AI Assistant Quotes

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

IDMS

The Integrated Database Management System (IDMS) is a network model (CODASYL) database management system for mainframes. It was first developed at BFGoodrich and later marketed by Cullinane Database Systems (renamed Cullinet in 1983). Since 1989 the product has been owned by Computer Associates (now CA Technologies), who renamed it Advantage CA-IDMS and later simply to CA IDMS. In 2018 Broadcom acquired CA Technologies, renaming it back to IDMS. == History == The roots of IDMS go back to the pioneering database management system called Integrated Data Store (IDS), developed at General Electric by a team led by Charles Bachman and first released in 1964. In the early 1960s IDS was taken from its original form, by the computer group of the BFGoodrich Chemical Division, and re-written in a language called Intermediate System Language (ISL). ISL was designed as a portable system programming language able to produce code for a variety of target machines. Since ISL was actually written in ISL, it was able to be ported to other machine architectures with relative ease, and then to produce code that would execute on them. The Chemical Division computer group had given some thought to selling copies of IDMS to other companies, but was told by management that they were not in the software products business. Eventually, a deal was struck with John Cullinane to buy the rights and market the product. Because Cullinane was required to remit royalties back to B.F. Goodrich, all add-on products were listed and billed as separate products – even if they were mandatory for the core IDMS product to work. This sometimes confused customers. The original platforms were the GE 235 computer and GE DATANET-30 message switching computer: later the product was ported to IBM mainframes and to DEC and ICL hardware. The IBM-ported version runs on IBM mainframe systems (System/360, System/370, System/390, zSeries, System z9). In the mid-1980s, it was claimed that some 2,500 IDMS licenses had been sold. Users included the Strategic Air Command, Ford of Canada, Ford of Europe, Jaguar Cars, Clarks Shoes UK, Axa/PPP, MAPFRE, Royal Insurance, Tesco, Manulife, Hudson's Bay Company, Cleveland Clinic, Bank of Canada, General Electric, Aetna and BT in the UK. A version for use on the Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-11 series of computers was sold to DEC and was marketed as DBMS-11. In 1976 the source code was licensed to ICL, who ported the software to run on their 2900 series mainframes, and subsequently also on the older 1900 range. ICL continued development of the software independently of Cullinane, selling the original ported product under the name ICL 2900 IDMS and an enhanced version as IDMSX. In this form it was used by many large UK users, an example being the Pay-As-You-Earn system operated by Inland Revenue. Many of these IDMSX systems for UK Government were still running in 2013. In the early to mid-1980s, relational database management systems started to become more popular, encouraged by increasing hardware power and the move to minicomputers and client–server architecture. Relational databases offered improved development productivity over CODASYL systems, and the traditional objections based on poor performance were slowly diminishing. Cullinet attempted to continue competing against IBM's DB2 and other relational databases by developing a relational front-end and a range of productivity tools. These included Automatic System Facility (ASF), which made use of a pre-existing IDMS feature called LRF (Logical Record Facility). ASF was a fill-in-the-blanks database generator that would also develop a mini-application to maintain the tables. It is difficult to judge whether such features may have been successful in extending the selling life of the product, but they made little impact in the long term. Those users who stayed with IDMS were primarily interested in its high performance, not in its relational capabilities. It was widely recognized (helped by a high-profile campaign by E. F. Codd, the father of the relational model) that there was a significant difference between a relational database and a network database with a relational veneer. In 1989 Computer Associates continued after Cullinet acquisition with the development and released Release 12.0 with full SQL in 1992–93. CA Technologies continued to market and support the CA IDMS and enhanced IDMS in subsequent releases by TCP/IP support, two phase commit support, XML publishing, zIIP specialty processor support, Web-enabled access in combination with CA IDMS Server, SQL Option and GUI database administration via CA IDMS Visual DBA tool. CA-IDMS systems are today still running businesses worldwide. Many customers have opted to web-enable their applications via the CA-IDMS SQL Option which is part of CA Technologies' Dual Database Strategy. == Integrated Data Dictionary == One of the sophisticated features of IDMS was its built-in Integrated data dictionary (IDD). The IDD was primarily developed to maintain database definitions. It was itself an IDMS database. DBAs (database administrators) and other users interfaced with the IDD using a language called Data Dictionary Definition Language (DDDL). IDD was also used to store definitions and code for other products in the IDMS family such as ADS/Online and IDMS-DC. IDD's power was that it was extensible and could be used to create definitions of just about anything. Some companies used it to develop in-house documentation. == Overview == === Logical Data Model === The data model offered to users is the CODASYL network model. The main structuring concepts in this model are records and sets. Records essentially follow the COBOL pattern, consisting of fields of different types: this allows complex internal structure such as repeating items and repeating groups. The most distinctive structuring concept in the Codasyl model is the set. Not to be confused with a mathematical set, a Codasyl set represents a one-to-many relationship between records: one owner, many members. The fact that a record can be a member in many different sets is the key factor that distinguishes the network model from the earlier hierarchical model. As with records, each set belongs to a named set type (different set types model different logical relationships). Sets are in fact ordered, and the sequence of records in a set can be used to convey information. A record can participate as an owner and member of any number of sets. Records have identity, the identity being represented by a value known as a database key. In IDMS, as in most other Codasyl implementations, the database key is directly related to the physical address of the record on disk. Database keys are also used as pointers to implement sets in the form of linked lists and trees. This close correspondence between the logical model and the physical implementation (which is not a strictly necessary part of the Codasyl model, but was a characteristic of all successful implementations) is responsible for the efficiency of database retrieval, but also makes operations such as database loading and restructuring rather expensive. Records can be accessed directly by database key, by following set relationships, or by direct access using key values. Initially the only direct access was through hashing, a mechanism known in the Codasyl model as CALC access. In IDMS, CALC access is implemented through an internal set, linking all records that share the same hash value to an owner record that occupies the first few bytes of every disk page. In subsequent years, some versions of IDMS added the ability to access records using BTree-like indexes. === Storage === IDMS organizes its databases as a series of files. These files are mapped and pre-formatted into so-called areas. The areas are subdivided into pages which correspond to physical blocks on the disk. The database records are stored within these blocks. The DBA allocates a fixed number of pages in a file for each area. The DBA then defines which records are to be stored in each area, and details of how they are to be stored. IDMS intersperses special space-allocation pages throughout the database. These pages are used to keep track of the free space available in each page in the database. To reduce I/O requirements, the free space is only tracked for all pages when the free space for the area falls below 30%. Four methods are available for storing records in an IDMS database: Direct, Sequential, CALC, and VIA. The Fujitsu/ICL IDMSX version extends this with two more methods, Page Direct, and Random. In direct mode the target database key is specified by the user and is stored as close as possible to that DB key, with the actual DB key on which the record is stored being returned to the application program. Sequential placement (not to be confused with indexed sequential), simply places each new record at the end of the area. This option is rarely used. CALC uses a hashing algo
Read more →
Enterprise information integration

Enterprise information integration (EII) is the ability to support a unified view of data and information for an entire organization. The goal of EII is to get a large set of heterogeneous data sources to appear to a user or system as a single, homogeneous data source. In a data virtualization application of EII, there is a process of information integration, using data abstraction to provide a unified interface (known as uniform data access) for viewing all the data within an organization, and a single set of structures and naming conventions (known as uniform information representation) to represent this data. == Overview == Data within an enterprise can be stored in heterogeneous formats, including relational databases (which themselves come in a large number of varieties), text files, XML files, spreadsheets and a variety of proprietary storage methods, each with their own indexing and data access methods. Standardized data access APIs have emerged that offer a specific set of commands to retrieve and modify data from a generic data source. Many applications exist that implement these APIs' commands across various data sources, most notably relational databases. Such APIs include ODBC, JDBC, XQJ, OLE DB, and more recently ADO.NET. There are also standard formats for representing data within a file that are very important to information integration. The best-known of these is XML, which has emerged as a standard universal representation format. There are also more specific XML "grammars" defined for specific types of data such as Geography Markup Language for expressing geographical features and Directory Service Markup Language for holding directory-style information. In addition, non-XML standard formats exist such as iCalendar for representing calendar information and vCard for business card information. Enterprise Information Integration (EII) applies data integration commercially. Despite the theoretical problems described above, the private sector shows more concern with the problems of data integration as a viable product. EII emphasizes neither correctness nor tractability, but speed and simplicity. === Uniform data access === Uniform data access means connectivity and controllability across numerous target data sources. Necessary to fields such as EII and Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), it is most often used regarding analysis of disparate data types and data sources, which must be rendered into a uniform information representation, and generally must appear homogenous to the analysis tools—when the data being analyzed is typically heterogeneous and widely varying in size, type, and original representation. === Uniform information representation === Uniform information representation allows information from several realms or disciplines to be displayed and worked with as if it came from the same realm or discipline. It takes information from a number of sources, which may have used different methodologies and metrics in their data collection, and builds a single large collection of information, where some records may be more complete than others across all fields of data Uniform information representation is particularly important in EII and Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), where different departments of a large organization may have collected information for different purposes, with different labels and units, until one department realized that data already collected by those other departments could be re-purposed for their own needs—saving the enterprise the effort and cost of re-collecting the same information. === Combining disparate data sets === Each data source is disparate and as such is not designed to support EII. Therefore, data virtualization as well as data federation depends upon accidental data commonality to support combining data and information from disparate data sets. Because of this lack of data value commonality across data sources, the return set may be inaccurate, incomplete, and impossible to validate. One solution is to recast disparate databases to integrate these databases without the need for ETL. The recast databases support commonality constraints where referential integrity may be enforced between databases. The recast databases provide designed data access paths with data value commonality across databases. === Simplicity of deployment === Even if recognized as a solution to a problem, EII as of 2009 currently takes time to apply and offers complexities in deployment. Proposed schema-less solutions include "Lean Middleware". === Handling higher-order information === Analysts experience difficulty—even with a functioning information integration system—in determining whether the sources in the database will satisfy a given application. Answering these kinds of questions about a set of repositories requires semantic information like metadata and/or ontologies. == Applications == EII products enable loose coupling between homogeneous-data consuming client applications and services and heterogeneous-data stores. Such client applications and services include Desktop Productivity Tools (spreadsheets, word processors, presentation software, etc.), development environments and frameworks (Java EE, .NET, Mono, SOAP or RESTful Web services, etc.), business intelligence (BI), business activity monitoring (BAM) software, enterprise resource planning (ERP), Customer relationship management (CRM), business process management (BPM and/or BPEL) Software, and web content management (CMS). == Data access technologies == Service Data Objects (SDO) for Java, C++ and .Net clients and any type of data source XQuery and XQuery API for Java
Read more →
Ecoinformatics

Ecoinformatics, or ecological informatics, is the science of information in ecology and environmental science. It integrates environmental and information sciences to define entities and natural processes with language common to both humans and computers. However, this is a rapidly developing area in ecology and there are alternative perspectives on what constitutes ecoinformatics. A few definitions have been circulating, mostly centered on the creation of tools to access and analyze natural system data. However, the scope and aims of ecoinformatics are certainly broader than the development of metadata standards to be used in documenting datasets. Ecoinformatics aims to facilitate environmental research and management by developing ways to access, integrate databases of environmental information, and develop new algorithms enabling different environmental datasets to be combined to test ecological hypotheses. Ecoinformatics is related to the concept of ecosystem services. Ecoinformatics characterize the semantics of natural system knowledge. For this reason, much of today's ecoinformatics research relates to the branch of computer science known as knowledge representation, and active ecoinformatics projects are developing links to activities such as the Semantic Web. Current initiatives to effectively manage, share, and reuse ecological data are indicative of the increasing importance of fields like ecoinformatics to develop the foundations for effectively managing ecological information. Examples of these initiatives are National Science Foundation Datanet projects, DataONE, Data Conservancy, and Artificial Intelligence for Environment & Sustainability. == Software Development Lifecycle == Central to the concept of ecoinformatics is the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC), a systematic framework for writing, implementing, and maintaining software products. Typically in Ecoinformatics projects, the development pipeline includes data collection, usually from several different environmental data sources, then integrating these data sources together, and then analyzing the data. Here, each step of the SDLC is described in the context of ecoinformatics, per Michener et al. It is important to note that the plan, collect, assure, describes and preserve steps refer to the data collection entity, which can be individual researchers or large data-collection networks, while the discover, integrate, and analyze steps typically refer to the individual researcher. Plan: Ecoinformatics projects require data from several databases. Each database holds different data, and therefore researchers should identify what types of environmental or ecological data they will need to answer their research question. Collect: Data is collected in several different ways. In ecoinformatics, this is usually restricted to manually entering data into a spreadsheet, and parsing data from an existing database. The growth of relational databases has made it easier for ecologists to download relevant data and integrate datasets together Assure: Data entries should be checked thoroughly to validate their accuracy and usability, such as to check for outliers and erroneous points. The same principle applies to data downloaded from datasets. This responsibility falls on both the ecologist downloading the data, and the entity that sets up the data collection system. Describe: An accurate description of the metadata of a dataset that is used in a study should include enough information to deduce the data collection and processing methodology, when the data were collected, why the data were collected, and how the data were stored. This is important for reproducibility, especially for projects that build on each other and may recycle data Preserve: After data is collected by an institutional entity, it should be archived such that it is easily accessible. Ideally, this is in databases that are maintained and not at risk of deprecation Discover: While there are good practices for discovering data to start a research project, this process is often marred by a lack of usable, published data, as researchers may collect data specific to their study, but may not publish this data for wider use. On the data collection end, this can be addressed by better data-sharing practices, such as by linking datasets when publishing papers or studies. On the data procurement end, this can be addressed by more precise data searching, such as using key words to find relevant datasets. Integrate: Synthesizing datasets together can be difficult and labor-intensive, largely due to the methodological differences in data collection. There are several approaches to this, but the best practices typically involve computational approaches, namely using R or Python, to automate the processes and prevent errors Analyze: Data analysis can take several forms, and should be tailored to the specific ecological project. However, all data analysis methods should be well-documented, including the procedure for analysis, justification for analysis methods, and any shortcomings in a specific approach. == Applications of Ecoinformatics Across Ecology == === Ecosystem Ecology === Source: Ecosystem studies, by definition, encompass interactions across the entire life sciences spectrum, from microscopic biochemical reactions to large-scale geological phenomena. As a result, big databases may not be designed specifically for any particular research question, but should be inclusive enough to support most studies. Since ecosystem-level questions require a broad perspective, data-related ecosystem projects would likely incorporate data from several databases. A common framework for incorporating data into ecosystem-level studies is the network science model, in which data collection mechanisms and resources are treated like a large, interconnected network instead of individual entities. The network may include several data collection stations within one databases, or may span across multiple databases. Currently there are several large-scale networks, but they do not generate data on the scale to consider ecology as a big data science. A current challenge for ecoinformatics in ecosystem ecology is that most funding is prioritized for generating new data rather than maintaining existing data infrastructures. Integrating data across the different spatial scales can also be difficult, since each dataset may hold different types of data. === Urban Ecology === Source: The current push for smart cities, and sensor network integration into infrastructure, has positioned as a major source of data for ecological studies. Typical urban ecology questions address the effects of urbanization on the local ecosystem, and how to drive future development to promote urban biodiversity. While sensor networks in cities typically collect environmental data to optimize city processes, they may also be used for ecological initiatives, especially with respect to understanding the complex, multi-layered relationship between cities and their local ecosystem. It can also be used to better understand the current landscape of cities, and identify avenues for rewinding of cities. For example, analyzing mobility patterns can identify areas that may lend themselves well to building parks and green spaces. Bird watching data can also be used to identify the types of bird species in a local area. === Infectious Disease === Source: Like other disciplines of ecology, emerging infectious disease and epidemiology span multiple scales, from understanding the genetics that drive disease trends to large-scale spatiotemporal analyses. As a result, infectious disease studies can incorporate everything from bioinformatics, genetic sequences, amino acid sequences, and environmental observation data. On the micro-scale, these data can then be used to predict infectivity/transmissibility, drug resistance, drug candidates, and mutation sites. On the macro-scale, it can be used to identify societal trends or environmental factors that lend themselves to spillover, locations of infection, and practices that cause disease transmission. == Databases == Source: USGS National Streamflow sensor network GBIF Neotoma Paleobiology database European Vegetation Archive USDA Forest Inventory Analysis TRY BIEN AmeriFlux TEAM iNaturalist NEON GLEON LTER CZO TERN SAEON
Read more →
Enterprise bus matrix

The enterprise bus matrix is a data warehouse planning tool and model created by Ralph Kimball, and is part of the data warehouse bus architecture. The matrix is the logical definition of one of the core concepts of Kimball's approach to dimensional modeling conformed dimension. The bus matrix defines part of the data warehouse bus architecture and is an output of the business requirements phase in the Kimball lifecycle. It is applied in the following phases of dimensional modeling and development of the data warehouse. The matrix can be categorized as a hybrid model, being part technical design tool, part project management tool and part communication tool == Background == The need for an enterprise bus matrix stems from the way one goes about creating the overall data warehouse environment. Historically there have been two approaches: a structured, centralized and planned approach and a more loosely defined, department specific approach, in which solutions are developed in a more independent matter. Autonomous projects can result in a range of isolated stove pipe data marts. Naturally each approach has its issues; the visionary approach often struggles with long delivery cycles and lack of reaction time as needs emerge and scope issues arise. On the other hand, the development of isolated data marts leads to stovepipe systems that lack synergy in development. Over time this approach will lead to a so-called data-mart-in-a-box architecture where interoperability and lack of cohesion is apparent, and can hinder the realization of an overall enterprise data warehouse. As an attempt to handle this issue, Ralph Kimball introduced the enterprise bus. == Description == The bus matrix purpose is one of high abstraction and visionary planning on the data warehouse architectural level. By dictating coherency in the development and implementation of an overall data warehouse the bus architecture approach enables an overall vision of the broader enterprise integration and consistency while at the same time dividing the problem into more manageable parts – all in a technology and software independent manner. The bus matrix and architecture builds upon the concept of conformed dimensions, creating a structure of common dimensions that ideally can be used across the enterprise by all business processes related to the data warehouse and the corresponding fact tables from which they derive their context. According to Kimball and Margy Ross's article “Differences of Opinion” "The Enterprise Data warehouse built on the bus architecture ”identifies and enforces the relationship between business process metrics (facts) and descriptive attributes (dimensions)”. The concept of a bus is well known in the language of information technology, and is what reflects the conformed dimension concept in the data warehouse, creating the skeletal structure where all parts of a system connect, ensuring interoperability and consistency of data, and at the same time considers future expansion. This makes the conformed dimensions act as the integration ‘glue’, creating a robust backbone of the enterprise Data Warehouse.
Read more →
Catie Cuan

Catie Cuan is an artist, entrepeuneur, and innovator in the field of robotic art and human-robot interaction, where she specializes in choreorobotics, an emerging field at the intersection of choreographic dance and robotics. Catie Cuan is currently one of the academic researchers pioneering the field of choreorobotics and currently holds a post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford University. == Career == Catie Cuan earned a bachelor's degree from the University of California, Berkeley. She graduated with a Ph.D. from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University, focusing in robotics. Her most cited publication is about how to improve robotic expressive systems using tools from dance theory, such as the Laban/Bartenieff Movement Analysis. In her most recent research projects, she explores a predictive model of imitation learning for robots moving around humans, a project that advances the field of social robotics. Cuan credits her work in robotics to the experience with her father when he had a stroke and was surrounded by many medical machines, which made her think about how people might feel empowered and hopeful rather than afraid. As a ballet dancer and choreographer, she has performed with the Metropolitan Opera Ballet and the Lyric Opera of Chicago. In 2020, she was the dancer and choreographer of the show Output, which was part of a collaboration with ThoughtWorks Arts and the Pratt Institute. In the production, she danced with an ABB IRB 6700 industrial robot. In 2022, she was named as an IF/THEN ambassador for the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The same year, she was appointed Futurist-in-Residence at the Smithsonian Arts and Industries Building, where she performed at the closing ceremonies of the FUTURES exhibit on July 6, 2022. Cuan has also contributed to product designs, working with IDEO and Dutch interior design firm moooi on their Piro project, which launched a dancing scent diffuser robot during Milan Design Week in June 2022. She is a TED speaker with talks about how to teach robots to dance, and what is coming up for dancing robots in the AI era.
Read more →
Maritime Informatics

Maritime Informatics is a thematic topic within the broader discipline of informatics. It can be considered as both a field of study and domain of application. As an application domain, it is the outlet of innovations originating from data science and artificial intelligence; as a field of study, it is positioned between computer science and marine engineering. == Beginnings of maritime informatics == As a result of the increasing levels of digitalisation occurring in the maritime sector starting around 2010 and stimulated by the EU-endorsed MonaLisa project for sea traffic management (STM), a number of academics and shipping industry leaders recognised that the maritime transportation sector would benefit from a specific field of study and application to be known as Maritime Informatics - the use of information systems, data sharing and data analytics in the business and operations of maritime transportation. They considered that it would lead to improvements in efficiency, safety, resilience, and ecological sustainability - all of which are currently lacking for many aspects of sea transport. One of the first public airings of the concept of Maritime Informatics was a presentation delivered on 11 September 2014 in Gothenburg, Sweden. A proposal for an inaugural minitrack on Maritime Informatics was accepted for the 2015 Americas Conference on Information Systems in Puerto Rico where three papers were presented. Since then numerous publications has been brought forward captured at www.maritimeinformatics.org and in late 2020 the first reference book on Maritime Informatics was co-written by 81 expert contributors (47 practitioners and 34 researchers) from 20 countries. Most impactful authors and journals in the domain have been documented in a review paper. Dimitrios Zissis, Luca Cazzanti and Leonardo M. Millefiori are the top three authors; top journals and conferences include Ocean Engineering, Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems, Sensors, the international Conference On Engineering, Technology And Innovation, Expert Systems With Applications, IEEE Access, and Journal of Navigation. == Background == The shipping industry has several particular organisational aspects that are recognised and taken into account in maritime informatics: It is predominantly a self-organising ecosystem Many activities are undertaken as part of episodic tight coupling There is a so-called maritime stack There is increasing pressure to balance capital productivity and energy efficiency There is the potential virtuous interplay between different types of systems == Data sharing == Digital data sharing is key to the all-important, arguably fundamental, data analytics aspects of maritime informatics because it opens the way for better access to relevant and reliable data. As in land-based commerce, digital data sharing is a growing phenomenon in maritime operations - though there is a way to go. It is enabling greater transparency for all those involved in the transportation of goods and passengers, not least being the end-customer. This leads to better and more informed decision-making and planning by all those involved. The push for digitalisation and data sharing is being pursued both by governments and the commercial sector. For example, the Member States of the IMO agreed a mandatory requirement for their governments to introduce electronic information exchange between ships and ports as from 8 April 2019. Meanwhile, commercial operators, particularly in the container lines are putting systems in place for sharing data for mutual benefit in their operations. Data sharing is an important aspect of the Port Collaborative Decision Making (PortCDM) and Port Call Optimization initiatives, both of which seek to improve the coordination, synchronization and efficiency of the port call process by enabling a common and shared situational awareness among all those involved. == Standardisation == The availability and sharing of relevant digital data underpins maritime informatics and is key to more effective and efficient coordination and synchronisation in the predominantly self-organising ecosystem that is maritime transportation. For this to occur, a high priority underpinning maritime informatics is the encouragement of standardised digital data exchange and data sharing, leading, in turn, to improvements in shipping analytics. Improved availability of data will support better historical analysis, now-casting and forecasting. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) FAL Committee is taking the lead in ensuring that the common terms used in the various standards being developed or in use in the maritime sector are compatible and therefore interoperable as far as is practicable, by creating and maintaining The IMO Compendium on Facilitation and Electronic Business. The IMO Compendium consists of an IMO Data Set and IMO Reference Data Model agreed by the main organisations involved in the development of standards for the electronic exchange of information related to the FAL Convention: the World Customs Organization (WCO), the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). There are several other prominent international governmental and non-governmental organisations actively contributing to the ongoing standardisation and harmonisation process including the UN Electronic Data Interchange for Administration, Commerce and Transport (UN EDIFACT), the Digital Container Shipping Association (DCSA), the International Harbour Masters Association (IHMA) and BIMCO - the world's largest direct-membership organisation for shipowners, charterers, shipbrokers and agents.
Read more →
Flajolet–Martin algorithm

The Flajolet–Martin algorithm is an algorithm for approximating the number of distinct elements in a stream with a single pass and space-consumption logarithmic in the maximal number of possible distinct elements in the stream (the count-distinct problem). The algorithm was introduced by Philippe Flajolet and G. Nigel Martin in their 1984 article "Probabilistic Counting Algorithms for Data Base Applications". Later it has been refined in "LogLog counting of large cardinalities" by Marianne Durand and Philippe Flajolet, and "HyperLogLog: The analysis of a near-optimal cardinality estimation algorithm" by Philippe Flajolet et al. In their 2010 article "An optimal algorithm for the distinct elements problem", Daniel M. Kane, Jelani Nelson and David P. Woodruff give an improved algorithm, which uses nearly optimal space and has optimal O(1) update and reporting times. == The algorithm == Assume that we are given a hash function h a s h ( x ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {hash} (x)} that maps input x {\displaystyle x} to integers in the range [ 0 ; 2 L − 1 ] {\displaystyle [0;2^{L}-1]} , and where the outputs are sufficiently uniformly distributed. Note that the set of integers from 0 to 2 L − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{L}-1} corresponds to the set of binary strings of length L {\displaystyle L} . For any non-negative integer y {\displaystyle y} , define b i t ( y , k ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {bit} (y,k)} to be the k {\displaystyle k} -th bit in the binary representation of y {\displaystyle y} , such that: y = ∑ k ≥ 0 b i t ( y , k ) 2 k . {\displaystyle y=\sum _{k\geq 0}\mathrm {bit} (y,k)2^{k}.} We then define a function ρ ( y ) {\displaystyle \rho (y)} that outputs the position of the least-significant set bit in the binary representation of y {\displaystyle y} , and L {\displaystyle L} if no such set bit can be found as all bits are zero: ρ ( y ) = { min { k ≥ 0 ∣ b i t ( y , k ) ≠ 0 } y > 0 L y = 0 {\displaystyle \rho (y)={\begin{cases}\min\{k\geq 0\mid \mathrm {bit} (y,k)\neq 0\}&y>0\\L&y=0\end{cases}}} Note that with the above definition we are using 0-indexing for the positions, starting from the least significant bit. For example, ρ ( 13 ) = ρ ( 1101 2 ) = 0 {\displaystyle \rho (13)=\rho (1101_{2})=0} , since the least significant bit is a 1 (0th position), and ρ ( 8 ) = ρ ( 1000 2 ) = 3 {\displaystyle \rho (8)=\rho (1000_{2})=3} , since the least significant set bit is at the 3rd position. At this point, note that under the assumption that the output of our hash function is uniformly distributed, then the probability of observing a hash output ending with 2 k {\displaystyle 2^{k}} (a one, followed by k {\displaystyle k} zeroes) is 2 − ( k + 1 ) {\displaystyle 2^{-(k+1)}} , since this corresponds to flipping k {\displaystyle k} heads and then a tail with a fair coin. Now the Flajolet–Martin algorithm for estimating the cardinality of a multiset M {\displaystyle M} is as follows: Initialize a bit-vector BITMAP to be of length L {\displaystyle L} and contain all 0s. For each element x {\displaystyle x} in M {\displaystyle M} : Calculate the index i = ρ ( h a s h ( x ) ) {\displaystyle i=\rho (\mathrm {hash} (x))} . Set B I T M A P [ i ] = 1 {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [i]=1} . Let R {\displaystyle R} denote the smallest index i {\displaystyle i} such that B I T M A P [ i ] = 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [i]=0} . Estimate the cardinality of M {\displaystyle M} as 2 R / ϕ {\displaystyle 2^{R}/\phi } , where ϕ ≈ 0.77351 {\displaystyle \phi \approx 0.77351} . The idea is that if n {\displaystyle n} is the number of distinct elements in the multiset M {\displaystyle M} , then B I T M A P [ 0 ] {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [0]} is accessed approximately n / 2 {\displaystyle n/2} times, B I T M A P [ 1 ] {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [1]} is accessed approximately n / 4 {\displaystyle n/4} times and so on. Consequently, if i ≫ log 2 ⁡ n {\displaystyle i\gg \log _{2}n} , then B I T M A P [ i ] {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [i]} is almost certainly 0, and if i ≪ log 2 ⁡ n {\displaystyle i\ll \log _{2}n} , then B I T M A P [ i ] {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [i]} is almost certainly 1. If i ≈ log 2 ⁡ n {\displaystyle i\approx \log _{2}n} , then B I T M A P [ i ] {\displaystyle \mathrm {BITMAP} [i]} can be expected to be either 1 or 0. The correction factor ϕ ≈ 0.77351 {\displaystyle \phi \approx 0.77351} (OEIS: A244256) is found by calculations, which can be found in the original article. == Improving accuracy == A problem with the Flajolet–Martin algorithm in the above form is that the results vary significantly. A common solution has been to run the algorithm multiple times with k {\displaystyle k} different hash functions and combine the results from the different runs. One idea is to take the mean of the k {\displaystyle k} results together from each hash function, obtaining a single estimate of the cardinality. The problem with this is that averaging is very susceptible to outliers (which are likely here). A different idea is to use the median, which is less prone to be influences by outliers. The problem with this is that the results can only take form 2 R / ϕ {\displaystyle 2^{R}/\phi } , where R {\displaystyle R} is integer. A common solution is to combine both the mean and the median: Create k ⋅ l {\displaystyle k\cdot l} hash functions and split them into k {\displaystyle k} distinct groups (each of size l {\displaystyle l} ). Within each group use the mean for aggregating together the l {\displaystyle l} results, and finally take the median of the k {\displaystyle k} group estimates as the final estimate. The 2007 HyperLogLog algorithm splits the multiset into subsets and estimates their cardinalities, then it uses the harmonic mean to combine them into an estimate for the original cardinality.
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 →
Crackme

A crackme is a small computer program designed to test a programmer's reverse engineering skills. Crackmes are made as a legal way to crack software, since no intellectual property is being infringed. == Description == Crackmes often incorporate protection schemes and algorithms similar to those used in proprietary software. However, they can sometimes be more challenging because they may use advanced packing or protection techniques, making the underlying algorithm harder to analyze and modify. == Keygenme == A keygenme is specifically designed for the reverser to not only identify the protection algorithm used in the application but also create a small key generator (keygen) in the programming language of their choice. Most keygenmes, when properly manipulated, can be made self-keygenning. For example, during validation, they might generate the correct key internally and compare it to the user's input. This allows the key generation algorithm to be easily replicated. Anti-debugging and anti-disassembly routines are often used to confuse debuggers or render disassembly output useless. Code obfuscation is also used to further complicate reverse engineering.
Read more →
Operational system

An operational system is a term used in data warehousing to refer to a system that is used to process the day-to-day transactions of an organization. These systems are designed in a manner that processing of day-to-day transactions is performed efficiently and the integrity of the transactional data is preserved. == Synonyms == Sometimes operational systems are referred to as operational databases, transaction processing systems, or online transaction processing systems (OLTP). However, the use of the last two terms as synonyms may be confusing, because operational systems can be batch processing systems as well. Any enterprise must necessarily maintain a lot of data about its operation.
Read more →
Emotion Markup Language

An Emotion Markup Language (EML or EmotionML) has first been defined by the W3C Emotion Incubator Group (EmoXG) as a general-purpose emotion annotation and representation language, which should be usable in a large variety of technological contexts where emotions need to be represented. Emotion-oriented computing (or "affective computing") is gaining importance as interactive technological systems become more sophisticated. Representing the emotional states of a user or the emotional states to be simulated by a user interface requires a suitable representation format; in this case a markup language is used. EmotionML version 1.0 was published by the group in May 2014. == Example == Here is an example of an EmotionML document describing emotions expressed in a video recording of the interaction between a teacher, Alice, and a student, Bob. == History == In 2006, a first W3C Incubator Group, the Emotion Incubator Group (EmoXG), was set up "to investigate a language to represent the emotional states of users and the emotional states simulated by user interfaces" with the final Report published on 10 July 2007. In 2007, the Emotion Markup Language Incubator Group (EmotionML XG) was set up as a follow-up to the Emotion Incubator Group, "to propose a specification draft for an Emotion Markup Language, to document it in a way accessible to non-experts, and to illustrate its use in conjunction with a number of existing markups." The final report of the Emotion Markup Language Incubator Group, Elements of an EmotionML 1.0, was published on 20 November 2008. The work then was continued in 2009 in the frame of the W3C's Multimodal Interaction Activity, with the First Public Working Draft of "Emotion Markup Language (EmotionML) 1.0" being published on 29 October 2009. The Last Call Working Draft of "Emotion Markup Language 1.0", was published on 7 April 2011. The Last Call Working Draft addressed all open issues that arose from feedback of the community on the First Call Working Draft as well as results of a workshop held in Paris in October 2010. Along with the Last Call Working Draft, a list of vocabularies for EmotionML has been published to aid developers using common vocabularies for annotating or representing emotions. Annual draft updates were published until the 1.0 version was finished in 2014. == Reasons for defining an emotion markup language == A standard for an emotion markup language would be useful for the following purposes: To enhance computer-mediated human-human or human-machine communication. Emotions are a basic part of human communication and should therefore be taken into account, e.g. in emotional Chat systems or emphatic voice boxes. This involves specification, analysis and display of emotion related states. To enhance systems' processing efficiency. Emotion and intelligence are strongly interconnected. The modeling of human emotions in computer processing can help to build more efficient systems, e.g. using emotional models for time-critical decision enforcement. To allow the analysis of non-verbal behavior, emotion, mental states that can be provided using web services to enable data collection, analysis, and reporting. Concrete examples of existing technology that could apply EmotionML include: Opinion mining / sentiment analysis in Web 2.0, to automatically track customer's attitude regarding a product across blogs; Affective monitoring, such as ambient assisted living applications, fear detection for surveillance purposes, or using wearable sensors to test customer satisfaction; Wellness technologies that provide assistance according to a person's emotional state with the goal to improve the person's well-being; Character design and control for games and virtual worlds; Building web services to capture, analysis, and report data of non-verbal behavior, emotion and mental states of an individual or group across the internet using standard web technologies such as HTML5 and JSON. Social robots, such as guide robots engaging with visitors; Expressive speech synthesis, generating synthetic speech with different emotions, such as happy or sad, friendly or apologetic; expressive synthetic speech would for example make more information available to blind and partially sighted people, and enrich their experience of the content; Emotion recognition (e.g., for spotting angry customers in speech dialog systems, to improve computer games or e-Learning applications); Support for people with disabilities, such as educational programs for people with autism. EmotionML can be used to make the emotional intent of content explicit. This would enable people with learning disabilities (such as Asperger syndrome) to realise the emotional context of the content; EmotionML can be used for media transcripts and captions. Where emotions are marked up to help deaf or hearing impaired people who cannot hear the soundtrack, more information is made available to enrich their experience of the content. The Emotion Incubator Group has listed 39 individual use cases for an Emotion markup language. A standardised way to mark up the data needed by such "emotion-oriented systems" has the potential to boost development primarily because data that was annotated in a standardised way can be interchanged between systems more easily, thereby simplifying a market for emotional databases, and the standard can be used to ease a market of providers for sub-modules of emotion processing systems, e.g. a web service for the recognition of emotion from text, speech or multi-modal input. == The challenge of defining a generally usable emotion markup language == Any attempt to standardize the description of emotions using a finite set of fixed descriptors is doomed to failure, as there is no consensus on the number of relevant emotions, on the names that should be given to them or how else best to describe them. For example, the difference between ":)" and "(:" is small, but using a standardized markup it would make one invalid. Even more basically, the list of emotion-related states that should be distinguished varies depending on the application domain and the aspect of emotions to be focused. Basically, the vocabulary needed depends on the context of use. On the other hand, the basic structure of concepts is less controversial: it is generally agreed that emotions involve triggers, appraisals, feelings, expressive behavior including physiological changes, and action tendencies; emotions in their entirety can be described in terms of categories or a small number of dimensions; emotions have an intensity, and so on. For details, see the Scientific Descriptions of Emotions in the Final Report of the Emotion Incubator Group. Given this lack of agreement on descriptors in the field, the only practical way of defining an emotion markup language is the definition of possible structural elements and to allow users to "plug in" vocabularies that they consider appropriate for their work. An additional challenge lies in the aim to provide a markup language that is generally usable. The requirements that arise from different use cases are rather different. Whereas manual annotation tends to require all the fine-grained distinctions considered in the scientific literature, automatic recognition systems can usually distinguish only a very small number of different states and affective avatars need yet another level of detail for expressing emotions in an appropriate way. For the reasons outlined here, it is clear that there is an inevitable tension between flexibility and interoperability, which need to be weighed in the formulation of an EmotionML. The guiding principle in the following specification has been to provide a choice only where it is needed, and to propose reasonable default options for every choice. == Applications and web services benefiting from an emotion markup language == There are a range of existing projects and applications to which an emotion markup language will enable the building of webservices to measure capture data of individuals non-verbal behavior, mental states, and emotions and allowing results to be reported and rendered in a standardized format using standard web technologies such as JSON and HTML5. One such project is measuring affect data across the Internet using EyesWeb.
Read more →
Lancichinetti–Fortunato–Radicchi benchmark

Lancichinetti–Fortunato–Radicchi benchmark is an algorithm that generates benchmark networks (artificial networks that resemble real-world networks). They have a priori known communities and are used to compare different community detection methods. The advantage of the benchmark over other methods is that it accounts for the heterogeneity in the distributions of node degrees and of community sizes. == The algorithm == The node degrees and the community sizes are distributed according to a power law, with different exponents. The benchmark assumes that both the degree and the community size have power law distributions with different exponents, γ {\displaystyle \gamma } and β {\displaystyle \beta } , respectively. N {\displaystyle N} is the number of nodes and the average degree is ⟨ k ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle k\rangle } . There is a mixing parameter μ {\displaystyle \mu } , which is the average fraction of neighboring nodes of a node that do not belong to any community that the benchmark node belongs to. This parameter controls the fraction of edges that are between communities. Thus, it reflects the amount of noise in the network. At the extremes, when μ = 0 {\displaystyle \mu =0} all links are within community links, if μ = 1 {\displaystyle \mu =1} all links are between nodes belonging to different communities. One can generate the benchmark network using the following steps. Step 1: Generate a network with nodes following a power law distribution with exponent γ {\displaystyle \gamma } and choose extremes of the distribution k min {\displaystyle k_{\min }} and k max {\displaystyle k_{\max }} to get desired average degree is ⟨ k ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle k\rangle } . Step 2: ( 1 − μ ) {\displaystyle (1-\mu )} fraction of links of every node is with nodes of the same community, while fraction μ {\displaystyle \mu } is with the other nodes. Step 3: Generate community sizes from a power law distribution with exponent β {\displaystyle \beta } . The sum of all sizes must be equal to N {\displaystyle N} . The minimal and maximal community sizes s min {\displaystyle s_{\min }} and s max {\displaystyle s_{\max }} must satisfy the definition of community so that every non-isolated node is in at least in one community: s min > k min {\displaystyle s_{\min }>k_{\min }} s max > k max {\displaystyle s_{\max }>k_{\max }} Step 4: Initially, no nodes are assigned to communities. Then, each node is randomly assigned to a community. As long as the number of neighboring nodes within the community does not exceed the community size a new node is added to the community, otherwise stays out. In the following iterations the “homeless” node is randomly assigned to some community. If that community is complete, i.e. the size is exhausted, a randomly selected node of that community must be unlinked. Stop the iteration when all the communities are complete and all the nodes belong to at least one community. Step 5: Implement rewiring of nodes keeping the same node degrees but only affecting the fraction of internal and external links such that the number of links outside the community for each node is approximately equal to the mixing parameter μ {\displaystyle \mu } . == Testing == Consider a partition into communities that do not overlap. The communities of randomly chosen nodes in each iteration follow a p ( C ) {\displaystyle p(C)} distribution that represents the probability that a randomly picked node is from the community C {\displaystyle C} . Consider a partition of the same network that was predicted by some community finding algorithm and has p ( C 2 ) {\displaystyle p(C_{2})} distribution. The benchmark partition has p ( C 1 ) {\displaystyle p(C_{1})} distribution. The joint distribution is p ( C 1 , C 2 ) {\displaystyle p(C_{1},C_{2})} . The similarity of these two partitions is captured by the normalized mutual information. I n = ∑ C 1 , C 2 p ( C 1 , C 2 ) log 2 ⁡ p ( C 1 , C 2 ) p ( C 1 ) p ( C 2 ) 1 2 H ( { p ( C 1 ) } ) + 1 2 H ( { p ( C 2 ) } ) {\displaystyle I_{n}={\frac {\sum _{C_{1},C_{2}}p(C_{1},C_{2})\log _{2}{\frac {p(C_{1},C_{2})}{p(C_{1})p(C_{2})}}}{{\frac {1}{2}}H(\{p(C_{1})\})+{\frac {1}{2}}H(\{p(C_{2})\})}}} If I n = 1 {\displaystyle I_{n}=1} the benchmark and the detected partitions are identical, and if I n = 0 {\displaystyle I_{n}=0} then they are independent of each other.
Read more →
Automation in construction

Automation in construction is the combination of methods, processes, and systems that allow for greater machine autonomy in construction activities. Construction automation may have multiple goals, including but not limited to, reducing jobsite injuries, decreasing activity completion times, and assisting with quality control and quality assurance. Some systems may be fielded as a direct response to increasing skilled labor shortages in some countries. Opponents claim that increased automation may lead to less construction jobs and that software leaves heavy equipment vulnerable to hackers. Research insights on this subject are today published in several journals such as Automation in Construction by Elsevier. == Uses of automation in construction == Equipment control and management: Automation can be used to control and monitor construction equipment, such as cranes, excavators, and bulldozers. Material handling: Automated systems can be used to handle, transport, and place materials such as concrete, bricks, and stones. Surveying: Automated survey equipment and drones can be used to collect and analyze data on construction sites. Quality control: Automated systems can be used to monitor and control the quality of materials and construction processes. Safety management: Automated systems can be used to monitor and control safety conditions on construction sites. Scheduling and planning: Automated systems can be used to manage schedules, resources, and costs. Waste management: Automated systems can be used to manage and dispose of waste materials generated during construction. 3D printing: Automated 3D printing can be used to create prototypes, models, and even full-scale building components. == Autonomous heavy equipment == Advances in sensors, machine learning, and autonomous vehicle technology have led to the development of self-operating construction equipment and retrofit systems designed to automate excavators, bulldozers, tracked loaders, skid steer loaders, and haul trucks, allowing them to perform tasks with limited human supervision. Since 2017, tech companies have developed autonomous or semi-autonomous retrofit kits that can be installed on existing construction machinery. Examples include Bedrock Robotics, Built Robotics, and SafeAI, which develop sensor and software systems that enable excavators and other earthmoving machines to operate with varying degrees of autonomy. Major equipment manufacturers have also introduced autonomous capabilities: Caterpillar and John Deere have developed autonomous or semi-autonomous systems for construction and mining equipment, including haul trucks and earthmoving machines. == Transportation сonstruction == Kratos Defense & Security Solutions fielded the world’s first Autonomous Truck-Mounted Attenuator (ATMA) in 2017, in conjunction with Royal Truck & Equipment. == Benefits of automation in construction == The use of automation in construction has become increasingly prevalent in recent years due to its numerous benefits. Automation in construction refers to the use of machinery, software, and other technologies to perform tasks that were previously done manually by workers. One of the most significant benefits of automation in construction is increased productivity. Automation can help speed up construction processes, reduce project completion times, and improve overall efficiency. For example, using automated machinery for tasks such as concrete pouring, bricklaying, and welding can significantly increase the speed and accuracy of these tasks, allowing for more work to be completed in a shorter amount of time. Another benefit of automation in construction is improved safety. By automating tasks that are hazardous to workers, such as demolition or working at height, companies can reduce the risk of accidents and injuries on site. Automation can also help to reduce worker fatigue, which can be a significant factor in accidents and mistakes. Overall, the use of automation in construction can improve productivity, reduce costs, increase safety, and improve the quality of construction projects. As technology continues to advance, the use of automation is likely to become even more prevalent in the construction industry.
Read more →
Ontology (information science)

In information science, an ontology encompasses a representation, formal naming, and definitions of the categories, properties, and relations between the concepts, data, or entities that pertain to one, many, or all domains of discourse. More simply, an ontology is a way of showing the properties of a subject area and how they are related, by defining a set of terms and relational expressions that represent the entities in that subject area. The field which studies ontologies so conceived is sometimes referred to as applied ontology. Every academic discipline or field, in creating its terminology, thereby lays the groundwork for an ontology. Each uses ontological assumptions to frame explicit theories, research and applications. Improved ontologies may improve problem solving within that domain, interoperability of data systems, and discoverability of data. Translating research papers within every field is a problem made easier when experts from different countries maintain a controlled vocabulary of jargon between each of their languages. For instance, the definition and ontology of economics is a primary concern in Marxist economics, but also in other subfields of economics. An example of economics relying on information science occurs in cases where a simulation or model is intended to enable economic decisions, such as determining what capital assets are at risk and by how much (see risk management). What ontologies in both information science and philosophy have in common is the attempt to represent entities, including both objects and events, with all their interdependent properties and relations, according to a system of categories. In both fields, there is considerable work on problems of ontology engineering (e.g., Quine and Kripke in philosophy, Sowa and Guarino in information science), and debates concerning to what extent normative ontology is possible (e.g., foundationalism and coherentism in philosophy, BFO and Cyc in artificial intelligence). Applied ontology is considered by some as a successor to prior work in philosophy. However many current efforts are more concerned with establishing controlled vocabularies of narrow domains than with philosophical first principles, or with questions such as the mode of existence of fixed essences or whether enduring objects (e.g., perdurantism and endurantism) may be ontologically more primary than processes. Artificial intelligence has retained considerable attention regarding applied ontology in subfields like natural language processing within machine translation and knowledge representation, but ontology editors are being used often in a range of fields, including biomedical informatics and industry. Such efforts often use ontology editing tools such as Protégé. == Ontology in philosophy == Ontology is a branch of philosophy and intersects areas such as metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophy of language, as it considers how knowledge, language, and perception relate to the nature of reality. Metaphysics deals with questions like "what exists?" and "what is the nature of reality?". One of five traditional branches of philosophy, metaphysics is concerned with exploring existence through properties, entities and relations such as those between particulars and universals, intrinsic and extrinsic properties, or essence and existence. Metaphysics has been an ongoing topic of discussion since recorded history. == Etymology == The compound word ontology combines onto-, from the Greek ὄν, on (gen. ὄντος, ontos), i.e. "being; that which is", which is the present participle of the verb εἰμί, eimí, i.e. "to be, I am", and -λογία, -logia, i.e. "logical discourse", see classical compounds for this type of word formation. While the etymology is Greek, the oldest extant record of the word itself, the Neo-Latin form ontologia, appeared in 1606 in the work Ogdoas Scholastica by Jacob Lorhard (Lorhardus) and in 1613 in the Lexicon philosophicum by Rudolf Göckel (Goclenius). The first occurrence in English of ontology as recorded by the OED (Oxford English Dictionary, online edition, 2008) came in Archeologia Philosophica Nova or New Principles of Philosophy (1663) by Gideon Harvey. == Formal ontology == Since the mid-1970s, researchers in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) have recognized that knowledge engineering is the key to building large and powerful AI systems. AI researchers argued that they could create new ontologies as computational models that enable certain kinds of automated reasoning, which was only marginally successful. In the 1980s, the AI community began to use the term ontology to refer to both a theory of a modeled world and a component of knowledge-based systems. In particular, David Powers introduced the word ontology to AI to refer to real world or robotic grounding, publishing in 1990 literature reviews emphasizing grounded ontology in association with the call for papers for a AAAI Summer Symposium Machine Learning of Natural Language and Ontology, with an expanded version published in SIGART Bulletin and included as a preface to the proceedings. Some researchers, drawing inspiration from philosophical ontologies, viewed computational ontology as a kind of applied philosophy. In 1993, the widely cited web page and paper "Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing" by Tom Gruber used ontology as a technical term in computer science closely related to earlier idea of semantic networks and taxonomies. Gruber introduced the term as a specification of a conceptualization: An ontology is a description (like a formal specification of a program) of the concepts and relationships that can formally exist for an agent or a community of agents. This definition is consistent with the usage of ontology as set of concept definitions, but more general. And it is a different sense of the word than its use in philosophy. Attempting to distance ontologies from taxonomies and similar efforts in knowledge modeling that rely on classes and inheritance, Gruber stated (1993): Ontologies are often equated with taxonomic hierarchies of classes, class definitions, and the subsumption relation, but ontologies need not be limited to these forms. Ontologies are also not limited to conservative definitions, that is, definitions in the traditional logic sense that only introduce terminology and do not add any knowledge about the world (Enderton, 1972). To specify a conceptualization, one needs to state axioms that do constrain the possible interpretations for the defined terms. Recent experimental ontology frameworks have also explored resonance-based AI-human co-evolution structures, such as IAMF (Illumination AI Matrix Framework), OntoMotoOS (a meta-operating system concept for ethical and ontological AI–human co-evolution), and PSRT (Phase-Structural Reality Theory across multi-scale ontological layers). Though not yet widely adopted in academic discourse, such models propose phased approaches to ethical harmonization and structural emergence. As refinement of Gruber's definition Feilmayr and Wöß (2016) stated: "An ontology is a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization that is characterized by high semantic expressiveness required for increased complexity." == Formal ontology components == Contemporary ontologies share many structural similarities, regardless of the language in which they are expressed. Most ontologies describe individuals (instances), classes (concepts), attributes and relations. === Types === ==== Domain ontology ==== A domain ontology (or domain-specific ontology) represents concepts which belong to a realm of the world, such as biology or politics. Each domain ontology typically models domain-specific definitions of terms. For example, the word card has many different meanings. An ontology about the domain of poker would model the "playing card" meaning of the word, while an ontology about the domain of computer hardware would model the "punched card" and "video card" meanings. Since domain ontologies are written by different people, they represent concepts in very specific and unique ways, and are often incompatible within the same project. As systems that rely on domain ontologies expand, they often need to merge domain ontologies by hand-tuning each entity or using a combination of software merging and hand-tuning. This presents a challenge to the ontology designer. Different ontologies in the same domain arise due to different languages, different intended usage of the ontologies, and different perceptions of the domain (based on cultural background, education, ideology, etc.). At present, merging ontologies that are not developed from a common upper ontology is a largely manual process and therefore time-consuming and expensive. Domain ontologies that use the same upper ontology to provide a set of basic elements with which to specify the meanings of the domain ontology entities can be merged with less effo
Read more →
How to Solve it by Computer

How to Solve it by Computer is a computer science book by R. G. Dromey, first published by Prentice-Hall in 1982. It is occasionally used as a textbook, especially in India. It is an introduction to the whys of algorithms and data structures. Features of the book: The design factors associated with problems, The creative process behind coming up with innovative solutions for algorithms and data structures, The line of reasoning behind the constraints, factors and the design choices made. The very fundamental algorithms portrayed by this book are mostly presented in pseudocode and/or Pascal notation.
Read more →