AI Assistant Card

AI Assistant Card — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Cleverbot

Cleverbot is a chatterbot web application. It was created by British AI scientist Rollo Carpenter and launched in October 2008. It was preceded by Jabberwacky, a chatbot project that began in 1988 and went online in 1997. In its first decade, Cleverbot held several thousand conversations with Carpenter and his associates. Since launching on the web, the number of conversations held has exceeded 150 million. Besides the web application, Cleverbot is also available as an iOS, Android, and Windows Phone app. == Operation == Cleverbot's responses are not pre-programmed because it learns from human input: Humans type into the box below the Cleverbot logo and the system finds all keywords or an exact phrase matching the input. After searching through its saved conversations, it responds to the input by finding how a human responded to that input when it was asked, in part or in full, by Cleverbot. Cleverbot participated in a formal Turing test at the 2011 Techniche festival at the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 3 September 2011. Out of the 1334 votes cast, Cleverbot was judged to be 59.3% human, compared to the rating of 63.3% human achieved by human participants. A score of 50.05% or higher is often considered to be a passing grade. The software running for the event had to handle just 1 or 2 simultaneous requests, whereas online Cleverbot is usually talking to around 10,000 to 50,000 people at once. == Developments == Cleverbot is constantly growing in data size at the rate of 4 to 7 million interactions per day. Updates to the software have been mostly behind the scenes. In 2014, Cleverbot was upgraded to use GPU serving techniques. Unlike Eliza, the program does not respond in a fixed way, instead choosing its responses heuristically using fuzzy logic, the whole of the conversation being compared to the millions that have taken place before. Cleverbot now uses over 279 million interactions, about 3-4% of the data it has already accumulated. The developers of Cleverbot are attempting to build a new version using machine learning techniques. An app that uses the Cleverscript engine to play a game of 20 Questions has been launched under the name Clevernator. Unlike other such games, the player asks the questions and it is the role of the AI to understand, and answer factually. An app that allows owners to create and talk to their own small Cleverbot-like AI has been launched, called Cleverme! for Apple products. == In popular culture == Cleverbot received media attention after being featured in the popular 2010 creepypasta ARG web serial Ben Drowned by Alexander D. Hall. In early 2017, a Twitch stream of two Google Home devices modified to talk to each other using Cleverbot garnered over 700,000 visitors and over 30,000 peak concurrent viewers.
Read more →
Relational data stream management system

A relational data stream management system (RDSMS) is a distributed, in-memory data stream management system (DSMS) that is designed to use standards-compliant SQL queries to process unstructured and structured data streams in real-time. Unlike SQL queries executed in a traditional RDBMS, which return a result and exit, SQL queries executed in a RDSMS do not exit, generating results continuously as new data become available. Continuous SQL queries in a RDSMS use the SQL Window function to analyze, join and aggregate data streams over fixed or sliding windows. Windows can be specified as time-based or row-based. == RDSMS SQL Query Examples == Continuous SQL queries in a RDSMS conform to the ANSI SQL standards. The most common RDSMS SQL query is performed with the declarative SELECT statement. A continuous SQL SELECT operates on data across one or more data streams, with optional keywords and clauses that include FROM with an optional JOIN subclause to specify the rules for joining multiple data streams, the WHERE clause and comparison predicate to restrict the records returned by the query, GROUP BY to project streams with common values into a smaller set, HAVING to filter records resulting from a GROUP BY, and ORDER BY to sort the results. The following is an example of a continuous data stream aggregation using a SELECT query that aggregates a sensor stream from a weather monitoring station. The SELECTquery aggregates the minimum, maximum and average temperature values over a one-second time period, returning a continuous stream of aggregated results at one second intervals. RDSMS SQL queries also operate on data streams over time or row-based windows. The following example shows a second continuous SQL query using the WINDOW clause with a one-second duration. The WINDOW clause changes the behavior of the query, to output a result for each new record as it arrives. Hence the output is a stream of incrementally updated results with zero result latency.
Read more →
E-Science librarianship

E-Science librarianship refers to a role for librarians in e-Science. == Early scholars == Early references to e-Science and librarianship involve information studies scholars researching cyberinfrastructure and emerging networked information and knowledge communities. Notably Christine Borgman, Professor and Presidential Chair in Information Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) was a key player in bringing e-Science, and the idea of networked knowledge communities, to the attention of the library profession. In 2004, as a visiting fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, she conducted research and lectured publicly on e-Science, Digital Libraries, and Knowledge Communities. In 2007 Anna K. Gold, formerly of MIT and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, authored a series of articles in D-Lib Magazine that opened the door for academic libraries to begin exploring roles, skills, and strategies for engaging in e-Science: Cyberinfrastructure, Data, and Libraries, Part 1: A Cyberinfrastructure Primer for Librarians and Cyberinfrastructure, Data, and Libraries, Part 2: Libraries and the Data Challenge: Roles and Actions for Libraries. == Academic research and health sciences libraries == In 2007, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) e-Science task force issued its report on e-Science and librarianship. The ARL's report encouraged its member libraries to position themselves to engage with researchers involved in e-Science (eScience) by cultivating new research support strategies and developing their digital scholarship infrastructure. E-Science has multiple attributes; Tony and Jessie Hey framed e-Science for the library community by characterizing it as a research methodology: "e-Science is not a new scientific discipline in its own right: e-Science is shorthand for the set of tools and technologies required to support collaborative, networked science". In addition to academic libraries' interests in providing support for their researchers engaging in e-Science, the health sciences library community also emerged as a major proponent for creating librarian positions for supporting the information needs of large-scale, networked, research collaborations on their campuses. Neil Rambo, current director of NYU's Health Sciences Library and former director of University of Washington Health Sciences Library, was the first to use the term in the Journal of the Medical Library Association, in his 2009 editorial e-Science and the Biomedical Library. Rambo's definition of e-Science highlighted the potential e-Science held for creating data as a research product: "E-science is a new research methodology, fueled by networked capabilities and the practical possibility of gathering and storing vast amounts of data." In response to this article the University of Massachusetts Medical School Lamar Soutter Library and National Network of Libraries of Medicine, New England Region encouraged health sciences libraries to cooperate to identify skills and develop a program for training e-Science Librarians. Then, in 2013, Shannon Bohle, an archivist who was employed in the library at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, an NCI-designated basic cancer research facility, used experience gained there and previous papers and presentations about preserving scientific archival materials to expand the traditional definition of e-Science by including the terms, principles, and practices used in archival science. These included in the definition the "long-term storage and accessibility of all materials generated through the scientific process," as well as examples of material types traditionally preserved in archives, like "electronic/digitized laboratory notebooks, raw and fitted data sets, manuscript production and draft versions, pre-prints," as well as library materials ("print and/or electronic publications"). == Roles == Many areas of science are about to be transformed by the availability of vast amounts of new scientific data that can potentially provide insights at a level of detail never before envisaged. However, this new data dominant era brings new challenges for the scientists and they will need the skills and technologies both of computer scientists and of the library community to manage, search and curate these new data resources. Libraries will not be immune from change in this new world of research. Karen Williams identifies roles in the following areas for librarians in the developing world of e-Science. Campus Engagement Content/Collection Development and Management Teaching and Learning Scholarly Communication E-Scholarship and Digital Tools Reference/Help Services Outreach Fund Raising Exhibit and Event Planning Leadership == Challenges for research libraries == E-science tends toward inter- and multidisciplinary approaches that depend on computation and computer science. Research libraries have traditionally been discipline focused and, although increasingly technologically sophisticated, do not have systems of the scale or complexity of the e-science environment. E-science is data intensive, but research libraries have not typically been responsible for scientific data. E-science is frequently conducted in a team context, often distributed across multiple institutions and on a global scale. The primary constituency of libraries generally comprises those affiliated with the local institution. Licenses for electronic content are typically restricted to a particular institutional community, and the infrastructure to move institutional licenses into a multi-institutional environment is not well developed. E-science challenges all these traditional paradigms of research library organization and services. == Skills == Garritano & Carlson were among the first to outline a skill set for librarians seeking to support the data needs of e-Science; they identified five skill categories librarians new to this area should expect to adapt or develop when participating on such projects: Library and information science expertise Subject expertise Partnerships and outreach (both internal and external) Participating in sponsored research Balancing workload An example of librarians reconfiguring traditional librarian skills to meet the needs of researchers engaging in e-Science is Witt & Carlson's adaptation of the traditional reference interview into a "data interview" in order to provide effective data management and e-Science services. This interview consists of ten practical queries necessary for understanding the provenance and expectations for the preservation of datasets typical of e-Science that also help illustrate some of the educational tools and skills needed by a librarian new to e-Science. "What is the story of the data? What form and format are the data in? What is the expected lifespan of the dataset? How could the data be used, reused, and repurposed? How large is the dataset, and what is its rate of growth? Who are the potential audiences for the data? Who owns the data? Does the dataset include any sensitive information? What publications or discoveries have resulted from the data? How should the data be made accessible?" == Resources == In 2009 the Lamar Soutter Library at the University of Massachusetts Medical School (UMMS) and the National Network of Libraries of Medicine, New England Region (NN/LM NER) funded an e-Science program for building the skills highlighted above for librarians. Elaine Russo Martin, Director of Library Services at the Lamar Soutter Library and Director of the NN/LM NER developed this comprehensive e-Science program to build librarians' subject expertise in the sciences, developing their data management skills, and their familiarity with cyberinfrastructure and e-Science. Three major products of this program are the e-Science web portal for librarians, the E-Science Symposium, and the New England Collaborative Data Management Curriculum (NECDMC). This portal includes educational resources for specific tools and subject/discipline tutorials and modules to assist librarians new to e-Science. UMMS and NN/LM NER also publish an open access journal called the Journal of eScience Librarianship.
Read more →
Algorithm IMED

In multi-armed bandit problems, IMED (for Indexed Minimum Empirical Divergence) is an algorithm developed in 2015 by Junya Honda and Akimichi Takemura. It is the first algorithm proved to be asymptotically optimal respect to the problem-dependant Lai–Robbins lower bound for distributions in ( − ∞ , 1 ] {\displaystyle (-\infty ,1]} . == Multi-armed bandit problem == The Multi-armed bandit problem is a sequential game where one player has to choose at each turn between K {\displaystyle K} actions (arms). Behind every arm a {\displaystyle a} there is an unknown distribution ν a {\displaystyle \nu _{a}} that lies in a set D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} known by the player (for example, D {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}} can be the set of Gaussian distributions or Bernoulli distributions). At each turn t {\displaystyle t} the player chooses (pulls) an arm a t {\displaystyle a_{t}} , he then gets an observation X t {\displaystyle X_{t}} of the distribution ν a t {\displaystyle \nu _{a_{t}}} . === Regret minimization === The goal is to minimize the regret at time T {\displaystyle T} that is defined as R T := ∑ a = 1 K Δ a E [ N a ( T ) ] {\displaystyle R_{T}:=\sum _{a=1}^{K}\Delta _{a}\mathbb {E} [N_{a}(T)]} where μ a := E [ ν a ] {\displaystyle \mu _{a}:=\mathbb {E} [\nu _{a}]} is the mean of arm a {\displaystyle a} μ ∗ := max a μ a {\displaystyle \mu ^{}:=\max _{a}\mu _{a}} is the highest mean Δ a := μ ∗ − μ a {\displaystyle \Delta _{a}:=\mu ^{}-\mu _{a}} N a ( t ) {\displaystyle N_{a}(t)} is the number of pulls of arm a {\displaystyle a} up to turn t {\displaystyle t} The player has to find an algorithm that chooses at each turn t {\displaystyle t} which arm to pull based on the previous actions and observations ( a s , X s ) s < t {\displaystyle (a_{s},X_{s})_{s μ } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}_{inf}(\nu ,\mu ,{\mathcal {D}}):=\inf \left\{\mathrm {KL} (\nu ,{\tilde {\nu }})\ |\ {\tilde {\nu }}\in {\mathcal {P}}([-\infty ,1]),\ \mathbb {E} [{\tilde {\nu }}]>\mu \right\}} K L {\displaystyle \mathrm {KL} } is the Kullback–Leibler divergence P ( [ − ∞ , 1 ] ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}([-\infty ,1])} is the set of distribution in [ − ∞ , 1 ] {\displaystyle [-\infty ,1]} ν ^ a ( t ) {\displaystyle {\hat {\nu }}_{a}(t)} is the empirical distribution of arm a {\displaystyle a} at turn t {\displaystyle t} μ ^ ∗ ( t ) {\displaystyle {\hat {\mu }}^{}(t)} is the highest empirical mean of turn t {\displaystyle t} Remark : For arms a {\displaystyle a} that verify μ ^ a ( t ) = μ ^ ∗ ( t ) {\displaystyle {\hat {\mu }}_{a}(t)={\hat {\mu }}^{}(t)} we have K i n f ( ν ^ a ( t ) , μ ^ ∗ ( t ) ) = 0 {\displaystyle K_{inf}({\hat {\nu }}_{a}(t),{\hat {\mu }}^{}(t))=0} . Then there index is equal to ln ⁡ ( N a ( t ) ) {\displaystyle \ln(N_{a}(t))} === Pseudocode === for each arm i do: n[i] ← 1; nu[i] ← None; mu[i] ← None for t from 1 to K do: select arm t observe reward r n[t] ← n[t] + 1 nu[t] ← update empirical distribution mu[t] ← update empirical mean for t from K+1 to T do: mu ← highest mu for each arm i do: scoreK[i] ← n[i] K_inf(nu[i],mu) scoreN[i] ← ln(n[i]) index[i] ← scoreK[i] + scoreN[i] select arm a with smallest index[a] observe reward r n[a] ← n[a] + 1 nu[a] ← update empirical distribution mu[a] ← update empirical mean == Theoretical results == In the multi-armed bandit problem we have the asymptotic Lai–Robbins lower bound asymptotic lower bound on regret. The algorithm IMED is the first algorithm that matches this lower bound for distribution in ( − ∞ , 1 ] {\displaystyle (-\infty ,1]} in the first order. If the distribution are also bounded then it also match the second order. It is the first algorithm that match the second under of this lower bound. === Lai–Robbins lower bound === In 1985 Lai and Robbins proved an asymptotic, problem-dependent lower bound on regret. In 2018, Aurelien Garivier, Pierre Menard and Gilles Stoltz proved a refined lower bound that gives the second order It states that for every consistent algorithm on the set P ( [ − ∞ , 1 ] ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}([-\infty ,1])} — that is, an algorithm for which, for every ( ν 1 , … , ν K ) ∈ P ( [ − ∞ , 1 ] ) K {\displaystyle (\nu _{1},\dots ,\nu _{K})\in {\mathcal {P}}([-\infty ,1])^{K}} , the regret R T {\displaystyle R_{T}} is subpolynomial (i.e. R T = o T → + ∞ ( T α ) {\displaystyle R_{T}=o_{T\to +\infty }(T^{\alpha })} for all α > 0 {\displaystyle \alpha >0} ) — we have: R T ≥ ( ∑ a : μ a < μ ∗ Δ a K inf ( ν a , μ ∗ ) ) ln ⁡ T − Ω T → + ∞ ( ln ⁡ ln ⁡ T ) . {\displaystyle R_{T}\geq \left(\sum _{a:\mu _{a}<\mu ^{}}{\frac {\Delta _{a}}{{\mathcal {K}}_{\inf }(\nu _{a},\mu ^{})}}\right)\ln T-\Omega _{T\to +\infty }(\ln \ln T).} This bound is asymptotic (as T → + ∞ {\displaystyle T\to +\infty } ) and gives a first-order lower bound of order ln ⁡ T {\displaystyle \ln T} with the optimal constant in front of it and the second order in − Ω ( ln ⁡ ln ⁡ T ) {\displaystyle -\Omega (\ln \ln T)} . === Regret bound for IMED === If the distribution of every arm a {\displaystyle a} is ( − ∞ , 1 ] {\displaystyle (-\infty ,1]} ( i.e. ν a ∈ P ( [ − ∞ , 1 ] ) ) {\displaystyle \nu _{a}\in {\mathcal {P}}([-\infty ,1]))} then the regret of the algorithm IMED verify R T ≤ ( ∑ a : μ a < μ ∗ Δ a K inf ( ν a , μ ∗ ) ) ln ⁡ T + O ( 1 ) {\displaystyle R_{T}\leq \left(\sum _{a:\mu _{a}<\mu ^{}}{\frac {\Delta _{a}}{{\mathcal {K}}_{\inf }(\nu _{a},\mu ^{})}}\right)\ln T+O(1)} If all the distribution ν a {\displaystyle \nu _{a}} are bounded then it exists a constant C > 0 {\displaystyle C>0} such that for T {\displaystyle T} large enough the regret of IMED is upper bounded by R T ≤ ( ∑ a : μ a < μ ∗ Δ a K inf ( ν a , μ ∗ ) ) ln ⁡ T − C ln ⁡ ln ⁡ T {\displaystyle R_{T}\leq \left(\sum _{a:\mu _{a}<\mu ^{}}{\frac {\Delta _{a}}{{\mathcal {K}}_{\inf }(\nu _{a},\mu ^{})}}\right)\ln T-C\ln \ln T} == Computation time == The algorithm only requiere to compute the K i n f {\displaystyle K_{inf}} for suboptimal arms who are pulled O ( ln ⁡ T ) {\displaystyle O(\ln T)} times, which make it a lot faster than KL-UCB. A faster version of IMED was developed in 2023 to make it even faster, using a Taylor development of the K i n f {\displaystyle K_{inf}} in the first order .
Read more →
List of Go software and tools

This is a list of Go software and tools, including compilers, development environments, build tools, testing frameworks, web frameworks, database tools, and related software for the Go programming language. == Core toolchain == Go — programming language and toolchain go command — build and package tool gofmt — source code formatter go vet — static analysis tool == Compilers and runtimes == gc — default Go compiler gccgo — GCC front end for Go GopherJS — Go-to-JavaScript compiler gollvm — Go compiler using the LLVM backend llgo — experimental Go frontend for LLVM TinyGo — compiler for embedded systems and WebAssembly Yaegi — Go interpreter == Development environments and editors == Emacs — text editor with Go support GoLand — JetBrains integrated development environment LiteIDE — Go-focused integrated development environment Neovim — text editor with Go support TextMate — text editor with Go support Vim — text editor with Go support Visual Studio Code — editor with Go support == Language servers and editor tools == delve — debugger gopls — Go language server golangci-lint — lint runner revive — linter staticcheck — static analysis tool == Build, dependency and release tools == Air — live reload development tool dep — deprecated dependency manager Go modules — dependency management system Goreleaser — release automation tool Mage — build tool Task — task runner == Testing and benchmarking == benchstat — benchmark comparison tool Ginkgo — testing framework GoMock — mock generation tool testify — testing toolkit testing — standard testing package == Web frameworks and HTTP tools == Beego — web framework Caddy — web server Chi — router Echo — web framework Fiber — web framework Gin — web framework Gorilla Mux — router Hugo — static site generator Revel — web framework Traefik — reverse proxy and load balancer == RPC and API tools == Goa — API design framework gRPC — remote procedure call framework grpc-gateway — REST gateway oapi-codegen — OpenAPI code generator Swag — OpenAPI documentation tool == Database and ORM tools == Bun — SQL toolkit and ORM CockroachDB client libraries — database drivers and tools ent — entity framework GORM — object–relational mapper sqlx — SQL toolkit == Command-line and terminal tools == Bubble Tea — terminal user interface framework Cobra — command-line framework pflag — flag parsing library urfave/cli — command-line framework Viper — configuration library == GUI toolkits and application frameworks == Fyne — cross-platform graphical user interface toolkit == Documentation, generation and analysis == errcheck — unchecked error checker godoc — documentation tool goimports — import management tool mockgen — mock generator pkgsite — package documentation site Prometheus — monitoring and alerting toolkit stringer — code generation tool wire — dependency injection code generator == Package hosting and community services == GoCenter — former Go package repository pkg.go.dev — package documentation and discovery site proxy.golang.org — module proxy == Major applications written in Go == Consul — service networking platform Docker — containerization platform InfluxDB — time-series database written in Go Kubernetes — container orchestration platform Ollama — platform for running and managing large language models locally Terraform — infrastructure as code tool Vault — secrets management tool
Read more →
List of library and information science journals

This list covers the journals, magazines, periodicals already published and continuing in the discipline of library and information science (LIS). It doesn't include ceased titles or predatory journals. Titles listed were taken from various scholarly sources, UGC Care and Wikipedia articles. == LIS journal prestige as assessed by LIS faculty == In a 2013 article by Laura Manzari, 232 LIS faculty members from ALA-accredited information science programs ranked the most prestigious journals in library and information science. The following journals were ranked in the top ten most prestigious: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology The Library Quarterly Annual Review of Information Science and Technology Journal of Documentation Library Trends Library and Information Science Research Information Processing and Management Journal of Education for Library and Information Science Education College & Research Libraries First Monday (journal) A subsequent study by Safón and Docampo in 2023 identified impactful LIS journals based on their influence on papers published in other LIS publications. Journals listed in the top ten in this study that did not appear in Manzari's list include: Scientometrics International Journal of Information Management Quantitative Science Studies MIS Quarterly Information and Management Journal of the Association for Information Systems Journal of Informetrics The Journal of Academic Librarianship == India == Annals of Library and Information Studies. (Pub: CSIR-NIScPR ), Formerly: Annals of Library Science. ISSN 0003-4835. (1954-) OPEN ACCESS Collnet Journal of Scientrometrics and Information Management (Pub: Taru Publications, Online through Taylor and Francis) ISSN: 0973-7766 Online 2168-930X. College Libraries (Pub: West Bengal College Librarians’ Association (WBCLA) ISSN 0972-1975, Quarterly DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology (DJLIT) (Formerly: DESIDOC Bulletin 0970-8154, DESIDOC Bulletin of Information Technology. 0971-4383/0974-0643) (Pub: Defence Scientific Information & Documentation Centre) ISSN: 0974-0643, ISSN: 0976-4658 (O), Bi-monthly, OPEN ACCESS. Grandhalaya Sarvaswam (Bilingual: Telugu & English) [Pub: Andhra Pradesh Library Association, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India] (1915–) Gyankosh: Journal of Library and Information Management. (Pub: Integrated Academy Of Management And Technology. Through: Indian Journals.Com). ISSN: 2229-4023 (P), 2249-3182. Half yearly. IASLIC Bulletin (Pub: Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres) ISSN: 0018-8411. Quarterly (1956-) IASLIC Newsletter (Pub: Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres. (Pub: Indian Association of Special Libraries and Information Centres) ISSN 0018-845X. Monthly. (1966-) INFLIBNET Newsletter. (Pub: INFLIBNET). Monthly. Informatics Studies. (Pub: Centre For Informatics Research And Development). Quarterly. Through: Indian journals.com. ISSN: 2583-8994 (Online), 2320-530X (Print) ISST Journal of Advances in Librarianship (Pub:Intellectuals Society for Socio-Techno Welfare) ISSN: 0976-9021. Semiannual. Journal of Advanced Research in Library and Information Science. (JALIS Publishers). 4/year. ISSN 2277-2219. Journal of Indian Library Association (Pub: Indian Library Association). ISSN (P) 2277-5145 O) 2456-513X. Quarterly. (1965-). Journal of Scientometric Research. (Pub: Phcog.Net). ISSN (P) 2321-6654, (O) 2320-0057]; Frequency : Triannual. KELPRO Bulletin (Pub: Kerala Library Professionals' Organisation - KELPRO). ISSN 0975-4911( Print),2582-497X (O).(1993-) KIIT Journal of Library and Information Management (Pub: KIIT University, online through Indian Journals.com) Half yearly. ISSN: 2348-0858. Library Herald. (Pub: Delhi Library Association - DLA). Quarterly. ISSN: 0024-2292. Library Progress (International). (Pub: Bpas Publications, Through: ). Half yearly. ISSN: 0970-1052. (O) ISSN: 2320-317X. (1981-) Pearl: A Journal of Library and Information Science. (Pub: University Library Teacher's Association of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad), ISSN: 0973-7081 (print), 0975-6922 (online). Quarterly. RBU Journal of Library and Information Science. (Pub: Rabindra Bharati University).ISSN: 0972-2750. Annual. SALIS Journal of Information Management and Technology - SJIMT. (Pub: Society for the Advancement of Library and Information Science). Half-yearly. ISSN 0975-4105. SALIS Journal of Library and Information Science - SJLIS: an International Journal. (Pub: Society for the Advancement of Library and Information Science). Half-yearly. ISSN: 0973-3108. SRELS journal of Information and Knowledge (Formerly: Library Science with a Slant to Documentation, ISSN: 0024-2543; Library Science with a Slant to Documentation and Information Studies ISSN: 0970-6089; SRELS Journal of Information Management ISSN: ). Quarterly. ISSN: 2583-9314 (O) World Digital Libraries. Half yearly. ISSN: 0974-567X (P), 0975-7597 (O). == Other countries == African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science Art Libraries Journal (Cambridge University Press) Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science Cataloging & Classification Quarterly Communications in Information Literacy Cataloging & Classification Quarterly Catholic Library Association Children and Libraries Code4Lib Journal College & Research Libraries Communications in Information Literacy Disability in Library and Information Studies Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship El Profesional de la Información (es) (EPI) (Formerly Information World en Español) Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (journal) Faslname-ye Ketab Florida Libraries. Florida Library Association. Georgia Library Quarterly. Quarterly. (Pub: Georgia Library Association). Hipertext.net IFLA Journal In the Library with the Lead Pipe Information & Culture International Journal of Information Retrieval Research (IJIRR) Information Processing and Management Information Research Information Sciences (journal) Information Visualization (journal) Information, Communication & Society International Journal of Geographical Information Science Information Research: An International Electronic Journal (IR) Internet Research (journal) Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship Italian Journal of Library and Information Studies (JLIS.it) JLIS.it Journal of Documentation (JDoc) Journal of Information Ethics Journal of Information Science (JIS) Journal of Information Technology Journal of Informetrics Journal of Librarianship and Information Science Journal of Library & Information Studies - JLIS. (Pub: National Taiwan University) Journal of Library Administration Journal of Religious & Theological Information Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (Formerly Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology) (JASIST) Journal of the Medical Library Association Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association (Pub: Canadian Health Libraries Association). Knowledge Organization (journal) Knowledge Quest. (Pub: American Association of School Librarians) Library and Information Science Abstracts Library Literature and Information Science Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts Library Literature and Information Science Retrospective Library Review (journal) Library Trends Libri (journal) Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science MLA Forum New Century Library New Review of Children's Literature and Librarianship Notes (journal) Portal – Libraries and the Academy Progressive Librarian, Progressive Librarians Guild Reference and User Services Quarterly Reference Services Review Research Evaluation (journal) Scientometrics (journal) Serials Review South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science The Charleston Advisor The Christian Librarian, from the Association of Christian Librarians The Journal of Academic Librarianship The Library Quarterly (LQ) The Public-Access Computer Systems Review TripleC Webolog
Read more →
Literature review

A literature review is an overview of previously published works on a particular topic. The term can refer to a full scholarly paper or a section of a scholarly work such as books or articles. Either way, a literature review provides the researcher/author and the audiences with general information of an existing knowledge of a particular topic. A good literature review has a proper research question, a proper theoretical framework, and/or a chosen research method. It serves to situate the current study within the body of the relevant literature and provides context for the reader. In such cases, the review usually precedes the methodology and results sections of the work. Producing a literature review is often part of a graduate and post-graduate requirement, included in the preparation of a thesis, dissertation, or a journal article. Literature reviews are also common in a research proposal or prospectus (the document approved before a student formally begins a dissertation or thesis). A literature review can be a type of a review article. In this sense, it is a scholarly paper that presents the current knowledge including substantive findings as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to a particular topic. Literature reviews are secondary sources and do not report new or original experimental work. Most often associated with academic-oriented literature, such reviews are found in academic journals and are not to be confused with book reviews, which may also appear in the same publication. Literature reviews are a basis for research in nearly every academic field. == Types == Since the concept of a systematic review was formalized in the 1970s, a basic division among types of reviews is the dichotomy of narrative reviews versus systematic reviews. The main types of narrative reviews are evaluative, exploratory, and instrumental. A fourth type of review of literature (the scientific literature) is the systematic review but it is not called a literature review, which absent further specification, conventionally refers to narrative reviews. A systematic review focuses on a specific research question to identify, appraise, select, and synthesize all high-quality research evidence and arguments relevant to that question. A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable result. Torraco (2016) describes an integrative literature review. The purpose of an integrative literature review is to generate new knowledge on a topic through the process of review, critique, and synthesis of the literature under investigation. George et al (2023) offer an extensive overview of review approaches. They also propose a model for selecting an approach by looking at the purpose, object, subject, community, and practices of the review. They describe six different types of review, each with their own unique purposes: Exploratory or scoping reviews focus on breadth as opposed to depth Systematic or integrative reviews integrate empirical studies on a topic Meta-narrative reviews are qualitative and use literature to compare research or practice communities Problematizing or critical reviews propose new perspectives on a concept by association with other literature Meta-analyses and meta-regressions integrate quantitative studies and identify moderators Mixed research syntheses combine other review approaches in the same paper == Process and product == Shields and Rangarajan (2013) distinguish between the process of reviewing the literature and a finished work or product known as a literature review. The process of reviewing the literature is often ongoing and informs many aspects of the empirical research project. The process of reviewing the literature requires different kinds of activities and ways of thinking. Shields and Rangarajan (2013) and Granello (2001) link the activities of doing a literature review with Benjamin Bloom's revised taxonomy of the cognitive domain (ways of thinking: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating). === Use of artificial intelligence in a literature review === Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping traditional literature reviews across various disciplines. Generative pre-trained transformers, such as ChatGPT, are often used by students and academics for review purposes. Since 2023, an increasing number of tools powered by large language models and other artificial intelligence technologies have been developed to assist, automate, or generate literature reviews. Nevertheless, the employment of ChatGPT in academic reviews is problematic due to ChatGPT's propensity to "hallucinate". In response, efforts are being made to mitigate these hallucinations through the integration of plugins. For instance, Rad et al. (2023) used ScholarAI for review in cardiothoracic surgery.
Read more →
Known-item search

Known-item search is a specialization of information exploration which represents the activities carried out by searchers who have a particular item in mind. In the context of library catalogs, known‐item search means a search for an item for which the author or title is known. Although the concept of known-item search originated in library science, it is now applied in the context of web search and other online search activities. Known-item search is distinguished from exploratory search, in which a searcher is unfamiliar with the domain of their search goal, unsure about the ways to achieve their goal, and/or unsure about what their goal is.
Read more →
Dynamic texture

Dynamic texture ( sometimes referred to as temporal texture) is the texture with motion which can be found in videos of sea-waves, fire, smoke, wavy trees, etc. Dynamic texture has a spatially repetitive pattern with time-varying visual pattern. Modeling and analyzing dynamic texture is a topic of images processing and pattern recognition in computer vision. Extracting features that describe the dynamic texture can be utilized for tasks of images sequences classification, segmentation, recognition and retrieval. Comparing with texture found within static images, analyzing dynamic texture is a challenging problem. It is important that the extracted features from dynamic texture combine motion and appearance description, and also be invariance to some transformation such as rotation, translation and illumination. == Analysis methods of dynamic texture == The methods of dynamic texture recognition can categorized as follows: Methods based on optical flow: by applying optical flow to the dynamic texture, velocity with direction and magnitude can be detected and used to recognize the dynamic texture. Due to simplicity of its computation, it is currently the most popular method. Methods computing geometric properties: this methods track the surfaces of motion trajectories in spatiotemporal domain. Methods based on local spatiotemporal filtering : this methods analyze the local spatiotemporal patterns and its orientation and energy and employ them as feature used for classification. Methods based on global spatiotemporal transform: this method characterize the motion at different scale using wavelets that can decompose the motion into local and global. Model-based methods : These methods aims at generating a model to describe the motion by a set of parameters. == Applications == - Segmenting the sequence images of natural scenes. This helps on differentiate between streets and grass alongside these streets which could be used in the application of navigations. - Motion detection : Dynamic texture features extracted from footage videos can be exploited to detect abnormal crowd activities. - Video classification: video of natural scenes or other scenes that exhibit dynamic textures. - Video retrieval : Dynamic textures can be employed as a feature retrieve videos that contain, for example, sea-waves, smoke, clouds, wavy trees.
Read more →
Exploratory search

Exploratory search is a specialization of information exploration which represents the activities carried out by searchers who are: unfamiliar with the domain of their goal (i.e. need to learn about the topic in order to understand how to achieve their goal) or unsure about the ways to achieve their goals (either the technology or the process) or unsure about their goals in the first place. Exploratory search is distinguished from known-item search, for which the searcher has a particular target in mind. Consequently, exploratory search covers a broader class of activities than typical information retrieval, such as investigating, evaluating, comparing, and synthesizing, where new information is sought in a defined conceptual area; exploratory data analysis is another example of an information exploration activity. Typically, therefore, such users generally combine querying and browsing strategies to foster learning and investigation. == History == Exploratory search is a topic that has grown from the fields of information retrieval and information seeking but has become more concerned with alternatives to the kind of search that has received the majority of focus (returning the most relevant documents to a Google-like keyword search). The research is motivated by questions like "What if the user doesn't know which keywords to use?" or "What if the user isn't looking for a single answer?" Consequently, research has begun to focus on defining the broader set of information behaviors in order to learn about the situations when a user is, or feels, limited by only having the ability to perform a keyword search. In the last few years, a series of workshops has been held at various related and key events. In 2005, the Exploratory Search Interfaces workshop focused on beginning to define some of the key challenges in the field. Since then a series of other workshops has been held at related conferences: Evaluating Exploratory Search at SIGIR06 and Exploratory Search and HCI at CHI07 (in order to meet with the experts in human–computer interaction). In March 2008, an Information Processing and Management special issue focused particularly on the challenges of evaluating exploratory search, given the reduced assumptions that can be made about scenarios of use. In June 2008, the National Science Foundation sponsored an invitational workshop to identify a research agenda for exploratory search and similar fields for the coming years. == Research challenges == === Important scenarios === With the majority of research in the information retrieval community focusing on typical keyword search scenarios, one challenge for exploratory search is to further understand the scenarios of use for when keyword search is not sufficient. An example scenario, often used to motivate the research by mSpace, states: if a user does not know much about classical music, how should they even begin to find a piece that they might like. Similarly, for patients or their carers, if they don't know the right keywords for their health problems, how can they effectively find useful health information for themselves? === Designing new interfaces === With one of the motivations being to support users when keyword search is not enough, some research has focused on identifying alternative user interfaces and interaction models that support the user in different ways. An example is faceted search which presents diverse category-style options to the users, so that they can choose from a list instead of guess a possible keyword query. Many of the interactive forms of search, including faceted browsers, are being considered for their support of exploratory search conditions. Computational cognitive models of exploratory search have been developed to capture the cognitive complexities involved in exploratory search. Model-based dynamic presentation of information cues are proposed to facilitate exploratory search performance. === Evaluating interfaces === As the tasks and goals involved with exploratory search are largely undefined or unpredictable, it is very hard to evaluate systems with the measures often used in information retrieval. Accuracy was typically used to show that a user had found a correct answer, but when the user is trying to summarize a domain of information, the correct answer is near impossible to identify, if not entirely subjective (for example: possible hotels to stay in Paris). In exploration, it is also arguable that spending more time (where time efficiency is typically desirable) researching a topic shows that a system provides increased support for investigation. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, giving study participants a well specified task could immediately prevent them from exhibiting exploratory behavior. === Models of exploratory search behavior === There have been recent attempts to develop a process model of exploratory search behavior, especially in social information system (e.g., see models of collaborative tagging. The process model assumes that user-generated information cues, such as social tags, can act as navigational cues that facilitate exploration of information that others have found and shared with other users on a social information system (such as social bookmarking system). These models provided extension to existing process model of information search that characterizes information-seeking behavior in traditional fact-retrievals using search engines. Recent development in exploratory search is often concentrated in predicting users' search intents in interaction with the user. Such predictive user modeling, also referred as intent modeling, can help users to get accustomed to a body of domain knowledge and help users to make sense of the potential directions to be explored around their initial, often vague, expression of information needs. == Major figures == Key figures, including experts from both information seeking and human–computer interaction, are: Marcia Bates Nicholas Belkin Gary Marchionini m.c. schraefel Ryen W. White
Read more →
Vocabulary-based transformation

In metadata, a vocabulary-based transformation (VBT) is a transformation aided by the use of a semantic equivalence statements within a controlled vocabulary. Many organizations today require communication between two or more computers. Although many standards exist to exchange data between computers such as HTML or email, there is still much structured information that needs to be exchanged between computers that is not standardized. The process of mapping one source of data into another is often a slow and labor-intensive process. VBT is a possible way to avoid much of the time and cost of manual data mapping using traditional extract, transform, load technologies. == History == The term vocabulary-based transformation was first defined by Roy Shulte of the Gartner Group around May 2003 and appeared in annual "hype-cycle" for integration. == Application == VBT allows computer systems integrators to more automatically "look up" the definitions of data elements in a centralized data dictionary and use that definition and the equivalent mappings to transform that data element into a foreign namespace. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) language also support three semantic equivalence statements. == Companies or products == IONA Technologies Contivo and Delta by Liaison Technologies enLeague Systems ItemField Unicorn Solutions Vitria Technology Zonar
Read more →
Iteration

Iteration means repeating a process to generate a (possibly unbounded) sequence of outcomes. Each repetition of the process is a single iteration, and the outcome of each iteration is the starting point of the next iteration. In mathematics and computer science, iteration (along with the related technique of recursion) is a standard element of algorithms. == Mathematics == In mathematics, iteration may refer to the process of iterating a function, i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviors and difficult problems – for examples, see the Collatz conjecture and juggler sequences. Another use of iteration in mathematics is in iterative methods which are used to produce approximate numerical solutions to certain mathematical problems. Newton's method is an example of an iterative method. Manual calculation of a number's square root is a common use and a well-known example. == Computing == In computing, iteration is a technique that marks out of a block of statements within a computer program for a defined number of repetitions. That block of statements is said to be iterated. A computer programmer might also refer to that block of statements as an iteration. === Implementations === Loops constitute the most common language constructs for performing iterations. The following pseudocode "iterates" three times the line of code between begin & end through a for loop, and uses the values of i as increments. It is permissible, and often necessary, to use values from other parts of the program outside the bracketed block of statements, to perform the desired function. Iterators constitute alternative language constructs to loops, which ensure consistent iterations over specific data structures. They can eventually save time and effort in later coding attempts. In particular, an iterator allows one to repeat the same kind of operation at each node of such a data structure, often in some pre-defined order. Iteratees are purely functional language constructs, which accept or reject data during the iterations. === Relation with recursion === Recursions and iterations have different algorithmic definitions, even though they can generate identical results. The primary difference is that recursion can be a solution without prior knowledge as to how many times the action must repeat, while a successful iteration requires that foreknowledge. Some types of programming languages, known as functional programming languages, are designed such that they do not set up a block of statements for explicit repetition, as with the for loop. Instead, those programming languages exclusively use recursion. Rather than call out a block of code to repeate a pre-defined number of times, the executing code block instead "divides" the work into a number of separate pieces, after which the code block executes itself on each individual piece. Each piece of work is divided repeatedly until the "amount" of work is as small as possible, at which point the algorithm does that work very quickly. The algorithm then "reverses" and reassembles the pieces into a complete whole. The classic example of recursion is in list-sorting algorithms, such as merge sort. The merge sort recursive algorithm first repeatedly divides the list into consecutive pairs. Each pair is then ordered, then each consecutive pair of pairs, and so forth until the elements of the list are in the desired order. The code below is an example of a recursive algorithm in the Scheme programming language that outputs the same result as the pseudocode under the previous heading. == Education == In some schools of pedagogy, iterations are used to describe the process of teaching or guiding students to repeat experiments, assessments, or projects, until more accurate results are found, or the student has mastered the technical skill. This idea is found in the old adage, "Practice makes perfect." In particular, "iterative" is defined as the "process of learning and development that involves cyclical inquiry, enabling multiple opportunities for people to revisit ideas and critically reflect on their implication." Unlike computing and math, educational iterations are not predetermined; instead, the task is repeated until success according to some external criteria (often a test) is achieved.
Read more →
Adobe ImageReady

Adobe ImageReady was a bitmap graphics editor that was shipped with Adobe Photoshop for six years. It was available for Windows, Classic Mac OS and Mac OS X from 1998 to 2007. ImageReady was designed for web development and closely interacted with Photoshop. == Function == ImageReady was designed for web development rather than effects-intensive photo manipulation. To that end, ImageReady has specialized features such as animated GIF creation, image compression optimization, image slicing, adding rollover effects, and HTML generation. Photoshop versions with which ImageReady was released have an "Edit in ImageReady" button that enables editing of image directly in ImageReady. ImageReady, in turn, has an "Edit in Photoshop" button. ImageReady has strong resemblances to Photoshop; it can even use the same set of Photoshop filters. One set of tools that does not resemble the Photoshop tools, however, is the Image Map set of tools, indicated by a shape or arrow with a hand that varied depending upon the version. This toolbox has several features not found in Photoshop, including: Toggle Image Map Visibility and Toggle Slice Visibility tools: toggle between showing and hiding image maps and slices, respectively Export Animation Frames as Files option: saves all or specified frames for an alternate use, e.g., to e-mail slides for review Preview Document tool: provides a preview of rollover effects in ImageReady rather than previewing them in a browser Preview in Default Browser tool: previews the image in a browser, including any rollover or animation effects Edit in Photoshop button: opens the current image in Photoshop == History == Adobe ImageReady 1.0 was released in July 1998 as a standalone application. Version 2.0 was packaged with Photoshop 5.5, and the program was included with Photoshop through version 9.0 (CS2). Starting with Photoshop 7.0, Adobe changed the version numbers of ImageReady to match. With the release of the Creative Suite 3, ImageReady was discontinued. According to Adobe, ImageReady's most popular features were merged into Photoshop. (Even before discontinuation, some of ImageReady's web optimization functionality could be found in Photoshop's Save For Web & Devices tool.) Around the same time, Adobe purchased rival software developer Macromedia, whose application Fireworks had been a competitor to ImageReady.
Read more →
Library and information scientist

A library and information scientist, also known as a library scholar, is a researcher or academic who specializes in the field of library and information science and often participates in scholarly writing about and related to library and information science. A library and information scientist is neither limited to any one subfield of library and information science nor any one particular type of library. These scientists come from all information-related sectors including library and book history. == University of Chicago Graduate Library School == The University of Chicago Graduate Library School was established in 1928 to grant a graduate degree in librarianship with an emphasis on research. The program expanded the concept of librarianship, focused on scientific inquiry and established it as a domain for scientific study. In The Spirit of Inquiry: The Graduate Library School at Chicago, 1921-51 Richardson reviewed the history of the School and its impact on the discipline. == Bibliometric mappings == Bibliometric methods have been used to create maps of library and information science, thus identifying the most important researchers as well as their relative connections (or distances) and identifying emerging trends related to LIS publications within the field. White and McCain (1998) made a map of information science and Åström (2002), Chen, Ibekwe-SanJuan, and Hou (2010), Janssens, Leta, Glanzel, and De Moor (2006), and Zhao and Strotmann (2008) constructed some later maps of library and information science. Jabeen, Yun, Rafiq, and Jabeen (2015) mapped the growth and trends of LIS publications. == Notable library and information scientists == See also Beta Phi Mu Award, Award of Merit - Association for Information Science and Technology, Justin Winsor Prize (library)
Read more →
Task Force on Process Mining

The IEEE Task Force on Process Mining (TFPM) is a non-commercial association for process mining. The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Task Force on Process Mining was established in October 2009 as part of the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society at the Eindhoven University of Technology. The task force is supported by over 80 organizations and has around 750 members. The main goal of the task force is to promote the research, development, education, and understanding of process mining. == About == In 2012, the IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence/ IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation held a session on Process Mining. Process mining is a type of research that is a mix of computational intelligence and data mining, as well as process modeling and analysis. === Activities and organization === The Task Force on Process Mining has a Steering Committee and an Advisory Board. The Steering Committee, was chaired by Wil van der Aalst in its inception in 2009, defined 15 action lines. These include the organization of the annual International Process Mining Conference (ICPM) series, standardization efforts leading to the IEEE XES standard for storing and exchanging event data, and the Process Mining Manifesto which was translated into 16 languages. The Task Force on Process Mining also publishes a newsletter, provides data sets, organizes workshops and competitions, and connects researchers and practitioners. In 2016, the IEEE Standards Association published the IEEE Standard for Extensible Event Stream (XES), which is a widely accepted file format by the process mining community. As of 2023, Boudewijn van Dongen serves as chair of the Steering Committee. Wil van der Aalst and Moe Wynn both serve as vice-chair of the Steering Committee.
Read more →