AI Coding Book

AI Coding Book — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Automatic scorer

An automatic scorer is the computerized scoring system to keep track of scoring in ten-pin bowling. It was introduced en masse in bowling alleys in the 1970s and combined with mechanical pinsetters to detect overturned pins. By eliminating the need for manual score-keeping, these systems have introduced new bowlers into the game who otherwise would not participate because they had to count the score themselves, as many do not understand the mathematical formula involved in bowler scoring. At first, people were skeptical about whether a computer could keep an accurate score. In the twenty-first century, automatic scorers are used in most bowling centers around the world. The three manufacturers of these specialty computers have been Brunswick Bowling, AMF Bowling (later QubicaAMF), and RCA. == History == Automatic equipment is considered a cornerstone of the modern bowling center. The traditional bowling center of the early 20th century was advanced in automation when the pinsetter person ("pin boy"), who set back up by hand the bowled down pins, was replaced by a machine that automatically replaced the pins in their proper play positions. This machine came out in the 1950s. A detection system was developed from the pinsetter mechanism in the 1960s that could tell which pins had been knocked down, and that information could be transferred to a digital computer. Automatic electronic scoring was first conceived by Robert Reynolds, who was described by a newspaper story at the time as "a West Coast electronics calculator expert." He worked with the technical staff of Brunswick Bowling to develop it. The goal was realized in the late 1960s when a specialized computer was designed for the purpose of automatic scorekeeping for bowling. The field test for the automatic scorer took place at Village Lanes bowling center, Chicago in 1967. The scoring machine received approval for official use by the American Bowling Congress in August of that year. They were first used in national official league gaming on October 10, 1967. In November, Brunswick announced that they were accepting orders for the new digital computer, which cost around $3,000 per bowling lane. Bowling centers that installed these new automatic scoring devices in the 1970s charged a ten cents extra per line of scoring for the convenience. == Description == Each Automatic Scorer computer unit kept score for four lanes. It had two bowler identification panels serving two lanes each. The bowler pushed it into his named position when his turn came up so the computer knew who was bowling and score accordingly. After the bowler rolled the bowling ball down the lane and knocked down pins, the pinsetter detected which pins were down and relayed this information back to the computer for scoring. The result was then printed on a scoresheet and projected overhead onto a large screen for all to see. The Automatic Scorer digital computer was mathematically accurate, however the detection system at the pinsetter mechanism sometimes reported the wrong number of pins knocked down. The computer could be corrected manually for any errors in the system; similarly, human errors, such as neglecting to move the bowler identification mechanism, could be corrected for by manual action. The scorer could take into account bowlers' handicaps and could adjust for late-arriving bowlers. The automatic scorer is directly connected to the foul detection unit. As a result, foul line violations are automatically scored. Brunswick had put ten years of research and development into the Automatic Scorer, and by 1972 there were over 500 of these computers installed in bowling centers around the world. AMF Bowling, competitor to Brunswick, entered into the automatic scorer computer field during the 1970s and their systems were installed into their brand of bowling centers. By 1974, RCA was also making these computers for automatic scoring. == Reception and further developments == The purposes of the computerized scoring were to avoid errors by human scorers and to prevent cheating. It had the side benefit of speeding up the progress of the game and introducing new bowlers to the game. Score-keeping for bowling is based on a formula that many new to bowling were not familiar with and thought difficult to learn. These casual bowlers unfamiliar with the formula thought the scores given by the computers were confusing. Some bowlers were not comfortable with automatic scorers when they were introduced in the 1970s, so kept score using the traditional method on paper score sheets. The introduction of this device increased the popularity of the sport. Automatic scorers came to be considered a normal part of modern bowling installations worldwide, with owners and managers saying that bowlers expect such equipment to be present in bowling establishments and that business increased following their introduction. Brunswick introduced a color television style automatic scorer in 1983. Bowling center owners could use these style automatic scorers for advertising, management, videos, and live television. By the 2010s, these types of electronic visual displays could show bowler avatars and social media connections to publicize the bowlers' scores. Some are capable of being extended entertainment systems of games for children and adults. Some scoring systems support variations on traditional bowling, such as different kinds of bingo games where certain pins have to be knocked down at certain times or practice regimes where certain spares have to be accomplished. By this point, QubicaAMF Worldwide, an outgrowth of AMF, was one of the leading providers of bowling scoring equipment.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Presentation Makers Compared (2026)

Trying to pick the best AI presentation maker? An AI presentation maker 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 presentation maker 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 →
Top 10 AI Avatar Generators Compared (2026)

In search of the best AI avatar generator? An AI avatar generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI avatar generator 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 →
Powerset construction

In the theory of computation and automata theory, the powerset construction or subset construction is a standard method for converting a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) into a deterministic finite automaton (DFA) that recognizes the same formal language. It is important in theory because it establishes that NFAs, despite their additional flexibility, are unable to recognize any language that cannot be recognized by some DFA. It is also important in practice for converting easier-to-construct NFAs into more efficiently executable DFAs. However, if the NFA has n states, the resulting DFA may have up to 2n states, an exponentially larger number, which sometimes makes the construction impractical for large NFAs. The construction, sometimes called the Rabin–Scott powerset construction (or subset construction) to distinguish it from similar constructions for other types of automata, was first published by Michael O. Rabin and Dana Scott in 1959. == Intuition == To simulate the operation of a DFA on a given input string, one needs to keep track of a single state at any time: the state that the automaton will reach after seeing a prefix of the input. In contrast, to simulate an NFA, one needs to keep track of a set of states: all of the states that the automaton could reach after seeing the same prefix of the input, according to the nondeterministic choices made by the automaton. If, after a certain prefix of the input, a set S of states can be reached, then after the next input symbol x the set of reachable states is a deterministic function of S and x. Therefore, the sets of reachable NFA states play the same role in the NFA simulation as single DFA states play in the DFA simulation, and in fact the sets of NFA states appearing in this simulation may be re-interpreted as being states of a DFA. == Construction == The powerset construction applies most directly to an NFA that does not allow state transformations without consuming input symbols (aka: "ε-moves"). Such an automaton may be defined as a 5-tuple (Q, Σ, T, q0, F), in which Q is the set of states, Σ is the set of input symbols, T is the transition function (mapping a state and an input symbol to a set of states), q0 is the initial state, and F is the set of accepting states. The corresponding DFA has states corresponding to subsets of Q. The initial state of the DFA is {q0}, the (one-element) set of initial states. The transition function of the DFA maps a state S (representing a subset of Q) and an input symbol x to the set T(S,x) = ∪{T(q,x) | q ∈ S}, the set of all states that can be reached by an x-transition from a state in S. A state S of the DFA is an accepting state if and only if at least one member of S is an accepting state of the NFA. In the simplest version of the powerset construction, the set of all states of the DFA is the powerset of Q, the set of all possible subsets of Q. However, many states of the resulting DFA may be useless as they may be unreachable from the initial state. An alternative version of the construction creates only the states that are actually reachable. === NFA with ε-moves === For an NFA with ε-moves (also called an ε-NFA), the construction must be modified to deal with these by computing the ε-closure of states: the set of all states reachable from some given state using only ε-moves. Van Noord recognizes three possible ways of incorporating this closure computation in the powerset construction: Compute the ε-closure of the entire automaton as a preprocessing step, producing an equivalent NFA without ε-moves, then apply the regular powerset construction. This version, also discussed by Hopcroft and Ullman, is straightforward to implement, but impractical for automata with large numbers of ε-moves, as commonly arise in natural language processing application. During the powerset computation, compute the ε-closure { q ′ | q → ε ∗ q ′ } {\displaystyle \{q'~|~q\to _{\varepsilon }^{}q'\}} of each state q that is considered by the algorithm (and cache the result). During the powerset computation, compute the ε-closure { q ′ | ∃ q ∈ Q ′ , q → ε ∗ q ′ } {\displaystyle \{q'~|~\exists q\in Q',q\to _{\varepsilon }^{}q'\}} of each subset of states Q' that is considered by the algorithm, and add its elements to Q'. === Multiple initial states === If NFAs are defined to allow for multiple initial states, the initial state of the corresponding DFA is the set of all initial states of the NFA, or (if the NFA also has ε-moves) the set of all states reachable from initial states by ε-moves. == Example == The NFA below has four states; state 1 is initial, and states 3 and 4 are accepting. Its alphabet consists of the two symbols 0 and 1, and it has ε-moves. The initial state of the DFA constructed from this NFA is the set of all NFA states that are reachable from state 1 by ε-moves; that is, it is the set {1,2,3}. A transition from {1,2,3} by input symbol 0 must follow either the arrow from state 1 to state 2, or the arrow from state 3 to state 4. Additionally, neither state 2 nor state 4 have outgoing ε-moves. Therefore, T({1,2,3},0) = {2,4}, and by the same reasoning the full DFA constructed from the NFA is as shown below. As can be seen in this example, there are five states reachable from the start state of the DFA; the remaining 11 sets in the powerset of the set of NFA states are not reachable. == Complexity == Because the DFA states consist of sets of NFA states, an n-state NFA may be converted to a DFA with at most 2n states. For every n, there exist n-state NFAs such that every subset of states is reachable from the initial subset, so that the converted DFA has exactly 2n states, giving Θ(2n) worst-case time complexity. A simple example requiring nearly this many states is the language of strings over the alphabet {0,1} in which there are at least n characters, the nth from last of which is 1. It can be represented by an (n + 1)-state NFA, but it requires 2n DFA states, one for each n-character suffix of the input; cf. picture for n=4. == Applications == Brzozowski's algorithm for DFA minimization uses the powerset construction, twice. It converts the input DFA into an NFA for the reverse language, by reversing all its arrows and exchanging the roles of initial and accepting states, converts the NFA back into a DFA using the powerset construction, and then repeats its process. Its worst-case complexity is exponential, unlike some other known DFA minimization algorithms, but in many examples it performs more quickly than its worst-case complexity would suggest. Safra's construction, which converts a non-deterministic Büchi automaton with n states into a deterministic Muller automaton or into a deterministic Rabin automaton with 2O(n log n) states, uses the powerset construction as part of its machinery.
Read more →
Metigo

metigo is a software application that performs image-based modelling and close range photogrammetry. It produces rectified imagery plans, true ortho-projections on planar, cylindric and conic surfaces, 3D photorealistic models, measurements from photography and mappings on a photographic base for uses in the cultural heritage sector, mainly conservation. == Products == The metigo product line currently consists of the mapping software metigo MAP, the stereo-photogrammetry modeling software metigo 3D, the free viewer metigo VIEW. These products are all standalone and are not depending on other software, such as AutoCAD. === metigo MAP === metigo MAP is mainly used to map findings and conservation measured on a uniform metric photographic base. Therefore, photos of planar surfaces can be rectified based on geometrical informations, e.g. height and width of a rectangle, or cartesian coordinates measured by total station. Beside rectified imagery several other metric mapping bases can be imported and used: true ortho-projections; scaled scans of plans and plots; CAD-files; 3D models, such as digital surface models (DSM) produced by stereo-photogrammetry, SfM or 3D scanning. metigo MAP 's strong point is that rectified imagery taken with different techniques (visual light, sided light, IR, UV, UV-fluorescence, X-ray), historic images and photos taken at various stages of the conservation process can be superimposed and evaluated mutually. The user can allocate several attributes, such as different conservation measures and damage classes, to the mapped geometries. The mappings can be analysed by geometries as well as by user-defined attributes at any stage of the project. metigo MAP targets mainly conservators in different cultural heritage fields. Using it no specialist knowledge of surveying and photogrammetric techniques are needed. === metigo 3D === metigo 3D is a stereo-photogrammetric kit that allows to calculate bundle adjustments (axios3D), create high-quality 3D point clouds using multiple stereo photo pairs combined with metric survey data, mesh these point clouds, texture the meshes with high-resolution image data to create photo-realistic models, ortho-project orientated images on digital surface models (DSM) on planes and best-fit cylinders and cones, create unwrappings and developed views of curved surfaces, analyse deformations of 3D surfaces. metigo 3D targets metric survey specialists working in the cultural heritage sector. == Supported file formats == metigo has the ability to read the following formats: images: JPEG (.jpg), Tiff (.tif), Bitmaps (.bmp), CompuServ (.gif), Encapsualated Postscript (.eps), PCX (.pcx), Photo-CD (.pcd), PICT (.pcd), PNG (.png), Targa (.tga), RAW-format of several camera brands. CAD: DBX, DXF, DWG. 3D: many ASCII-formats (.stl, .wrl, etc.) point data: format editor for ASCII files. == Supported languages == Currently, an English and German version of the software is supported. For metigo MAP beside these a French and Polish GUI is offered for sale. == Applications == The main applications of metigo are: conservation in the cultural heritage context, e.g. stone conservation paintings tapestry etc. architecture, archaeology, many other are possible, e.g. forensics. == History == The first public release of metigo was in 2000.
Read more →
Models of DNA evolution

A number of different Markov models of DNA sequence evolution have been proposed. These substitution models differ in terms of the parameters used to describe the rates at which one nucleotide replaces another during evolution. These models are frequently used in molecular phylogenetic analyses. In particular, they are used during the calculation of likelihood of a tree (in Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches to tree estimation) and they are used to estimate the evolutionary distance between sequences from the observed differences between the sequences. == Introduction == These models are phenomenological descriptions of the evolution of DNA as a string of four discrete states. These Markov models do not explicitly depict the mechanism of mutation nor the action of natural selection. Rather they describe the relative rates of different changes. For example, mutational biases and purifying selection favoring conservative changes are probably both responsible for the relatively high rate of transitions compared to transversions in evolving sequences. However, the Kimura (K80) model described below only attempts to capture the effect of both forces in a parameter that reflects the relative rate of transitions to transversions. Evolutionary analyses of sequences are conducted on a wide variety of time scales. Thus, it is convenient to express these models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change between different states (the Q matrices below). If we are given a starting (ancestral) state at one position, the model's Q matrix and a branch length expressing the expected number of changes to have occurred since the ancestor, then we can derive the probability of the descendant sequence having each of the four states. The mathematical details of this transformation from rate-matrix to probability matrix are described in the mathematics of substitution models section of the substitution model page. By expressing models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change we can avoid estimating a large numbers of parameters for each branch on a phylogenetic tree (or each comparison if the analysis involves many pairwise sequence comparisons). The models described on this page describe the evolution of a single site within a set of sequences. They are often used for analyzing the evolution of an entire locus by making the simplifying assumption that different sites evolve independently and are identically distributed. This assumption may be justifiable if the sites can be assumed to be evolving neutrally. If the primary effect of natural selection on the evolution of the sequences is to constrain some sites, then models of among-site rate-heterogeneity can be used. This approach allows one to estimate only one matrix of relative rates of substitution, and another set of parameters describing the variance in the total rate of substitution across sites. == DNA evolution as a continuous-time Markov chain == === Continuous-time Markov chains === Continuous-time Markov chains have the usual transition matrices which are, in addition, parameterized by time, t {\displaystyle t} . Specifically, if E 1 , E 2 , E 3 , E 4 {\displaystyle E_{1},E_{2},E_{3},E_{4}} are the states, then the transition matrix P ( t ) = ( P i j ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\big (}P_{ij}(t){\big )}} where each individual entry, P i j ( t ) {\displaystyle P_{ij}(t)} refers to the probability that state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} will change to state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} in time t {\displaystyle t} . Example: We would like to model the substitution process in DNA sequences (i.e. Jukes–Cantor, Kimura, etc.) in a continuous-time fashion. The corresponding transition matrices will look like: P ( t ) = ( p A A ( t ) p A G ( t ) p A C ( t ) p A T ( t ) p G A ( t ) p G G ( t ) p G C ( t ) p G T ( t ) p C A ( t ) p C G ( t ) p C C ( t ) p C T ( t ) p T A ( t ) p T G ( t ) p T C ( t ) p T T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\begin{pmatrix}p_{\mathrm {AA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {GA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {CA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {TA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TT} }(t)\end{pmatrix}}} where the top-left and bottom-right 2 × 2 blocks correspond to transition probabilities and the top-right and bottom-left 2 × 2 blocks corresponds to transversion probabilities. Assumption: If at some time t 0 {\displaystyle t_{0}} , the Markov chain is in state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} , then the probability that at time t 0 + t {\displaystyle t_{0}+t} , it will be in state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} depends only upon i {\displaystyle i} , j {\displaystyle j} and t {\displaystyle t} . This then allows us to write that probability as p i j ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{ij}(t)} . Theorem: Continuous-time transition matrices satisfy: P ( t + τ ) = P ( t ) P ( τ ) {\displaystyle P(t+\tau )=P(t)P(\tau )} Note: There is here a possible confusion between two meanings of the word transition. (i) In the context of Markov chains, transition is the general term for the change between two states. (ii) In the context of nucleotide changes in DNA sequences, transition is a specific term for the exchange between either the two purines (A ↔ G) or the two pyrimidines (C ↔ T) (for additional details, see the article about transitions in genetics). By contrast, an exchange between one purine and one pyrimidine is called a transversion. === Deriving the dynamics of substitution === Consider a DNA sequence of fixed length m evolving in time by base replacement. Assume that the processes followed by the m sites are Markovian independent, identically distributed and that the process is constant over time. For a particular site, let E = { A , G , C , T } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}=\{A,\,G,\,C,\,T\}} be the set of possible states for the site, and p ( t ) = ( p A ( t ) , p G ( t ) , p C ( t ) , p T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=(p_{A}(t),\,p_{G}(t),\,p_{C}(t),\,p_{T}(t))} their respective probabilities at time t {\displaystyle t} . For two distinct x , y ∈ E {\displaystyle x,y\in {\mathcal {E}}} , let μ x y {\displaystyle \mu _{xy}\ } be the transition rate from state x {\displaystyle x} to state y {\displaystyle y} . Similarly, for any x {\displaystyle x} , let the total rate of change from x {\displaystyle x} be μ x = ∑ y ≠ x μ x y . {\displaystyle \mu _{x}=\sum _{y\neq x}\mu _{xy}\,.} The changes in the probability distribution p A ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{A}(t)} for small increments of time Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} are given by p A ( t + Δ t ) = p A ( t ) − p A ( t ) μ A Δ t + ∑ x ≠ A p x ( t ) μ x A Δ t . {\displaystyle p_{A}(t+\Delta t)=p_{A}(t)-p_{A}(t)\mu _{A}\Delta t+\sum _{x\neq A}p_{x}(t)\mu _{xA}\Delta t\,.} In other words, (in frequentist language), the frequency of A {\displaystyle A} 's at time t + Δ t {\displaystyle t+\Delta t} is equal to the frequency at time t {\displaystyle t} minus the frequency of the lost A {\displaystyle A} 's plus the frequency of the newly created A {\displaystyle A} 's. Similarly for the probabilities p G ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{G}(t)} , p C ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{C}(t)} and p T ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{T}(t)} . These equations can be written compactly as p ( t + Δ t ) = p ( t ) + p ( t ) Q Δ t , {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t+\Delta t)=\mathbf {p} (t)+\mathbf {p} (t)Q\Delta t\,,} where Q = ( − μ A μ A G μ A C μ A T μ G A − μ G μ G C μ G T μ C A μ C G − μ C μ C T μ T A μ T G μ T C − μ T ) {\displaystyle Q={\begin{pmatrix}-\mu _{A}&\mu _{AG}&\mu _{AC}&\mu _{AT}\\\mu _{GA}&-\mu _{G}&\mu _{GC}&\mu _{GT}\\\mu _{CA}&\mu _{CG}&-\mu _{C}&\mu _{CT}\\\mu _{TA}&\mu _{TG}&\mu _{TC}&-\mu _{T}\end{pmatrix}}} is known as the rate matrix. Note that, by definition, the sum of the entries in each row of Q {\displaystyle Q} is equal to zero. It follows that p ′ ( t ) = p ( t ) Q . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} '(t)=\mathbf {p} (t)Q\,.} For a stationary process, where Q {\displaystyle Q} does not depend on time t, this differential equation can be solved. First, P ( t ) = exp ⁡ ( t Q ) , {\displaystyle P(t)=\exp(tQ),} where exp ⁡ ( t Q ) {\displaystyle \exp(tQ)} denotes the exponential of the matrix t Q {\displaystyle tQ} . As a result, p ( t ) = p ( 0 ) P ( t ) = p ( 0 ) exp ⁡ ( t Q ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=\mathbf {p} (0)P(t)=\mathbf {p} (0)\exp(tQ)\,.} === Ergodicity === If the Markov chain is irreducible, i.e. if it is always possible to go from a state x {\displaystyle x} to a state y {\displaystyle y} (possibly in several steps), then it is also ergodic. As a result, it has a unique stationary distribution π = { π x , x ∈ E } {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\pi }}=\{\pi _{x},\,x\in {\mathcal {E}}\}} , where π x {\displaystyle \pi _{x}} corresponds to the proportion of time spent in state x {\displaystyle x} after the Markov chain has run for an infinite amount of time. In DNA evo
Read more →
AI Analytics Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

In search of the best AI analytics tool? An AI analytics tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI analytics tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Copywriting Tools Compared (2026)

In search of the best AI copywriting tool? An AI copywriting tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI copywriting tool 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 →
JBoss Tools

JBoss Tools is a set of Eclipse plugins and features designed to help JBoss and JavaEE developers develop applications. It is an umbrella project for the JBoss developed plugins that will make it into JBoss Developer Studio. == Modules == JBoss Tools includes the following modules: Visual Page Editor (VPE). The visual editor contributed by Exadel supports visual editing of HTML and JSF (JSP and Facelets) pages. VPE also includes visual support for JSF component libraries including JBoss RichFaces. Seam Tools. Includes support for (for example) seam-gen, RichFaces VE integration, Seam related code completion and refactoring. Hibernate Tools. Supporting mapping files, annotations and JPA with reverse engineering, code completion, project wizards, refactoring, interactive HQL/JPA-QL/Criteria execution and more. In short a merger of Hibernate Tools and Exadel ORM features. JBoss AS Tools. Easy start, stop and debug of JBoss AS 4+ servers from within Eclipse. Also includes features for packaging and deployment of any type of Eclipse project. Drools IDE. Rules file editing, Rete View, working memory debugging/inspection and more. jBPM Tools. jBPM workflow editing, deployment, etc. JBossWS Tools. Inspecting, invoking, developing and functional/load/compliance testing of web services over HTTP, base tooling provided by soapUI with the addition of JBossWS specific features/support. JBoss ESB Tools. The structured xml editor for the jboss-esb.xml file used in JBoss ESB. Birt Tools. Hibernate and Seam extensions for Eclipse BIRT. Portal Tools. JBoss Tools supports the JSR-168 Portlet Specification (Portlet 1.0), JSR-286 Portlet Specification (Portlet 2.0) and works with PortletBridge for supporting Portlets in JSF/Seam applications. To enable these features, add the JBoss Portlet facet to a new or an existing web project. Core/General Tools. To reduce the UI clutter, most of the "configure project" menu items move into the Configure menu introduced in Eclipse 3.5 instead of always having a static JBoss Tools menu entry show up even in projects unrelated to JBoss Tools. Smooks Tools. The editor for Smooks configuration files. JBoss ESB Tools. The ESB project Wizard, which creates a project that can be deployed as an .esb archive to a JBoss AS-based server with JBoss ESB installed. JMX Tools. JMX Tools allows establishing multiple JMX connections and provides views for exploring the JMX tree and execute operations directly from Eclipse. The JMX Tools replaces the JMX node previously available in the JBoss Server View. JST/JSF Tools. RichFaces Support, Code Assists, Web XML/JSP/XHTML Editors, CSS Style Editing, web.xml validation, Faceleted taglib in taglib.xml is supported with XSD schema location. Project Examples. The experimental feature called Project Example wizard aims to allow users to download example projects from a remote site and have them working out-of-the-box. AS/Project Archives Tools. To deploy projects compressed, configurable in the server editor. If enabled, all projects deployed to that server will be compressed instead of in an exploded folder. Maven Tools. The optional integration with m2eclipse to provide Maven support for projects created by JBoss Tools and to some extent core WTP projects. BPEL Tools. A BPEL Editor based on the Eclipse BPEL project has been added to JBoss Tools. This means that users can create, edit and deploy BPEL artifacts for the Riftsaw BPEL Runtime. CDI (JSR-299) Tools. Support of the Contexts and Dependency Injection annotations; it works on any Eclipse Java project (via the Configure menu with CDI enabled).
Read more →
How to Choose an AI Bug Finder

Comparing the best AI bug finder? An AI bug finder 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 bug finder 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 →
Steve Omohundro

Stephen Malvern Omohundro (born 1959) is an American computer scientist whose areas of research include Hamiltonian physics, dynamical systems, programming languages, machine learning, machine vision, and the social implications of artificial intelligence. His current work uses rational economics to develop safe and beneficial intelligent technologies for better collaborative modeling, understanding, innovation, and decision making. == Education == Omohundro has degrees in physics and mathematics from Stanford University (Phi Beta Kappa) and a Ph.D. in physics from the University of California, Berkeley. == Learning algorithms == Omohundro started the "Vision and Learning Group" at the University of Illinois, which produced 4 Masters and 2 Ph.D. theses. His work in learning algorithms included a number of efficient geometric algorithms, the manifold learning task and various algorithms for accomplishing this task, other related visual learning and modelling tasks, the best-first model merging approach to machine learning (including the learning of Hidden Markov Models and Stochastic Context-free Grammars), and the Family Discovery Learning Algorithm, which discovers the dimension and structure of a parameterized family of stochastic models. == Self-improving artificial intelligence and AI safety == Omohundro started Self-Aware Systems in Palo Alto, California to research the technology and social implications of self-improving artificial intelligence. He is an advisor to the Machine Intelligence Research Institute on artificial intelligence. He argues that rational systems exhibit problematic natural "drives" that will need to be countered in order to build intelligent systems safely. His papers, talks, and videos on AI safety have generated extensive interest. He has given many talks on self-improving artificial intelligence, cooperative technology, AI safety, and connections with biological intelligence. == Programming languages == At Thinking Machines Corporation, Cliff Lasser and Steve Omohundro developed Star Lisp, the first programming language for the Connection Machine. Omohundro joined the International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) in Berkeley, California, where he led the development of the open source programming language Sather. Sather is featured in O'Reilly's History of Programming Languages poster. == Physics and dynamical systems theory == Omohundro's book Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics describes natural Hamiltonian symplectic structures for a wide range of physical models that arise from perturbation theory analyses. He showed that there exist smooth partial differential equations which stably perform universal computation by simulating arbitrary cellular automata. The asymptotic behavior of these PDEs is therefore logically undecidable. With John David Crawford he showed that the orbits of three-dimensional period doubling systems can form an infinite number of topologically distinct torus knots and described the structure of their stable and unstable manifolds. == Mathematica and Apple tablet contest == From 1986 to 1988, he was an Assistant Professor of Computer science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and cofounded the Center for Complex Systems Research with Stephen Wolfram and Norman Packard. While at the University of Illinois, he worked with Stephen Wolfram and five others to create the symbolic mathematics program Mathematica. He and Wolfram led a team of students that won an Apple Computer contest to design "The Computer of the Year 2000." Their design entry "Tablet" was a touchscreen tablet with GPS and other features that finally appeared when the Apple iPad was introduced 22 years later. == Other contributions == Subutai Ahmad and Steve Omohundro developed biologically realistic neural models of selective attention. As a research scientist at the NEC Research Institute, Omohundro worked on machine learning and computer vision, and was a co-inventor of U.S. Patent 5,696,964, "Multimedia Database Retrieval System Which Maintains a Posterior Probability Distribution that Each Item in the Database is a Target of a Search." === Pirate puzzle === Omohundro developed an extension to the game theoretic pirate puzzle featured in Scientific American. == Outreach == Omohundro has sat on the Machine Intelligence Research Institute board of advisors. He has written extensively on artificial intelligence, and has warned that "an autonomous weapons arms race is already taking place" because "military and economic pressures are driving the rapid development of autonomous systems".
Read more →
Collocation

In corpus linguistics, a collocation is a series of words or terms that co-occur more often than would be expected by chance. In phraseology, a collocation is a type of compositional phraseme, meaning that it can be understood from the words that make it up. This contrasts with an idiom, where the meaning of the whole cannot be inferred from its parts, and may be completely unrelated. There are about seven main types of collocations: adjective + noun, noun + noun (such as collective nouns), noun + verb, verb + noun, adverb + adjective, verbs + prepositional phrase (phrasal verbs), and verb + adverb. Collocation extraction is a computational technique that finds collocations in a document or corpus, using various computational linguistics elements resembling data mining. == Expanded definition == Collocations are partly or fully fixed expressions that become established through repeated context-dependent use. Such terms as crystal clear, middle management, nuclear family, and cosmetic surgery are examples of collocated pairs of words. Collocations can be in a syntactic relation (such as verb–object: make and decision), lexical relation (such as antonymy), or they can be in no linguistically defined relation. Knowledge of collocations is vital for the competent use of a language: a grammatically correct sentence will stand out as awkward if collocational preferences are violated. This makes collocation a common focus for language teaching. Corpus linguists specify a key word in context (KWIC) and identify the words immediately surrounding them, to illustrate the way words are used in practice. The processing of collocations involves a number of parameters, the most important of which is the measure of association, which evaluates whether the co-occurrence is purely by chance or statistically significant. Due to the non-random nature of language, most collocations are classed as significant, and the association scores are simply used to rank the results. Commonly used measures of association include mutual information, t scores, and log-likelihood. Rather than select a single definition, Gledhill proposes that collocation involves at least three different perspectives: co-occurrence, a statistical view, which sees collocation as the recurrent appearance in a text of a node and its collocates; construction, which sees collocation either as a correlation between a lexeme and a lexical-grammatical pattern, or as a relation between a base and its collocative partners; and expression, a pragmatic view of collocation as a conventional unit of expression, regardless of form. These different perspectives contrast with the usual way of presenting collocation in phraseological studies. Traditionally speaking, collocation is explained in terms of all three perspectives at once, in a continuum: == In dictionaries == In 1933, Harold Palmer's Second Interim Report on English Collocations highlighted the importance of collocation as a key to producing natural-sounding language, for anyone learning a foreign language. Thus from the 1940s onwards, information about recurrent word combinations became a standard feature of monolingual learner's dictionaries. As these dictionaries became "less word-centred and more phrase-centred", more attention was paid to collocation. This trend was supported, from the beginning of the 21st century, by the availability of large text corpora and intelligent corpus-querying software, making it possible to provide a more systematic account of collocation in dictionaries. Using these tools, dictionaries such as the Macmillan English Dictionary and the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English included boxes or panels with lists of frequent collocations. There are also a number of specialized dictionaries devoted to describing the frequent collocations in a language. These include (for Spanish) Redes: Diccionario combinatorio del español contemporaneo (2004), (for French) Le Robert: Dictionnaire des combinaisons de mots (2007), and (for English) the LTP Dictionary of Selected Collocations (1997) and the Macmillan Collocations Dictionary (2010). == Statistically significant collocation == Student's t-test can be used to determine whether the occurrence of a collocation in a corpus is statistically significant. For a bigram w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , let P ( w 1 ) = # w 1 N {\displaystyle P(w_{1})={\frac {\#w_{1}}{N}}} be the unconditional probability of occurrence of w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} in a corpus with size N {\displaystyle N} , and let P ( w 2 ) = # w 2 N {\displaystyle P(w_{2})={\frac {\#w_{2}}{N}}} be the unconditional probability of occurrence of w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} in the corpus. The t-score for the bigram w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} is calculated as: where x ¯ = # w i w j N {\displaystyle {\bar {x}}={\frac {\#w_{i}w_{j}}{N}}} is the sample mean of the occurrence of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , # w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle \#w_{1}w_{2}} is the number of occurrences of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} , μ = P ( w i ) P ( w j ) {\displaystyle \mu =P(w_{i})P(w_{j})} is the probability of w 1 w 2 {\displaystyle w_{1}w_{2}} under the null-hypothesis that w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} appear independently in the text, and s 2 = x ¯ ( 1 − x ¯ ) ≈ x ¯ {\displaystyle s^{2}={\bar {x}}(1-{\bar {x}})\approx {\bar {x}}} is the sample variance. With a large N {\displaystyle N} , the t-test is equivalent to a Z-test.
Read more →
Adversarial stylometry

Adversarial stylometry is the practice of altering writing style to reduce the potential for stylometry to discover the author's identity or their characteristics. This task is also known as authorship obfuscation or authorship anonymisation. Stylometry poses a significant privacy challenge in its ability to unmask anonymous authors or to link pseudonyms to an author's other identities, which, for example, creates difficulties for whistleblowers, activists, and hoaxers and fraudsters. The privacy risk is expected to grow as machine learning techniques and text corpora develop. All adversarial stylometry shares the core idea of faithfully paraphrasing the source text so that the meaning is unchanged but the stylistic signals are obscured. Such a faithful paraphrase is an adversarial example for a stylometric classifier. Several broad approaches to this exist, with some overlap: imitation, substituting the author's own style for another's; translation, applying machine translation with the hope that this eliminates characteristic style in the source text; and obfuscation, deliberately modifying a text's style to make it not resemble the author's own. Manually obscuring style is possible, but laborious; in some circumstances, it is preferable or necessary. Automated tooling, either semi- or fully-automatic, could assist an author. How best to perform the task and the design of such tools is an open research question. While some approaches have been shown to be able to defeat particular stylometric analyses, particularly those that do not account for the potential of adversariality, establishing safety in the face of unknown analyses is an issue. Ensuring the faithfulness of the paraphrase is a critical challenge for automated tools. It is uncertain if the practice of adversarial stylometry is detectable in itself. Some studies have found that particular methods produced signals in the output text, but a stylometrist who is uncertain of what methods may have been used may not be able to reliably detect them. == History == Rao & Rohatgi (2000), an early work in adversarial stylometry, identified machine translation as a possibility, but noted that the quality of translators available at the time presented severe challenges. Kacmarcik & Gamon (2006) is another early work. Brennan, Afroz & Greenstadt (2012) performed the first evaluation of adversarial stylometric methods on actual texts. Brennan & Greenstadt (2009) introduced the first corpus of adversarially authored texts specifically for evaluating stylometric methods; other corpora include the International Imitation Hemingway Competition, the Faux Faulkner contest, and the hoax blog A Gay Girl in Damascus. == Motivations == Rao & Rohatgi (2000) suggest that short, unattributed documents (i.e., anonymous posts) are not at risk of stylometric identification, but pseudonymous authors who have not practiced adversarial stylometry in producing corpuses of thousands of words may be vulnerable. Narayanan et al. (2012) attempted large-scale deanonymisation of 100,000 blog authors with mixed results: the identifications were significantly better than chance, but only accurately matched the blog and author a fifth of the time; identification improved with the number of posts written by the author in the corpus. Even if an author is not identified, some of their characteristics may still be deduced stylometrically, or stylometry may narrow the anonymity set of potential authors sufficiently for other information to complete the identification. Detecting author characteristics (e.g., gender or age) is often simpler than identifying an author from a large, possibly open, set of candidates. Modern machine learning techniques offer powerful tools for identification; further development of corpora and computational stylometric techniques are likely to raise further privacy issues. Gröndahl & Asokan (2020a) say that the general validity of the hypothesis underlying stylometry—that authors have invariant, content-independent 'style fingerprints'—is uncertain, but "the deanonymisation attack is a real privacy concern". Those interested in practicing adversarial stylometry and stylistic deception include whistleblowers avoiding retribution; journalists and activists; perpetrators of frauds and hoaxes; authors of fake reviews; literary forgers; criminals disguising their identity from investigators; and, generally, anyone with a desire for anonymity or pseudonymity. Authors, or agents acting on behalf of authors, may also attempt to remove stylistic clues to author characteristics (e.g., race or gender) so that knowledge of those characteristics cannot be used for discrimination (e.g., through algorithmic bias). Another possible use for adversarial stylometry is in disguising automatically generated text as human-authored. == Methods == With imitation, the author attempts to mislead stylometry by matching their style to another author's. An incomplete imitation, where some of the true author's unique characteristics appear alongside the imitated author's, can be a detectable signal for the use of adversarial stylometry. Imitation can be performed automatically with style transfer systems, though this typically requires a large corpus in the target style for the system to learn from. Another approach is translation, which employs machine translation of a source text to eliminate characteristic style, often through multiple translators in sequence to produce a round-trip translation. Such chained translation can lead to texts being significantly altered, even to the point of incomprehensibility; improved translation tools reduce this risk. More simply-structured texts can be easier to machine translate without losing the original meaning. Machine translation blurs into direct stylistic imitation or obfuscation achieved through automated style transfer, which can be viewed as a "translation" with the same language as input and output. With low-quality translation tools, an author can be required to manually correct major translation errors while avoiding the hazard of re-introducing stylistic characteristics. Wang, Juola & Riddell (2022) found that gross errors introduced by Google Translate were rare, but more common with several intermediate translations—however, occasional simple or short sentences and misspellings in the source text appeared verbatim in the output, potentially providing an identifying signal. Chain translation can leave characteristic traces of its application in a document, which may allow reconstruction of the intermediate languages used and the number of translation steps performed. Obfuscation involves deliberately changing the style of a text to reduce its similarity to other texts by some metric; this may be performed at the time of writing by conscious modification, or as part of a revision process with feedback from the metric being targeted as an input to decide when the text has been sufficiently obfuscated. In contrast to translation, complex texts can offer more opportunities for effective obfuscation without altering meaning, and likewise genres with more permissible variation allow more obfuscation. However, longer texts are harder to thoroughly obfuscate. Obfuscation can blend into imitation if the author develops a novel target style, distinct from their original style. With respect to masking author characteristics, obfuscation may aim to achieve a union (adding signals for imitated characteristics) or an intersection (removing signals and normalising) of other authors' styles. Avoiding the author's own idiosyncrasies and producing a "normalised" text is a critical obfuscatory step: an author may have a unique tendency to misspell certain words, use particular variants, or to format a document in a characteristic way. Stylometric signals vary in how simply they can be adversarially masked; an author may easily change their vocabulary by conscious choice, but altering the pattern of grammar or the letter frequency in their text may be harder to achieve, though Juola & Vescovi (2011) report that imitation typically succeeds at masking more characteristics than obfuscation. Automated obfuscation may require large amounts of training data written by the author. Concerning automated implementations of adversarial stylometry, two possible implementations are rule-based systems for paraphrasing; and encoder–decoder architectures, where the text passes through an intermediate format that is (intended to be) style-neutral. Another division in automated methods is whether there is feedback from an identification system or not. With such feedback, finding paraphrases for author masking has been characterised as a heuristic search problem, exploring textual variants until the result is stylistically sufficiently far (in the case of obfuscation) or near (in the case of imitation), which then constitutes an adversarial example for that identification system. == Evaluation == How
Read more →
AI Logo Makers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

Shopping for the best AI logo maker? An AI logo maker 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 logo maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Glushkov's construction algorithm

In computer science theory – particularly formal language theory – Glushkov's construction algorithm, invented by Victor Mikhailovich Glushkov, transforms a given regular expression into an equivalent nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). Thus, it forms a bridge between regular expressions and nondeterministic finite automata: two abstract representations of the same class of formal languages. A regular expression may be used to conveniently describe an advanced search pattern in a "find and replace"–like operation of a text processing utility. Glushkov's algorithm can be used to transform it into an NFA, which furthermore is small by nature, as the number of its states equals the number of symbols of the regular expression, plus one. Subsequently, the NFA can be made deterministic by the powerset construction and then be minimized to get an optimal automaton corresponding to the given regular expression. The latter format is best suited for execution on a computer. From another, more theoretical point of view, Glushkov's algorithm is a part of the proof that NFA and regular expressions both accept exactly the same languages; that is, the regular languages. The converse of Glushkov's algorithm is Kleene's algorithm, which transforms a finite automaton into a regular expression. The automaton obtained by Glushkov's construction is the same as the one obtained by Thompson's construction algorithm, once its ε-transitions are removed. Glushkov's construction algorithm is also called The algorithm of Berry-Sethi, named after Gérard Berry and Ravi Sethi who worked on this construction. == Construction == Given a regular expression e, the Glushkov Construction Algorithm creates a non-deterministic automaton that accepts the language L ( e ) {\displaystyle L(e)} accepted by e. The construction uses four steps: === Step 1 === Linearisation of the expression. Each letter of the alphabet appearing in the expression e is renamed, so that each letter occurs at most once in the new expression e ′ {\displaystyle e'} . Glushkov's construction essentially relies on the fact that e ′ {\displaystyle e'} represents a local language L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . Let A be the old alphabet and let B be the new one. === Step 2a === Computation of the sets P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , and F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} . The first, P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , is the set of letters which occurs as first letter of a word of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . The second, D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , is the set of letters that can end a word of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . The last one, F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} , is the set of letter pairs that can occur in words of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} , i.e. it is the set of factors of length two of the words of L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} . Those sets are mathematically defined by P ( e ′ ) = { x ∈ B ∣ x B ∗ ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle P(e')=\{x\in B\mid xB^{}\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} , D ( e ′ ) = { y ∈ B ∣ B ∗ y ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle D(e')=\{y\in B\mid B^{}y\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} , F ( e ′ ) = { u ∈ B 2 ∣ B ∗ u B ∗ ∩ L ( e ′ ) ≠ ∅ } {\displaystyle F(e')=\{u\in B^{2}\mid B^{}uB^{}\cap L(e')\neq \emptyset \}} . They are computed by induction over the structure of the expression, as explained below. === Step 2b === Computation of the set Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')} which contains the empty word ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } if this word belongs to L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L(e')} , and is the empty set otherwise. Formally, this is Λ ( e ′ ) = { ε } ∩ L ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')=\{\varepsilon \}\cap L(e')} . === Step 3 === Computation of automaton recognizing the local language, as defined by P ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle P(e')} , D ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle D(e')} , F ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle F(e')} , and Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle \Lambda (e')} . By definition, the local language defined by the sets P, D, and F is the set of words which begin with a letter of P, end by a letter of D, and whose factors of length 2 belong to F, optionally also including the empty word; that is, it is the language: L ′ = ( P B ∗ ∩ B ∗ D ) ∖ B ∗ ( B 2 ∖ F ) B ∗ ∪ Λ ( e ′ ) {\displaystyle L'=(PB^{}\cap B^{}D)\setminus B^{}(B^{2}\setminus F)B^{}\cup \Lambda (e')} . Strictly speaking, it is the computation of the automaton for the local language denoted by this linearised expression that is Glushkov's construction. === Step 4 === Remove the linearisation, replacing each indexed letter B by the original letter of A. == Example == Consider the regular expression e = ( a ( a b ) ∗ ) ∗ + ( b a ) ∗ {\displaystyle e=(a(ab)^{})^{}+(ba)^{}} . == Computation of the set of letters == The computation of the sets P, D, F, and Λ is done inductively over the regular expression e ′ {\displaystyle e'} . One must give the values for ∅, ε (the symbols for the empty language and the singleton language containing the empty word), the letters, and the results of the operations + , ⋅ , ∗ {\displaystyle +,\cdot ,^{}} . The most costly operations are the cartesian products of sets for the computation of F. == Properties == The obtained automaton is non-deterministic, and it has as many states as the number of letters of the regular expression, plus one. It has been proven that every Thompson's automaton can be transformed into Glushkov's automaton via a ε-transitions elimination method. == Applications and deterministic expressions == The computation of the automaton by the expression occurs often; it has been systematically used in search functions, in particular by the Unix grep command. Similarly, XML's specification also uses such constructions; for more efficiency, regular expressions of a certain kind, called deterministic expressions, have been studied.
Read more →