AI Chatbot Soulmate

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

  • Uncertain data

    Uncertain data

    In computer science, uncertain data is data that contains noise that makes it deviate from the correct, intended or original values. In the age of big data, uncertainty or data veracity is one of the defining characteristics of data. Data is constantly growing in volume, variety, velocity and uncertainty (1/veracity). Uncertain data is found in abundance today on the web, in sensor networks, within enterprises both in their structured and unstructured sources. For example, there may be uncertainty regarding the address of a customer in an enterprise dataset, or the temperature readings captured by a sensor due to aging of the sensor. In 2012 IBM called out managing uncertain data at scale in its global technology outlook report that presents a comprehensive analysis looking three to ten years into the future seeking to identify significant, disruptive technologies that will change the world. In order to make confident business decisions based on real-world data, analyses must necessarily account for many different kinds of uncertainty present in very large amounts of data. Analyses based on uncertain data will have an effect on the quality of subsequent decisions, so the degree and types of inaccuracies in this uncertain data cannot be ignored. Uncertain data is found in the area of sensor networks; text where noisy text is found in abundance on social media, web and within enterprises where the structured and unstructured data may be old, outdated, or plain incorrect; in modeling where the mathematical model may only be an approximation of the actual process. When representing such data in a database, an appropriate uncertain database model needs to be selected. == Example data model for uncertain data == One way to represent uncertain data is through probability distributions. Let us take the example of a relational database. There are three main ways to do represent uncertainty as probability distributions in such a database model. In attribute uncertainty, each uncertain attribute in a tuple is subject to its own independent probability distribution. For example, if readings are taken of temperature and wind speed, each would be described by its own probability distribution, as knowing the reading for one measurement would not provide any information about the other. In correlated uncertainty, multiple attributes may be described by a joint probability distribution. For example, if readings are taken of the position of an object, and the x- and y-coordinates stored, the probability of different values may depend on the distance from the recorded coordinates. As distance depends on both coordinates, it may be appropriate to use a joint distribution for these coordinates, as they are not independent. In tuple uncertainty, all the attributes of a tuple are subject to a joint probability distribution. This covers the case of correlated uncertainty, but also includes the case where there is a probability of a tuple not belonging in the relevant relation, which is indicated by all the probabilities not summing to one. For example, assume we have the following tuple from a probabilistic database: Then, the tuple has 10% chance of not existing in the database.

    Read more →
  • RAMnets

    RAMnets

    RAMnets is one of the oldest practical neurally inspired classification algorithms. The RAMnets is also known as a type of "n-tuple recognition method" or "weightless neural network". == Algorithm == Consider (let us say N) sets of n distinct bit locations are selected randomly. These are the n-tuples. The restriction of a pattern to an n-tuple can be regarded as an n-bit number which, together with the identity of the n-tuple, constitutes a `feature' of the pattern. The standard n-tuple recognizer operates simply as follows: A pattern is classified as belonging to the class for which it has the most features in common with at least one training pattern of that class. This is the Θ {\displaystyle \Theta } = 0 case of a more general rule whereby the class assigned to unclassified pattern u is a c r g m a x ( ∑ i = 1 N Θ ( ∑ v ∈ D c δ ( α i ( u ) , α i ( v ) ) ) ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\underset {c}{a}}rgmax(\sum _{i=1}^{N}\Theta (\sum _{v\in D_{c}}\delta (\alpha _{i}(u),\alpha _{i}(v))))\end{aligned}}} where Dc is the set of training patterns in class c, Θ ( x ) {\displaystyle \Theta (x)} = x for 0 ≤ x ≤ θ {\displaystyle 0\leq x\leq \theta } , Θ ( x ) = θ {\displaystyle \Theta (x)=\theta } for x ≥ θ {\displaystyle x\geq \theta } , δ i , j {\displaystyle \delta _{i,j}} is the Kronecker delta( δ i , j {\displaystyle \delta _{i,j}} =1 if i=j and 0 otherwise.)and ( α i ( u ) ) {\displaystyle (\alpha _{i}(u))} is the ith feature of the pattern u: ∑ j = 0 n − 1 u η i ( j ) 2 j {\displaystyle \sum _{j=0}^{n-1}u_{\eta }i(j)2^{j}} Here uk is the kth bit of u and u η i ( j ) {\displaystyle u_{\eta }i(j)} is the jth bit location of the ith n-tuple. With C classes to distinguish, the system can be implemented as a network of NC nodes, each of which is a random access memory (RAM); hence the term RAMnet. The memory content m c i α {\displaystyle m_{ci\alpha }} at address α {\displaystyle \alpha } of the ith node allocated to class c is set to m c i α {\displaystyle m_{ci\alpha }} = Θ ( ∑ v ∈ D c δ ( α , α i ( v ) ) ) {\displaystyle \Theta (\sum _{v\in D_{c}}\delta (\alpha ,\alpha _{i}(v)))} In the usual θ {\displaystyle \theta } = 1 case, the 1-bit content of m c i α {\displaystyle m_{ci\alpha }} is set if any pattern of Dc has feature α {\displaystyle \alpha } and unset otherwise. Recognition is accomplished by summing the contents of the nodes of each class at the addresses given by the features of the unclassified pattern. That is, pattern u is assigned to class a c r g m a x ( ∑ i = 1 N m c i α ( u ) ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\underset {c}{a}}rgmax(\sum _{i=1}^{N}m_{ci\alpha }(u))\end{aligned}}} == RAM-discriminators and WiSARD == The RAMnets formed the basis of a commercial product known as WiSARD (Wilkie, Stonham and Aleksander Recognition Device) was the first artificial neural network machine to be patented. A RAM-discriminator consists of a set of X one-bit word RAMs with n inputs and a summing device (Σ). Any such RAM-discriminator can receive a binary pattern of X⋅n bits as input. The RAM input lines are connected to the input pattern by means of a biunivocal pseudo-random mapping. The summing device enables this network of RAMs to exhibit – just like other ANN models based on synaptic weights – generalization and noise tolerance. In order to train the discriminator one has to set all RAM memory locations to 0 and choose a training set formed by binary patterns of X⋅n bits. For each training pattern, a 1 is stored in the memory location of each RAM addressed by this input pattern. Once the training of patterns is completed, RAM memory contents will be set to a certain number of 0's and 1's. The information stored by the RAM during the training phase is used to deal with previous unseen patterns. When one of these is given as input, the RAM memory contents addressed by the input pattern are read and summed by Σ. The number r thus obtained, which is called the discriminator response, is equal to the number of RAMs that output 1. r reaches the maximum X if the input belongs to the training set. r is equal to 0 if no n-bit component of the input pattern appears in the training set (not a single RAM outputs 1). Intermediate values of r express a kind of “similarity measure” of the input pattern with respect to the patterns in the training set. A system formed by various RAM-discriminators is called WiSARD. Each RAM-discriminator is trained on a particular class of patterns, and classification by the multi-discriminator system is performed in the following way. When a pattern is given as input, each RAM-discriminator gives a response to that input. The various responses are evaluated by an algorithm which compares them and computes the relative confidence c of the highest response (e.g., the difference d between the highest response and the second highest response, divided by the highest response). A schematic representation of a RAM-discriminator and a 10 RAM-discriminator WiSARD is shown in Figure 1.

    Read more →
  • Evaluation of machine translation

    Evaluation of machine translation

    Various methods for the evaluation for machine translation have been employed. This article focuses on the evaluation of the output of machine translation, rather than on performance or usability evaluation. == Round-trip translation == A typical way for lay people to assess machine translation quality is to translate from a source language to a target language and back to the source language with the same engine. Though intuitively this may seem like a good method of evaluation, it has been shown that round-trip translation is a "poor predictor of quality". The reason why it is such a poor predictor of quality is reasonably intuitive. A round-trip translation is not testing one system, but two systems: the language pair of the engine for translating into the target language, and the language pair translating back from the target language. Consider the following examples of round-trip translation performed from English to Italian and Portuguese from Somers (2005): In the first example, where the text is translated into Italian then back into English—the English text is significantly garbled, but the Italian is a serviceable translation. In the second example, the text translated back into English is perfect, but the Portuguese translation is meaningless; the program thought "tit" was a reference to a tit (bird), which was intended for a "tat", a word it did not understand. While round-trip translation may be useful to generate a "surplus of fun," the methodology is deficient for serious study of machine translation quality. == Human evaluation == This section covers two of the large scale evaluation studies that have had significant impact on the field—the ALPAC 1966 study and the ARPA study. === Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee (ALPAC) === One of the constituent parts of the ALPAC report was a study comparing different levels of human translation with machine translation output, using human subjects as judges. The human judges were specially trained for the purpose. The evaluation study compared an MT system translating from Russian into English with human translators, on two variables. The variables studied were "intelligibility" and "fidelity". Intelligibility was a measure of how "understandable" the sentence was, and was measured on a scale of 1–9. Fidelity was a measure of how much information the translated sentence retained compared to the original, and was measured on a scale of 0–9. Each point on the scale was associated with a textual description. For example, 3 on the intelligibility scale was described as "Generally unintelligible; it tends to read like nonsense but, with a considerable amount of reflection and study, one can at least hypothesize the idea intended by the sentence". Intelligibility was measured without reference to the original, while fidelity was measured indirectly. The translated sentence was presented, and after reading it and absorbing the content, the original sentence was presented. The judges were asked to rate the original sentence on informativeness. So, the more informative the original sentence, the lower the quality of the translation. The study showed that the variables were highly correlated when the human judgment was averaged per sentence. The variation among raters was small, but the researchers recommended that at the very least, three or four raters should be used. The evaluation methodology managed to separate translations by humans from translations by machines with ease. The study concluded that, "highly reliable assessments can be made of the quality of human and machine translations". === Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) === As part of the Human Language Technologies Program, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) created a methodology to evaluate machine translation systems, and continues to perform evaluations based on this methodology. The evaluation programme was instigated in 1991, and continues to this day. Details of the programme can be found in White et al. (1994) and White (1995). The evaluation programme involved testing several systems based on different theoretical approaches; statistical, rule-based and human-assisted. A number of methods for the evaluation of the output from these systems were tested in 1992 and the most recent suitable methods were selected for inclusion in the programmes for subsequent years. The methods were; comprehension evaluation, quality panel evaluation, and evaluation based on adequacy and fluency. Comprehension evaluation aimed to directly compare systems based on the results from multiple choice comprehension tests, as in Church et al. (1993). The texts chosen were a set of articles in English on the subject of financial news. These articles were translated by professional translators into a series of language pairs, and then translated back into English using the machine translation systems. It was decided that this was not adequate for a standalone method of comparing systems and as such abandoned due to issues with the modification of meaning in the process of translating from English. The idea of quality panel evaluation was to submit translations to a panel of expert native English speakers who were professional translators and get them to evaluate them. The evaluations were done on the basis of a metric, modelled on a standard US government metric used to rate human translations. This was good from the point of view that the metric was "externally motivated", since it was not specifically developed for machine translation. However, the quality panel evaluation was very difficult to set up logistically, as it necessitated having a number of experts together in one place for a week or more, and furthermore for them to reach consensus. This method was also abandoned. Along with a modified form of the comprehension evaluation (re-styled as informativeness evaluation), the most popular method was to obtain ratings from monolingual judges for segments of a document. The judges were presented with a segment, and asked to rate it for two variables, adequacy and fluency. Adequacy is a rating of how much information is transferred between the original and the translation, and fluency is a rating of how good the English is. This technique was found to cover the relevant parts of the quality panel evaluation, while at the same time being easier to deploy, as it didn't require expert judgment. Measuring systems based on adequacy and fluency, along with informativeness is now the standard methodology for the ARPA evaluation program. == Automatic evaluation == In the context of this article, a metric is a measurement. A metric that evaluates machine translation output represents the quality of the output. The quality of a translation is inherently subjective, there is no objective or quantifiable "good." Therefore, any metric must assign quality scores so they correlate with the human judgment of quality. That is, a metric should score highly translations that humans score highly, and give low scores to those humans give low scores. Human judgment is the benchmark for assessing automatic metrics, as humans are the end-users of any translation output. The measure of evaluation for metrics is correlation with human judgment. This is generally done at two levels, at the sentence level, where scores are calculated by the metric for a set of translated sentences, and then correlated against human judgment for the same sentences. And at the corpus level, where scores over the sentences are aggregated for both human judgments and metric judgments, and these aggregate scores are then correlated. Figures for correlation at the sentence level are rarely reported, although Banerjee et al. (2005) do give correlation figures that show that, at least for their metric, sentence-level correlation is substantially worse than corpus level correlation. While not widely reported, it has been noted that the genre, or domain, of a text has an effect on the correlation obtained when using metrics. Coughlin (2003) reports that comparing the candidate text against a single reference translation does not adversely affect the correlation of metrics when working in a restricted domain text. Even if a metric correlates well with human judgment in one study on one corpus, this successful correlation may not carry over to another corpus. Good metric performance, across text types or domains, is important for the reusability of the metric. A metric that only works for text in a specific domain is useful, but less useful than one that works across many domains—because creating a new metric for every new evaluation or domain is undesirable. Another important factor in the usefulness of an evaluation metric is to have a good correlation, even when working with small amounts of data, that is candidate sentences and reference translations. Turian et al. (2003) point out that, "Any MT evaluation measure is less reliable on shorter translations", and

    Read more →
  • Heng Ji

    Heng Ji

    Heng Ji is a computer scientist who works on information extraction and natural language processing. She is well known for her work on joined named entity recognition and relation extraction, as well as for her work on cross-document event extraction. She has been coordinating the popular NIST TAC Knowledge Base Population task since 2010. She has been recognised as one of AI's 10 to watch by IEEE Intelligent Systems in 2013, and has won multiple awards, including a NSF Career Award in 2009, Google Research awards in 2009 and 2014, and an IBM Watson Faculty Award in 2012. == Education == Heng Ji obtained a Bachelor's and master's degree in Computational Linguistics from Tsinghua University. She subsequently obtained a MSc, then PhD in Computer Science from New York University in 2008 under the supervision of Ralph Grishman. Her PhD thesis was on the topic of information extraction, with a particular focus on joint training of multiple components in the information extraction pipeline, as well as cross-lingual learning. == Career == Upon graduating with a PhD from New York University, Ji took up a position as assistant professor at Queens College, City University of New York, where she founded the BLENDER Lab, which focuses on research on cross-lingual, cross-documents, cross-media information extraction and fusion. In 2013, she joined Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as an Edward P. Hamilton Development Chair and Tenured associate professor in Computer Science. Since 2019, she has been a full professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, as well as an Amazon Scholar. == Research == Heng Ji works in the area of natural language processing, machine learning and information extraction. She has published over 300 peer-reviewed research papers. Her work is published in the proceedings of computer science conferences, including the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, The Web Conference, and the ACM Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD). Ji is a leading researcher in information extraction, having coordinated the popular NIST TAC Knowledge Base Population shared task since 2010. She is most recognised for her work on modelling interactions between subtasks in information extraction, which was also the topic of her PhD thesis, and for her work on event detection using cross-document signals. == Selected honors and distinctions == 2009 NSF Career Award 2009 Google Research Award 2012 IBM Watson Faculty Award 2013 IEEE AI's 10 to Watch 2014 Google Research Award 2016 World Economic Forum, 'Young Scientist' 2017 World Economic Forum, 'Young Scientist' 2020 Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, best demonstration paper

    Read more →
  • Emergent algorithm

    Emergent algorithm

    An emergent algorithm is an algorithm that exhibits emergent behavior. In essence an emergent algorithm implements a set of simple building block behaviors that when combined exhibit more complex behaviors. One example of this is the implementation of fuzzy motion controllers used to adapt robot movement in response to environmental obstacles. An emergent algorithm has the following characteristics: it achieves predictable global effects it does not require global visibility it does not assume any kind of centralized control it is self-stabilizing Other examples of emergent algorithms and models include cellular automata, artificial neural networks and swarm intelligence systems (ant colony optimization, bees algorithm, etc.).

    Read more →
  • Markov chain

    Markov chain

    In probability theory and statistics, a Markov chain or Markov process is a stochastic process describing a sequence of possible events in which the probability of each event depends only on the state attained in the previous event. Informally, this may be thought of as, "What happens next depends only on the state of affairs now." A countably infinite sequence, in which the chain moves state at discrete time steps, gives a discrete-time Markov chain (DTMC). A continuous-time process is called a continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC). Markov processes are named in honor of the Russian mathematician Andrey Markov. Markov chains have many applications as statistical models of real-world processes. They provide the basis for general stochastic simulation methods known as Markov chain Monte Carlo, which are used for simulating sampling from complex probability distributions, and have found application in areas including Bayesian statistics, biology, chemistry, economics, finance, information theory, physics, signal processing, and speech processing. The adjectives Markovian and Markov are used to describe something that is related to a Markov process. == Principles == === Definition === A Markov process is a stochastic process that satisfies the Markov property (sometimes characterized as "memorylessness"). In simpler terms, it is a process for which predictions can be made regarding future outcomes based solely on its present state and—most importantly—such predictions are just as good as the ones that could be made knowing the process's full history. In other words, conditional on the present state of the system, its future and past states are independent. A Markov chain is a type of Markov process that has either a discrete state space or a discrete index set (often representing time), but the precise definition of a Markov chain varies. For example, it is common to define a Markov chain as a Markov process in either discrete or continuous time with a countable state space (thus regardless of the nature of time), but it is also common to define a Markov chain as having discrete time in either countable or continuous state space (thus regardless of the state space). === Types of Markov chains === The system's state space and time parameter index need to be specified. The following table gives an overview of the different instances of Markov processes for different levels of state space generality for both discrete and continuous time: Note that there is no definitive agreement in the literature on the use of some of the terms that signify special cases of Markov processes. Usually the term "Markov chain" is reserved for a process with a discrete set of times, that is, a discrete-time Markov chain (DTMC), but a few authors use the term "Markov process" to refer to a continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC) without explicit mention. In addition, there are other extensions of Markov processes that are referred to as such but do not necessarily fall within any of these four categories (see Markov model). Moreover, the time index need not necessarily be real-valued; like with the state space, there are conceivable processes that move through index sets with other mathematical constructs. Notice that the general state space continuous-time Markov chain is general to such a degree that it has no designated term. While the time parameter is usually discrete, the state space of a Markov chain does not have any generally agreed-on restrictions: the term may refer to a process on an arbitrary state space. However, many applications of Markov chains employ finite or countably infinite state spaces, which have a more straightforward statistical analysis. Besides time-index and state-space parameters, there are many other variations, extensions and generalizations (see Variations). For simplicity, most of this article concentrates on the discrete-time, discrete state-space case, unless mentioned otherwise. === Transitions === The changes of state of the system are called transitions. The probabilities associated with various state changes are called transition probabilities. The process is characterized by a state space, a transition matrix describing the probabilities of particular transitions, and an initial state (or initial distribution) across the state space. By convention, we assume all possible states and transitions have been included in the definition of the process, so there is always a next state, and the process does not terminate. A discrete-time random process involves a system which is in a certain state at each step, with the state changing randomly between steps. The steps are often thought of as moments in time, but they can equally well refer to physical distance or any other discrete measurement. Formally, the steps are the integers or natural numbers, and the random process is a mapping of these to states. The Markov property states that the conditional probability distribution for the system at the next step (and in fact at all future steps) depends only on the current state of the system, and not additionally on the state of the system at previous steps. Since the system changes randomly, it is generally impossible to predict with certainty the state of a Markov chain at a given point in the future. However, the statistical properties of the system's future can be predicted. In many applications, it is these statistical properties that are important. == History == Andrey Markov studied Markov processes in the early 20th century, publishing his first paper on the topic in 1906. Markov processes in continuous time were discovered long before his work in the early 20th century in the form of the Poisson process. Markov was interested in studying an extension of independent random sequences, motivated by a disagreement with Pavel Nekrasov who claimed independence was necessary for the weak law of large numbers to hold. In his first paper on Markov chains, published in 1906, Markov showed that under certain conditions the average outcomes of the Markov chain would converge to a fixed vector of values, so proving a weak law of large numbers without the independence assumption, which had been commonly regarded as a requirement for such mathematical laws to hold. Markov later used Markov chains to study the distribution of vowels in Eugene Onegin, written by Alexander Pushkin, and proved a central limit theorem for such chains. In 1912 Henri Poincaré studied Markov chains on finite groups with an aim to study card shuffling. Other early uses of Markov chains include a diffusion model, introduced by Paul and Tatyana Ehrenfest in 1907, and a branching process, introduced by Francis Galton and Henry William Watson in 1873, preceding the work of Markov. After the work of Galton and Watson, it was later revealed that their branching process had been independently discovered and studied around three decades earlier by Irénée-Jules Bienaymé. Starting in 1928, Maurice Fréchet became interested in Markov chains, eventually resulting in him publishing in 1938 a detailed study on Markov chains. Andrey Kolmogorov developed in a 1931 paper a large part of the early theory of continuous-time Markov processes. Kolmogorov was partly inspired by Louis Bachelier's 1900 work on fluctuations in the stock market as well as Norbert Wiener's work on Einstein's model of Brownian movement. He introduced and studied a particular set of Markov processes known as diffusion processes, where he derived a set of differential equations describing the processes. Independent of Kolmogorov's work, Sydney Chapman derived in a 1928 paper an equation, now called the Chapman–Kolmogorov equation, in a less mathematically rigorous way than Kolmogorov, while studying Brownian movement. The differential equations are now called the Kolmogorov equations or the Kolmogorov–Chapman equations. Other mathematicians who contributed significantly to the foundations of Markov processes include William Feller, starting in 1930s, and then later Eugene Dynkin, starting in the 1950s. == Examples == Mark V. Shaney is a third-order Markov chain program, and a Markov text generator. It ingests the sample text (the Tao Te Ching, or the posts of a Usenet group) and creates a massive list of every sequence of three successive words (triplet) which occurs in the text. It then chooses two words at random, and looks for a word which follows those two in one of the triplets in its massive list. If there is more than one, it picks at random (identical triplets count separately, so a sequence which occurs twice is twice as likely to be picked as one which only occurs once). It then adds that word to the generated text. Then, in the same way, it picks a triplet that starts with the second and third words in the generated text, and that gives a fourth word. It adds the fourth word, then repeats with the third and fourth words, and so on. Random walks based on integers and the gambler's ruin problem are ex

    Read more →
  • Andrew McCallum

    Andrew McCallum

    Andrew McCallum is an American professor in the computer science department at University of Massachusetts Amherst. His primary specialties are in machine learning, natural language processing, information extraction, information integration, and social network analysis. == Career == McCallum graduated summa cum laude from Dartmouth College in 1989. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Rochester in 1995 under the supervision of Dana H. Ballard. McCallum was then a postdoctoral fellow, working with Sebastian Thrun and Tom M. Mitchell at Carnegie Mellon University. From 1998 to 2000, he was a Research Scientist and Research Coordinator at Justsystem Pittsburgh Research Center. From 2000 to 2002, he was Vice President of Research and Development at WhizBang Labs, and Director of its Pittsburgh office. Since 2002, he has worked as a professor of computer science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. In 2020, he also joined Google as a part-time research scientist. He was elected as a fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in 2009, and as an Association for Computing Machinery in 2017. From 2014 to 2017, he was the President of International Machine Learning Society (IMLS), which organizes the International Conference on Machine Learning. He is also the director of the Center for Data Science at UMass, leading a new partnership with the Chan and Zuckerberg Initiative. In 2018, the initiative made an initial grant of 5.5 million to the center, supporting research to facilitate new ways for scientists to explore and discover research articles. == Main contributions == In collaboration with John D. Lafferty and Fernando Pereira, McCallum developed conditional random fields, first described in a paper presented at the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). In 2011 this research paper won the ICML "Test of Time" (10-year best paper) award. McCallum has written several widely used open-source software toolkits for machine learning, natural language processing and other text processing, including Rainbow, Mallet (software project), and FACTORIE. In addition, he was instrumental in publishing the Enron Corpus, a large collection of emails that has been used as a basis for a number of academic studies of social networking and language. McCallum instigated and directs the nonprofit project OpenReview.net, an online platform that aims to promote openness in scientific communication, particularly the peer review process, by providing a flexible cloud-based web interface and underlying database API.

    Read more →
  • Top 10 AI Headshot Generators Compared (2026)

    Top 10 AI Headshot Generators Compared (2026)

    Trying to pick the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • Deblurring

    Deblurring

    Deblurring is the process of removing blurring artifacts from images. Deblurring recovers a sharp image S from a blurred image B, where S is convolved with K (the blur kernel) to generate B. Mathematically, this can be represented as B = S ∗ K {\displaystyle B=SK} (where represents convolution). While this process is sometimes known as unblurring, deblurring is the correct technical word. The blur K is typically modeled as point spread function and is convolved with a hypothetical sharp image S to get B, where both the S (which is to be recovered) and the point spread function K are unknown. This is an example of an inverse problem. In almost all cases, there is insufficient information in the blurred image to uniquely determine a plausible original image, making it an ill-posed problem. In addition the blurred image contains additional noise which complicates the task of determining the original image. This is generally solved by the use of a regularization term to attempt to eliminate implausible solutions. This problem is analogous to echo removal in the signal processing domain. Nevertheless, when coherent beam is used for imaging, the point spread function can be modeled mathematically. By proper deconvolution of the point spread function K and the blurred image B, the blurred image B can be deblurred (unblur) and the sharp image S can be recovered.

    Read more →
  • Karl Steinbuch

    Karl Steinbuch

    Karl W. Steinbuch (June 15, 1917 in Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt – June 4, 2005 in Ettlingen) was a German computer scientist, cyberneticist, and electrical engineer. He was an early and influential researcher in German computer science, and was the developer of the Lernmatrix, an early implementation of artificial neural networks. From the late 1960s onwards the focus of his activity shifted from scientific research to right-wing political activism supporting the Neue Rechte. == Biography == Steinbuch joined the National Socialist German Students' League (NSDStB) and the Nazi Party. Steinbuch studied at the University of Stuttgart and in 1944 he received his PhD in physics. In 1948 he joined Standard Elektrik Lorenz (SEL, part of the ITT group) in Stuttgart, as a computer design engineer and later as a director of research and development, where he filed more than 70 patents. Steinbuch completed the first European fully transistorized computer, the ER 56 marketed by SEL. In 1958 he became professor and director of the Institute of Technology for information processing (ITIV) of the University of Karlsruhe, where he retired in 1980. In 1967 he began publishing books, in which he tried to influence German education policy. Together with books from colleagues like Jean Ziegler from Switzerland, Eric J. Hobsbawm from the UK, and John Naisbitt his books predicted what he regarded as the coming education disaster of the emerging civic lobby society. In 1957, together with Helmut Gröttrup, Steinbuch coined the term Informatik, the German word for computer science, which gave informatics, and the term kybernetische Anthropologie. == Awards and recognition == Wilhelm-Boelsche award - medal in Gold German non-fiction book award Gold medal award of the XXI. International Congresses on Aerospace Medicine Konrad Adenauer award of science Jakob Fugger award medal Medal of merit of the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg member, German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina member, International Academy of Science, Munich. grants from a state government grants program, named "Karl-Steinbuch-Stipendium" Steinbuch Centre for Computing at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology named after him == Books == Steinbuch wrote several books and articles, including: 1957 Informatik: Automatische Informationsverarbeitung ("Informatics: automatic information processing"). 1963 Learning matrices and their applications (together with U. A. W. Piske) 1965 A critical comparison of two kinds of adaptive classification networks (together with Bernard Widrow) 1966 (1969): Die informierte Gesellschaft. Geschichte und Zukunft der Nachrichtentechnik (The informed society. History and Future of telecommunications) 1989: Die desinformierte Gesellschaft (The disinformed society) 1968: Falsch programmiert. Über das Versagen unserer Gesellschaft in der Gegenwart und vor der Zukunft und was eigentlich geschehen müßte. (as a bestseller listet in: Der Spiegel) (Programmed falsely. About our society's failure in the present and with respect to the future and what should be done.) 1969: Programm 2000. (as a bestseller listet in: Der Spiegel) 1971: Automat und Mensch. Auf dem Weg zu einer kybernetischen Anthropologie (Machine and Man. On the way to a cybernetic anthropology; 4th revised edition) 1971: Mensch Technik Zukunft. Probleme von Morgen (German non-fiction book award) (Man Technology Future. Problems of Tomorrow) 1973: Kurskorrektur (Correcting the Course) 1978: Maßlos informiert. Die Enteignung des Denkens (Excessively informed. The Deprivation of Thinking) 1984: Unsere manipulierte Demokratie. Müssen wir mit der linken Lüge leben? (Our Thought-controlled Democracy. Do we have to live with the leftist lie?)

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

    AI Chatbots Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    Comparing the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI chatbot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

    Read more →
  • Optical braille recognition

    Optical braille recognition

    Optical braille recognition is technology to capture and process images of braille characters into natural language characters. It is used to convert braille documents for people who cannot read them into text, and for preservation and reproduction of the documents. == History == In 1984, a group of researchers at the Delft University of Technology designed a braille reading tablet, in which a reading head with photosensitive cells was moved along set of rulers to capture braille text line-by-line. In 1988, a group of French researchers at the Lille University of Science and Technology developed an algorithm, called Lectobraille, which converted braille documents into plain text. The system photographed the braille text with a low-resolution CCD camera, and used spatial filtering techniques, median filtering, erosion, and dilation to extract the braille. The braille characters were then converted to natural language using adaptive recognition. The Lectobraille technique had an error rate of 1%, and took an average processing time of seven seconds per line. In 1993, a group of researchers from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven developed a system to recognize braille that had been scanned with a commercially available scanner. The system, however, was unable to handle deformities in the braille grid, so well-formed braille documents were required. In 1999, a group at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University implemented an optical braille recognition technique using edge detection to translate braille into English or Chinese text. In 2001, Murray and Dais created a handheld recognition system, that scanned small sections of a document at once. Because of the small area scanned at once, grid deformation was less of an issue, and a simpler, more efficient algorithm was employed. In 2003, Morgavi and Morando designed a system to recognize braille characters using artificial neural networks. This system was noted for its ability to handle image degradation more successfully than other approaches. == Challenges == Many of the challenges to successfully processing braille text arise from the nature of braille documents. Braille is generally printed on solid-color paper, with no ink to produce contrast between the raised characters and the background paper. However, imperfections in the page can appear in a scan or image of the page. Many documents are printed inter-point, meaning they are double-sided. As such, the depressions of the braille of one side appear interlaid with the protruding braille of the other side. == Techniques == Some optical braille recognition techniques attempt to use oblique lighting and a camera to reveal the shadows of the depressions and protrusions of the braille. Others make use of commercially available document scanners.

    Read more →
  • Google Cloud Dataflow

    Google Cloud Dataflow

    Google Cloud Dataflow is a fully managed service for executing Apache Beam pipelines within the Google Cloud Platform ecosystem. Dataflow provides a fully managed service for executing Apache Beam pipelines, offering features like autoscaling, dynamic work rebalancing, and a managed execution environment. Dataflow is suitable for large-scale, continuous data processing jobs, and is one of the major components of Google's big data architecture on the Google Cloud Platform. At its core, Dataflow's architecture is designed to abstract away infrastructure management, allowing developers to focus purely on the logic of their data processing tasks. When a pipeline written using the Apache Beam SDK is submitted, Dataflow translates this high-level definition into an optimized job graph. The service then provisions and manages a fleet of Google Compute Engine workers to execute this graph in a highly parallelized and fault-tolerant manner. This serverless approach, combined with intelligent autoscaling of both the number of workers (horizontal) and the resources per worker (vertical), ensures that jobs have the precise amount of computational power needed at any given time, optimizing both performance and cost. The service's deep integration with the Google Cloud ecosystem makes it a powerful tool for a variety of use cases beyond simple data movement. For real-time analytics, Dataflow can ingest unbounded streams of data from Cloud Pub/Sub, perform complex transformations, and load results into BigQuery for immediate querying. In machine learning workflows, it is commonly used to preprocess and transform massive datasets stored in Cloud Storage, preparing them for training models in Vertex AI. This versatility makes it the central processing engine for modern ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) operations, streaming analytics, and large-scale data preparation within the cloud. == History == Google Cloud Dataflow was announced in June, 2014 and released to the general public as an open beta in April, 2015. In January, 2016 Google donated the underlying SDK, the implementation of a local runner, and a set of IOs (data connectors) to access Google Cloud Platform data services to the Apache Software Foundation. The donated code formed the original basis for Apache Beam. In August 2022, there was an incident where user timers were broken for certain Dataflow streaming pipelines in multiple regions, which was later resolved. Throughout 2023 and 2024, there have been various other updates and incidents affecting Google Cloud Dataflow, as documented in the release notes and service health history. The donation of the Dataflow SDK to the Apache Software Foundation was a pivotal moment, establishing Apache Beam as a unified, open-source programming model for defining both batch and streaming data pipelines. This strategic move decoupled the pipeline definition from the execution engine. As a result, developers could write portable data processing logic that was not locked into Google's ecosystem. A Beam pipeline can be executed on various runners, including Apache Flink, Apache Spark, and, of course, the highly optimized Google Cloud Dataflow service, providing flexibility and future-proofing data processing investments. == Features == Google Cloud Dataflow supports both batch and streaming data processing pipelines. It automatically handles resource provisioning, data sharding, and scaling according to workload, reducing manual configuration needed for large-scale data operations. == Use cases == Dataflow is used for ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) data pipelines, real-time analytics, and event stream processing for companies in industries such as finance, advertising, and IoT.

    Read more →
  • Top 10 AI Chatbots Compared (2026)

    Top 10 AI Chatbots Compared (2026)

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

    Read more →
  • Lise Getoor

    Lise Getoor

    Lise Getoor is an American computer scientist who is a distinguished professor and Baskin Endowed chair in the Computer Science and Engineering department, at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and an adjunct professor in the Computer Science Department at the University of Maryland, College Park. Her primary research interests are in machine learning and reasoning with uncertainty, applied to graphs and structured data. She also works in data integration, social network analysis and visual analytics. She has edited a book on Statistical relational learning that is a main reference in this domain. She has published many highly cited papers in academic journals and conference proceedings. She has also served as action editor for the Machine Learning Journal, JAIR associate editor, and TKDD associate editor. She received her Ph.D. from Stanford University, her M.S. from UC Berkeley, and her B.S. from UC Santa Barbara. Prior to joining University of California, Santa Cruz, she was a professor at the University of Maryland, College Park until November 2013. == Recognition == Getoor has multiple best paper awards, an NSF Career Award, and is an Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Fellow. In 2019, she was elected as an ACM Fellow "for contributions to machine learning, reasoning under uncertainty, and responsible data science", was selected as a Distinguished Alumna of the UC Santa Barbara Computer Science Department, was awarded the UCSC WiSE Chancellor's Achievement Award for Diversity, and was selected to give the UC Santa Cruz Faculty Research Lecture 2018-19, one of the highest recognitions given to UC faculty. She was named an IEEE Fellow in 2021, "for contributions to machine learning and reasoning under uncertainty". In October 2022, Getoor was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). In 2024, she was named a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAA&S). Also in 2024, she received the ACM SIGKDD Innovation Award recognizing individuals with outstanding technical innovations in the field of Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining that have had a lasting impact in advancing the theory and practice of the field. == Personal life == Getoor's father was mathematician Ronald Getoor (1929–2017).

    Read more →