AI Chatbot Questionnaire

AI Chatbot Questionnaire — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Autonomous aircraft

An autonomous aircraft is an aircraft which flies under the control of on-board autonomous robotic systems and needs no intervention from a human pilot or remote control. Most contemporary autonomous aircraft are unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) with pre-programmed algorithms to perform designated tasks, but advancements in artificial intelligence technologies (e.g. machine learning) mean that autonomous control systems are reaching a point where several air taxis and associated regulatory regimes are being developed. == History == === Unmanned aerial vehicles === The earliest recorded use of an unmanned aerial vehicle for warfighting occurred in July 1849, serving as a balloon carrier (the precursor to the aircraft carrier) Significant development of radio-controlled drones started in the early 1900s, and originally focused on providing practice targets for training military personnel. The earliest attempt at a powered UAV was A. M. Low's "Aerial Target" in 1916. Autonomous features such as the autopilot and automated navigation were developed progressively through the twentieth century, although techniques such as terrain contour matching (TERCOM) were applied mainly to cruise missiles. Before the introduction of the Bayraktar Kızılelma some modern drones have a high degree of autonomy, although they were not fully capable and the regulatory environment prohibits their widespread use in civil aviation. However some limited trials had been undertaken. On December 17, 2025, two Bayraktar Kızılelma performed the world's first autonomous close-formation flight by two unmanned fighter jets, using artificial intelligence. This was the first time in the history of aviation when two unmanned aerial vehicles flew in close formation on their own. === Passengers === As flight, navigation and communications systems have become more sophisticated, safely carrying passengers has emerged as a practical possibility. Autopilot systems are relieving the human pilot of progressively more duties, but the pilot currently remains necessary. A number of air taxis are under development and larger autonomous transports are also being planned. The personal air vehicle is another class where from one to four passengers are not expected to be able to pilot the aircraft and autonomy is seen as necessary for widespread adoption. == Control system architecture == The computing capability of aircraft flight and navigation systems followed the advances of computing technology, beginning with analog controls and evolving into microcontrollers, then system-on-a-chip (SOC) and single-board computers (SBC). === Sensors === Position and movement sensors give information about the aircraft state. Exteroceptive sensors deal with external information like distance measurements, while proprioceptive ones correlate internal and external states. Degrees of freedom (DOF) refers to both the amount and quality of sensors on board: 6 DOF implies 3-axis gyroscopes and accelerometers (a typical inertial measurement unit – IMU), 9 DOF refers to an IMU plus a compass, 10 DOF adds a barometer and 11 DOF usually adds a GPS receiver. === Actuators === UAV actuators include digital electronic speed controllers (which control the RPM of the motors) linked to motors/engines and propellers, servomotors (for planes and helicopters mostly), weapons, payload actuators, LEDs and speakers. === Software === UAV software called the flight stack or autopilot. The purpose of the flight stack is to obtain data from sensors, control motors to ensure UAV stability, and facilitate ground control and mission planning communication. UAVs are real-time systems that require rapid response to changing sensor data. As a result, UAVs rely on single-board computers for their computational needs. Examples of such single-board computers include Raspberry Pis, Beagleboards, etc. shielded with NavIO, PXFMini, etc. or designed from scratch such as NuttX, preemptive-RT Linux, Xenomai, Orocos-Robot Operating System or DDS-ROS 2.0. Civil-use open-source stacks include: Due to the open-source nature of UAV software, they can be customized to fit specific applications. For example, researchers from the Technical University of Košice have replaced the default control algorithm of the PX4 autopilot. This flexibility and collaborative effort has led to a large number of different open-source stacks, some of which are forked from others, such as CleanFlight, which is forked from BaseFlight and from which three other stacks are forked from. === Loop principles === UAVs employ open-loop, closed-loop or hybrid control architectures. Open loop – This type provides a positive control signal (faster, slower, left, right, up, down) without incorporating feedback from sensor data. Closed loop – This type incorporates sensor feedback to adjust behavior (reduce speed to reflect tailwind, move to altitude 300 feet). The PID controller is common. Sometimes, feedforward is employed, transferring the need to close the loop further. == Communications == Most UAVs use a radio for remote control and exchange of video and other data. Early UAVs had only narrowband uplink. Downlinks came later. These bi-directional narrowband radio links carried command and control (C&C) and telemetry data about the status of aircraft systems to the remote operator. For very long range flights, military UAVs also use satellite receivers as part of satellite navigation systems. In cases when video transmission was required, the UAVs will implement a separate analog video radio link. In most modern autonomous applications, video transmission is required. A broadband link is used to carry all types of data on a single radio link. These broadband links can leverage quality of service techniques to optimize the C&C traffic for low latency. Usually, these broadband links carry TCP/IP traffic that can be routed over the Internet. Communications can be established with: Ground control – a military ground control station (GCS). The MAVLink protocol is increasingly becoming popular to carry command and control data between the ground control and the vehicle. Remote network system, such as satellite duplex data links for some military powers. Downstream digital video over mobile networks has also entered consumer markets, while direct UAV control uplink over the cellular mesh and LTE have been demonstrated and are in trials. Another aircraft, serving as a relay or mobile control station – military manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T). As mobile networks have increased in performance and reliability over the years, drones have begun to use mobile networks for communication. Mobile networks can be used for drone tracking, remote piloting, over the air updates, and cloud computing. Modern networking standards have explicitly considered autonomous aircraft and therefore include optimizations. The 5G standard has mandated reduced user plane latency to 1ms while using ultra-reliable and low-latency communications. == Autonomy == Basic autonomy comes from proprioceptive sensors. Advanced autonomy calls for situational awareness, knowledge about the environment surrounding the aircraft from exteroceptive sensors: sensor fusion integrates information from multiple sensors. Civil aviation regulators and standards bodies have published high-level roadmaps and discussion papers focused on assurance, safety and governance of AI-enabled systems in aviation, particularly as autonomy increases in operations and decision support. === Basic principles === One way to achieve autonomous control employs multiple control-loop layers, as in hierarchical control systems. As of 2016 the low-layer loops (i.e. for flight control) tick as fast as 32,000 times per second, while higher-level loops may cycle once per second. The principle is to decompose the aircraft's behavior into manageable "chunks", or states, with known transitions. Hierarchical control system types range from simple scripts to finite state machines, behavior trees and hierarchical task planners. The most common control mechanism used in these layers is the PID controller which can be used to achieve hover for a quadcopter by using data from the IMU to calculate precise inputs for the electronic speed controllers and motors. Examples of mid-layer algorithms: Path planning: determining an optimal path for vehicle to follow while meeting mission objectives and constraints, such as obstacles or fuel requirements Trajectory generation (motion planning): determining control maneuvers to take in order to follow a given path or to go from one location to another Trajectory regulation: constraining a vehicle within some tolerance to a trajectory Evolved UAV hierarchical task planners use methods like state tree searches or genetic algorithms. === Autonomy features === UAV manufacturers often build in specific autonomous operations, such as: Self-level: attitude stabilization on the pitch and roll axes. Altitude hold: The aircraft maint
Read more →
For a Breath I Tarry

"For a Breath I Tarry" is a 1966 post-apocalyptic novelette by American writer Roger Zelazny, which was nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Novelette in 1967. Set in a future long after the self-extinction of humanity, the novelette recounts the tale of Frost, a sentient machine. Although humans have caused their own extinction, the sentient machines that they created continue the work of rebuilding a shattered Earth. Along the way, the story explores the differences between humanity and machines, the former experiencing the world qualitatively, while the latter doing so quantitatively. This difference is illustrated through philosophical conversations between Frost and another machine named Mordel. Frost's goal of becoming human, along with literary allusions, drives the plot and sets the tone of the novelette. These allusions include the first chapter of the Book of Job, in both situation and language, since verses are both quoted directly and paraphrased. In addition, the first three chapters of the Book of Genesis are echoed. Finally, Frost and Mordel enter into a Faustian bargain, though with better results than in the original story. The other major character is the Beta Machine, Frost's peer in the Southern Hemisphere. (Frost controls the Northern Hemisphere.) The novelette hints that though being a machine, Beta has a feminine personality. After Frost has succeeded in his millennium-long quest to become human (via recovered DNA), Beta agrees to join him in becoming human—suggesting the possibility of rebirth for the human race. The novelette has appeared in collections of Zelazny's works and in anthologies. The title is from a phrase in the poet A. E. Housman's collection A Shropshire Lad.
Read more →
Eclipse Phase

Eclipse Phase is a science fiction horror role-playing game with transhumanist themes. It was originally published by Catalyst Game Labs, and is now published by the game's creators, Posthuman Studios, and is released under a Creative Commons license. == Setting == Eclipse Phase is a science fiction horror role-playing game with transhumanist, post-apocalyptic, and conspiracy themes. The game is set after a World War III project to create artificial intelligence known as TITANs has gone rogue, resulting in the deaths of over 90% of the inhabitants of Earth. Earth is subsequently abandoned, and existing colonies throughout the Solar System are expanded to accommodate the refugees. The setting explores a spectrum of socioeconomic systems in each of these colonies: A capitalist / republican system exists in the Inner System (Mars, the Moon, and Mercury), under the Planetary Consortium, a corporate body which allows the election of representatives but whose shareholders are nominally most powerful. An Extropian/Propertarian system is established in the Asteroid Belt. The Extropians are split into two subfactions, an anarcho-capitalist group, more closely related to the Hypercapitalists, and a mutualist group, related closely to the Anarchists. A military oligarchy rules the moons around Jupiter. An alliance of Scandinavia-style social democracy and Collectivist anarchism are dominant in the Outer System. From there, the setting explores various scientific advances, extrapolated far into the future. Nanotechnology, terraforming, Zero-G living, upgrading animal sapience, and reputation systems are all used as plot points and background. With all of this, the game encourages players to confront existential threats like aliens, weapons of mass destruction, Exsurgent Virus outbreaks, and political unrest. == Mechanics == Eclipse Phase uses a simple roll-under percentile die system for task resolution. Unlike most percentile systems, a roll of 00 does not count as a 100. In addition, any roll of a double (11, 22, 33 etc.) is a critical. If the double is under the target number it is a critical success, while being over the target number constitutes a critical failure. For damage resolution (whether physical damage caused by injury or mental stress caused by traumatic events), players roll a designated number of ten-sided dice and add the values together, along with any modifiers. == Books == === Publications === Eclipse Phase (Core Rulebook) (2009) ISBN 978-0-9845835-0-8 GM Screen (2010) Sunward, Boyle, Rob; Knevitt, James (2010). Sunward : the inner system, a location sourcebook for Eclipse Phase. UK: Cubicle 7. ISBN 978-0984583522. Gatecrashing Boyle, Rob; Graham, Jack; Rosenberg, Aaron (2011). Gatecrashing. UK: Cubicle 7. ISBN 978-0984583539. Panopticon Volume 1: Habitats, Surveillance, Uplifts (2011) (2011) Rimward (2012) Transhuman: The Eclipse Phase Player’s Guide (2013) Firewall (2015) X-Risks (2016) Eclipse Phase (Core Rulebook, Second Edition) (2019) === Nano Ops === Nano Op: Grinder Nano Op: All That Glitters Nano Op: Better on the Inside Nano Op: Binge Nano Op: Body Count == Creative Commons License == The Eclipse Phase roleplaying game was released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 license, and newer printings have updated to the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 license; the text found on the Eclipse Phase website is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. As stated on their website, the publishers encourage players and gamemasters to recreate, alter, and "remix" the material for non-commercial purposes as long as Posthuman Studios is attributed, and any derivatives are licensed under the same Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Further, copying and sharing the game's electronic versions non-commercially is legal. == Reception == In 2010, it won the 36th Annual Origins award for Best Roleplaying Game of 2009. It also won three 2010 ENnie awards: Gold for Best Writing, Silver for Best Cover Art, and Silver for Product of the Year.
Read more →
Mars Plus

Mars Plus is a 1994 science fiction novel by American writer Frederik Pohl and Thomas T. Thomas. It is the sequel to Pohl's 1976 novel Man Plus, which is about a cyborg, Roger Torraway, who is designed to operate in the harsh Martian environment, so that humans can start to colonize Mars. Mars Plus is set fifty years after the first novel. Young Demeter Coghlan travels to Mars, now settled by humans and cyborgs, and finds herself amidst a rebellion by the colonists. == Plot == In Man Plus, set in the not-too-distant future, with threat of the Cold War becoming a fighting war, people plan for the colonization of Mars to escape the seemingly-inevitable Armageddon. The American government begins a cyborg program to create a being capable of surviving the harsh Martian environment: a "Man Plus" called Roger Torraway who is converted from man to cyborg. While his cyborg body is adapted to Mars, he feels strange at first. As more nations develop cyborgs, the computer networks of Earth become sentient. Mars Plus is set fifty years after the first novel, when Mars is settled by humans and cyborgs. The cyborg Torroway is in the novel, but he is not the main character. The protagonist is Demeter Coghlan, a young woman from Earth who travels to Mars. Demeter is seeking information about a canyon that she believes may be significant if the colonists begin to convert Mars to an Earth-like planet. Amidst a backdrop of spies and newly dispatched Earth diplomats, the inexperienced Demeter senses that tensions are rising on the planet. She is further disoriented due to recovering from an accident. Despite the risks in the region, Demeter has intense sexual encounters with some of the local colonists. When the locals rebel against the surveillance set up by the computer network, Demeter is kidnapped by the computer network. == Reception == The reviewer from SFBook Reviews criticizes the book, saying "nothing really happens" and stating that there is no linkage to Man Plus apart from the presence of the cyborg Torraway; moreover, the reviewer states that the questions posed in the first novel are not answered. SF Reviews calls Mars Plus "...not as good as Man Plus but...not bad", and it is praised for "...some nice touches: Demeter continuously forgetting to think about geology; her careless dictation to the computer and her irresistible urges for wild sex." SF Reviews criticizes the writing in Mars Plus for being "...a little careless in places" and in need of more "...more crafting and pruning."
Read more →
Microsoft To Do

Microsoft To Do (previously styled as Microsoft To-Do) is a cloud-based task management application. It allows users to manage their tasks from a smartphone, tablet and computer. The technology is produced by the team behind Wunderlist, which was acquired by Microsoft, and the stand-alone apps feed into the existing Tasks feature of the Outlook product range. == History == Microsoft To Do was first launched as a preview with basic features in April 2017. Later more features were added including Task list sharing in June 2018. In September 2019, a major update to the app was unveiled, adopting a new user interface with a closer resemblance to Wunderlist. The name was also slightly updated by removing the hyphen from To-Do. In May 2020, Microsoft officially closed the doors on Wunderlist, ending its active service in favor of improving and expanding Microsoft To Do.
Read more →
Paranoia (role-playing game)

Paranoia is a dystopian science-fiction tabletop role-playing game originally designed and written by Greg Costikyan, Dan Gelber, and Eric Goldberg, and first published in 1984 by West End Games. Since 2004 the game has been published under license by Mongoose Publishing. The game won the Origins Award for Best Roleplaying Rules of 1984 and was inducted into the Origins Awards Hall of Fame in 2007. Paranoia is notable among tabletop games for being more competitive than co-operative, with players encouraged to betray one another for their own interests, as well as for keeping a light-hearted, tongue in cheek tone despite its dystopian setting. Several editions of the game have been published since the original version, and the franchise has spawned several spin-offs, novels and comic books based on the game. == Premise == The game is set in a dystopian future city controlled by the Computer (also known as "Friend Computer"), and where information (including the game rules) are restricted by color-coded "security clearance". Player characters are initially enforcers of the Computer's authority known as Troubleshooters, and are given missions to seek out and eliminate threats to the Computer's control. They are also part of prohibited underground movements, and have secret objectives including theft from and murder of other player characters. == Tone == Paranoia is a humorous role-playing game set in a dystopian future along the lines of Nineteen Eighty-Four, Brave New World, Logan's Run, and THX 1138; however, the tone of the game is rife with black humor, frequently tongue-in-cheek rather than dark and heavy. Most of the game's humor is derived from the players' (usually futile) attempts to complete their assignment while simultaneously adhering to the Computer's arbitrary, contradictory and often nonsensical security directives. The Paranoia rulebook is unusual in a number of ways; demonstrating any knowledge of the rules is forbidden, and most of the rulebook is written in an easy, conversational tone that often makes fun of the players and their characters, while occasionally taking digs at other notable role-playing games. === Setting === The game's main setting is an immense, futuristic city called Alpha Complex. Alpha Complex is controlled by the Computer, a civil service AI construct (a literal realization of the "Influencing Machine" that some schizophrenics fear). The Computer serves as the game's principal antagonist, and fears a number of threats to its 'perfect' society, such as the Outdoors, mutants, and secret societies (especially Communists). To deal with these threats, the Computer employs Troubleshooters, whose job is to go out, find trouble, and shoot it. Player characters are usually Troubleshooters, although later game supplements have allowed the players to take on other roles, such as High-Programmers of Alpha Complex. The player characters frequently receive mission instructions from the Computer that are incomprehensible, self-contradictory, or obviously fatal if adhered to, and side-missions (such as Mandatory Bonus Duties) that conflict with the main mission. Failing a mission generally results in termination of the player character, but succeeding can just as often result in the same fate, after being rewarded for successfully concluding the mission. They are issued equipment that is uniformly dangerous, faulty, or "experimental" (i.e., almost certainly dangerous and faulty). Additionally, each player character is generally an unregistered mutant and a secret society member (which are both termination offenses in Alpha Complex), and has a hidden agenda separate from the group's goals, often involving stealing from or killing teammates. Thus, missions often turn into a comedy of errors, as everyone on the team seeks to double-cross everyone else while keeping their own secrets. The game's manual encourages suspicion between players, offering several tips on how to make the gameplay as paranoid as possible. Every player's character is assigned six clones, known as a six-pack, which are used to replace the preceding clone upon his or her death. The game lacks a conventional health system; most wounds the player characters can suffer are assumed to be fatal. As a result, Paranoia allows characters to be routinely killed, yet the player can continue instead of leaving the game. This easy spending of clones tends to lead to frequent firefights, gruesome slapstick, and the horrible yet humorous demise of most if not all of the player character's clone family. Additional clones can be purchased if one gains sufficient favour with the Computer. === Security clearances === Paranoia features a security clearance system based on colors of the visible spectrum which heavily restricts what the players can and cannot legally do; everything from corridors to food and equipment have security restrictions. The lowest rating is Infrared, but the lowest playable security clearance is Red; the game usually begins with the characters having just been promoted to Red grade. Interfering with anything which is above that player's clearance carries significant risk. The full order of clearances from lowest to highest is Infrared (visually represented by black), Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet, and Ultraviolet (visually represented by white). Within the game, Infrared-clearance citizens live dull lives of mindless drudgery and are heavily medicated, while higher clearance characters may be allowed to demote or even summarily execute those of a lower rank and those with Ultraviolet clearance are almost completely unrestricted and have a great deal of access to the Computer; they are the only citizens that may (legally) access and modify the Computer's programming, and thus Ultraviolet citizens are also referred to as "High Programmers". Security clearance is not related to competence but is instead the result of the Computer's often insane and unjustified calculus of trust concerning a citizen. It is suggested that it may in fact be the High Programmers' meddling with The Computer's programming that resulted in its insanity. === Secret societies === In the game, secret societies tend to be based on sketchy and spurious knowledge of historical matters. For example, previous editions included societies such as the "Seal Club" that idolizes the Outdoors but is unsure what plants and animals actually look like. Other societies include the Knights of the Circular Object (based on the Knights of the Round Table), the Trekkies, and the First Church of Christ Computer Programmer. In keeping with the theme of paranoia, many secret societies have spies or double agents in each other's organizations. The first edition also included secret societies such as Programs Groups (the personal agents and spies of the High Programmers at the apex of Alpha Complex society) and Spy For Another Alpha Complex. The actual societies which would be encountered in a game depends on the play style; some societies are more suited for more light-hearted games (Zap-style, or the lighter end of Classic), whereas others represent a more serious threat to Alpha Complex and are therefore more suitable for Straight or the more dark sort of Classic games. == Publication history == Six editions have been published. Three of these were published by West End Games — the first, second, and fifth editions — whereas the later three editions (Paranoia XP, the 25th Anniversary edition and the "Red Clearance" edition) were published by Mongoose Publishing. In addition to these six published editions, it is known that West End Games were working on a third edition — to replace the poorly received fifth edition — in the late 1990s, but their financial issues would prevent this edition from being published, except for being included in one tournament adventure. === First edition === The first edition, was written by Greg Costikyan, Dan Gelber, and Eric Goldberg, and published in 1984 by West End Games. In 1985, this edition of Paranoia won the Origins Award for Best Roleplaying Rules of 1984. This edition, while encouraging dark humour in-game, took a fairly serious dystopian tone; the supplements and adventures released to accompany it emphasised the lighter side, however, establishing the freewheeling mix of slapstick, intra-team backstabbing and satire that is classically associated with a game of Paranoia. === Second edition === The second edition, is credited to Costikyan, Gelber, Goldberg, Ken Rolston, and Paul Murphy, was published in 1987 by West End Games. This edition can be seen as a response to the natural development of the line towards a rules-light, fast and entertaining play style. Here, the humorous possibilities of life in a paranoid dystopia are emphasised, and the rules are simplified. ==== Metaplot and the second edition ==== Many of the supplements released for the second edition fall into a story arc set up by new writers and line editors
Read more →
Fuzzy classification

Fuzzy classification is the process of grouping elements into fuzzy sets whose membership functions are defined by the truth value of a fuzzy propositional function. A fuzzy propositional function is analogous to an expression containing one or more variables, such that when values are assigned to these variables, the expression becomes a fuzzy proposition. Accordingly, fuzzy classification is the process of grouping individuals having the same characteristics into a fuzzy set. A fuzzy classification corresponds to a membership function μ C ~ : P F ~ × U → T ~ {\textstyle \mu _{\tilde {C}}:{\tilde {PF}}\times U\to {\tilde {T}}} that indicates the degree to which an individual i ∈ U {\textstyle i\in U} is a member of the fuzzy class C ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {C}}} , given its fuzzy classification predicate Π ~ C ~ ∈ P F ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {\Pi }}_{\tilde {C}}\in {\tilde {PF}}} . Here, T ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {T}}} is the set of fuzzy truth values, i.e., the unit interval [ 0 , 1 ] {\textstyle [0,1]} . The fuzzy classification predicate Π ~ C ~ ( i ) {\textstyle {\tilde {\Pi }}_{\tilde {C}}(i)} corresponds to the fuzzy restriction " i {\textstyle i} is a member of C ~ {\textstyle {\tilde {C}}} ". == Classification == Intuitively, a class is a set that is defined by a certain property, and all objects having that property are elements of that class. The process of classification evaluates for a given set of objects whether they fulfill the classification property, and consequentially are a member of the corresponding class. However, this intuitive concept has some logical subtleties that need clarification. A class logic is a logical system which supports set construction using logical predicates with the class operator { ⋅ | ⋅ } {\textstyle \{\cdot |\cdot \}} . A class C = { i | Π ( i ) } {\displaystyle C=\{i|\Pi (i)\}} is defined as a set C of individuals i satisfying a classification predicate Π which is a propositional function. The domain of the class operator { .| .} is the set of variables V and the set of propositional functions PF, and the range is the powerset of this universe P(U) that is, the set of possible subsets: { ⋅ | ⋅ } : V × P F → P ( U ) {\displaystyle \{\cdot |\cdot \}:V\times PF\rightarrow P(U)} Here is an explanation of the logical elements that constitute this definition: An individual is a real object of reference. A universe of discourse is the set of all possible individuals considered. A variable V :→ R {\textstyle V:\rightarrow R} is a function which maps into a predefined range R without any given function arguments: a zero-place function. A propositional function is "an expression containing one or more undetermined constituents, such that, when values are assigned to these constituents, the expression becomes a proposition". In contrast, classification is the process of grouping individuals having the same characteristics into a set. A classification corresponds to a membership function μ that indicates whether an individual is a member of a class, given its classification predicate Π. μ : P F × U → T {\displaystyle \mu :PF\times U\rightarrow T} The membership function maps from the set of propositional functions PF and the universe of discourse U into the set of truth values T. The membership μ of individual i in Class C is defined by the truth value τ of the classification predicate Π. μ C ( i ) := τ ( Π ( i ) ) {\displaystyle \mu C(i):=\tau (\Pi (i))} In classical logic the truth values are certain. Therefore a classification is crisp, since the truth values are either exactly true or exactly false.
Read more →
AI Action Summit 2025

The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit (French: Sommet pour l'action sur l'intelligence artificielle or Sommet pour l'action sur l'IA, SAIA) was held at the Grand Palais in Paris, France, from 10 to 11 February 2025. The summit was co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 2025 AI Action Summit followed the 2023 AI Safety Summit hosted at Bletchley Park in the UK, and the 2024 AI Seoul Summit in South Korea. This series of AI summits continued with the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, which was hosted by India in February 2026. Whereas the 2023 AI Safety Summit was attended by representatives from 29 governments and executives from only a handful of AI companies, over 1,000 participants from more than 100 countries attended the 2025 Paris AI Summit, representing government leaders, international organisations, the academic and research community, the private sector, and civil society. == Background == The First International AI Safety Report was published on 29 January 2025. Commissioned after the Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit, the report focused on the risks and threats posed by general-purpose AI, and was slated for discussion at the Paris summit as part of the "Trust in AI" pillar. Whereas the first summit was focused on the catastrophic risks of AI and their mitigation, the Paris meeting was recast as an "AI Action Summit" emphasising innovation, practical implementation, and potential economic opportunities of AI, while also exploring a broader range of risks including its environmental impact and disruptions to the labour market. In the weeks leading up to the Paris summit, government leaders had also started to rally around "national champions" in AI, partly in response to Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, which had released a new model rivalling OpenAI o1. On Sunday 9 February, French President Emmanuel Macron posted a compilation of AI-generated deepfake video clips of himself on Instagram to help publicise the start of the 2025 AI Action Summit the following day. While acknowledging the humour of the deepfakes, the real Macron states in the video that using artificial intelligence, "we can do some very big things: change healthcare, energy, life in our society". == Proceedings == === Day 1 === In her opening address, French special envoy Anne Bouverot discussed the environmental impact of AI, acknowledging the technology's "current trajectory is unsustainable". General secretary Christy Hoffman of the UNI Global Union said that "AI-driven productivity gains risk turning the technology into yet another engine of inequality, further straining our democracies". Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing made a speech expressing China's willingness "to work with other countries to promote development, safeguard security, and share achievements in the field of artificial intelligence". Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his speech that while the rise of AI brings many risks, "The biggest risk is missing out". He discussed Google's long track record of AI research and said that the company is investing further into "deep research" agents that can autonomously search the Internet and compile a full analysis for users. A new coalition, the Robust Open Online Safety Tools (ROOST) initiative, debuted at the summit. Supported by Google, Discord, OpenAI, and Roblox, and incubated at the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the organisation is developing free, open-source tools to detect and report child sexual abuse material (CSAM). In his speech closing the first day, President Emmanuel Macron emphasized that France has the capability to deliver the power required by AI companies, thanks to its production of nuclear energy. While declaring that Europe was "back in the race" for AI, Macron said that the region was "too slow" for investors, and called on the EU to "simplify regulation" and "resynchronize with the rest of the world". === Day 2 === On 11 February 2025, the French government announced its $400 million endowment of Current AI, a new foundation to support the creation of AI "public goods" including high-quality datasets and open-source tools and infrastructure. Launched by President Macron, Current AI is backed by nine governments – Finland, France, Germany, Chile, India, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Slovenia, and Switzerland – plus various philanthropic organisations such as the Omidyar Group and the McGovern Foundation, and private companies such as Google and Salesforce. Another initiative launched at the summit was the Coalition for Sustainable AI. Led by France, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the coalition has the support of 11 countries, five international organisations, and 37 tech companies including EDF, IBM, Nvidia, and SAP. The Summit of Heads of State and Government took place with a plenary session in the Grand Palais. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India stressed the need to "democratise technology" and "[ensure] access to all, especially in the Global South". Vice President JD Vance of the United States used his speech to warn against "excessive regulation of the AI" which "could kill a transformative sector just as it's taking off". Vance also warned other leaders against cooperating with "authoritarian regimes" on AI, a comment widely interpreted as a reference to China. == Investments == At the summit, the European Union made several announcements related to planned investments supporting AI development. President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission launched InvestAI, a €200 billion initiative, including €20 billion to build four AI gigafactories to train highly complex, very large models. In addition, a coalition of more than 60 European companies launched the EU AI Champions Initiative. Led by venture capital firm General Catalyst, the coalition plans to invest €150 billion in AI-related businesses and infrastructure in Europe over five years. President Emmanuel Macron announced that private investors had pledged to invest nearly €110 billion in the AI sector in France. Financing of between €30 and €50 billion is expected from the United Arab Emirates to build a very large data centre campus, with another €20 billion from the Canadian investment firm Brookfield Corporation. French startup Mistral AI and Helsing, a German-British company, announced their partnership in developing vision-language-action models helping soldiers use AI on the battlefield. == Reactions == The Financial Times editorial board noted that the Paris summit "highlighted a shift in the dynamics towards geopolitical competition", which it characterised as "a new AI arms race" between the US and China, with Europe "trying to carve out its role". Fortune.com AI editor Jeremy Kahn described the 2025 Paris Summit as an "AI festival, complete with glitzy corporate side events and even a late night dance party", contrasting it with the "decidedly sober" mood of the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. Many experts of the AI Safety Community expressed disappointment that the Paris Summit did not do enough to address AI risks, with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calling it a "missed opportunity". Others voicing similar concerns included David Leslie of the Alan Turing Institute and Max Tegmark of the Future of Life Institute. Reporting from Paris, technology columnist Kevin Roose of The New York Times wrote, "The biggest surprise of the Paris summit, for me, has been that policymakers can't seem to grasp how soon powerful AI systems could arrive, or how disruptive they could be." == Statement on inclusive and sustainable AI == At the summit, 58 countries, including France, China, and India, signed a joint declaration, the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet. The statement outlines general principles such as accessibility and overcoming the digital divide; developing AI that is open, transparent, ethical, safe, and trustworthy; avoiding market concentration of AI development to encourage innovation; positive outcomes for labour markets; making AI sustainable; and promoting international cooperation and governance. The US and UK refused to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. The UK government said in a brief statement that the international agreement did not go far enough in defining global governance of AI and addressing concerns about its impact on national security. === Signatories === The list of signatory countries to the statement for inclusive and sustainable AI in alphabetical order: Additional signatories included the following international bodies and research institutes: ALAI (Latin American Association on Internet) African Union (AU) Commission BEUC The European Consumer Organisation Center for Democracy and Technology Council of Europe European Commission (and the 27 member states) Hugging Face INRIA Institute of Advanced Study OEC
Read more →
Wavelet noise

Wavelet noise is an alternative to Perlin noise which reduces the problems of aliasing and detail loss that are encountered when Perlin noise is summed into a fractal. == Algorithm detail == The basic algorithm for 2-dimensional wavelet noise is as follows: Create an image, R {\displaystyle R} , filled with uniform white noise. Downsample R {\displaystyle R} to half-size to create R ↓ {\displaystyle R^{\downarrow }} , then upsample it back up to full size to create R ↓↑ {\displaystyle R^{\downarrow \uparrow }} . Subtract R ↓↑ {\displaystyle R^{\downarrow \uparrow }} from R {\displaystyle R} to create the end result, N {\displaystyle N} . This results in an image that contains all the information that cannot be represented at half-scale. From here, N {\displaystyle N} can be used similarly to Perlin noise to create fractal patterns.
Read more →
Semantic Scholar

Semantic Scholar is a research tool for scientific literature. It is developed at the Allen Institute for AI and was publicly released in November 2015. Semantic Scholar uses modern techniques in natural language processing to support the research process, for example by providing automatically generated summaries of scholarly papers. The Semantic Scholar team is actively researching the use of artificial intelligence in natural language processing, machine learning, human–computer interaction, and information retrieval. Semantic Scholar began as a database for the topics of computer science, geoscience, and neuroscience. In 2017, the system began including biomedical literature in its corpus. As of September 2022, it includes over 200 million publications from all fields of science. == Technology == Semantic Scholar provides a one-sentence summary of scientific literature. One of its aims was to address the challenge of reading numerous titles and lengthy abstracts on mobile devices. It also seeks to ensure that the three million scientific papers published yearly reach readers, since it is estimated that only half of this literature is ever read. Artificial intelligence is used to capture the essence of a paper, generating it through an "abstractive" technique. The project uses a combination of machine learning, natural language processing, and machine vision to add a layer of semantic analysis to the traditional methods of citation analysis, and to extract relevant figures, tables, entities, and venues from papers. Another key AI-powered feature is Research Feeds, an adaptive research recommender that uses AI to quickly learn what papers users care about reading and recommends the latest research to help scholars stay up to date. It uses a paper embedding model trained using contrastive learning to find papers similar to those in each Library folder. Semantic Scholar also offers Semantic Reader, an augmented reader with the potential to revolutionize scientific reading by making it more accessible and richly contextual. Semantic Reader provides in-line citation cards that allow users to see citations with TLDR (short for Too Long, Didn't Read) automatically generated short summaries as they read and skimming highlights that capture key points of a paper so users can digest faster. In contrast with Google Scholar and PubMed, Semantic Scholar is designed to highlight the most important and influential elements of a paper. The AI technology is designed to identify hidden connections and links between research topics. Like the previously cited search engines, Semantic Scholar also exploits graph structures, which include the Microsoft Academic Knowledge Graph, Springer Nature's SciGraph, and the Semantic Scholar Corpus (originally a 45 million papers corpus in computer science, neuroscience and biomedicine). == Article identifier == Each paper hosted by Semantic Scholar is assigned a unique identifier called the Semantic Scholar Corpus ID (abbreviated S2CID). The following entry is an example: Liu, Ying; Gayle, Albert A; Wilder-Smith, Annelies; Rocklöv, Joacim (March 2020). "The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus". Journal of Travel Medicine. 27 (2). doi:10.1093/jtm/taaa021. PMID 32052846. S2CID 211099356. == Indexing == Semantic Scholar is free to use and unlike similar search engines (e.g., Google Scholar) does not search for material that is behind a paywall. One study compared the index scope of Semantic Scholar to Google Scholar, and found that for the papers cited by secondary studies in computer science, the two indices had comparable coverage, each only missing a handful of the papers. == Number of users and publications == As of January 2018, following a 2017 project that added biomedical papers and topic summaries, the Semantic Scholar corpus included more than 40 million papers from computer science and biomedicine. In March 2018, Doug Raymond, who developed machine learning initiatives for the Amazon Alexa platform, was hired to lead the Semantic Scholar project. As of August 2019, the number of included papers metadata (not the actual PDFs) had grown to more than 173 million after the addition of the Microsoft Academic Graph records. In 2020, a partnership between Semantic Scholar and the University of Chicago Press Journals made all articles published under the University of Chicago Press available in the Semantic Scholar corpus. At the end of 2020, Semantic Scholar had indexed 190 million papers. In 2020, Semantic Scholar reached seven million users per month.
Read more →
Pommerman Challenge

The Pommerman Challenge is a multi-agent game to test autonomous artificial intelligence systems. == Game structure == Two-agent team compete against each other on an 11 x 11 board. Each agent can observe only part of the board, and the agents cannot communicate. The goal is to knock down the opponents. Agents place explosives to destroy walls and collect power-ups that appear from those walls, while avoiding death. Game objects can move unpredictably or be moved by an agent. == Play == The game involves real-time decision making. Agents must choose moves in about .1 seconds. == Algorithms == The real-time requirement limits the use of compute-heavy techniques such as Monte Carlo tree search. The branching factor at each move can be as large as 1,296, because all four agents act in each step, choosing among six possibilities. The agents choose by accounting for explosions, which have lifetimes of 10 steps. Explosions derail tree search techniques, as searches with less than 10 levels ignore explosions while deeper searches consider too many choices (given the branching factor). A hybrid approach uses a limited-depth tree search followed by exploring a deterministic/pessimistic scenario. Limiting the depth keeps the search tree small. The deterministic approach can predict far in the future, by omitting branching. "Good" actions are often those that perform well under pessimistic scenarios, particularly if safety is important. Identifying the worst sequence of positions for an object can suggest where to move it. After generating pessimistic scenarios, the agent quantifies the survivability of each move, notionally the number of positions in which the agent can then remain safely (without encountering other agents). == Competitions == 3 competitions were organized with slightly changing rules during 2018–2019. === Online - FFA === This round was a warm-up online event, where each competitor controlled only one agent. Results: 1st: Agent47Agent by Yichen Gong 2nd: aiKiller by Márton Görög === NeurIPS 2018 - Team === The first Pommerman competition with in-person finals. Results: 1st: hakozakijunctions by Toshihiro Takahashi 2nd: eisenach by Márton Görög 3rd: dypm by Takayuki Osogami The 3 best performing solutions used online tree search. === NeurIPS 2019 - Team Radio === The second competition with in-person finals improved communication between teammate agents. Results: 1st: Márton Görög 2nd: Paul Jasek 3rd: Yifan Zhang
Read more →
TCEC Season 14

The 14th season of the Top Chess Engine Championship took place between 17 November 2018 and 24 February 2019. Stockfish was the defending champion, having defeated Komodo in the previous season's superfinal. The season is notable for two things: the emergence of two strong, new engines, the Komodo variant Komodo Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS) and the neural network engine Leela Chess Zero, and the dramatic superfinal. Komodo MCTS and Leela fought their way from Division 4 and Division 3 respectively to the Premier Division, with Leela further qualifying for the superfinal against Stockfish. The superfinal was a topsy-turvy affair with the lead changing hands several times. It finished as the closest superfinal TCEC has ever seen, with Stockfish winning by a single game, 50.5–49.5 (+10 =81 -9). == Overview == === Structure === The season comprised five divisions: from the lowest Division 4 to the Premier Division. The top two engines of each division promote to the division above, while the bottom two engines relegate. The top two engines of the Premier Division contest a 100-game superfinal. The lengths of the opening books used increases as the divisions progress. The superfinal itself used a custom opening book designed by Jeroen Noomen. === Rules === The TCEC draw and win rules were slightly modified for Season 14. The game is now adjudicated as drawn if, after move 30, both engines have evals ±0.08 for five consecutive moves, and there are neither pawn moves nor a capture. Win adjudication now occurs if both engines have an eval of ±10 for five consecutive moves. Following the controversy over DeusX's participation last season, the uniqueness rule for neural networks was modified such that at least two of the following three hallmarks must be unique: The code for training the neural network The neural network (and weights file) itself The engine that executes this network This change meant DeusX did not meet the uniqueness criteria and therefore did not participate. Aside from this change, the season used the standard rules of the TCEC. == Results == === Division 4 === New entrant Komodo MCTS dominated Division 4, winning by a clear four points, although it did lose a game to second-place finisher rofChade. Fellow new entrant Scorpio NN performed badly and finished last, drawing only one game and losing the rest. === Division 3 === The neural network engine Leela Chess Zero had just missed promotion to Division 2 in the previous season. Since its relatively weak performance last season was partly due to hardware problems, and since it had shown a lot of improvement in strength, it was the hot favourite in this division. Leela lived up to its billing by comprehensively defeating everyone else. In a portent of future divisions however, Leela surprisingly dropped a game to third-place Arasan. Komodo MCTS was also improving quickly, and an updated version finished second behind Leela. The gap between second and third was 6.5 points, illustrating the gulf in class. === Division 2 === Although Division 2 engines are significantly stronger than Division 3, Leela and Komodo MCTS continued to dominate the competition, and again finished first and second. Komodo MCTS only lost one game to Leela, while Leela's tendency to occasionally lose to weaker engines saw her losing a game to 4th-placed Booot. Third place finisher Xiphos gave Leela and Komodo MCTS a run for their money, and was in the running up until the final rounds when it lost a crucial game to Leela. This loss left it one point behind Komodo MCTS in the final standings. === Division 1 === Leela and Komodo MCTS's rampage through the lower divisions continued, and they again finished first and second. In a demonstration of how much it had improved, Leela scored 20/28 in this division, the same score it had achieved in Division 2. This was also a TCEC points record for this division. However, Leela dropped a game against fourth-place finisher Chiron. Komodo MCTS, which had yet to lose a game in the lower divisions except to Leela, also conceded its first loss to third-place Fizbo. At the other end of the table, former champions Jonny and Fritz, which had not been updated, found themselves outclassed and finished second-last and last respectively; however with fellow competitor Ginkgo crashing five times (and therefore being disqualified), Jonny managed to stay in the division. The penultimate game for this division set a new TCEC moves record for a decisive game: 308 moves before Leela defeated Fritz. === Premier division === This was the strongest premier division ever, with multiple-time champions Stockfish, Komodo, and Houdini in the mix. Right from the start it became clear that Stockfish was in a league of its own, and it dominated the division, scoring wins against every other engine without losing a game. Second place however was a hotly-contested affair, with Leela, Komodo and Houdini neck-and-neck for most of the division. Houdini took the early lead, but Komodo gained second after winning two games by forfeit when its sibling Komodo MCTS crashed. This led to murmurs of a "Konspiracy". However, when both Komodo and Houdini failed to score more wins against the lower half of the field, Leela was able to take the lead. Halfway through the division the race was upended again when Leela went through a bad streak, losing three games in a row to Stockfish, Komodo, and Fire. This led to Komodo regaining second place, only for Komodo MCTS to crash yet again. By TCEC rules this meant Komodo MCTS was disqualified and all its scores were zeroed out, which put Leela back in second place. With three games left, Leela missed a win against Andscacs, which would've more or less secured her a place in the superfinal. Meanwhile, Komodo kept the division interesting by winning two of its last three games. Because Komodo had superior tiebreakers to Leela, this meant Komodo would qualify for the superfinal unless Leela managed to hold Stockfish to a draw with Black in the last game of the division. In a tense final game, Stockfish came close to winning, but missed the winning line. Leela managed to draw and qualified for the superfinal. At the other end of the table, it was quickly apparent that Ethereal and Andscacs were the weakest engines and would likely relegate. However, when Komodo MCTS was disqualified (and therefore relegated), it threw both engines a lifeline, since they could now stay in the division by beating the other. Andscacs was able to score a head-to-head win against Ethereal, but was crushed by Stockfish (+0 =2 -4) and Leela (+0 =3 -3). Ethereal didn't manage to score a win in the entire division, but did manage to score more draws than Andscacs, condemning Andscacs to relegation. === Superfinal === Going into the superfinal expectations were high for Leela: she had received a new network and had just won her first major competition when she defeated Houdini in the second TCEC cup. However, she had won the tournament without having played Stockfish (who had been surprisingly eliminated by Houdini in the semifinals). That, plus the fact that Stockfish dominated Premier Division and had never lost a match to Leela, left it unclear which engine was superior, although most spectators favored Stockfish. The superfinal turned out to be a roller-coaster. It began with Stockfish drawing first blood in game 7, and then scoring another win in game 10. Leela hit back with wins in game 11 and 13, but then lost games 20, 21, and 22. This gave Stockfish a 3-point lead. However, in the next 30 games, Leela was the only one to score wins: it first equalized by winning games 25, 27, and 29, and then took the lead by winning games 49 and 53. Stockfish won game 56, but Leela won game 63, maintaining her lead. There followed two dramatic games. In game 65, Leela built up a winning position. Stockfish showed a +153 evaluation, indicating that it had found a forced line leading to an endgame tablebase win; indeed analysis with 7-piece tablebases showed that Leela's position was winning. Under previous seasons' rules, the game would have been adjudicated as a win because Leela's evaluation was above 6.5. However under the new rules, Leela's +8.92 evaluation was not enough to adjudicate. It turned out that Leela could not see the winning line, and shuffled her pieces aimlessly, leading to a 50-move draw. In game 66, Stockfish was given a substantial advantage by the opening, but failed to make the most of it. The evaluations were leveling out to zero when the internet connection to the GPU servers was cut off. By tournament rules, this meant the game was replayed from scratch. After a further internet disconnection and restart, Stockfish handled the opening better and won, leaving Leela with a 1-point lead. In the last third of the superfinal, there followed more drama as Leela often built up strong advantages, but Stockfish showed great resourcefulness in defending inferior positions. Meanwh
Read more →
Eugene Goostman

Eugene Goostman is a chatbot that some regard as having passed the Turing test, a test of a computer's ability to communicate indistinguishably from a human. Developed in Saint Petersburg in 2001 by a group of three programmers, the Russian-born Vladimir Veselov, Ukrainian-born Eugene Demchenko, and Russian-born Sergey Ulasen, Goostman is portrayed as a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy—characteristics that are intended to induce forgiveness in those with whom it interacts for its grammatical errors and lack of general knowledge. The Goostman bot has competed in a number of Turing test contests since its creation, and finished second in the 2005 and 2008 Loebner Prize contest. In June 2012, at an event marking what would have been the 100th birthday of the test's author, Alan Turing, Goostman won a competition promoted as the largest-ever Turing test contest, in which it successfully convinced 29% of its judges that it was human. On 7 June 2014, at a contest marking the 60th anniversary of Turing's death, 33% of the event's judges thought that Goostman was human; the event's organiser Kevin Warwick considered it to have passed Turing's test as a result, per Turing's prediction in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", that by the year 2000, machines would be capable of fooling 30% of human judges after five minutes of questioning. The validity and relevance of the announcement of Goostman's pass was questioned by critics, who noted the exaggeration of the achievement by Warwick, the bot's use of personality quirks and humour in an attempt to misdirect users from its non-human tendencies and lack of real intelligence, along with "passes" achieved by other chatbots at similar events. == Personality == Eugene Goostman is portrayed as being a 13-year-old boy from Odesa, Ukraine, who has a pet guinea pig and a father who is a gynaecologist. Veselov stated that Goostman was designed to be a "character with a believable personality". The choice of age was intentional, as, in Veselov's opinion, a thirteen-year-old is "not too old to know everything and not too young to know nothing". Goostman's young age also induces people who "converse" with him to forgive minor grammatical errors in his responses. In 2014, work was made on improving the bot's "dialog controller", allowing Goostman to output more human-like dialogue. A conversation between Scott Aaronson and Eugene Goostman ran as follows: == Competitions == Eugene Goostman has competed in a number of Turing test competitions, including the Loebner Prize contest; it finished joint second in the Loebner test in 2001, and came second to Jabberwacky in 2005 and to Elbot in 2008. On 23 June 2012, Goostman won a Turing test competition at Bletchley Park in Milton Keynes, held to mark the centenary of its namesake, Alan Turing. The competition, which featured five bots, twenty-five hidden humans, and thirty judges, was considered to be the largest-ever Turing test contest by its organizers. After a series of five-minute-long text conversations, 29% of the judges were convinced that the bot was an actual human. === 2014 "pass" === On 7 June 2014, in a Turing test competition at the Royal Society, organised by Kevin Warwick of the University of Reading to mark the 60th anniversary of Turing's death, Goostman won after 33% of the judges were convinced that the bot was human. 30 judges took part in the event, which included Lord Sharkey, a sponsor of Turing's posthumous pardon, artificial intelligence Professor Aaron Sloman, Fellow of the Royal Society Mark Pagel and Red Dwarf actor Robert Llewellyn. Each judge partook in a textual conversation with each of the five bots; at the same time, they also conversed with a human. In all, a total of 300 conversations were conducted. In Warwick's view, this made Goostman the first machine to pass a Turing test. In a press release, he added that: Some will claim that the Test has already been passed. The words Turing Test have been applied to similar competitions around the world. However this event involved more simultaneous comparison tests than ever before, was independently verified and, crucially, the conversations were unrestricted. A true Turing Test does not set the questions or topics prior to the conversations. In his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", Turing predicted that by the year 2000, computer programs would be sufficiently advanced that the average interrogator would, after five minutes of questioning, "not have more than 70 per cent chance" of correctly guessing whether they were speaking to a human or a machine. Although Turing phrased this as a prediction rather than a "threshold for intelligence", commentators believe that Warwick had chosen to interpret it as meaning that if 30% of interrogators were fooled, the software had "passed the Turing test". ==== Reactions ==== Warwick's claim that Eugene Goostman was the first ever chatbot to pass a Turing test was met with scepticism; critics acknowledged similar "passes" made in the past by other chatbots under the 30% criteria, including PC Therapist in 1991 (which tricked 5 of 10 judges, 50%), and at the Techniche festival in 2011, where a modified version of Cleverbot tricked 59.3% of 1334 votes (which included the 30 judges, along with an audience). Cleverbot's developer, Rollo Carpenter, argued that Turing tests can only prove that a machine can "imitate" intelligence rather than show actual intelligence. Gary Marcus was critical of Warwick's claims, arguing that Goostman's "success" was only the result of a "cleverly-coded piece of software", going on to say that "it's easy to see how an untrained judge might mistake wit for reality, but once you have an understanding of how this sort of system works, the constant misdirection and deflection becomes obvious, even irritating. The illusion, in other words, is fleeting." While acknowledging IBM's Deep Blue and Watson projects—single-purpose computer systems meant for playing chess and the quiz show Jeopardy! respectively—as examples of computer systems that show a degree of intelligence in their specialised field, he further argued that they were not an equivalent to a computer system that shows "broad" intelligence, and could—for example, watch a television programme and answer questions on its content. Marcus stated that "no existing combination of hardware and software can learn completely new things at will the way a clever child can." However, he still believed that there were potential uses for technology such as that of Goostman, specifically suggesting the creation of "believable", interactive video game characters. Imperial College London professor Murray Shanahan questioned the validity and scientific basis of the test, stating that it was "completely misplaced, and it devalues real AI research. It makes it seem like science fiction AI is nearly here, when in fact it's not and it's incredibly difficult." Mike Masnick, editor of the blog Techdirt, was also skeptical, questioning publicity blunders such as the five chatbots being referred to in press releases as "supercomputers", and saying that "creating a chatbot that can fool humans is not really the same thing as creating artificial intelligence."
Read more →
It's the Most Terrible Time of the Year

It's the Most Terrible Time of the Year is an AI-generated television commercial created for McDonald's Netherlands by TBWA\Neboko and The Sweetshop. It was released on 6 December 2025 before being pulled four days later due to negative reception over its use of generative artificial intelligence and its cynical, negative depiction of the holiday season. == Plot == On a bleak, snowy day, various people in the city experience different kinds of mishaps during the Christmas season. Among other incidents, families struggle with their huge loads of presents; Santa Claus gets stuck in traffic; a Christmas tree "redecorates" a man's home, sending him through the window; another family puts up with annoying relatives and a burnt Christmas dinner. Because of all this chaos, a man decides to find refuge in a McDonald's outlet. A Christmas choir finishes singing the jingle "It's the Most Terrible Time of the Year" with the call to action to "hide out in McDonald's till January's here". == Campaign == It's the Most Terrible Time of the Year is a 45-second television commercial made by Dutch agency TBWA\Neboko with involvement of United States-based film production studio The Sweetshop. The advertisement was produced heavily with generative artificial intelligence (AI) following the trend set by other brands such as Coca-Cola and Toys "R" Us. McDonald's Netherlands, the client, released a statement that the commercial was meant to depict "the stressful moments during the holidays in the Netherlands". The commercial also used Andy Williams's "It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year" with lyrics changed to fit with the concept of the advertisement. According to The Sweetshop, the production of the advertisement took "seven weeks". It also added that much effort was put into the commercial compared to the traditional process. Ten people of its in-house AI engine The Gardening Club worked on the project. Los Angeles-based directors Mark Potoka and Matt Spicer were initially credited to be involved in the film but they resigned due to being sidelined from the production process. == Reception == The advertisement was released on McDonald's Netherlands' YouTube channel on 6 December 2025. It had a negative reception over the use of generative AI and the "cynical" concept of the work's story. The video was made private on 9 December 2025. The Sweetshop stated that the production of the advertisement took human effort. McDonald's Netherlands, while stating the original intent of the commercial, released a statement after its pullout that, for many of its customers, the holiday season is the "most wonderful time of the year".
Read more →
Oasis (Minecraft clone)

Oasis is a 2024 video game that attempts to replicate the 2011 sandbox game Minecraft, run entirely using generative artificial intelligence. The project, which began development in 2022 between the AI company Decart and the computer hardware startup Etched, was released by Decart to the public on October 31, 2024. The AI-driven simulation uses "next-frame prediction" to anticipate player actions based on keyboard and mouse inputs, trained on millions of hours of gameplay footage. Without memory or code, the game often outputs unpredictable changes in scenery and inventory, limiting its functionality as a traditional video game. Critics noted its lack of sound, low frame rate, and "dream-like" appearance, though some praised its unpredictability as entertaining. The project is seen as a potential proof of concept for AI-driven video games. == Creation and gameplay == The demo "proof of concept" version of the game was developed by Israeli San Francisco–based AI company Decart and Silicon Valley hardware startup Etched. The idea originated in 2022 when Robert Wachen, a Harvard graduate and co-founder of Etched, met Dean Leitersdorf, an Israel Institute of Technology graduate and co-founder of Decart. Sharing an interest in OpenAI's GPT-3, they collaborated to create the game, naming it after the setting of the novel and film Ready Player One. It was funded by a $21 million grant from Israeli-American billionaire Oren Zeev and New York–based Sequoia Capital. Decart released the game to the public for free on October 31, 2024. The AI replicates Minecraft's gameplay without code using "next-frame prediction", in which the AI tries to predict what the player will see after each keyboard and mouse input, which it was trained to do on millions of hours of Minecraft footage. The game used Nvidia graphics processing units or GPUs for its demo but plans to transition to more energy-efficient Sohu GPUs, under development by Etched, capable of supporting up to 4K graphics. Etched has also suggested the possibility of making the game open source in the future. Alongside Oasis, the company is co-developing AI-generated video and educational content. == Reception == Upon its launch, many players posted videos of their experience with the game online, which often showed Oasis could not maintain coherent logic in its actions or setting. The game also presented low-quality graphics, running between 360p and 720p consistently at 20 FPS, no in-game sound, and could only be played for five minutes at a time before restarting. These issues led some news outlets to refer to the game as a "nightmarish hallucination", and drawing comparisons to dementia and dreams. Despite the negative reviews, Leitersdorf, as well as a number of commentators, have commented that while the game may have fallen short of replicating Minecraft in its demo launch, it was the first step towards something more advanced, which could one day resemble Minecraft or any other game. Online publication The Backdash commented the game could be a "glimpse at the future of game development", while others like Tom's Hardware expressed doubts a game without code could ever look as good as one with, arguing they fail to capture "the point of what makes games fun—or even coherent". In terms of legality, Decart and Etched did not receive permission from Microsoft to create a copy of their game using generative artificial intelligence. No legal actions have been taken by the latter, however, as artificial intelligence and copyright remains largely vague legally.
Read more →