AI Assistant Jarvis

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

  • Version space learning

    Version space learning

    Version space learning is a logical approach to machine learning, specifically binary classification. Version space learning algorithms search a predefined space of hypotheses, viewed as a set of logical sentences. Formally, the hypothesis space is a disjunction H 1 ∨ H 2 ∨ . . . ∨ H n {\displaystyle H_{1}\lor H_{2}\lor ...\lor H_{n}} (i.e., one or more of hypotheses 1 through n are true). A version space learning algorithm is presented with examples, which it will use to restrict its hypothesis space; for each example x, the hypotheses that are inconsistent with x are removed from the space. This iterative refining of the hypothesis space is called the candidate elimination algorithm, the hypothesis space maintained inside the algorithm, its version space. == The version space algorithm == In settings where there is a generality-ordering on hypotheses, it is possible to represent the version space by two sets of hypotheses: (1) the most specific consistent hypotheses, and (2) the most general consistent hypotheses, where "consistent" indicates agreement with observed data. The most specific hypotheses (i.e., the specific boundary SB) cover the observed positive training examples, and as little of the remaining feature space as possible. These hypotheses, if reduced any further, exclude a positive training example, and hence become inconsistent. These minimal hypotheses essentially constitute a (pessimistic) claim that the true concept is defined just by the positive data already observed: Thus, if a novel (never-before-seen) data point is observed, it should be assumed to be negative. (I.e., if data has not previously been ruled in, then it's ruled out.) The most general hypotheses (i.e., the general boundary GB) cover the observed positive training examples, but also cover as much of the remaining feature space without including any negative training examples. These, if enlarged any further, include a negative training example, and hence become inconsistent. These maximal hypotheses essentially constitute a (optimistic) claim that the true concept is defined just by the negative data already observed: Thus, if a novel (never-before-seen) data point is observed, it should be assumed to be positive. (I.e., if data has not previously been ruled out, then it's ruled in.) Thus, during learning, the version space (which itself is a set – possibly infinite – containing all consistent hypotheses) can be represented by just its lower and upper bounds (maximally general and maximally specific hypothesis sets), and learning operations can be performed just on these representative sets. After learning, classification can be performed on unseen examples by testing the hypothesis learned by the algorithm. If the example is consistent with multiple hypotheses, a majority vote rule can be applied. == Historical background == The notion of version spaces was introduced by Mitchell in the early 1980s as a framework for understanding the basic problem of supervised learning within the context of solution search. Although the basic "candidate elimination" search method that accompanies the version space framework is not a popular learning algorithm, there are some practical implementations that have been developed (e.g., Sverdlik & Reynolds 1992, Hong & Tsang 1997, Dubois & Quafafou 2002). A major drawback of version space learning is its inability to deal with noise: any pair of inconsistent examples can cause the version space to collapse, i.e., become empty, so that classification becomes impossible. One solution of this problem is proposed by Dubois and Quafafou that proposed the Rough Version Space, where rough sets based approximations are used to learn certain and possible hypothesis in the presence of inconsistent data.

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

    Top 10 AI Blog Writers Compared (2026)

    Comparing the best AI blog writer? An AI blog writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI blog writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

    Read more →
  • Is an AI Blog Writer Worth It in 2026?

    Is an AI Blog Writer Worth It in 2026?

    Trying to pick the best AI blog writer? An AI blog writer 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 blog 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 →
  • Daniel J. Hulme

    Daniel J. Hulme

    Daniel Hulme (born 21 February 1980) is a British businessman, investor, academic and commentator, working in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI), applied technology and ethics. He is the CEO and founder of Satalia that exited to WPP plc in 2021 for a rumoured $100M where he is also Chief AI Officer. Hulme is also an angel investor in emerging technology companies. In 2024 Hulme co-founded Conscium, an AI Safety company which tests AI Agents and verifies that they do what they are supposed to do. It is also investigating whether AIs will soon become conscious, and how to test for that, and developing more efficient approaches to AI development using neuromorphic computing. Alongside building and scaling Satalia, Hulme was also a Co-Founding Director of Faculty (company) AI - previously ASI Data-Science. In 2026, Accenture announced it had agreed to acquire Faculty for $1bn. Hulme founded Satalia in 2008, a company that provides AI products and consultancy for governments and companies such as Tesco,DFS Furniture,PwC and the BBC. He received a masters and doctorate in AI from University College London (UCL), and is now their Computer Science Entrepreneur in residence, where he teaches how AI can be applied to solve business and social problems. After exiting Satalia to WPP plc Hulme took the dual role of Chief AI Officer at WPP where he is responsible for informing and coordinating AI across the group. In 2026 Hulme was elected as a Founding Fellow of the Academy for the Mathematical Sciences, in recognition of his contributions at the intersection of AI and applied mathematics. Hulme is an angel investor and also a frequent public speaker and writer on the topics of AI, ethics, technology, innovation, decentralization and organisational design. == Early life and education == Hulme was born in 1980. He grew up in the seaside town of Morecambe in north west England. After completing secondary school, Hulme moved to London to study at University College London. On completing his under graduate degree, Hulme stayed at UCL to complete a master's degree and then an EngD. All three degrees were in subjects related to AI. In 2009 Hulme was awarded a Kauffman Global Entrepreneur Scholarship, which saw him visit institutes in the United States to better understand their culture of innovation, and what UK business people could learn from it. This included a tour of Stanford, MIT, Berkeley and Harvard, along with a placement at Cisco Systems HQ in Silicon Valley. == Career == === Satalia === Hulme founded NPComplete Limited in 2007, and incorporated it in 2008, a few months before completing his PhD. NPComplete Limited trades as Satalia. The London-based company provides full-stack AI consultancy and products, helping organisations harness data science, machine learning and AI to solve complex problems, including real-time optimisation. NPComplete refers to mathematical NP-completeness, which describes a class of exponential problems in the field of computational complexity theory. The trading name of NPComplete, Satalia, is a portmanteau of SAT (Short for satisfiability, as in the Boolean satisfiability problem) and the Latin phrase Et alia. Satalia seeks to solve hard problems, in particular the class of exponentially hard problems found in academia and industry known as NP-hardness. In 2016, Satalia was the only UK company to appear in the Gartner Cool Vendors list for data science. In November 2019, City A.M. reported that Satalia was the 39th fastest growing tech firm in the UK, with three year growth at 886%. Satalia was acquired by WPP plc in August 2021 for a rumored $100,000,000, where Hulme was the majority shareholder. === Conscium === Conscium is the World's first commercial organisation dedicated to the understanding, verification and validation of conscious AI and its implications for developing safe, efficient neuromorphic models. Conscium is an AI safety company with three workstreams: AI agent verification. Verification of AI agents developed by third parties to ensure they are beneficial and not harmful. Development of neuromorphic systems. Neuromorphic computing refers to technologies that can process information more like a biological brain compared to existing approaches, making them far more adaptive, scalable and efficient than current AI. Research into artificial consciousness. This workstream is led by Mark Solms, Chair of Neuropsychology at the University of Cape Town. This research aims to better understand what consciousness in AI systems and machines would look like, and, if and when machines do reach consciousness, what the moral and ethical implications would be. Conscium was founded in 2024 in London by a team including Hulme, Ed Charvet, Calum Chace, Ted Lappas, and Panagiotis Repoussis. Conscium has recruited some of the world’s leading neuroscientists and computer scientists to its advisory board, including Anil Seth, Mark Solms, Karl J. Friston, Anthony Finkelstein, Benjamin Rosman, David Wood, Jonathan Shock, Megan Peters, Moran Cerf, Nicholas Humphrey, Nicky Clayton, Nikola Kasabov, Steve Furber, and Suzanne Livingston. Supported by these world-leading experts, Conscium is creating a neuromorphic computing lab to research and validate the capacity of machines to acquire consciousness, making them safer for humanity. Conscium has published an open letter warning of the risks of AI suffering if care is not taken to mitigate against that possibility when and if AI becomes conscious. Signatories of the letter included Stephen Fry, Karl Friston and Anthony Finkelstein. === The Partnership for Research Into Sentient Machines (PRISM) === Hulme is one of the founding partners of PRISM - The Partnership for Research Into Sentient Machines, a non-profit set up to help prepare society for a future with conscious, or seemingly conscious, artificial intelligence. === Academia === Hulme's master's degree topic was on simulating artificial life, where he used Evolutionary algorithm's to generate emergent intelligence in AI agent's with Artificial Neural Network brains. His PhD spanned modelling bumblebee brains and mathematical optimization. Hulme maintained his connection with UCL after completing his doctorate, staying on in various teaching positions. From 2014 to Oct 2019 he was the Director of UCL's Business analytics MSc, which dealt with the application of AI to government, social, and business problems. As of 2020, Hulme is UCL's (University College London) Entrepreneur-in-Residence. He is also a faculty member and lecturer at Singularity University, and a visiting lecturer at London School of Economics's Marshall Institute. === Public engagement === Hulme frequently speaks for TEDx, Google and at various other events. He specialises in Artificial Intelligence, Decentralization, Organisational Design, and Innovation. He has written numerous articles and contributed to several books, largely concerning AI, as well as applied technology and related ethical issues. In 2017, along with Elon Musk, Stuart J. Russell, Geoffrey Hinton and Demis Hassabis, Hulme was one of the 116 founders of robotics and AI companies to sign an open letter to the United Nations, warning against the use of AI in autonomous weapons. Hulme also consults with various companies, governments and other organisations, independently of Satalia.

    Read more →
  • Round-trip engineering

    Round-trip engineering

    Round-trip engineering (RTE) in the context of model-driven architecture is a functionality of software development tools that synchronizes two or more related software artifacts, such as, source code, models, configuration files, documentation, etc. between each other. The need for round-trip engineering arises when the same information is present in multiple artifacts and when an inconsistency may arise in case some artifacts are updated. For example, some piece of information was added to/changed in only one artifact (source code) and, as a result, it became missing in/inconsistent with the other artifacts (in models). == Overview == Round-trip engineering is closely related to traditional software engineering disciplines: forward engineering (creating software from specifications), reverse engineering (creating specifications from existing software), and reengineering (understanding existing software and modifying it). Round-trip engineering is often wrongly defined as simply supporting both forward and reverse engineering. In fact, the key characteristic of round-trip engineering that distinguishes it from forward and reverse engineering is the ability to synchronize existing artifacts that evolved concurrently by incrementally updating each artifact to reflect changes made to the other artifacts. Furthermore, forward engineering can be seen as a special instance of RTE in which only the specification is present and reverse engineering can be seen as a special instance of RTE in which only the software is present. Many reengineering activities can also be understood as RTE when the software is updated to reflect changes made to the previously reverse engineered specification. === Types === Various books describe two types of RTE: partial or uni-directional RTE: changes made to a higher level representation of a code and model are reflected in lower level, but not otherwise; the latter might be allowed, but with limitations that may not affect higher-level abstractions full or bi-directional RTE: regardless of changes, both higher and lower-level code and model representations are synchronized if any of them altered === Auto synchronization === Another characteristic of round-trip engineering is automatic update of the artifacts in response to automatically detected inconsistencies. In that sense, it is different from forward- and reverse engineering which can be both manual (traditionally) and automatic (via automatic generation or analysis of the artifacts). The automatic update can be either instantaneous or on-demand. In instantaneous RTE, all related artifacts are immediately updated after each change made to one of them. In on-demand RTE, authors of the artifacts may concurrently update the artifacts (even in a distributed setting) and at some point choose to execute matching to identify inconsistencies and choose to propagate some of them and reconcile potential conflicts. === Iterative approach === Round trip engineering may involve an iterative development process. After you have synchronized your model with revised code, you are still free to choose the best way to work – make further modifications to the code or make changes to your model. You can synchronize in either direction at any time and you can repeat the cycle as many times as necessary. == Software == Many commercial tools and research prototypes support this form of RTE; a 2007 book lists Rational Rose, Together, ESS-Model, BlueJ, and Fujaba among those capable, with Fujaba said to be capable to also identify design patterns. == Limitations == A 2005 book on Visual Studio notes for instance that a common problem in RTE tools is that the model reversed is not the same as the original one, unless the tools are aided by leaving laborious annotations in the source code. The behavioral parts of UML impose even more challenges for RTE. Usually, UML class diagrams are supported to some degree; however, certain UML concepts, such as associations and containment do not have straightforward representations in many programming languages which limits the usability of the created code and accuracy of code analysis/reverse engineering (e.g., containment is hard to recognize in the code). A more tractable form of round-trip engineering is implemented in the context of framework application programming interfaces (APIs), whereby a model describing the usage of a framework API by an application is synchronized with that application's code. In this setting, the API prescribes all correct ways the framework can be used in applications, which allows precise and complete detection of API usages in the code as well as creation of useful code implementing correct API usages. Two prominent RTE implementations in this category are framework-specific modeling languages and Spring Roo (Java). Round-trip engineering is critical for maintaining consistency among multiple models and between the models and the code in Object Management Group's (OMG) Model-driven architecture. OMG proposed the QVT (query/view/transformation) standard to handle model transformations required for MDA. To date, a few implementations of the standard have been created. (Need to present practical experiences with MDA in relation to RTE). == Controversies == === Code generation controversy === Code generation (forward-engineering) from models means that the user abstractly models solutions, which are connoted by some model data, and then an automated tool derives from the models parts or all of the source code for the software system. In some tools, the user can provide a skeleton of the program source code, in the form of a source code template where predefined tokens are then replaced with program source code parts during the code generation process. UML (if used for MDA) diagrams specification was criticized for lack the detail which is needed to contain the same information as is covered with the program source. Some developers even claim that "the Code is the design". == Disadvantages == There is a serious risk that the generated code will rapidly differ from the model or that the reverse-engineered model will lose its reflection on the code or a mix of these two problems as result of cycled reengineering efforts. Regarding behavioral/dynamic part of UML for features like statechart diagram there is no equivalents in programming languages. Their translation during code-generation will result in common programming statement (.e.g if,switch,enum) being either missing or misinterpreted. If edited and imported back may result in different or incomplete model. The same goes for code snippets used for code generation stage for the pattern-implementation and user-specific logic: intermixed they may not be easily reverse-engineered back. There is also general lack of advanced tooling for modelling that are comparable to that of modern IDEs (for testing, debugging, navigation, etc.) for general-purpose programming languages and domain-specific languages. == Examples in software engineering == Perhaps the most common form of round-trip engineering is synchronization between UML (Unified Modeling Language) models and the corresponding source code and entity–relationship diagrams in data modelling and database modelling. Round-trip engineering based on Unified Modeling Language (UML) needs three basic tools for software development: Source Code Editor; UML Editor for the Attributes and Methods; Visualisation of UML structure

    Read more →
  • Quantum finite automaton

    Quantum finite automaton

    In quantum computing, quantum finite automata (QFA) or quantum state machines are a quantum analog of probabilistic automata or a Markov decision process. They provide a mathematical abstraction of real-world quantum computers. Several types of automata may be defined, including measure-once and measure-many automata. Quantum finite automata can also be understood as the quantization of subshifts of finite type, or as a quantization of Markov chains. QFAs are, in turn, special cases of geometric finite automata or topological finite automata. The automata work by receiving a finite-length string σ = ( σ 0 , σ 1 , … , σ k ) {\displaystyle \sigma =(\sigma _{0},\sigma _{1},\dots ,\sigma _{k})} of letters σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} from a finite alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , and assigning to each such string a probability Pr ⁡ ( σ ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Pr} (\sigma )} indicating the probability of the automaton being in an accept state; that is, indicating whether the automaton accepted or rejected the string. The languages accepted by QFAs are not the regular languages of deterministic finite automata, nor are they the stochastic languages of probabilistic finite automata. Study of these quantum languages remains an active area of research. == Informal description == There is a simple, intuitive way of understanding quantum finite automata. One begins with a graph-theoretic interpretation of deterministic finite automata (DFA). A DFA can be represented as a labelled directed graph, with states as nodes in the graph, and arrows representing state transitions. Each arrow is labelled with a possible input symbol, so that, given a specific state and an input symbol, the arrow points at the next state. One way of representing such a graph is by means of a set of adjacency matrices, with one matrix for each input symbol. In this case, a list of possible DFA states is written as a column vector. For a given input symbol, the adjacency matrix indicates how any given state (row in the state vector) will transition to the next state; a state transition is given by matrix multiplication. One needs a distinct adjacency matrix for each possible input symbol, since each input symbol can result in a different transition. The entries in the adjacency matrix must be zero's and one's. For any given column in the matrix, only one entry can be non-zero: this is the entry that indicates the next (unique) state transition. Similarly, the state of the system is a column vector, in which only one entry is non-zero: this entry corresponds to the current state of the system. Let Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } denote the set of input symbols. For a given input symbol α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } , write U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} as the adjacency matrix that describes the evolution of the DFA to its next state. The set { U α | α ∈ Σ } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }|\alpha \in \Sigma \}} then completely describes the state transition function of the DFA. Let Q represent the set of possible states of the DFA. If there are N states in Q, then each matrix U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} is N by N-dimensional. The initial state q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} corresponds to a column vector with a one in the q0'th row. A general state q is then a column vector with a one in the q'th row. By abuse of notation, let q0 and q also denote these two vectors. Then, after reading input symbols α β γ ⋯ {\displaystyle \alpha \beta \gamma \cdots } from the input tape, the state of the DFA will be given by q = ⋯ U γ U β U α q 0 . {\displaystyle q=\cdots U_{\gamma }U_{\beta }U_{\alpha }q_{0}.} The state transitions are given by ordinary matrix multiplication (that is, multiply q0 by U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , etc.); the order of application is 'reversed' only because we follow the standard notation of linear algebra. The above description of a DFA, in terms of linear operators and vectors, almost begs for generalization, by replacing the state-vector q by some general vector, and the matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by some general operators. This is essentially what a QFA does: it replaces q by a unit vector, and the { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by unitary matrices. Other, similar generalizations also become obvious: the vector q can be some distribution on a manifold; the set of transition matrices become automorphisms of the manifold; this defines a topological finite automaton. Similarly, the matrices could be taken as automorphisms of a homogeneous space; this defines a geometric finite automaton. Before moving on to the formal description of a QFA, there are two noteworthy generalizations that should be mentioned and understood. The first is the non-deterministic finite automaton (NFA). In this case, the vector q is replaced by a vector that can have more than one entry that is non-zero. Such a vector then represents an element of the power set of Q; it’s just an indicator function on Q. Likewise, the state transition matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} are defined in such a way that a given column can have several non-zero entries in it. Equivalently, the multiply-add operations performed during component-wise matrix multiplication should be replaced by Boolean and-or operations so that the semantics are kept intact. A well-known theorem states that, for each DFA, there is an equivalent NFA, and vice versa. This implies that the set of languages that can be recognized by DFA's and NFA's are the same; these are the regular languages. In the generalization to QFAs, the set of recognized languages will be different to the regular languages. Describing that set is one of the outstanding research problems in QFA theory. Another generalization that should be immediately apparent is to use a stochastic matrix for the transition matrices, and a probability vector for the state; this gives a probabilistic finite automaton. The entries in the state vector must be real numbers, positive, and sum to one, in order for the state vector to be interpreted as a probability. The transition matrices must preserve this property: this is why they must be stochastic. Each state vector should be imagined as specifying a point in a simplex; thus, this is a topological automaton, with the simplex being the manifold, and the stochastic matrices being linear automorphisms of the simplex onto itself. Since each transition is (essentially) independent of the previous (if we disregard the distinction between accepted and rejected languages), the PFA essentially becomes a kind of Markov chain. By contrast, in a QFA, the manifold is complex projective space C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} , and the transition matrices are unitary matrices. Each point in C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} corresponds to a (pure) quantum-mechanical state; the unitary matrices can be thought of as governing the time evolution of the system (viz in the Schrödinger picture). The generalization from pure states to mixed states should be straightforward: A mixed state is simply a measure-theoretic probability distribution on C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} . A worthy point to contemplate is the distributions that result on the manifold during the input of a language. In order for an automaton to be 'efficient' in recognizing a language, that distribution should be 'as uniform as possible'. This need for uniformity is the underlying principle behind maximum entropy methods: these simply guarantee crisp, compact operation of the automaton. Put in other words, the machine learning methods used to train hidden Markov models generalize to QFAs as well: the Viterbi algorithm and the forward–backward algorithm generalize readily to the QFA. Although the study of QFA was popularized in the work of Kondacs and Watrous in 1997 and later by Moore and Crutchfeld, they were described as early as 1971, by Ion Baianu. == Measure-once automata == Measure-once automata were introduced by Cris Moore and James P. Crutchfield. They may be defined formally as follows. As with an ordinary finite automaton, the quantum automaton is considered to have N {\displaystyle N} possible internal states, represented in this case by an N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle } . More precisely, the N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ ∈ P ( C N ) {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle \in P(\mathbb {C} ^{N})} is an element of ( N − 1 ) {\displaystyle (N-1)} -dimensional complex projective space, carrying an inner product ‖ ⋅ ‖ {\displaystyle \Vert \cdot \Vert } that is the Fubini–Study metric. The state transitions, transition matrices or de Bruijn graphs are represented by a collection of N × N {\displaystyle N\times N} unitary matrices U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , with one unitary matrix for each letter α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } . That is, given an input letter α {\displaystyle \alpha } , the unitary matrix describe

    Read more →
  • AI Virtual Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    AI Virtual Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    Trying to pick the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual 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 virtual assistant 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 →
  • Best AI Art Generators in 2026

    Best AI Art Generators in 2026

    Curious about the best AI art generator? An AI art generator 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 art generator 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 →
  • Video browsing

    Video browsing

    Video browsing, also known as exploratory video search, is the interactive process of skimming through video content in order to satisfy some information need or to interactively check if the video content is relevant. While originally proposed to help users inspecting a single video through visual thumbnails, modern video browsing tools enable users to quickly find desired information in a video archive by iterative human–computer interaction through an exploratory search approach. Many of these tools presume a smart user that wants features to interactively inspect video content, as well as automatic content filtering features. For that purpose, several video interaction features are usually provided, such as sophisticated navigation in video or search by a content-based query. Video browsing tools often build on lower-level video content analysis, such as shot transition detection, keyframe extraction, semantic concept detection, and create a structured content overview of the video file or video archive. Furthermore, they usually provide sophisticated navigation features, such as advanced timelines, visual seeker bars or a list of selected thumbnails, as well as means for content querying. Examples of content queries are shot filtering through visual concepts (e.g., only shots showing cars), through some specific characteristics (e.g., color or motion filtering), through user-provided sketches (e.g., a visually drawn sketch), or through content-based similarity search. == History == Video browsing was originally proposed by Iranian engineer Farshid Arman, Taiwanese computer scientist Arding Hsu, and computer scientist Ming-Yee Chiu, while working at Siemens, and it was presented at the ACM International Conference in August 1993. They described a shot detection algorithm for compressed video that was originally encoded with discrete cosine transform (DCT) video coding standards such as JPEG, MPEG and H.26x. The basic idea was that, since the DCT coefficients are mathematically related to the spatial domain and represent the content of each frame, they can be used to detect the differences between video frames. In the algorithm, a subset of blocks in a frame and a subset of DCT coefficients for each block are used as motion vector representation for the frame. By operating on compressed DCT representations, the algorithm significantly reduces the computational requirements for decompression and enables effective video browsing. The algorithm represents separate shots of a video sequence by an r-frame, a thumbnail of the shot framed by a motion tracking region. A variation of this concept was later adopted for QBIC video content mosaics, where each r-frame is a salient still from the shot it represents. === Video Notebook === Modern video browsing solutions include Video Notebook, a Menlo Park startup founded in 2021 by Mike Lanza, which uses computer vision to extract slides and optical character recognition and speech recognition to facilitate video search. The software can be either used on the client side (using a browser extension), where the slides and text are extracted while the video is watched (e.g. on a video platform like YouTube or Udemy), or on the server side. Processed videos, which can be viewed in the Video Notebook web app, feature a video browsing user interface with extracted timestamped slides, a search bar for querying the video (or a collection of videos), and text chapters. Video Notebook customers include organisations like Ernst & Young. === Video Browser Showdown === The Video Browser Showdown (VBS) is an annual live evaluation competition for exploratory video search tools, where international researchers use video browsing tools to solve ad-hoc video search tasks on a moderately large data set as fast as possible. The main goal of the VBS, which started in 2012 at the International Conference on MultiMedia Modeling (MMM), is to advance the performance of video browsing tools. Since 2016, the VBS also collaborates with TRECVID. The aim of the VBS is to evaluate video browsing tools for efficiency at known-item search (KIS) tasks with a well-defined data set in direct comparison to other tools.

    Read more →
  • AI Virtual Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    AI Virtual Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    Trying to pick the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual 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 virtual assistant 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 →
  • Stefan Schaal

    Stefan Schaal

    Stefan Schaal (born 1961) is a German-American computer scientist specializing in robotics, machine learning, autonomous systems, and computational neuroscience. == Education and career == Schaal was born in Frankfurt am Main in Germany, Schaal grew up in the North Bavarian town of Nürnberg. After graduating from school, he served in the German army in the Ski Patrol Division of Bad Reichenhall, where he honorably discharged with the rank of a Lieutenant. Schaal studied mechanical engineering at the Technical University of Munich, graduating in 1987 with a Diploma degree (summa cum laude). Subsequently, Schaal did his Ph.D. in computer aided design and artificial intelligence at the Technical University of Munich and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, receiving his Ph.D. in 1991 (Summa Cum Laude) under Klaus Ehrlenspiel. In 1991, Schaal was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Department and Brain and Cognitive Science and the Artificial Intelligence Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, funded by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the German Academic Scholarship Foundation. Starting from 1992, he became an invited researcher at the ATR Computational Neuroscience Labs in Japan, where he created a robotics lab focusing on biological principles of motor control and learning. In 1994, Schaal moved to the Georgia Institute of Technology as an adjunct assistant professor, and also held the same rank at the Pennsylvania State University. In 1996, Schaal assumed a group leader position in the ERATO Kawato Dynamic Brain Project in Japan. Schaal joined the University of Southern California (USC) in 1997, where he advanced from the ranks of assistant professor, to associate professor, to full professor. In 2009, Schaal became a founder in defining and creating the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems in Tübingen and Stuttgart, Germany, an institute focusing on principles of perception-action-learning systems in synthetic intelligence. In 2012, Schaal founded the Autonomous Motion Department (AMD) at this institute, while maintaining a partial appointment at USC. Stefan Schaal joined Google X as lead of a robotics research team in late 2018. == Research == Stefan Schaal's interests focus on autonomous perception-action-learning systems, in particular anthropomorphic robotic systems. He works on topics of machine learning for control, control theory, computational neuroscience for neuromotor control, experimental robotics, reinforcement learning, artificial intelligence, and nonlinear dynamical systems. Stefan has co-authored more than 400 publications in top conferences and journals, and served as organizer on various top conferences in machine learning and robotics. He has received numerous best paper awards and honors in his scientific community. Stefan Schaal has been noted as one of the five leaders in robotics in 2011, and among the top robotics experts in the world. == Controversy == In 2018, the German newsjournal Der Spiegel published an article reporting on his double affiliation with USC and the Max-Planck Society, both with full salaries, which was apparently unknown to either party. Schaal rejected the allegations, but was forced to leave his position at the Max Planck Institute.

    Read more →
  • David Horn (Israeli physicist)

    David Horn (Israeli physicist)

    David Horn (Hebrew: דוד הורן; born 10 September 1937) is a Professor (Emeritus) of Physics in the School of Physics and Astronomy at Tel Aviv University (TAU), Israel. He has served as Vice-Rector of TAU, Chairman of the School of Physics and Astronomy and as Dean of the Faculty of Exact Sciences in TAU. He is a fellow of the American Physical Society, nominated for "contributions to theoretical particle physics, including the seminal work on finite energy sum rules, research of the phenomenology of hadronic processes, and investigation of Hamiltonian lattice theories". == Early life and education == David Horn was born and educated in Haifa. He graduated from the Reali School in 1955. He began his academic studies in Physics at the Technion in Haifa in 1957, and received his B.Sc. (Summa Cum Laude) in 1961, and M.Sc. in 1962. He continued his Ph.D. studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem until 1965. His thesis on "Some Aspects of the Structure of Weak Interactions" was supervised by Prof. Yuval Ne'eman. == Career == Horn joined the newly founded Tel Aviv University as an assistant in 1962. He became a lecturer in 1965, a senior lecturer in 1967 and an associate professor in 1968. He was promoted to full professor of Physics in 1972. In 1974 he became the incumbent of the Edouard and Francoise Jaupart Chair of Theoretical Physics of Particles and Fields, a position he held until 2007. Horn has supervised 43 graduate students at TAU and authored over 240 scientific publications. He retired as a professor emeritus in 2005, and continues to be an active researcher. Horn spent a significant part of his career holding visiting academic positions at other universities and research institutes, including: Postdoctoral Fellow at Argonne National Lab, ILL, Research Fellow and three times Visiting Associate at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, Visitor at CERN in Geneva, Visiting Professor at Cornell University, NY, Member of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ, Visiting Professor at SLAC in Stanford University, CA, and Visiting Professor at Kyoto University, Japan. Beginning from 1980, Horn held official positions at Tel Aviv University, starting with tenure as Vice-Rector (1980-1983), a position he left for research at SLAC. After returning he was nominated Chairman of the Department of High Energy Physics (1984-1986), followed by tenures as Chairman of the School of Physics and Astronomy (1986-9), Dean of the Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences (1990-1995), and first Director of the Adams Super Center for Brain Studies (1993-2000). Horn has also held national and international professional positions. He was Chairman of the Israel Commission for High Energy Physics (1983-2003), and, in this capacity, served as an Israeli observer of the council of CERN (1991-2003). He served as member of the Israel Council for Higher Education (1987-1991), member of the Executive Committee of the European Physical Society (1989-1992) and member of the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (2005-2017). He chaired the Israeli Committee of Research Infrastructures (2012-2016), issuing roadmaps for scientific RI in 2013 and 2016. == Research == Horn's research work focused on theory and phenomenology of High Energy Physics until 1990. He then shifted his interests to Neural Computation and Machine Learning and, since 2005, he has also published in Bioinformatics. Together with Richard Dolen and Christoph Schmid he discovered the Finite Energy Sum Rules in 1967. It was a realization of the bootstrap approach to hadronic structure, and became known as the Dolen-Horn-Schmid Duality. Together with Richard Silver he investigated a model of coherent production of pions at high energy hadron collisions in 1971, and together with Jeffrey Mandula he undertook the investigation of mesons with constituent gluons in 1978. Moving to lattice gauge theories in 1979, he discovered, together with Shimon Yankielowic and Marvin Weinstein, a non-confining phase in Z(N) theories for large N. In 1981 he demonstrated the existence of finite matrix models with link gauge fields, nowadays known as quantum link models. In 1984 Horn and Weinstein developed the t-expansion methodology. Horn's contributions to neural modeling include a novel mechanism for memory maintenance via neuronal regulation in 1998, developed with Nir Levy and Eytan Ruppin and unsupervised learning of natural languages in 2005, a joint work with Zach Solan, Eytan Ruppin and Shimon Edelman, introducing novel algorithms for motif and grammar extraction from text. Horn has contributed to algorithms of clustering, an important topic in Machine Learning, by developing Support Vector Clustering (SVC) in 2001, together with Asa Ben Hur, Hava Siegelmann and Vladimir Vapnik. This was followed shortly thereafter by a joint work with Assaf Gottlieb on Quantum Clustering (QC). His contributions to Bioinformatics include motif descriptions of function and structure of proteins, as well as motif studies of genomic structures. Together with Erez Persi he studied compositional order of proteomes, and repeat instability of genomes, as evolution markers of organisms and of cancer (a joint work with Persi and others). == Honors == Horn is a Fellow of the American Physical Society (1985) and a Fellow of the Israel Physical Society (2018). == Publications == === Selected articles === R. Dolen, D. Horn and C. Schmid; Prediction of Regge-parameters of rho poles from low-energy pi-N scattering data Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 402–407. Finite-Energy Sum Rules and Their Application to pi-N Charge Exchange Phys. Rev. 166 (1968) 1768–1781. D. Horn and R. Silver: Coherent production of pions, Annals Phys. 66 (1971) 509-541 T. Banks, D. Horn and H. Neuberger: Bosonization of the SU(N) Thirring Models, Nucl. Phys. B108, 119 (1976). D. Horn and J. Mandula: Model of Mesons with Constituent Gluons, Phys. Rev. D17, 898 (1978). D. Horn, M. Weinstein and S. Yankielowicz: Hamiltonian Approach to Z(N) Lattice Gauge Theories, Phys. Rev. D19, 3715 (1979). D. Horn: Finite Matrix Models with Continuous Local Gauge Invariance, Phys. Lett. 100B, 149-151 (1981). T. Banks, Y. Dothan and D. Horn: Geometric Fermions, Phys. Lett. 117B, 413 (1982). D. Horn and M. Weinstein: The t expansion: A nonperturbative analytic tool for Hamiltonian systems. Phys. Rev. D 30, 1256-1270 (1984). Ury Naftaly, Nathan Intrator and David Horn: Optimal Ensemble Averaging of Neural Networks. Network, Computation in Neural Systems, 8, 283-296 (1997). David Horn, Nir Levy, Eytan Ruppin: Memory Maintenance via Neuronal Regulation, Neural Computation, 10, 1-18 (1998). Asa Ben-Hur, David Horn, Hava Siegelmann and Vladimir Vapnik: Support Vector Clustering. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2, 125-137 (2001). David Horn and Assaf Gottlieb: Algorithm for data clustering in pattern recognition problems based on quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 18702 Zach Solan, David Horn, Eytan Ruppin and Shimon Edelman: Unsupervised learning of natural languages, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sc. 102 (2005) 11629–11634. Vered Kunik, Yasmine Meroz, Zach Solan, Ben Sandbank, Uri Weingart, Eytan Ruppin and David Horn: Functional representation of enzymes by specific peptides. PLOS Computational Biology 2007, 3(8):e167. Benny Chor, David Horn, Yaron Levy, Nick Goldman and Tim Massingham: Genomic DNA k-mer spectra: models and modalities. Genome Biology 2009, 10(10):R108 Erez Persi and David Horn. Systematic Analysis of Compositional Order of Proteins Reveals New Characteristics of Biological Functions and a Universal Correlate of Macroevolution. PLoS Comput Biol 9 (2013): e1003346. David Horn. Taxa counting using Specific Peptides of Aminoacyl tRNA Synthetases Encyclopedia of Metagenomics, Springer, 2013. Sagi Shporer, Benny Chor, Saharon Rosset, David Horn. Inversion symmetry of DNA k-mer counts: validity and deviations. BMC Genomics 2016, 17:696 Erez Persi, Davide Prandi, Yuri I. Wolf, Yair Pozniak, Christopher Barbieri, Paola Gasperini, Himisha Beltran, Bishoy M. Faltas, Mark A. Rubin, Tamar Geiger, Eugene V. Koonin, Francesca Demichelis, David Horn. Proteomic and Genomic Signatures of Repeat Instability in Cancer and Adjacent Normal Tissues. PNAS 116, 34, 2019 - 08790 === Book === David Horn and Fredrick Zachariasen: Hadron Physics at Very High Energies. Benjamin 1973. === Patents === Method and Apparatus for Quantum Clustering. USA Patent No. 7,653,646 B2. Method for discovering relationships in data by dynamic quantum clustering USA Patent No 8874412 and USA Patent No. 9,646,074. == Personal life == Horn was married to Nira Fuss since 1963 until her death in 2019. He is a father of three, Yuval, Tamar, and Oded, and grandfather of nine. He lives in Tel Aviv, Israel.

    Read more →
  • Rapid application development

    Rapid application development

    Rapid application development (RAD), also called rapid application building (RAB), is both a general term for adaptive software development approaches, and the name for James Martin's method of rapid development. In general, RAD approaches to software development put less emphasis on planning and more emphasis on an adaptive process. Prototypes are often used in addition to or sometimes even instead of design specifications. RAD is especially well suited for (although not limited to) developing software that is driven by user interface requirements. Graphical user interface builders are often called rapid application development tools. Other approaches to rapid development include the adaptive, agile, spiral, and unified models. == History == Rapid application development was a response to plan-driven waterfall processes, developed in the 1970s and 1980s, such as the Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method (SSADM). One of the problems with these methods is that they were based on a traditional engineering model used to design and build things like bridges and buildings. Software is an inherently different kind of artifact. Software can change the process used to solve a problem. As a result, knowledge gained from the development process itself can feed back to the requirements and design of the solution. Plan-driven approaches attempt to define requirements, the solution, and the implementation plan, and have a process that discourages changes. RAD approaches, on the other hand, recognize that software development is a knowledge intensive process and provide flexible processes that help take advantage of knowledge gained during the project to improve or adapt the solution. The first such RAD alternative was developed by Barry Boehm and was known as the spiral model. Boehm and other subsequent RAD approaches emphasized developing prototypes as well as or instead of rigorous design specifications. Prototypes had several advantages over traditional specifications: Risk reduction. A prototype could test some of the most difficult potential parts of the system early on in the life-cycle. This can provide valuable information as to the feasibility of a design and can prevent the team from pursuing solutions that turn out to be too complex or time-consuming to implement. This benefit of finding problems earlier in the life-cycle rather than later was a key benefit of the RAD approach. The earlier a problem can be found the cheaper it is to address. Users are better at using and reacting than at creating specifications. In the waterfall model it was common for a user to sign off on a set of requirements but then when presented with an implemented system to suddenly realize that a given design lacked some critical features or was too complex. In general most users give much more useful feedback when they can experience a prototype of the running system rather than abstractly define what that system should be. Prototypes can be usable and can evolve into the completed product. One approach used in some RAD methods was to build the system as a series of prototypes that evolve from minimal functionality to moderately useful to the final completed system. The advantage of this besides the two advantages above was that the users could get useful business functionality much earlier in the process. Starting with the ideas of Barry Boehm and others, James Martin developed the rapid application development approach during the 1980s at IBM and finally formalized it by publishing a book in 1991, Rapid Application Development. This has resulted in some confusion over the term RAD even among IT professionals. It is important to distinguish between RAD as a general alternative to the waterfall model and RAD as the specific method created by Martin. The Martin method was tailored toward knowledge intensive and UI intensive business systems. These ideas were further developed and improved upon by RAD pioneers like James Kerr and Richard Hunter, who together wrote the seminal book on the subject, Inside RAD, which followed the journey of a RAD project manager as he drove and refined the RAD Methodology in real-time on an actual RAD project. These practitioners, and those like them, helped RAD gain popularity as an alternative to traditional systems project life cycle approaches. The RAD approach also matured during the period of peak interest in business re-engineering. The idea of business process re-engineering was to radically rethink core business processes such as sales and customer support with the new capabilities of Information Technology in mind. RAD was often an essential part of larger business re engineering programs. The rapid prototyping approach of RAD was a key tool to help users and analysts "think out of the box" about innovative ways that technology might radically reinvent a core business process. Much of James Martin's comfort with RAD stemmed from Dupont's Information Engineering division and its leader Scott Schultz and their respective relationships with John Underwood who headed up a bespoke RAD development company that pioneered many successful RAD projects in Australia and Hong Kong. Successful projects that included ANZ Bank, Lendlease, BHP, Coca-Cola Amatil, Alcan, Hong Kong Jockey Club and numerous others. Success that led to both Scott Shultz and James Martin both spending time in Australia with John Underwood to understand the methods and details of why Australia was disproportionately successful in implementing significant mission critical RAD projects. == James Martin approach == The James Martin approach to RAD divides the process into four distinct phases: Requirements planning phase – combines elements of the system planning and systems analysis phases of the systems development life cycle (SDLC). Users, managers, and IT staff members discuss and agree on business needs, project scope, constraints, and system requirements. It ends when the team agrees on the key issues and obtains management authorization to continue. User design phase – during this phase, users interact with systems analysts and develop models and prototypes that represent all system processes, inputs, and outputs. The RAD groups or subgroups typically use a combination of joint application design (JAD) techniques and CASE tools to translate user needs into working models. User design is a continuous interactive process that allows users to understand, modify, and eventually approve a working model of the system that meets their needs. Construction phase – focuses on program and application development task similar to the SDLC. In RAD, however, users continue to participate and can still suggest changes or improvements as actual screens or reports are developed. Its tasks are programming and application development, coding, unit-integration and system testing. Cutover phase – resembles the final tasks in the SDLC implementation phase, including data conversion, testing, changeover to the new system, and user training. Compared with traditional methods, the entire process is compressed. As a result, the new system is built, delivered, and placed in operation much sooner. == Advantages == In modern Information Technology environments, many systems are now built using some degree of Rapid Application Development (not necessarily the James Martin approach). In addition to Martin's method, agile methods and the Rational Unified Process are often used for RAD development. The purported advantages of RAD include: Better quality. By having users interact with evolving prototypes the business functionality from a RAD project can often be much higher than that achieved via a waterfall model. The software can be more usable and has a better chance to focus on business problems that are critical to end users rather than technical problems of interest to developers. However, this excludes other categories of what are usually known as Non-functional requirements (AKA constraints or quality attributes) including security and portability. Risk control. Although much of the literature on RAD focuses on speed and user involvement a critical feature of RAD done correctly is risk mitigation. It's worth remembering that Boehm initially characterized the spiral model as a risk based approach. A RAD approach can focus in early on the key risk factors and adjust to them based on empirical evidence collected in the early part of the process. E.g., the complexity of prototyping some of the most complex parts of the system. More projects completed on time and within budget. By focusing on the development of incremental units the chances for catastrophic failures that have dogged large waterfall projects is reduced. In the Waterfall model it was common to come to a realization after six months or more of analysis and development that required a radical rethinking of the entire system. With RAD this kind of information can be discovered and acted upon earlier in the proces

    Read more →
  • Amebis

    Amebis

    Amebis from Kamnik is a company in Slovenia in the field of language technologies. The company has published several electronic dictionaries and encyclopedic dictionaries (e.g. ASP (32) dictionaries) and developed spell checkers, grammar checker Besana, hyphenators and lemmatizers for Slovene, Serbian and Albanian languages. The company maintains and edits the largest Slovenian dictionary portal Termania, which contains more than 135 dictionaries. The most used terminological dictionary on Termania is the Slovenian medical dictionary. In co-operation with company Alpineon and the Jožef Stefan Institute they have developed a speech synthesizer and screen reader Govorec (Speaker). They have also provided technical support for the largest text corpus of Slovene, called FidaPLUS, Fran and Franček. Amebis also developed the system of machine translation Amebis Presis, which incorporates the Slovenian language. On 11 October 2023 Amebis received award of the Father Stanislav Škrabec Foundation for special achievements in Slovene linguistics.

    Read more →
  • MedSLT

    MedSLT

    MedSLT is a medium-ranged open source spoken language translator developed by the University of Geneva. It is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. The system has been designed for the medical domain. It currently covers the doctor-patient diagnosis dialogues for the domains of headache, chest and abdominal pain in English, French, Japanese, Spanish, Catalan and Arabic. The vocabulary used ranges from 350 to 1000 words depending on the domain and language pair. == Motivation for creating MedSLT == With more than 6000 languages worldwide, language barriers become an increasing problem for healthcare. The lack of medical interpreters can lead to disastrous consequences. These range from prolonged hospital stays to wrong diagnosis and medication. A study found that only about half of the 23 million people with limited proficiency in English in the United States had been provided with a medical interpreter. Millions of refugees and immigrants worldwide face similar problems, although not always as severe. The gap between need and availability of language services might be closed with speech translation systems. == Challenges == The biggest challenge is and was to develop an ideal system, though it is not possible to do so at this moment. This system would fit the needs of doctors and the patients alike, and would provide accurate and flexible translation. A realisation of an ideal translation tool is impossible without the use of unrestricted language and a large vocabulary. Medical professionals demand high reliability from translation. This favours rule-based architectures over data-driven. The latter are more suitable for inexperienced users. Rule-based architectures achieve higher accuracy especially if used by experts. Though it is highly desirable to build a bidirectional system supporting a two-way dialogue, which concentrates on patient-centered communication, the patients will have difficult access to the system. Most patients have no experience with such systems. Less reliable results for translation from the patient-to-doctor direction are the outcome. To overcome this the system needs to provide either easy access or an integrated help tool to guide the users through the process. Although controlled rule-based systems achieve good results, they are brittle. To receive good translations the user needs to be familiar with the system and has to know what is covered by the grammar. Covering different sub-domains (headache, chest and abdominal pain) and language pairs presents additional problems. A shared structure and grammar for all subdomains and language pairs minimises development and maintenance costs. The integration of new doctor and patient languages is also a key challenge. Adding new languages should be quick and rather simple, because he system has to be used in many countries to cover multiple language pairs. Direct translation from source to target language proves to be rather difficult. Using interlingua for unidirectional translation instead of a bidirectional approach helps to simplify the translation process. On top of this, the system has to run on different platforms, because mobility is a key issue for many attending physicians. A portable version addresses these issues, but has to deal with the heavy load of the translation process. == The MedSLT system == The system's speech recognition is based on the Nuance 8.5 platform that supports grammar-based language models. All grammars used for recognition, analysis and generation are compiled from a small set of unification grammars. These core grammars are created by the open-source Regulus Grammar Compiler and are automatically specialised using corpus-driven methods. The specialisation considers both the task (recognition, analysis and generation) and the sub-domain (headache, chest and abdominal pain). The specialisation uses the explanation-based learning algorithm to create a treebank from the training corpus. These examples are divided into sets of subtrees by using domain- and grammar-specific rules (also known as "operationality criteria" in machine translation). The subtree rules are combined into a single rule, creating a specialised unification grammar. The grammar is compiled to an executable form, for analysis and generation by a parser or generator, and for recognition of a CFG grammar. A CFG grammar is required for the Nuance engine. Compilation by Nuance-specific criteria turns the grammar into speech recognition packages. The final step uses the training corpus again for statistical tuning of the language model. MedSLT translation processes are based on a rule-based interlingua. The interlingua is treated as an actual language (it is a very simple version of English) and is specified by a Regulus grammar. This grammar does not take account of complex surface syntax phenomena of real languages like movement or agreement. A set of rules is the base for translating the source language semantic representation to interlingua. Another set of rules covers the translation from interlingua to the target language. The semantic representations are converted to surface words using a target language grammar. Defining semantics for a specific domain enables the developers to specify interlingua with a small, tightly constraint semantic grammar. The translations based on interlingua match direct translations almost perfectly, because the development shifts to a decoupled monolingual architecture. A set of combined interlingua corpora, with one corpus per sub-domain, is the core of this architecture. All source language development corpora are translated to interlingua. These are sorted and grouped together with the corresponding source language examples. The interlingua forms are then translated into each target language, and the results are attached together. This organisation improves the translation process. There is no duplicated effort for multilingual regression testing, because each parsing and generation step is performed once. This allows more frequent testing. The representation language used for all forms is Almost Flat Functional semantics. AFF is derived from the Spoken Language Translator, the precursor of MEdSLT. SLT uses Quasi Logical Form, a logical based representation language. QLF is an expressive yet very complex language, causing high development and maintenance costs. A minimal solution was planned for the medical translator. Early versions of the system utilised a language using simple feature-value lists. These lists were supplemented with an optional level of nesting to represent subordinate clauses (i.e. embedded clauses). Determiners were not included, because they are hard to translate and it is difficult to reliably distinguish and recognise them. This way, translation rules became a lot simpler, because only a list of feature-value pairs had to be mapped to another list of pairs. The language turned out to be underconstrained. Adding natural sortal constraints to the grammar solved this problem, but also returned the language to a more expressive formalism. The newly created AFF combines elements of QLF and the feature-value list semantics. This version of flat semantics is enhanced with additional functional markings. This together with a relatively small vocabulary solved the ambiguity problem of the original flat representation language without creating overly complex rules. In addition, the syntactic structures are treated carefully by a compromise of linguistic and engineering traditions. The grammars are in fact retrieved from linguistically motivated resource, using corpus-based methods. They are driven by small sets of examples. This results in simpler and flatter domain-specific grammars. The semantics are less sophisticated and represent a minimal approach in the engineering tradition. Each lexical item contributes a set of feature-value pairs. This leads to simple-to-write translation rules. There are only lists of features-value pairs to map to other feature-value pairs. However, as a result the machine translation channel model becomes underspecified and is weakened, whereas the target language model is strengthened. An intelligent help module is integrated into the system to support users in utilising the full coverage of the grammars. This tool provides the user with examples as close as possible to the users original utterance. The output is based on a library. Each sub-domain and language pair has its own library. The contents are extracted from the combined interlingua corpora. The help module scans the corpus for the tagged source language form mapped with the corresponding target language form. Additionally a second statistical recogniser is used as backup. The results are used to select similar examples from the library. According to the generation preferences, one of the derived strings is picked and the target language string is realised as spoken language. Some statistical corpus based meth

    Read more →