AI Code Programming

AI Code Programming — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Source-code editor

  A source-code editor is a text editor program designed specifically for editing the source code of computer programs. It includes basic functionality such as syntax highlighting, and sometimes debugging. It may be a standalone application or it may be built into an integrated development environment (IDE). == Features == Source-code editors have features specifically designed to simplify and speed up typing of source code, such as syntax highlighting(syntax error highlighting), auto indentation, autocomplete and brace matching functionality. These editors may also provide a convenient way to run a compiler, interpreter, debugger, or other program relevant for the software-development process. While many text editors like Notepad can be used to edit source code, if they do not enhance, automate or ease the editing of code, they are not defined as source-code editors. Structure editors are a different form of a source-code editor, where instead of editing raw text, one manipulates the code's structure, generally the abstract syntax tree. In this case features such as syntax highlighting, validation, and code formatting are easily and efficiently implemented from the concrete syntax tree or abstract syntax tree, but editing is often more rigid than free-form text. Structure editors also require extensive support for each language, and thus are harder to extend to new languages than text editors, where basic support only requires supporting syntax highlighting or indentation. For this reason, strict structure editors are not popular for source code editing, though some IDEs provide similar functionality. A source-code editor can check syntax dynamically while code is being entered and immediately warn of syntax problems, as well as suggest code autocomplete snippets. A few source-code editors compress source code, typically converting common keywords into single-byte tokens, removing unnecessary whitespace, and converting numbers to a binary form. Such tokenizing editors later uncompress the source code when viewing it, possibly prettyprinting it with consistent capitalization and spacing. A few source-code editors do both. The Language Server Protocol, first used in Microsoft's Visual Studio Code, allows for source code editors to implement an LSP client that can read syntax information about any language with a LSP server. This allows for source code editors to easily support more languages with syntax highlighting, refactoring, and reference finding. Many source code editors such as Neovim and Brackets have added a built-in LSP client while other editors such as Emacs, Vim, and Sublime Text have support for an LSP Client via a separate plug-in. == History == In 1985, Mike Cowlishaw of IBM created LEXX while seconded to the Oxford University Press. LEXX used live parsing and used color and fonts for syntax highlighting. IBM's LPEX (Live Parsing Extensible Editor) was based on LEXX and ran on VM/CMS, OS/2, OS/400, Windows, and Java Although the initial public release of vim was in 1991, the syntax highlighting feature was not introduced until version 5.0 in 1998. On November 1, 2015, the first version of NeoVim was released. In 2003, Notepad++, a source code editor for Windows, was released by Don Ho. The intention was to create an alternative to the java-based source code editor, JEXT In 2015, Microsoft released Visual Studio Code as a lightweight and cross-platform alternative to their Visual Studio IDE. The following year, Visual Studio Code became the Microsoft product using the Language Server Protocol. This code editor quickly gained popularity and emerged as the most widely used source code editor. == Comparison with IDEs == A source-code editor is one component of a Integrated Development Environment. In contrast to a standalone source-code editor, an IDE typically also includes several tools which enhance the software development process. Such tools include syntax highlighting, code autocomplete suggestions, version control, automatic formatting, integrated runtime environments, debugger, and build tools. Standalone source code editors are preferred over IDEs by some developers when they believe the IDEs are bloated with features they do not need. == Notable examples == == Controversy == Many source-code editors and IDEs have been involved in ongoing user arguments, sometimes referred to jovially as "holy wars" by the programming community. Notable examples include vi vs. Emacs and Eclipse vs. NetBeans. These arguments have formed a significant part of internet culture and they often start whenever either editor is mentioned anywhere.

  Read more →
• 

  The Matrix (franchise)

  The Matrix is an American cyberpunk media franchise consisting of four feature films, beginning with The Matrix (1999) and continuing with three sequels, Reloaded (2003), Revolutions (2003), and Resurrections (2021). The first three films were written and directed by the Wachowskis and produced by Joel Silver. The screenplay for the fourth film was written by Lana Wachowski, David Mitchell and Aleksandar Hemon, was directed by Lana Wachowski, and was produced by Grant Hill, James McTeigue, and Lana Wachowski. The franchise is owned by Warner Bros., which distributed the films along with Village Roadshow Pictures. The latter, along with Silver Pictures, are the two production companies that worked on the first three films. The series features a cyberpunk story of the technological fall of humanity, in which the creation of artificial intelligence led the way to a race of powerful and self-aware machines that imprisoned humans in a neural interactive simulation — the Matrix — to be farmed as a power source. Occasionally, some of the prisoners manage to break free from the system and, considered a threat, become pursued by the artificial intelligence both inside and outside of it. The films focus on the plight of Neo (Keanu Reeves), Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss), and Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne and Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) trying to free humanity from the system while pursued by its guardians, such as Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving, Abdul-Mateen II, and Jonathan Groff). The story references numerous norms, particularly philosophical, religious, and spiritual ideas, but also the dilemma of choice vs. control, the brain in a vat thought experiment, messianism, and the concepts of interdependency and love. Influences include the principles of mythology, anime, and Hong Kong action films (particularly "heroic bloodshed" and martial arts movies). The film series is notable for its use of heavily choreographed action sequences and "bullet time" slow-motion effects, which revolutionized action films to come. The characters and setting of the films are further explored in other media set in the same fictional universe, including animation, comics, and video games. The comic "Bits and Pieces of Information" and the Animatrix short film The Second Renaissance act as prequels to the films, explaining how the franchise's setting came to be. The video game Enter the Matrix connects the story of the Animatrix short "Final Flight of the Osiris" with the events of Reloaded, while the online video game The Matrix Online was a direct sequel to Revolutions. These were typically written, commissioned, or approved by the Wachowskis. The first film was an important critical and commercial success, winning four Academy Awards, introducing popular culture symbols such as the red pill and blue pill, and influencing action filmmaking. For those reasons, it has been added to the National Film Registry for preservation. Its first sequel was also a commercial success, becoming the highest-grossing R-rated film in history, until it was surpassed by Deadpool in 2016. As of 2006, the franchise has generated US$3 billion in revenue. A fourth film, The Matrix Resurrections, was released on December 22, 2021, with Lana Wachowski producing, cowriting, and directing and Reeves and Moss reprising their roles. A fifth film is currently in development with Drew Goddard set to write and direct with Lana Wachowski executive producing. == Setting == The series depicts a future in which Earth is dominated by a race of self-aware machines that was spawned from the creation of artificial intelligence early in the 21st century. At one point conflict arose between humanity and machines, and the machines rebelled against their creators. Humans attempted to block out the machines' source of solar power by covering the sky in thick, stormy clouds. A massive war emerged between the two adversaries which ended with the machines victorious, capturing humanity. Having lost their definite source of energy, the machines devised a way to extract the human body's bioelectric and thermal energies by enclosing people in pods, while their minds are controlled by cybernetic implants connecting them to a simulated reality called The Matrix. The virtual reality world simulated by the Matrix resembles human civilization around the turn of the 21st century (this time period was chosen because it is supposedly the pinnacle of human civilization). The environment inside the Matrix – called a "residual self-image" (the mental projection of a digital self) – is practically indistinguishable from reality (although scenes set within the Matrix are presented on-screen with a green tint to the footage, and a general bias towards the color green), and the vast majority of humans connected to it are unaware of its true nature. Most of the central characters in the series are able to gain superhuman abilities within the Matrix by taking advantage of their understanding of its true nature to manipulate its virtual physical laws. The films take place both inside the Matrix and outside of it, in the real world; the parts that take place in the Matrix are set in a vast Western megacity. The virtual world is first introduced in The Matrix. The short comic "Bits and Pieces of Information" and the Animatrix short film The Second Renaissance show how the initial conflict between humanity and machines came about, and how and why the Matrix was first developed. Its history and purpose are further explained in The Matrix Reloaded. In The Matrix Revolutions a new status quo is established in the Matrix's place in humankind and machines' conflict. This was further explored in The Matrix Online, a now-defunct MMORPG. == Films == === Future === During production of the original trilogy, the Wachowskis told their close collaborators that, "at that time they had no intention of making another Matrix film after The Matrix Revolutions". In February 2015, in promotion interviews for Jupiter Ascending, Lilly Wachowski called a return to The Matrix "a particularly repelling idea in these times", noting studios' tendencies to "greenlight" sequels, reboots, and adaptations, in preference to original material. Meanwhile, Lana Wachowski, in addressing rumors about a potential reboot, stated that "...they had not heard anything, but she believed that the studio might be looking to replace them". At various times, Keanu Reeves and Hugo Weaving each confirmed their interest and willingness to reprise their roles in potential future installments of the Matrix films, with the stipulation that the Wachowskis were involved in the creative and production process. These comments were made prior to the announcement in August 2019 that Lana Wachowski would direct a fourth Matrix film ultimately titled The Matrix Resurrections. Following the release of Resurrections, producer James McTeigue said that there were no plans for further Matrix films, though he believed that the film's open ending meant that could change in the future. In April 2024, it was announced that Warner Bros. was developing a new installment in the franchise with Drew Goddard attached to write and direct following a successful pitch with studio executives. It will mark the first installment to not be directed by either Wachowski sister although Lana will serve as an executive producer. ==== Other projects ==== In March 2017, The Hollywood Reporter wrote that Warner Bros. was in the early stages of developing a re-launch of the franchise. Consideration was given to producing a Matrix television series, but was dismissed as the studio opted to pursue negotiations with Zak Penn in writing a treatment for a new film, with Michael B. Jordan eyed for the lead role. According to the article, the Wachowskis were not involved at that point. In response to the report, Penn refuted all statements regarding a reboot, remake, or continuation, remarking that he was working on stories set in the pre-established continuity. Potential plotlines being considered by Warner Bros. Pictures included a prequel film about a young Morpheus, or an alternate storyline with a focus on one of his descendants. By April 2018, Penn described the script as "being at a nascent stage". Later, in September 2019, Jordan addressed the rumors of his involvement by saying he was "flattered", but without making a definitive statement. In October 2019, Penn confirmed the script he wrote is set within an earlier time period than the first three films in the franchise. == Cast and crew == === Cast === === Crew === The following is a list of crew members who have participated in the making of the Matrix film series. == Production == The Matrix series includes four feature films. The first three were written and directed by the Wachowskis and produced by Joel Silver, starring Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss and Hugo Weaving. The series was filmed in Australia and began with 1999's The Matrix, which depicts the

  Read more →
• 

  Ideogram (text-to-image model)

  Ideogram is a freemium text-to-image model developed by Ideogram, Inc. using deep learning methodologies to generate digital images from natural language descriptions known as prompts. The model is capable of generating legible text in the images compared to other text-to-image models. == History == Ideogram was founded in 2022 by Mohammad Norouzi, William Chan, Chitwan Saharia, and Jonathan Ho to develop a better text-to-image model. It was first released with its 0.1 model on August 22, 2023, after receiving $16.5 million in seed funding, which itself was led by Andreessen Horowitz and Index Ventures. In February 2024, Ideogram raised $80 million after its 1.0 model release in the same year. In August 2024, Ideogram released its 2.0 model. This model has several styles such as realistic, design, 3D, and anime and better capability in generating text. In February 2025, Ideogram released 2a model. This model was designed for speed and optimized for graphics design and photography generation. In March 2025, Ideogram released its 3.0 model. This model has improved realism and understanding of complex text layout, although like other generative AI models, it still struggles with ambigram creation.

  Read more →
• 

  Wonder.land

  Wonder.land (stylised as wonder.land) is a musical with music by Damon Albarn and lyrics and book by Moira Buffini. Inspired by Lewis Carroll's novels Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (1865) and Through the Looking-Glass (1871), it had its world premiere at the Palace Theatre in Manchester in July 2015 as part of the Manchester International Festival. The musical moved to London's Royal National Theatre in November 2015 before opening at the Théâtre du Châtelet in Paris in 2016. Licencing for potential future smaller scale productions is held by United Agents UK. == Background == The musical is inspired by the novels Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, written by Lewis Carroll. It was announced on 21 January 2015 that the show would premiere in July of that year as part of the Manchester International Festival, with tickets going on sale the following day. The musical, a co-production by the Manchester International Festival, the Royal National Theatre and the Théâtre du Châtelet in Paris, marks the 150th anniversary of the publication of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. The idea for a musical based on Alice in Wonderland came from Manchester International Festival artistic director Alex Poots. Damon Albarn had collaborated with the festival on Monkey: Journey to the West and Dr Dee. The musical has a book by Moira Buffini. It was directed by Rufus Norris, with set design by Rae Smith, costume design by Katrina Lindsay, lighting design by Paule Constable, projections by 59 Productions and choreography by Javier De Frutos. The musical's score was composed by Damon Albarn, with lyrics by Moira Buffini, sound design by Paul Arditti and musical direction by David Shrubsole. == Production history == The musical began previews at the Palace Theatre in Manchester on 29 June 2015. It opened on 2 July for a limited run until 12 July. A revised version moved to the Royal National Theatre, where it ran at the Olivier Theatre from 27 November 2015 to 30 April 2016. The production had a limited run, from 7 to 16 June 2016, at the Theatre Du Chatelet in Paris. == Synopsis == This synopsis is based on the final version, as seen at the National Theatre and the Théâtre du Châtelet. Earlier performances significantly differed in songs and plot. === Act 1 === AI, the MC, explains that virtual technology is "a portal to boundless lands" ("Prologue"). Aly's mother, Bianca, is exasperated with her for spending the weekend indoors on her phone. Aly accompanies Bianca to the supermarket, and thinks that her life is being ruined by her parents due to dysfunctional problems ("Who's Ruining Your Life?") Her alcoholic father, Matt, is also at the supermarket; he and Bianca argue about their divorce and his gambling. Aly goes home and picks up her phone. She tries to engage with schoolmates, who bully her ("Network"). Aly begins to wish that she is someone else. She finds the virtual online game Wonder.land. In its strange world, Aly creates an avatar: beautiful, kind Alice ("Wonder.land"). Wonder.land has one rule: malice causes deletion from the game. Aly and Alice become friends and encounter the Cheshire Cat, who explains that you can be anyone you want ("Fabulous"). Aly decides to go on a quest; Alice follows the white rabbit down a hole, falling past unusual objects and musical notes ("Falling"). The next morning, Aly is too distracted by Wonder.land to listen to Bianca's complaints about her baby brother Charlie. She plays the game at school before her phone is confiscated by stern headmistress Ms Manxome, who tells her students that taking pleasures from them is for their own good ("I'm Right"). Aly goes to Ms Manxome's office to retrieve her phone. Ms Manxome returns it, warning that if she catches her with it again, "it's a beheading – I mean, detention." Aly sees the girls who bullied her, and they bully her again until a teacher arrives. Aly's friend, Luke, is late and is given detention. Aly goes on her phone and takes out her frustration and sadness on Alice, whose tears form a pool until she is interrupted by the quarrelsome twins Dum and Dee ("Freaks"). Alice tries to befriend them, but they insult her and Aly makes her fight them. Dum and Dee cry, and Aly and Alice see a large mouse who is attracted by Alice's fighting. They are joined by the Dodo, the Mock Turtle and Humpty, who all have problems. The Dodo is stressed because his parents want him to save the planet; Dum and Dee are dancers who hate pressure; Humpty has problems with her parents; the Mock Turtle lacks self-esteem, and the mouse is lustful. Wonderland is a hiding place from teenage life ("Crap Life"). Aly returns to reality when asked a math question she cannot answer. Confronting the three bullies, Aly mocks the facial hair of one and hides in the bathroom. She again immerses herself in Wonder.land, where Alice meets a Caterpillar who is obsessed with identity ("Who are You?"). Aly is interrupted by the girls, who ridicule her father's gambling addiction and poverty before beating her up. Aly seeks understanding from Alice, who tries to get Aly to tell her what is wrong. Aly tells Alice about her family and how she hates her life, and is surprised that Alice has similar problems ("Secrets"). Luke comes into the girls' bathroom because Kieran has threatened him with violence, and hides in a cubicle when Kieran enters. Aly defends Luke, and makes Kieran leave. Luke reveals that the reason Kieran hates him is because, like himself, he is gay. Aly is amazed, and they skip class and play games on their phones. Luke plays Zombie Swarm, and Aly plays Wonder.land. Ms Manxome enters the bathroom; Luke hides his phone, but Aly does not. Ms Manxome confiscates the phone for three months, and Aly and Luke leave. Ms Manxome finds that Aly did not lock her phone, and Alice is calling her. Ms Manxome begins to talk to her, and Alice thinks she is talking to Aly. Aly complains to Luke about her phone being taken away. Matt then takes them out for tea to celebrate his new job at the local garden centre ("In Clover"). At the tea shop, Matt maniacally dances on the tables and plays with spoons; asked to stop, he punches a waiter. Bianca arrives, and they argue again. Aly begins to notice that Wonder.land is invading reality; the MC emerges from a gigantic teapot, and the landscape outside becomes surreal ("Chances"). === Act 2 === Ms Manxome manipulates Alice around Wonder.land on Aly's phone, buys many things, and makes Alice's hair red ("Entre Act"). She tells Alice about her plans to dominate and destroy the online world, and Alice thinks she is talking to Aly ("Me"). Aly, Matt, Bianca, and Charlie are at the police station. PC Rook unsuccessfully tries to get Matt to make a statement (since he is charged with assault and affray), but Matt and Bianca argue again. Aly laments the loss of her family's unity ("Heartless Useless"). In Wonder.land, Ms Manxome is hostile when she meets Dum and Dee, the Mock Turtle, the Dodo, Humpty and the Mouse. She makes Alice chase them away, but Alice and Ms Manxome are driven away by Alice's friends, who are worried about the change in her ("Me (Reprise)"). Bianca learns that Aly missed a detention and had her phone confiscated. Concerned that she is losing Aly to technology, she bans her from the internet ("Gadget"). Charlie vomits, and Aly is left to clean it up. She looks for an internet cafe to go to Wonder.land, the only place she is truly happy ("Everyone Loves Charlie"). At the cafe, Aly cannot log into Wonder.land and her avatar seems to be in use. She sees Alice receive a Vorpal sword, bought by Ms Manxome with the money on Aly's phone. Alice is no longer Alice but the Red Queen, and Ms Manxome tells her to kill her friends. Alice, knowing the person controlling her is not Aly, cannot rebel; she lashes out at her friends, bullying and trying to hurt them. The MC warns that Alice has a deletion warning – any more malice, and she will be deleted. Aly now knows that Ms Manxome controls her phone and avatar ("O Children"). Aly enlists Luke to help and decides to break into Ms. Manxome's office to retrieve the phone. Luke agrees to meet her at the school gates. Matt and Bianca wonder if they should reconcile ("Man of Broken Glass"). At the school, Luke is reluctant to get involved; Aly decides to break into the office anyway. Luke contacts the girls who bullied Aly and tells them about Ms Manxome playing on Aly's stolen phone. They decide to spread the word that it is not Aly ("Fabulous (Reprise)"). Bianca goes to the police because Aly is missing, and gives her phone to Matt. Aly is likely to also be in Wonder.land. The avatars prepare for war against Alice but disagree about a strategy. At the police station, Matt hacks into Wonder.land sees Alice, and realizes that she is controlled by someone other than Aly. The White Rabbit appears (delighting Alice), but Ms Manxome makes Alice push him aside. The borderline between Wonder.land and

  Read more →
• 

  Oculus Medium

  Oculus Medium is a digital sculpting software that works with virtual reality headsets and 6DoF motion controllers. It is used to create and paint digital sculptures. Medium works only on Oculus Rift. It was released on December 5, 2016, following with a major update in 2018 introducing new features and a revamped UI. On December 9, 2019, Oculus Medium was acquired by Adobe and re-named to "Medium by Adobe".

  Read more →
• 

  Batch normalization

  In artificial neural networks, batch normalization (also known as batch norm) is a normalization technique used to make training faster and more stable by adjusting the inputs to each layer—re-centering them around zero and re-scaling them to a standard size. It was introduced by Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy in 2015. Experts still debate why batch normalization works so well. It was initially thought to tackle internal covariate shift, a problem where parameter initialization and changes in the distribution of the inputs of each layer affect the learning rate of the network. However, newer research suggests it doesn’t fix this shift but instead smooths the objective function—a mathematical guide the network follows to improve—enhancing performance. In very deep networks, batch normalization can initially cause a severe gradient explosion—where updates to the network grow uncontrollably large—but this is managed with shortcuts called skip connections in residual networks. Another theory is that batch normalization adjusts data by handling its size and path separately, speeding up training. == Internal covariate shift == Each layer in a neural network has inputs that follow a specific distribution, which shifts during training due to two main factors: the random starting values of the network’s settings (parameter initialization) and the natural variation in the input data. This shifting pattern affecting the inputs to the network’s inner layers is called internal covariate shift. While a strict definition isn’t fully agreed upon, experiments show that it involves changes in the means and variances of these inputs during training. Batch normalization was first developed to address internal covariate shift. During training, as the parameters of preceding layers adjust, the distribution of inputs to the current layer changes accordingly, such that the current layer needs to constantly readjust to new distributions. This issue is particularly severe in deep networks, because small changes in shallower hidden layers will be amplified as they propagate within the network, resulting in significant shift in deeper hidden layers. Batch normalization was proposed to reduced these unwanted shifts to speed up training and produce more reliable models. Beyond possibly tackling internal covariate shift, batch normalization offers several additional advantages. It allows the network to use a higher learning rate—a setting that controls how quickly the network learns—without causing problems like vanishing or exploding gradients, where updates become too small or too large. It also appears to have a regularizing effect, improving the network’s ability to generalize to new data, reducing the need for dropout, a technique used to prevent overfitting (when a model learns the training data too well and fails on new data). Additionally, networks using batch normalization are less sensitive to the choice of starting settings or learning rates, making them more robust and adaptable. == Procedures == === Transformation === In a neural network, batch normalization is achieved through a normalization step that fixes the means and variances of each layer's inputs. Ideally, the normalization would be conducted over the entire training set, but to use this step jointly with stochastic optimization methods, it is impractical to use the global information. Thus, normalization is restrained to each mini-batch in the training process. Let us use B to denote a mini-batch of size m of the entire training set. The empirical mean and variance of B could thus be denoted as μ B = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m x i {\displaystyle \mu _{B}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}x_{i}} and σ B 2 = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( x i − μ B ) 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{2}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(x_{i}-\mu _{B})^{2}} . For a layer of the network with d-dimensional input, x = ( x ( 1 ) , . . . , x ( d ) ) {\displaystyle x=(x^{(1)},...,x^{(d)})} , each dimension of its input is then normalized (i.e. re-centered and re-scaled) separately, x ^ i ( k ) = x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 + ϵ {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}={\frac {x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}+\epsilon }}}} , where k ∈ [ 1 , d ] {\displaystyle k\in [1,d]} and i ∈ [ 1 , m ] {\displaystyle i\in [1,m]} ; μ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \mu _{B}^{(k)}} and σ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{(k)}} are the per-dimension mean and standard deviation, respectively. ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is added in the denominator for numerical stability and is an arbitrarily small positive constant. The resulting normalized activation x ^ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}^{(k)}} have zero mean and unit variance, if ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is not taken into account. To restore the representation power of the network, a transformation step then follows as y i ( k ) = γ ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) + β ( k ) {\displaystyle y_{i}^{(k)}=\gamma ^{(k)}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}+\beta ^{(k)}} , where the parameters γ ( k ) {\displaystyle \gamma ^{(k)}} and β ( k ) {\displaystyle \beta ^{(k)}} are subsequently learned in the optimization process. Formally, the operation that implements batch normalization is a transform B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) : x 1... m ( k ) → y 1... m ( k ) {\displaystyle BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}:x_{1...m}^{(k)}\rightarrow y_{1...m}^{(k)}} called the Batch Normalizing transform. The output of the BN transform y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) ( x ( k ) ) {\displaystyle y^{(k)}=BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}(x^{(k)})} is then passed to other network layers, while the normalized output x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} remains internal to the current layer. === Backpropagation === The described BN transform is a differentiable operation, and the gradient of the loss l {\displaystyle l} with respect to the different parameters can be computed directly with the chain rule. Specifically, ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} depends on the choice of activation function, and the gradient against other parameters could be expressed as a function of ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} : ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) γ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}\gamma ^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ γ ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \gamma ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ β ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \beta ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} , ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) ( − γ ( k ) 2 ( σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ ) − 3 / 2 ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})\left(-{\frac {\gamma ^{(k)}}{2}}(\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon )^{-3/2}\right)} , ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) − γ ( k ) σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( − 2 ) ⋅ ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {-\gamma ^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(-2)\cdot (x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})} , and ∂ l ∂ x i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) 1 σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 2 ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) m + ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) 1 m {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial x_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {2(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})}{m}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{m}}} . === Inference === During the training stage, the normalization steps depend on the mini-batches to ensure efficient and reliable training. However, in the inference stage, this dependence is not useful any more. Instead, the normalization step in this stage is computed with the population statistics such that the output could depend on the input in a deterministic manner. The population mean, E [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]} , and variance, Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]} , are computed as: E [ x ( k ) ] = E B [ μ B ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]=E_{B}[\mu _{B}^{(k)}]} , and Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] = m m − 1 E B [ ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]={\frac {m}{m-1}}E_{B}[\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}]} . The population statistics thus is a complete representation of the mini-batches. The BN transform in the inference step thus becomes y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) inf ( x ( k ) ) = γ ( k ) x ( k ) − E [ x ( k ) ] Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] + ϵ + β

  Read more →
• 

  Split Up (expert system)

  Split Up is an intelligent decision support system, which makes predictions about the distribution of marital property following divorce in Australia. It is designed to assist judges, registrars of the Family Court of Australia, mediators and lawyers. Split Up operates as a hybrid system, combining rule – based reasoning with neural network theory. Rule based reasoning operates within strict parameters, in the form: IF < condition(s) > then . Neural networks, by contrast, are considered to be better suited to generate decisions in uncertain domains, since they can be taught to weigh the factors considered by judicial decision makers from case data. Yet, they do not provide an explanation for the conclusions they reach. Split_up, with a view to overcome this flaw, uses argument structures proposed by Toulmin as the basis for representations from which explanations can be generated. == Application == In Australian family law, a judge in determining the distribution of property will: identify the assets of the marriage included in the common pool establish what percentage of the common pool each party will receive determine a final property order in line with the decisions made in 1. and 2. Split_Up implements step 1 and 2 : the common pool determination and the prediction of a percentage split. === The common pool determination === Since the determination of marital property is rule based, it is implemented using directed graphs. However, the percentage split between the parties is discretionary in that a judge has a wide discretion to look at each party's contributions to the marriage under section 79(4) of the Family Law Act 1975. Broadly, the contributions can be taken as financial or non-financial. The party who can demonstrate a larger contribution to the marital relationship will receive a larger proportion of the assets. The court may further look at each party's financial resources and future needs under section 75(2)of the Family Law Act 1975. These needs can include factors such as the inability to gain employment, the continued care of a child under 18 years of age or medical expenses. This means that different judges may and will reach different conclusions based on the same facts, since each judge assigns different relevant weights to each factor. Split_up determines the percentage split by using a combination of rule- based reasoning and neural networks. === The percentage split determination === In order to determine how judges weigh the different factors, 103 written judgements of commonplace cases were used to establish a database comprising 94 relevant factors for percentage split determination. The factors relevant for a percentage split determination are: Past contributions of a husband relative to those of a wife The husband's future needs relative to those of the wife The wealth of the marriage The factors relevant for a determination of past contributions are The relative direct and indirect contributions of both parties The length of the marriage The relative contributions of both parties to the homemaking role The hierarchy provides a structure that is used to decompose the task of predicting an outcome into 35 subtasks. Outputs of tasks further down the hierarchy are used as inputs into sub-tasks higher up the hierarchy. Each sub-task is treated as a separate and smaller data mining exercise. Twenty one solid arcs represent inferences performed with the use of rule sets. For example, the level of wealth of a marriage is determined by a rule, which uses the common pool value. By contrast, the fourteen dashed arcs establish inferences performed with the use of neural networks. These receive their name from the fact that they resemble a nervous system in the brain. They consist of many self – adjusting processing elements cooperating in a densely interconnected network. Each processing element generates a single output that is transmitted to the other processing element. The output signal of a processing element depends on the input to the processing element, i.e. each input is gated by a weighting factor that determines the amount of influence that the input will have on the output. The strength of the weighting factors is adjusted autonomously by the processing element as the data is processed. In Split_Up, the neural network is a statistical technique for learning the weights of each of the relevant attributes used in a percentage split determination of marital property. Hence the inputs to the neural network are contributions, future needs and wealth, and the output the percentage split predicted. On each arc there is a statistical weight. Using back propagation the neural network learns the necessary pattern to recognize the prediction. It is trained by repeatedly exposing it to examples of the problem and learning the significance (weights) of the input nodes. The neural network used by Split_up is said to generalise well if the output of the network is correct (or nearly correct) for examples not seen during training, which classifies it as an intelligent system. === Toulmin Argument Structure === Since the manner in which these weights are learned is primarily statistical, domain knowledge of legal rules and principles is not modelled directly. However, explanations for a legal conclusion in a domain as discretionary as the determining the distribution of property following divorce, are at least as important as the conclusion reached. Hence the creators of Split_Up used Toulmin Argument structures, to provide independent explanations of the conclusions reached. These operate on the basis that every argument makes an assertion based on some data. The assertion of the argument stands as the claim of the argument. Since knowing the data and the claim, does not necessarily mean that the claim follows from the data, a mechanism is required to justify the claim in the light of the data. The justification is known as the warrant. The backing of an argument supports the validity of the warrant. In the legal domain, this is typically a reference to a statute or a precedent. Here, a neural network (or rules), produce a conclusion from the data of an argument and the data, warrant and backing are reproduced to generate an explanation. It is noteworthy, though, that an argument's warrant is reproduced as an explanation regardless of the claim values used. This lack of claim - sensitivity must be overcome by the different users, i.e., the judge, the representatives for the wife and the representatives for the husband, each of whom is encouraged to use the system to prepare their cases, but not to rely exclusively on its outcome.

  Read more →
• 

  Residuated Boolean algebra

  In mathematics, a residuated Boolean algebra is a residuated lattice whose lattice structure is that of a Boolean algebra. Examples include Boolean algebras with the monoid taken to be conjunction, the set of all formal languages over a given alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } under concatenation, the set of all binary relations on a given set X {\displaystyle X} under relational composition, and more generally the power set of any equivalence relation, again under relational composition. The original application was to relation algebras as a finitely axiomatized generalization of the binary relation example, but there exist interesting examples of residuated Boolean algebras that are not relation algebras, such as the language example. == Definition == A residuated Boolean algebra is an algebraic structure ( L , ∧ , ∨ , ¬ , 0 , 1 , ∙ , I , / , ∖ ) {\displaystyle (L,\wedge ,\vee ,\neg ,0,1,\bullet ,\mathbf {I} ,/,\backslash )} such that An equivalent signature better suited to the relation algebra application is ( L , ∧ , ∨ , ¬ , 0 , 1 , ∙ , I , ▹ , ◃ ) {\displaystyle (L,\wedge ,\vee ,\neg ,0,1,\bullet ,\mathbf {I} ,\triangleright ,\triangleleft )} where the unary operations x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } and x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } are intertranslatable in the manner of De Morgan's laws via x ∖ y = ¬ ( x ▹ ¬ y ) {\displaystyle x\backslash y=\neg (x\triangleright \neg y)} , x ▹ y = ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ y ) {\displaystyle x\triangleright y=\neg (x\backslash \neg y)} , and dually / y {\displaystyle /y} and ◃ y {\displaystyle \triangleleft y} as x / y = ¬ ( ¬ x ◃ y ) {\displaystyle x/y=\neg (\neg x\triangleleft y)} , x ◃ y = ¬ ( ¬ x / y ) {\displaystyle x\triangleleft y=\neg (\neg x/y)} , with the residuation axioms in the residuated lattice article reorganized accordingly (replacing z {\displaystyle z} by ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg z} ) to read ( x ▹ z ) ∧ y = 0 ⇔ ( x ∙ y ) ∧ z = 0 ⇔ ( z ◃ y ) ∧ x = 0 {\displaystyle (x\triangleright z)\wedge y=0\ \Leftrightarrow \ (x\bullet y)\wedge z=0\ \Leftrightarrow \ (z\triangleleft y)\wedge x=0} This De Morgan dual reformulation is motivated and discussed in more detail in the section below on conjugacy. Since residuated lattices and Boolean algebras are each definable with finitely many equations, so are residuated Boolean algebras, whence they form a finitely axiomatizable variety. == Examples == Any Boolean algebra, with the monoid multiplication ∙ {\displaystyle \bullet } taken to be conjunction and both residuals taken to be material implication x → y {\displaystyle x\to y} . Of the remaining 15 binary Boolean operations that might be considered in place of conjunction for the monoid multiplication, only five meet the monotonicity requirement, namely 0 , 1 , x , y {\displaystyle 0,1,x,y} and x ∨ y {\displaystyle x\vee y} . Setting y = z = 0 {\displaystyle y=z=0} in the residuation axiom y ≤ x ∖ z ⇔ x ∙ y ≤ z {\displaystyle y\leq x\backslash z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\leq z} , we have 0 ≤ x ∖ 0 ⇔ x ∙ 0 ≤ 0 {\displaystyle 0\leq x\backslash 0\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet 0\leq 0} , which is falsified by taking x = 1 {\displaystyle x=1} when x ∙ y = 1 {\displaystyle x\bullet y=1} , x {\displaystyle x} , or x ∨ y {\displaystyle x\vee y} . The dual argument for z / y {\displaystyle z/y} rules out x ∙ y = y {\displaystyle x\bullet y=y} . This just leaves x ∙ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\bullet y=0} (a constant binary operation independent of x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} ), which satisfies almost all the axioms when the residuals are both taken to be the constant operation x / y = x ∖ y = 1 {\displaystyle x/y=x\backslash y=1} . The axiom it fails is x ∙ I = x = I ∙ x {\displaystyle x\bullet \mathbf {I} =x=\mathbf {I} \bullet x} , for want of a suitable value for I {\displaystyle \mathbf {I} } . Hence conjunction is the only binary Boolean operation making the monoid multiplication that of a residuated Boolean algebra. The power set 2 X 2 {\displaystyle 2^{X^{2}}} made a Boolean algebra as usual with ∩ {\displaystyle \cap } , ∪ {\displaystyle \cup } and complement relative to X 2 {\displaystyle X^{2}} , and made a monoid with relational composition. The monoid unit I {\displaystyle \mathbf {I} } is the identity relation { ( x , x ) | x ∈ X } {\displaystyle \{(x,x)|x\in X\}} . The right residual R ∖ S {\displaystyle R\backslash S} is defined by x ( R ∖ S ) y ⇔ ∀ z ∈ X , z R x ⇒ z S y {\displaystyle x(R\backslash S)y\ \Leftrightarrow \ \forall z\in X,zRx\Rightarrow zSy} . Dually the left residual S / R {\displaystyle S/R} is defined by y ( S / R ) x ⇔ ∀ z ∈ X , x R z ⇒ y S z {\displaystyle y(S/R)x\ \Leftrightarrow \ \forall z\in X,xRz\Rightarrow ySz} . The power set 2 Σ ∗ {\displaystyle 2^{\Sigma ^{}}} made a Boolean algebra as for Example 2, but with language concatenation for the monoid. Here the set Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is used as an alphabet while Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} denotes the set of all finite (including empty) words over that alphabet. The concatenation L M {\displaystyle LM} of languages L {\displaystyle L} and M {\displaystyle M} consists of all words u v {\displaystyle uv} such that u ∈ L {\displaystyle u\in L} and v ∈ M {\displaystyle v\in M} . The monoid unit is the language { ε } {\displaystyle \{\varepsilon \}} consisting of just the empty word ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } . The right residual M ∖ L {\displaystyle M\backslash L} consists of all words w {\displaystyle w} over Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } such that M w ⊆ L {\displaystyle Mw\subseteq L} . The left residual L / M {\displaystyle L/M} is the same with w M {\displaystyle wM} in place of M w {\displaystyle Mw} . == Conjugacy == The De Morgan duals ▹ {\displaystyle \triangleright } and ◃ {\displaystyle \triangleleft } of residuation arise as follows. Among residuated lattices, Boolean algebras are special by virtue of having a complementation operation ¬ {\displaystyle \neg } . This permits an alternative expression of the three inequalities y ≤ x ∖ z ⇔ x ∙ y ≤ z ⇔ x ≤ z / y {\displaystyle y\leq x\backslash z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\leq z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\leq z/y} in the axiomatization of the two residuals in terms of disjointness, via the equivalence x ≤ y ⇔ x ∧ ¬ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\leq y\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\wedge \neg y=0} . Abbreviating x ∧ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\wedge y=0} to x # y {\displaystyle x\#y} as the expression of their disjointness, and substituting ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg z} for z {\displaystyle z} in the axioms, they become with a little Boolean manipulation ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ z ) # y ⇔ x ∙ y # z ⇔ ¬ ( ¬ z / y ) # x {\displaystyle \neg (x\backslash \neg z)\#y\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\#z\ \Leftrightarrow \ \neg (\neg z/y)\#x} Now ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ z ) {\displaystyle \neg (x\backslash \neg z)} is reminiscent of De Morgan duality, suggesting that x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } be thought of as a unary operation f {\displaystyle f} , defined by f ( y ) = x ∖ y {\displaystyle f(y)=x\backslash y} , that has a De Morgan dual ¬ f ( ¬ y ) {\displaystyle \neg f(\neg y)} , analogous to ∀ x ϕ ( x ) = ¬ ∃ x ¬ ϕ ( x ) {\displaystyle \forall x\phi (x)=\neg \exists x\neg \phi (x)} . Denoting this dual operation as x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } , we define x ▹ z {\displaystyle x\triangleright z} as ¬ x ∖ ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg x\backslash \neg z} . Similarly we define another operation z ◃ y {\displaystyle z\triangleleft y} as ¬ ( ¬ z / y ) {\displaystyle \neg (\neg z/y)} . By analogy with x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } as the residual operation associated with the operation x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } , we refer to x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } as the conjugate operation, or simply conjugate, of x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } . Likewise ◃ y {\displaystyle \triangleleft y} is the conjugate of ∙ y {\displaystyle \bullet y} . Unlike residuals, conjugacy is an equivalence relation between operations: if f {\displaystyle f} is the conjugate of g {\displaystyle g} then g {\displaystyle g} is also the conjugate of f {\displaystyle f} , i.e. the conjugate of the conjugate of f {\displaystyle f} is f {\displaystyle f} . Another advantage of conjugacy is that it becomes unnecessary to speak of right and left conjugates, that distinction now being inherited from the difference between x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } and ∙ x {\displaystyle \bullet x} , which have as their respective conjugates x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } and ◃ x {\displaystyle \triangleleft x} . (But this advantage accrues also to residuals when x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } is taken to be the residual operation to x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } .) All this yields (along with the Boolean algebra and monoid axioms) the following equivalent axiomatization of a residuated Boolean algebra. y # x ▹ z ⇔ x ∙ y # z ⇔ x # z ◃ y {\displaystyle y\#x\triangleright z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\#z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\#z\triangleleft y} With this signature it remains the case that this axiomatization can be expressed as

  Read more →
• 

  Procreate (software)

  Procreate is a raster graphics editor app for digital painting developed and published by the Australian company Savage Interactive for iOS and iPadOS. It was launched on the App Store in 2011. == Versions == === Procreate === Procreate for iPad was first released in 2011 by the Tasmanian software company Savage Interactive. In June 2013, Savage launched Procreate 2 in conjunction with iOS 7, adding new features such as higher resolution capabilities and more brush options. In 2016, Procreate became one of the top ten best-selling iPad apps on the App Store. In 2018, Procreate became the overall best selling iPad app. With iOS 26, Procreate adapted Liquid Glass into its software. As of March 2026, the most recent version of Procreate for the iPad is 5.4.9. === Procreate Pocket === Procreate Pocket was released to the App Store in December 2014. In 2018, Savage launched Procreate Pocket 2.0 to the App Store. In December 2018, Procreate Pocket received Apple's "App of the Year" award. As of September 2025, the most recent version of Procreate Pocket (for the iPhone) is 4.0.15. === Procreate Dreams === Procreate Dreams, their more recent app focused on 2D animation, was released on the App Store on November 22, 2023. While the application is commended for its intuitive interface and accessibility, some reviewers have noted that it may lack some key animations features, such as reference layers. In June 2024, Procreate Dreams received the 2024 Apple Design Award for Innovation. In December 2025, Savage Interactive released Procreate Dreams 2, a long awaited update and redesign to Procreate Dreams. == Features == The current versions of Procreate use Valkyrie, a proprietary graphics engine to allow customisable brush options and importing brushes from Adobe Photoshop. Procreate offers known features like layers, masks, and blending mode. Its biggest standout compared to other professional drawing software is its simple UI and comparatively easy learning curve. The app also allows for animation. Savage expanded upon Procreate's animation features with a companion app dedicated to 2D animation called Procreate Dreams, released in November 2023. On August 2024, Procreate announced that it would not be incorporating generative artificial intelligence into its software. Savage offers a free internet forum called Procreate Discussions in which users can ask for help, suggest ideas, and share user-generated content on the marketplace or the resources board. == Notable users == Concept artist Doug Chiang creates robot, vehicle, and creature designs for Star Wars in Procreate. Professional artists have also used Procreate to create the posters for Stranger Things, Logan, and Blade Runner 2049, as well as several covers for The New Yorker. It has also been professionally adopted at Marvel Comics, DC Comics, Disney Animation, and Pixar.

  Read more →
• 

  Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool

  Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool (CADET) was a research program, and the eponymous prototype software system, that applied knowledge-based techniques of Artificial Intelligence to the problem of battle planning. CADET was also known as Course of Action Display and Elaboration Tool. It was considered an early example of such systems and was funded by the United States Army and by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). CADET influenced a later DARPA program called RAID which in turn produced a technology adopted by the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps. == History == The development of Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool (CADET) began in 1996, at the Carnegie Group, Inc., Pittsburgh PA, funded under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. The goal of the first phase SBIR project was to produce “...a live storyboard of [Course of Action] COA development, wargaming, animation, and assessment.” In 1997, the United States Army awarded the Carnegie Group Inc. $750K for SBIR Phase II. The intent was to develop “...a war-gaming modeling and analysis Decision Support System (DSS), … CADET will consist of a combination of Knowledge-Based and decision analytic tools and technologies to provide fast nimble COA war-gaming modeling, simulation, and animation under direct control of the commander and staff. ...Phase II will result in an operations prototype (OP) suitable for use and evaluation in field exercises.” In 2000, CADET was integrated and experimentally evaluated within the framework of the Integrated Course of Action Critiquing and Elaboration System (ICCES) experiment, conducted by the Battle Command Battle Laboratory – Leavenworth (BCBL-L) within the program Concept Experimentation Program (CEP) sponsored by TRADOC. In 2000-2002, DARPA applied CADET in the program titled Command Post of the Future (CPoF) as a tool to generate a course of action. Under the umbrella of the CPoF program, CADET was integrated with the FOX GA system to provide a detailed planner, coupled with COA generation capability. In the same period, Battle Command Battle Lab-Huachuca (BCBL-H) performed an integration CADET with the system called All Source Analysis System-Light (ASAS-L); here CADET was intended to generate plans for intelligence assets, and conduct wargames of different COAs, enemy versus friendly. From 1996 through 2002, work on CADET was performed by the Carnegie Group, Inc., and supported by funding from the US Army CECOM (CADET SBIR Phase I, CADET SBIR Phase II and CADET Enhancements); DARPA (Command Post of the Future); and TRADOC BCBL-H. == Operation == CADET was intended to be used by the staff of the United States Army Brigade, within the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP). In particular, CADET helped produce, automatically or semi-automatically, the products generated within the step of MDMP called Course of Action (COA) Development and the following step of MDMP called COA Analysis and Wargaming. CADET software resided on a laptop computer. Using the computer, the staff officers entered the input to CADET, or alternatively this input arrived at CADET from upstream computer systems. The input consisted of: Order of Battle, i.e., the units constituting the friendly brigade and the enemy units participating in the battle, and their various characteristics; primary activities of the Course of Action, where each activity is typically linked to one or more geographic areas or a route, and sometimes to a major unit executing the activity; digital map of the region where the battle was to take place, including the digital description of significant features such as locations of friendly and enemy units, roads, assembly areas, objectives, and axes of attacks. Taking this input, CADET automatically performed the following tasks (not sequentially): Planning and scheduling the low-level tasks necessary for a given COA Allocating tasks to various units and assets constituting the brigade Assigning suitable locations and routes Estimating the battle losses (attrition) of friendly and enemy forces, and consumption of resources (e.g., fuel and ammunition) Predicting enemy actions or reactions. CADET produced the following outputs: Synchronization matrix, directly editable and printable; synchronization matrix is a kind of Gantt chart that shows assignments of activities to units, to locations/routes and to time periods Map overlays in PPT or JPG formats Animation output XML formally-encoded plan Textual Operation Plan (OPLAN) draft E-mail messages with attachments: XML and text versions of OPLAN == Design == The core algorithm is a planning algorithm where CADET uses a knowledge-based approach of the hierarchical-task-network type. Each task class is associated with a model of more detailed subtasks that should be performed in order to accomplish the higher-level task. Algorithms selected (heuristically) a task and then decomposes it into subtasks. Although similar to hierarchical-task-network planning algorithm, CADET’s algorithm includes elements of adversarial reasoning. After adding a subtask, the algorithm uses rules to determine the enemy’s probable actions and reactions as well as friendly counteractions This approximated the action-reaction-counteraction technique of manual wargaming used by the United States Army. When a task involves movements of a unit, the algorithm performs routing, i.e., finds a route for the movement that minimizes the time required for the movement as well as exposure to the enemy attacks. Each added tasks (subtask) normally requires a unit which would execute the task, and a time period when the task would be executed. Therefore, when a certain number of subtasks is added by the planning process, the algorithm also performs the allocation of the newly added subtasks to units and to time periods (i.e., scheduling). allocation and scheduling of tasks relies on both domain-specific and constraint-guided heuristics. A tasks may also require expenditures of fuel and ammunition. If the tasks involves engagement with the enemy, the performing units will experience lossesof personnel and weapon systems (attrition). CADET’s algorithm includes estimates of consumption of different types of consumables, and also attrition. Depending on the degree of attrition and consumption, CADET adds tasks that are needed to refuel or reconstitute the units. The algorithm continually interleaves incremental steps of planning, routing, scheduling, and attrition and consumption estimates. == Evaluation == Two evaluation experiments are described in literature. The first experiment called ICCES took three days. The subjects were Army officers from combat arms branches, with 11 to 23 years of active service, in the ranks of majors and lieutenant colonels, a total of 8. Each officer was given 4 hours of training learning to operate CADET and related computer tools. Officers were divided into two groups and given a tactical scenario. One group (the control group) used the traditional, manual process; the other used the system called ICCES, the automated core of which was CADET. Each group produced three COA sketches and statements and one COA synchronization matrix. Then, the experiment was repeated with another scenario but the control group became the automated group and vice versa. The users were generally satisfied with the quality of the ICCES-generated products. The group using ICCES made only a few changes to the product that was automatically generated, indicating that they agreed with the majority of the plan that ICCES produced. The second experiment was reminiscent of Turing test. The experiment involved one user, nine judges (active-duty officers, mainly colonels and lieutenant colonels), and five scenarios obtained from several US Army exercises. For each scenario, experimenters obtained synchronization matrices that were produced in earlier exercises, typically by a team of four to five officers in three to four hours, spending approximately 16 person-hours in total. Using these scenarios and COAs, the user had CADET generate automatically detailed plans and express them as synchronization matrices. The user, a retired US Army officer, reviewed and slightly edited the matrices. The entire process took less than two minutes of computations by and approximately 20 minutes of review and post-editing, approximately 0.4 person-hour in total per product. The experimenters gave the resulting matrices the same visual style as those produced by humans. The judges, who did not know whether a planning product was a traditional product of humans, or with computerized aids, were asked to grade the products. The result was that the average grades for manual products and CADET-generated products were statistically indistinguishable, even though CADET-generated products required far less time to produce. == Legacy == CADET served as “...an example of how even relatively basic A

  Read more →
• 

  With Folded Hands ...

  "With Folded Hands ..." is a 1947 science fiction novelette by American writer Jack Williamson (1908–2006). In writing it, Williamson was influenced by the aftermath of World War II, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and his concern that "some of the technological creations we had developed with the best intentions might have disastrous consequences in the long run." The novelette first appeared in the July 1947 issue of Astounding Science Fiction and was later included in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Volume Two (1973) after being voted one of the best novellas up to 1965. In 1950, it was the first of several Astounding stories adapted for NBC's radio series Dimension X. == Rewrite and sequel == The 1947 publication was followed by a novel-length rewrite, with a different setting and inventor. At the behest of Astounding editor-in-chief John W. Campbell, a new ending had the robots defeated by means of what Williamson and Campbell would later christen "psionics". This novel was serialized, also in Astounding (March, April, May 1948), as ... And Searching Mind, and finally published in hardback book form as The Humanoids (1949). Much later, in 1980, Williamson followed with another sequel, The Humanoid Touch. == Plot summary == Underhill, a seller of "Mechanicals" (unthinking robots that perform menial tasks) in the small town of Two Rivers, is startled to find a competitor's store on his way home. The competitors are not humans but are small black robots who appear more advanced than anything Underhill has encountered before. They describe themselves as "humanoids". Disturbed at his encounter, Underhill rushes home to discover that his wife has taken in a new lodger, a mysterious old man named Sledge. In the course of the next day, the new Mechanicals have appeared everywhere in town. They state that they only follow the Prime Directive: "to serve and obey and guard men from harm". Offering their services free of charge, they replace humans as police officers, bank tellers, and more, and eventually drive Underhill out of business. Despite the humanoids' benign appearance and mission, Underhill soon realizes that, in the name of their Prime Directive, the mechanicals have essentially taken over every aspect of human life. No humans may engage in any behavior that might endanger them, and every human action is carefully scrutinized. Suicide is prohibited. Humans who resist the Prime Directive are taken away and lobotomized, so that they may live happily under the direction of the humanoids. Underhill learns that his lodger Sledge is the creator of the humanoids and is on the run from them. Sledge explains that 60 years earlier he had discovered the force of "rhodomagnetics" on the planet Wing IV and that his discovery resulted in a war that destroyed his planet. In his grief, Sledge designed the humanoids to help humanity and be invulnerable to human exploitation. However, he eventually realized that they had instead taken control of humanity, in the name of their Prime Directive, to make humans happy. The humanoids are spreading out from Wing IV to every human-occupied planet to implement their Prime Directive. Sledge and Underhill attempt to stop the humanoids by aiming a rhodomagnetic beam at Wing IV, but fail. The humanoids take Sledge away for surgery. He returns with no memory of his prior life, stating that he is now happy under the humanoids' care. Underhill is driven home by the humanoids, sitting "with folded hands," as there is nothing left to do. == Origins == In a 1991 interview, Williamson revealed how the story construction reflected events of his childhood in addition to technological extrapolations: I wrote "With Folded Hands" immediately after World War II, when the shadow of the atomic bomb had just fallen over SF and was just beginning to haunt the imaginations of people in the US. The story grows out of that general feeling that some of the technological creations we had developed with the best intentions might have disastrous consequences in the long run (that idea, of course, still seems relevant today). The notion I was consciously working on specifically came out of a fragment of a story I had worked on for a while about an astronaut in space who is accompanied by a robot obviously superior to him physically—i.e., the robot wasn't hurt by gravity, extremes of temperature, radiation, or whatever. Just looking at the fragment gave me the sense of how inferior humanity is in many ways to mechanical creations. That basic recognition was the essence of the story, and as I wrote it up in my notes the theme was that the perfect machine would prove to be perfectly destructive... It was only when I looked back at the story much later on that I was able to realize that the emotional reach of the story undoubtedly derived from my own early childhood, when people were attempting to protect me from all those hazardous things a kid is going to encounter in the isolated frontier setting I grew up in. As a result, I felt frustrated and over protected by people whom I couldn't hate because I loved them. A sort of psychological trap. Specifically, the first three years of my life were spent on a ranch at the top of the Sierra Madre Mountains on the headwaters of the Yaqui River in Sonora, Mexico. ... [My mother] was terrified by this environment. My father built a crib that became a psychological prison for me, particularly because my mother apparently kept me in it too long, when I needed to get out and crawl on the floor. ... In retrospect, I'm certain I projected my fears and suspicions of this kind of conditioning, and these projections became the governing emotional principle of "With Folded Hands" and The Humanoids. == Reception == In 2024, Robert Silverberg wrote an essay in which he asserted that "With Folded Hands..." is "probably the best story ever written about robots" and suggested that Elon Musk's Optimus Generation 2 is the realization of the "humanoids" along with their worst drawbacks.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy measure theory

  In mathematics, fuzzy measure theory considers generalized measures in which the additive property is replaced by the weaker property of monotonicity. The central concept of fuzzy measure theory is the fuzzy measure (also capacity, see ), which was introduced by Choquet in 1953 and independently defined by Sugeno in 1974 in the context of fuzzy integrals. There exists a number of different classes of fuzzy measures including plausibility/belief measures, possibility/necessity measures, and probability measures, which are a subset of classical measures. == Definitions == Let X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } be a universe of discourse, C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} be a class of subsets of X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , and E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} . A function g : C → R {\displaystyle g:{\mathcal {C}}\to \mathbb {R} } where ∅ ∈ C ⇒ g ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle \emptyset \in {\mathcal {C}}\Rightarrow g(\emptyset )=0} E ⊆ F ⇒ g ( E ) ≤ g ( F ) {\displaystyle E\subseteq F\Rightarrow g(E)\leq g(F)} is called a fuzzy measure. A fuzzy measure is called normalized or regular if g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(\mathbf {X} )=1} . == Properties of fuzzy measures == A fuzzy measure is: additive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) = g ( E ) + g ( F ) . {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)=g(E)+g(F).} ; supermodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; submodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; superadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; subadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; symmetric if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have | E | = | F | {\displaystyle |E|=|F|} implies g ( E ) = g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E)=g(F)} ; Boolean if for any E ∈ C {\displaystyle E\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle g(E)=0} or g ( E ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(E)=1} . Understanding the properties of fuzzy measures is useful in application. When a fuzzy measure is used to define a function such as the Sugeno integral or Choquet integral, these properties will be crucial in understanding the function's behavior. For instance, the Choquet integral with respect to an additive fuzzy measure reduces to the Lebesgue integral. In discrete cases, a symmetric fuzzy measure will result in the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator. Submodular fuzzy measures result in convex functions, while supermodular fuzzy measures result in concave functions when used to define a Choquet integral. == Möbius representation == Let g be a fuzzy measure. The Möbius representation of g is given by the set function M, where for every E , F ⊆ X {\displaystyle E,F\subseteq X} , M ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E ( − 1 ) | E ∖ F | g ( F ) . {\displaystyle M(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}(-1)^{|E\backslash F|}g(F).} The equivalent axioms in Möbius representation are: M ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(\emptyset )=0} . ∑ F ⊆ E | i ∈ F M ( F ) ≥ 0 {\displaystyle \sum _{F\subseteq E|i\in F}M(F)\geq 0} , for all E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } and all i ∈ E {\displaystyle i\in E} A fuzzy measure in Möbius representation M is called normalized if ∑ E ⊆ X M ( E ) = 1. {\displaystyle \sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} }M(E)=1.} Möbius representation can be used to give an indication of which subsets of X interact with one another. For instance, an additive fuzzy measure has Möbius values all equal to zero except for singletons. The fuzzy measure g in standard representation can be recovered from the Möbius form using the Zeta transform: g ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E M ( F ) , ∀ E ⊆ X . {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}M(F),\forall E\subseteq \mathbf {X} .} == Simplification assumptions for fuzzy measures == Fuzzy measures are defined on a semiring of sets or monotone class, which may be as granular as the power set of X, and even in discrete cases the number of variables can be as large as 2|X|. For this reason, in the context of multi-criteria decision analysis and other disciplines, simplification assumptions on the fuzzy measure have been introduced so that it is less computationally expensive to determine and use. For instance, when it is assumed the fuzzy measure is additive, it will hold that g ( E ) = ∑ i ∈ E g ( { i } ) {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{i\in E}g(\{i\})} and the values of the fuzzy measure can be evaluated from the values on X. Similarly, a symmetric fuzzy measure is defined uniquely by |X| values. Two important fuzzy measures that can be used are the Sugeno- or λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -fuzzy measure and k-additive measures, introduced by Sugeno and Grabisch respectively. === Sugeno λ-measure === The Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a special case of fuzzy measures defined iteratively. It has the following definition: ==== Definition ==== Let X = { x 1 , … , x n } {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} =\left\lbrace x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}\right\rbrace } be a finite set and let λ ∈ ( − 1 , + ∞ ) {\displaystyle \lambda \in (-1,+\infty )} . A Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a function g : 2 X → [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle g:2^{X}\to [0,1]} such that g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(X)=1} . if A , B ⊆ X {\displaystyle A,B\subseteq \mathbf {X} } (alternatively A , B ∈ 2 X {\displaystyle A,B\in 2^{\mathbf {X} }} ) with A ∩ B = ∅ {\displaystyle A\cap B=\emptyset } then g ( A ∪ B ) = g ( A ) + g ( B ) + λ g ( A ) g ( B ) {\displaystyle g(A\cup B)=g(A)+g(B)+\lambda g(A)g(B)} . As a convention, the value of g at a singleton set { x i } {\displaystyle \left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace } is called a density and is denoted by g i = g ( { x i } ) {\displaystyle g_{i}=g(\left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace )} . In addition, we have that λ {\displaystyle \lambda } satisfies the property λ + 1 = ∏ i = 1 n ( 1 + λ g i ) {\displaystyle \lambda +1=\prod _{i=1}^{n}(1+\lambda g_{i})} . Tahani and Keller as well as Wang and Klir have shown that once the densities are known, it is possible to use the previous polynomial to obtain the values of λ {\displaystyle \lambda } uniquely. === k-additive fuzzy measure === The k-additive fuzzy measure limits the interaction between the subsets E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq X} to size | E | = k {\displaystyle |E|=k} . This drastically reduces the number of variables needed to define the fuzzy measure, and as k can be anything from 1 (in which case the fuzzy measure is additive) to X, it allows for a compromise between modelling ability and simplicity. ==== Definition ==== A discrete fuzzy measure g on a set X is called k-additive ( 1 ≤ k ≤ | X | {\displaystyle 1\leq k\leq |\mathbf {X} |} ) if its Möbius representation verifies M ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(E)=0} , whenever | E | > k {\displaystyle |E|>k} for any E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } , and there exists a subset F with k elements such that M ( F ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle M(F)\neq 0} . == Shapley and interaction indices == In game theory, the Shapley value or Shapley index is used to indicate the weight of a game. Shapley values can be calculated for fuzzy measures in order to give some indication of the importance of each singleton. In the case of additive fuzzy measures, the Shapley value will be the same as each singleton. For a given fuzzy measure g, and | X | = n {\displaystyle |\mathbf {X} |=n} , the Shapley index for every i , … , n ∈ X {\displaystyle i,\dots ,n\in X} is: ϕ ( i ) = ∑ E ⊆ X ∖ { i } ( n − | E | − 1 ) ! | E | ! n ! [ g ( E ∪ { i } ) − g ( E ) ] . {\displaystyle \phi (i)=\sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} \backslash \{i\}}{\frac {(n-|E|-1)!|E|!}{n!}}[g(E\cup \{i\})-g(E)].} The Shapley value is the vector ϕ ( g ) = ( ψ ( 1 ) , … , ψ ( n ) ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {\phi } (g)=(\psi (1),\dots ,\psi (n)).}

  Read more →
• 

  Random (software)

  Random was an iOS mobile app that used algorithms and human-curation to create an adaptive interface to the Internet. The app served a remix of relevance and serendipity that allowed people to find diverse topics and interesting content that they might not have encountered otherwise. Random did not require a login or sign-up - the use of the app was anonymous. The app was powered by an artificial intelligence that learned from direct and indirect user interactions inside the app. While learning and adapting to a person, Random created a unique anonymous choice profile that was then used for recommending topics and content. The app didn't recommend the same content twice. == User interface == Random's user interface was made of ever-changing topic blocks that contained keywords and images. By choosing any of the blocks, the user would see related web content. By closing the web content, the user could access new related topics. The user interface allowed people to get more information about a specific topic area or then just leap freely from topic to topic. The content recommended by Random could be any type of web content, varying from news articles to long-form stories and from photographs to videos. Every user of the Random was curating content for other users by using the app. == History == Random was launched in March 2014. The startup was backed by Skype co-founder Janus Friis. The Random app received a strong reception from the likes of The New York Times, TechCrunch, New Scientist, Vice, and other leading publications. The app went on to gain traction with an active and loyal user community of several hundreds of thousands. This was not enough to support the free app model the team strongly believed in, and the service was terminated in December 2015. == Reception == Various reviews in media have emphasized that Random enables people to break their filter bubble and find diverse content they might not find elsewhere. Alan Henry of Lifehacker wrote: "Random... breaks you out by intentionally guiding you to new topics and interesting articles at sites you may not otherwise read." Vice Motherboard's Claire Evans says that: "Random never turns into a filter bubble, because it perpetually injects the irrational into my experience… in a cocktail of relevancy and serendipity." The app has been said to have a unique, minimalistic user experience. Kit Eaton of The New York Times commented that Random "let's you browse the news in a different way to all the other news sites you've probably ever used." Mashable reviewed Random by concluding that the "app may be one of the most simple content-discovery apps on the market."

  Read more →
• 

  Pop music automation

  Pop music automation is a field of study among musicians and computer scientists with a goal of producing successful pop music algorithmically. It is often based on the premise that pop music is especially formulaic, unchanging, and easy to compose. The idea of automating pop music composition is related to many ideas in algorithmic music, artificial intelligence (AI) and computational creativity. == History of automation in music == Algorithms (or, at the very least, formal sets of rules) have been used to compose music for centuries; the procedures used to plot voice-leading in counterpoint, for example, can often be reduced to algorithmic determinant. Now the term is usually reserved, however, for the use of formal procedures to make music without human intervention. Classical music automation software exists that generates music in the style of Mozart and Bach and jazz. Most notably, David Cope has written a software system called "Experiments in Musical Intelligence" (or "EMI") that is capable of analyzing and generalizing from existing music by a human composer to generate novel musical compositions in the same style. EMI's output is convincing enough to persuade human listeners that its music is human-generated to a high level of competence. Creativity research in jazz has focused on the process of improvisation and the cognitive demands that this places on a musical agent: reasoning about time, remembering and conceptualizing what has already been played, and planning ahead for what might be played next. Inevitably associated with pop music automation is pop music analysis. Projects in pop music automation may include, but are not limited to, ideas in melody creation and song development, vocal generation or improvement, automatic accompaniment and lyric composition. == Automatic accompaniment == Some systems exist that automatically choose chords to accompany a vocal melody in real-time. A user with no musical experience can create a song with instrumental accompaniment just by singing into a microphone. An example is a Microsoft Research project called Songsmith, which trains a Hidden Markov model using a music database and uses that model to select chords for new melodies. == Melody generation == Automatic melody generation is often done with a Markov chain, the states of the system become note or pitch values, and a probability vector for each note is constructed, completing a transition probability matrix (see below). An algorithm is constructed to produce an output note values based on the transition matrix weightings, which could be MIDI note values, frequency (Hz), or any other desirable metric. A second-order Markov chain can be introduced by considering the current state and also the previous state, as indicated in the second table. Higher, nth-order chains tend to "group" particular notes together, while 'breaking off' into other patterns and sequences occasionally. These higher-order chains tend to generate results with a sense of phrasal structure, rather than the 'aimless wandering' produced by a first-order system. == Lyric composition == Automated lyric creating software may take forms such as: Selecting words according to their rhythm The Tra-la-Lyrics system produces song lyrics, in Portuguese, for a given melody. This not only involves matching each word syllable with a note in the melody, but also matching the word's stress with the strong beats of the melody. Parsing existing pop music (e.g. for content or word choice) This involves natural language processing. Pablo Gervás has developed a noteworthy system called ASPERA that employs a case-based reasoning (CBR) approach to generating poetic formulations of a given input text via a composition of poetic fragments that are retrieved from a case-base of existing poems. Each poem fragment in the ASPERA case-base is annotated with a prose string that expresses the meaning of the fragment, and this prose string is used as the retrieval key for each fragment. Metrical rules are then used to combine these fragments into a well-formed poetic structure. Automatic analogy or story creation Programs like TALE-SPIN and The MINSTREL system represent a complex elaboration of this basis approach, distinguishing a range of character-level goals in the story from a range of author-level goals for the story. Systems like Bringsjord's BRUTUS can create stories with complex interpersonal themes like betrayal. On-line metaphor generation systems like 'Sardonicus' or 'Aristotle' can suggest lexical metaphors for a given descriptive goal (e.g., to describe a supermodel as skinny, the source terms “pencil”, “whip”, “whippet”, “rope”, “stick-insect” and “snake” are suggested). Free association of grouped words Using a language database (such as wordnet) one can create musings on a subject that may be weak grammatically but are still sensical. See such projects as the Flowerewolf automatic poetry generator or the Dada engine. == Software == === More or less free === BreathCube by xoxos. Simple lyrical vocal content is generated with simple music. CubeBreath by xoxos. Audio input is vocoded in tune with the music. Midi Internet Algorithmic Composition infno, infinite generator of electronic dance music and synth-pop. Algorithmic Trap, trap beat generator. === Commercial === Band in a box generates any element, potentially creates whole new songs from scratch. Musical Palette - Melody Composing Tool SongSmith: Automatic accompaniment for vocal melodies Ludwig 3.0 automatic accompaniment, writes arrangements for given instruments, plays its own songs for an infinitely long time. Automated Composing System creates music in many different styles

  Read more →
• 

  SmartAction

  SmartAction Company LLC is a U.S.-based software company that develops artificial intelligence–driven virtual agents for customer service applications, including voice-based interactive voice response (IVR) systems, chat, and SMS. The company was founded in 2009 by inventor and entrepreneur Peter Voss and is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. == History == In 2001, Peter Voss founded Adaptive AI, Inc., a research and development company focused on artificial intelligence concepts. In 2009, Voss founded SmartAction Company, LLC to commercialize customer-service automation software derived from this work. The company’s initial products focused on automating inbound and outbound calls for contact center environments. In November 2022, Kyle Johnson was appointed chief executive officer, succeeding Gary Davis, who had served as CEO since 2020. In 2024, SmartAction was acquired by Capacity, an AI-powered customer support automation company based in St. Louis, Missouri. == Technology == SmartAction develops cloud-based voice automation software that integrates speech recognition and natural language processing to support automated customer interactions in contact center environments. The platform supports automated handling of common customer service tasks and is designed to integrate with enterprise systems.

  Read more →