings of his statistics, or characterized its distribution, nor did he give a decision procedure for accepting or rejecting candidate plaintexts on the basis of their S1 scores. The situation becomes more difficult when comparing strings of different lengths because Sinkov does not explain how the distribution of his statistics changes with length, especially when applied to higher-order grams. As for how to accept or reject a candidate plaintext, Sinkov simply said to try all possibilities and to pick the one with the highest S1 value. Although the procedure works for some applications, it is inadequate for applications that require on-line decisions. Furthermore, it is desirable to have a meaningful interpretation of the S1 values.

    Read more →
  • Top 10 AI Essay Writers Compared (2026)

    Top 10 AI Essay Writers Compared (2026)

    Curious about the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • Loebner Prize

    Loebner Prize

    The Loebner Prize was an annual competition in artificial intelligence that awarded prizes to the computer programs considered by the judges to be the most human-like. The format of the competition was that of a standard Turing test. In each round, a human judge simultaneously held textual conversations with a computer program and a human being via computer. Based upon the responses, the judge would attempt to determine which was which. The contest was launched in 1990 by Hugh Loebner in conjunction with the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, Massachusetts, United States. In 2004 and 2005, it was held in Loebner's apartment in New York City. Within the field of artificial intelligence, the Loebner Prize is somewhat controversial; the most prominent critic, Marvin Minsky, called it a publicity stunt that does not help the field along. Beginning in 2014, it was organised by the AISB at Bletchley Park. It has also been associated with Flinders University, Dartmouth College, the Science Museum in London, University of Reading and Ulster University, Magee Campus, Derry, UK City of Culture. For the final 2019 competition, the format changed. There was no panel of judges. Instead, the chatbots were judged by the public and there were to be no human competitors. The prize has been reported as defunct as of 2020. == Prizes == Originally, $2,000 was awarded for the most human-seeming program in the competition. The prize was $3,000 in 2005 and $2,250 in 2006. In 2008, $3,000 was awarded. In addition, there were two one-time-only prizes that have never been awarded. $25,000 is offered for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human and which can convince judges that the human is the computer program. $100,000 is the reward for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human in a Turing test that includes deciphering and understanding text, visual, and auditory input. The competition was planned to end after the achievement of this prize. == Competition rules and restrictions == The rules varied over the years and early competitions featured restricted conversation Turing tests but since 1995 the discussion has been unrestricted. For the three entries in 2007, Robert Medeksza, Noah Duncan and Rollo Carpenter, some basic "screening questions" were used by the sponsor to evaluate the state of the technology. These included simple questions about the time, what round of the contest it is, etc.; general knowledge ("What is a hammer for?"); comparisons ("Which is faster, a train or a plane?"); and questions demonstrating memory for preceding parts of the same conversation. "All nouns, adjectives and verbs will come from a dictionary suitable for children or adolescents under the age of 12." Entries did not need to respond "intelligently" to the questions to be accepted. For the first time in 2008 the sponsor allowed introduction of a preliminary phase to the contest opening up the competition to previously disallowed web-based entries judged by a variety of invited interrogators. The available rules do not state how interrogators are selected or instructed. Interrogators (who judge the systems) have limited time: 5 minutes per entity in the 2003 competition, 20+ per pair in 2004–2007 competitions, 5 minutes to conduct simultaneous conversations with a human and the program in 2008–2009, increased to 25 minutes of simultaneous conversation since 2010. == Criticisms == The prize has long been scorned by experts in the field, for a variety of reasons. It is regarded by many as a publicity stunt. Marvin Minsky scathingly offered a "prize" to anyone who could stop the competition. Loebner responded by jokingly observing that Minsky's offering a prize to stop the competition effectively made him a co-sponsor. The rules of the competition have encouraged poorly qualified judges to make rapid judgements. Interactions between judges and competitors was originally very brief, for example effectively 2.5 mins of questioning, which permitted only a few questions. Questioning was initially restricted to a single topic of the contestant's choice, such as "whimsical conversation", a domain suiting standard chatbot tricks. Competition entrants do not aim at understanding or intelligence but resort to basic ELIZA style tricks, and successful entrants find deception and pretense is rewarded. == Contests == See article history for more details of some earlier contests. A very incomplete listing of a few of the contests: === 2003 === In 2003, the contest was organised by Professor Richard H. R. Harper and Dr. Lynne Hamill from the Digital World Research Centre at the University of Surrey. Although no bot passed the Turing test, the winner was Jabberwock, created by Juergen Pirner. Second was Elbot (Fred Roberts, Artificial Solutions). Third was Jabberwacky, (Rollo Carpenter). === 2006 === In 2006, the contest was organised by Tim Child (CEO of Televirtual) and Huma Shah. On August 30, the four finalists were announced: Rollo Carpenter Richard Churchill and Marie-Claire Jenkins Noah Duncan Robert Medeksza The contest was held on 17 September in the VR theatre, Torrington Place campus of University College London. The judges included the University of Reading's cybernetics professor, Kevin Warwick, a professor of artificial intelligence, John Barnden (specialist in metaphor research at the University of Birmingham), a barrister, Victoria Butler-Cole and a journalist, Graham Duncan-Rowe. The latter's experience of the event can be found in an article in Technology Review. The winner was 'Joan', based on Jabberwacky, both created by Rollo Carpenter. === 2007 === The 2007 competition was held on October 21 in New York City. The judges were: computer science professor Russ Abbott, philosophy professor Hartry Field, psychology assistant professor Clayton Curtis and English lecturer Scott Hutchins. No bot passed the Turing test, but the judges ranked the three contestants as follows: 1st: Robert Medeksza, creator of Ultra Hal 2nd: Noah Duncan, a private entry, creator of Cletus 3rd: Rollo Carpenter from Icogno, creator of Jabberwacky The winner received $2,250 and the annual medal. The runners-up received $250 each. === 2008 === The 2008 competition was organised by professor Kevin Warwick, coordinated by Huma Shah and held on October 12 at the University of Reading, UK. After testing by over one hundred judges during the preliminary phase, in June and July 2008, six finalists were selected from thirteen original entrant artificial conversational entities (ACEs). Five of those invited competed in the finals: Brother Jerome, Peter Cole and Benji Adams Elbot, Fred Roberts / Artificial Solutions Eugene Goostman, Vladimir Veselov, Eugene Demchenko and Sergey Ulasen Jabberwacky, Rollo Carpenter Ultra Hal, Robert Medeksza In the finals, each of the judges was given five minutes to conduct simultaneous, split-screen conversations with two hidden entities. Elbot of Artificial Solutions won the 2008 Loebner Prize bronze award, for most human-like artificial conversational entity, through fooling three of the twelve judges who interrogated it (in the human-parallel comparisons) into believing it was human. This is coming very close to the 30% traditionally required to consider that a program has actually passed the Turing test. Eugene Goostman and Ultra Hal both deceived one judge each that it was the human. Will Pavia, a journalist for The Times, has written about his experience; a Loebner finals' judge, he was deceived by Elbot and Eugene. Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah have reported on the parallel-paired Turing tests. === 2009 === The 2009 Loebner Prize Competition was held September 6, 2009, at the Brighton Centre, Brighton UK in conjunction with the Interspeech 2009 conference. The prize amount for 2009 was $3,000. Entrants were David Levy, Rollo Carpenter, and Mohan Embar, who finished in that order. The writer Brian Christian participated in the 2009 Loebner Prize Competition as a human confederate, and described his experiences at the competition in his book The Most Human Human. === 2010 === The 2010 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 23 at California State University, Los Angeles. The 2010 competition was the 20th running of the contest. The winner was Bruce Wilcox with Suzette. === 2011 === The 2011 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 19 at the University of Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom. The prize amount for 2011 was $4,000. The four finalists and their chatterbots were Bruce Wilcox (Rosette), Adeena Mignogna (Zoe), Mohan Embar (Chip Vivant) and Ron Lee (Tutor), who finished in that order. That year there was an addition of a panel of junior judges, namely Georgia-Mae Lindfield, William Dunne, Sam Keat and Kirill Jerdev. The results of the junior contest were markedly different from the main contest, with chatterbots Tutor and Zoe tying for first place and Chip Vivant and Rosette coming in third and fourt

    Read more →
  • Hans Uszkoreit

    Hans Uszkoreit

    Hans Uszkoreit is a German computational linguist. Hans Uszkoreit studied Linguistics and Computer Science at Technische Universität Berlin and the University of Texas at Austin. While he was studying in Austin, he also worked as a research associate in a large machine translation project at the Linguistics Research Center. After he received his Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Texas, he worked as a computer scientist at the Artificial Intelligence Center and was affiliated with the Center for the Study of Language and Information at Stanford University. Nowadays, he is teaching as a professor of Computational Linguistics at Saarland University. Moreover, he serves as a Scientific Director at the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI) where he heads the DFKI Language Technology Lab. == Life and career == Hans Uszkoreit, a native of East Berlin, was actively involved in a group of young individuals who opposed the East Germany regime. His protesting against the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia led to his expulsion from high school and subsequent imprisonment for a period of fifteen months on charges of subversive agitation. Realizing that continuing his education in East Germany was not feasible, Uszkoreit made the decision to escape to West Berlin. There, he completed his high school education and pursued a degree in Linguistics and Computer Science at Technische Universität Berlin. During his time as a student, he worked part-time as an editor and writer for Zitty, a city magazine, which he co-founded. In 1977, Uszkoreit was granted a Fulbright Grant to further his studies at the University of Texas at Austin. During his time in Austin, he concurrently served as a research associate in a significant machine translation project. Subsequently, he received a second Fulbright grant, which enabled him to pursue a Ph.D. program in linguistics. In 1984, he successfully completed his doctoral studies, earning a Ph.D. in linguistics. Between 1982 and 1986, Uszkoreit held the position of a computer scientist at the Artificial Intelligence Center of SRI International in Menlo Park, California. In 1988, he created the Department of Computational Linguistics and Phonetics at Saarland University. In 1989 he was elected head of the Language Technology Lab at DFKI. In 2012, Uszkoreit's achievements in the domain of relation extraction led to his receipt of a Google Faculty Research Award, acknowledging the substantial progress made by Uszkoreit and his team in advancing the field. In 2013, Uszkoreit, in collaboration with Feiyu Xu and Roberto Navigli, was granted an additional Google Research Award, which provided support for a targeted project within Google's Language Understanding Program, focusing on the augmentation of language comprehension and analysis. == Personal life == He is father of a son Jakob Uszkoreit, machine learning researcher scientist, an author of the landmark paper "Attention Is All You Need", and daughter Lena Uszkoreit. == Awards == 2002 Elected Member of the European Academy of Sciences 2012 Google Faculty Research Award 2013 Google Focused Research Award

    Read more →
  • Muller automaton

    Muller automaton

    In automata theory, a Muller automaton is a type of an ω-automaton. The acceptance condition separates a Muller automaton from other ω-automata. The Muller automaton is defined using a Muller acceptance condition, i.e. the set of all states visited infinitely often must be an element of the acceptance set. Both deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata recognize the ω-regular languages. They are named after David E. Muller, an American mathematician and computer scientist, who invented them in 1963. == Formal definition == Formally, a deterministic Muller-automaton is a tuple A = (Q,Σ,δ,q0,F) that consists of the following information: Q is a finite set. The elements of Q are called the states of A. Σ is a finite set called the alphabet of A. δ: Q × Σ → Q is a function, called the transition function of A. q0 is an element of Q, called the initial state. F is a set of sets of states. Formally, F ⊆ P(Q) where P(Q) is powerset of Q. F defines the acceptance condition. A accepts exactly those runs in which the set of infinitely often occurring states is an element of F In a non-deterministic Muller automaton, the transition function δ is replaced with a transition relation Δ that returns a set of states and the initial state q0 is replaced by a set of initial states Q0. Generally, 'Muller automaton' refers to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. For more comprehensive formalisation look at ω-automaton. == Equivalence with other ω-automata == The Muller automata are equally expressive as parity automata, Rabin automata, Streett automata, and non-deterministic Büchi automata, to mention some, and strictly more expressive than the deterministic Büchi automata. The equivalence of the above automata and non-deterministic Muller automata can be shown very easily as the accepting conditions of these automata can be emulated using the acceptance condition of Muller automata and vice versa. McNaughton's theorem demonstrates the equivalence of non-deterministic Büchi automaton and deterministic Muller automaton. Thus, deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata are equivalent in terms of the languages they can accept. == Transformation to non-deterministic Muller automata == Following is a list of automata constructions that each transforms a type of ω-automata to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. From Büchi automata If B is the set of final states in a Büchi automaton with the set of states Q, we can construct a Muller automaton with same set of states, transition function and initial state with the Muller accepting condition as F = { X | X ∈ P(Q) ∧ X ∩ B ≠ ∅}. From Rabin automata/parity automata Similarly, the Rabin conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } and F ∩ F j ≠ ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}\neq \emptyset } , for some j. Note that this covers the case of parity automata too, as the parity acceptance condition can be expressed as a Rabin acceptance condition easily. From Streett automata The Streett conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ F j = ∅ ⟹ F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}=\emptyset \implies F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } , for all j. == Transformation to deterministic Muller automata == From Büchi automaton McNaughton's theorem provides a procedure to transform any non-deterministic Büchi automaton into a deterministic Muller automaton.

    Read more →