AI Coding Claude

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

• 

  Deductive language

  A deductive language is a computer programming language in which the program is a collection of predicates ('facts') and rules that connect them. Such a language is used to create knowledge based systems or expert systems which can deduce answers to problem sets by applying the rules to the facts they have been given. An example of a deductive language is Prolog, or its database-query cousin, Datalog. == History == As the name implies, deductive languages are rooted in the principles of deductive reasoning; making inferences based upon current knowledge. The first recommendation to use a clausal form of logic for representing computer programs was made by Cordell Green (1969) at Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International). This idea can also be linked back to the battle between procedural and declarative information representation in early artificial intelligence systems. Deductive languages and their use in logic programming can also be dated to the same year when Foster and Elcock introduced Absys, the first deductive/logical programming language. Shortly after, the first Prolog system was introduced in 1972 by Colmerauer through collaboration with Robert Kowalski. == Components == The components of a deductive language are a system of formal logic and a knowledge base upon which the logic is applied. === Formal Logic === Formal logic is the study of inference in regards to formal content. The distinguishing feature between formal and informal logic is that in the former case, the logical rule applied to the content is not specific to a situation. The laws hold regardless of a change in context. Although first-order logic is described in the example below to demonstrate the uses of a deductive language, no formal system is mandated and the use of a specific system is defined within the language rules or grammar. As input, a predicate takes any object(s) in the domain of interest and outputs either one of two Boolean values: true or false. For example, consider the sentences "Barack Obama is the 44th president" and "If it rains today, I will bring an umbrella". The first is a statement with an associated truth value. The second is a conditional statement relying on the value of some other statement. Either of these sentences can be broken down into predicates which can be compared and form the knowledge base of a deductive language. Moreover, variables such as 'Barack Obama' or 'president' can be quantified over. For example, take 'Barack Obama' as variable 'x'. In the sentence "There exists an 'x' such that if 'x' is the president, then 'x' is the commander in chief." This is an example of the existential quantifier in first order logic. Take 'president' to be the variable 'y'. In the sentence "For every 'y', 'y' is the leader of their nation." This is an example of the universal quantifier. === Knowledge Base === A collection of 'facts' or predicates and variables form the knowledge base of a deductive language. Depending on the language, the order of declaration of these predicates within the knowledge base may or may not influence the result of applying logical rules. Upon application of certain 'rules' or inferences, new predicates may be added to a knowledge base. As new facts are established or added, they form the basis for new inferences. As the core of early expert systems, artificial intelligence systems which can make decisions like an expert human, knowledge bases provided more information than databases. They contained structured data, with classes, subclasses, and instances. == Prolog == Prolog is an example of a deductive, declarative language that applies first- order logic to a knowledge base. To run a program in Prolog, a query is posed and based upon the inference engine and the specific facts in the knowledge base, a result is returned. The result can be anything appropriate from a new relation or predicate, to a literal such as a Boolean (true/false), depending on the engine and type system.

  Read more →
• 

  Minion (solver)

  Minion is a solver for satisfaction problems. Unlike constraint programming toolkits, which expect users to write programs in a traditional programming language like C++, Java or Prolog, Minion takes a text file which specifies the problem, and solves using only this. This makes using Minion much simpler, at the cost of much less customization. Minion has been shown to be faster than major commercial constraint solvers including CPLEX (formerly IBM ILOG). == Overview == Minion was introduced in 2006 by researchers at the University of St Andrews as a “fast, scalable” solver for large and hard CSP instances. The project provides a compact input language and a low-overhead C++ implementation aimed at throughput and memory efficiency. == Design and features == Minion implements a range of variable and constraint types commonly used in CSP modelling, plus search heuristics and optimisation support. The solver architecture prioritises cache-friendly data structures and specialised propagators. Notably, the developers adapted watched literal techniques from SAT solving to speed up constraint propagation for, among others, Boolean sums, the element global constraint, and table constraints. The modelling approach relies on a plain-text format (parsed by Minion) rather than embedding models into a host programming language. This reduces overhead and supports rapid “model-and-run” experimentation for large benchmark sets. == Performance == In the original evaluation on standard benchmarks, the authors reported that Minion often ran between one and two orders of magnitude faster than state-of-the-art toolkits of the time (including ILOG Solver and Gecode) on large, hard instances, with smaller gains—or slowdowns—on easier problems. Subsequent research has used Minion as a baseline solver in empirical studies and test generation tasks, reflecting its adoption within parts of the constraint programming community. == Applications == Minion has been applied in academic work on combinatorial search, scheduling and test generation, and is available to other environments via wrappers (for example, from the R language).

  Read more →
• 

  Richard S. Sutton

  Richard Stuart Sutton (born 1957 or 1958) is a Canadian computer scientist. He is a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta, fellow & Chief Scientific Advisor at the Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute, and a research scientist at Keen Technologies. Sutton is considered one of the founders of modern computational reinforcement learning. In particular, he contributed to temporal difference learning and policy gradient methods. He received the 2024 Turing Award with Andrew Barto. == Education and early life == Richard Sutton was born in either 1957 or 1958 in Toledo, Ohio, and grew up in Oak Brook, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, United States. Sutton received his Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in psychology from Stanford University in 1978 before taking a Master of Science (1980) and PhD (1984) in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst supervised by Andrew Barto. His doctoral dissertation introduced actor-critic architectures and temporal credit assignment. He was influenced by Harry Klopf's work in the 1970s, which proposed that supervised learning is insufficient for AI or explaining intelligent behavior, and trial-and-error learning, driven by "hedonic aspects of behavior", is necessary. This focused his interest to reinforcement learning. == Career and research == Sutton held a postdoctoral research position at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1984. He worked at GTE Laboratories in Waltham, Massachusetts as principal member of technical staff from 1985 to 1994, then returned to the University of Massachusetts Amherst as a senior research scientist. He joined AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory in Florham Park, New Jersey as principal technical staff member from 1998 to 2002. He has been a professor of computing science at the University of Alberta since 2003, where he helped establish the Reinforcement Learning and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In 2017 he became a distinguished research scientist with Google DeepMind and helped launch DeepMind Alberta in Edmonton, a research office operated in close collaboration with the University of Alberta. 1984: Postdoctoral researcher, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1985–1994: Principal member of technical staff, Computer and Intelligent Systems Laboratory, GTE Laboratories (Waltham, Massachusetts) 1995–1998: Senior research scientist, University of Massachusetts Amherst (Amherst, Massachusetts) 1998–2002: Principal technical staff member, Artificial Intelligence Department, AT&T Labs Shannon Laboratory (Florham Park, New Jersey) 2003–present: Professor of computing science, University of Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta) 2017–2023: Distinguished research scientist, DeepMind Alberta, Google DeepMind (Edmonton, Alberta) 2024–Present: Research scientist, Keen Technologies === Reinforcement learning === Sutton joined Andrew Barto in the early 1980s at UMass, trying to explore the behavior of neurons in the human brain as the basis for human intelligence, a concept that had been advanced by computer scientist A. Harry Klopf. Sutton and Barto used mathematics toward furthering the concept and using it as the basis for artificial intelligence. This concept became known as reinforcement learning and went on to becoming a key part of artificial intelligence techniques. Barto and Sutton used Markov decision processes (MDP) as the mathematical foundation to explain how agents (algorithmic entities) made decisions when in a stochastic or random environment, receiving rewards at the end of every action. Traditional MDP theory assumed the agents knew all information about the MDPs in their attempt toward maximizing their cumulative rewards. Barto and Sutton's reinforcement learning techniques allowed for both the environment and the rewards to be unknown, and thus allowed for these category of algorithms to be applied to a wide array of problems. Sutton returned to Canada in the 2000s and continued working on the topic which continued to develop in academic circles until one of its first major real world applications saw Google's AlphaGo program built on this concept defeating the then prevailing human champion. Barto and Sutton have widely been credited and accepted as pioneers of modern reinforcement learning, with the technique itself being foundational to the AI boom. In a 2019 essay, Sutton proposed the "bitter lesson", which criticized the field of AI research for failing to learn that "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run", arguing that "70 years of AI research [had shown] that general methods that leverage computation are ultimately the most effective, and by a large margin", beating efforts building on human knowledge about specific fields like computer vision, speech recognition, chess or Go. Sutton argues that large language models aren’t capable of learning on-the-job, and so new model architectures are required to enable continual learning. Sutton further argues that a special training phase will be unnecessary — the agent will learn on-the-fly, rendering large language models obsolete. In 2023, Sutton and John Carmack announced a partnership for the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI). === Awards and honors === Sutton has been a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 2001; his nomination read: "For significant contributions to many topics in machine learning, including reinforcement learning, temporal difference techniques, and neural networks." In 2003, he received the President's Award from the International Neural Network Society and in 2013, the Outstanding Achievement in Research award from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He received the 2024 Turing Award from the Association for Computing Machinery together with Andrew Barto; the citation of the award read: "For developing the conceptual and algorithmic foundations of reinforcement learning." In 2016, Sutton was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. In 2021, he was elected Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) of London. === Research === Sutton introduced temporal-difference methods for prediction and control, establishing convergence properties and practical algorithms. He proposed integrated learning and planning through the Dyna architecture. He co-developed the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning. He co-authored the first modern policy gradient formulation with function approximation. Sutton's essay The Bitter Lesson argued that general methods that scale with computation dominate domain-specific approaches in the long run. His former doctoral students include David Silver and Doina Precup. === Selected publications === His publications include: == Personal life == Sutton became a Canadian citizen in 2015, and his renunciation of US citizenship was reported in 2017.

  Read more →
• 

  National Library of Medicine classification

  The National Library of Medicine (NLM) classification system is a library indexing system covering the fields of medicine and preclinical basic sciences. Operated and maintained by the U.S. National Library of Medicine, the NLM classification is patterned after the Library of Congress (LC) Classification system: alphabetical letters denote broad subject categories which are subdivided by numbers. For example, QW 279 would indicate a book on an aspect of microbiology or immunology. The one- or two-letter alphabetical codes in the NLM classification use a limited range of letters: only QS–QZ and W–WZ. This allows the NLM system to co-exist with the larger LC coding scheme as neither of these ranges are used in the LC system. There are, however, three pre-existing codes in the LC system which overlap with the NLM: Human Anatomy (QM), Microbiology (QR), and Medicine (R). To avoid further confusion, these three codes are not used in the NLM. The headings for the individual schedules (letters or letter pairs) are given in brief form (e.g., QW - Microbiology and Immunology; WG - Cardiovascular System) and together they provide an outline of the subjects covered by the NLM classification. Headings are interpreted broadly and include the physiological system, the specialties connected with them, the regions of the body chiefly concerned and subordinate related fields. The NLM system is hierarchical, and within each schedule, division by organ usually has priority. Each main schedule, as well as some sub-sections, begins with a group of form numbers ranging generally from 1–49 which classify materials by publication type, e.g., dictionaries, atlases, laboratory manuals, etc. The main schedules QS-QZ, W-WY, and WZ (excluding the range WZ 220–270) classify works published after 1913; the 19th century schedule is used for works published 1801–1913; and WZ 220-270 is used to provide century groupings for works published before 1801. == Classification categories == === Preclinical Sciences === QS Human Anatomy QT Physiology QU Biochemistry QV Pharmacology QW Microbiology & Immunology QX Parasitology QY Clinical Pathology QZ Pathology === Medicine and Related Subjects === W Health Professions WA Public Health WB Practice of Medicine WC Communicable Diseases WD Disorders of Systemic, Metabolic, or Environmental Origin, etc. WE Musculoskeletal System WF Respiratory System WG Cardiovascular System WH Hemic and Lymphatic Systems WI Digestive System WJ Urogenital System WK Endocrine System WL Nervous System WM Psychiatry WN Radiology. Diagnostic Imaging WO Surgery WP Gynecology WQ Obstetrics WR Dermatology WS Pediatrics WT Geriatrics. Chronic Disease WU Dentistry. Oral Surgery WV Otolaryngology WW Ophthalmology WX Hospitals & Other Health Facilities WY Nursing WZ History of Medicine 19th Century Schedule

  Read more →
• 

  BeReal

  BeReal (stylized on the app logo as BeReal.) is a French social-networking app released in 2020, developed by Alexis Barreyat and Kévin Perreau. Currently, it is owned by Voodoo. Its main feature is a daily notification that encourages users to share photos of themselves in their day-to-day life, on any randomly selected two-minute window every day. Critics noted its emphasis on authenticity, which some felt crossed the line into the mundane. The primary reference of its name relates to its focus on users uploading unpolished photos, with it being a pun of the term B-reel. According to the app's description on Apple's App Store, BeReal encourages its users to "show their friends who they really are, for once," by removing filters and opportunities to stage or edit photos. After a couple of years of relative obscurity, it rapidly gained popularity in early and mid-2022 growing from 21.6 million to 73.5 million users between July and August, before experiencing a decrease in use in 2023 and continuing to decline to 23 million users at the beginning of 2024. == History == The app was developed by Alexis Barreyat, a former employee at GoPro, and Kévin Perreau, a graduate from 42 in Paris. Initially released in 2020, it first gained widespread popularity in early 2022. It first spread widely on college campuses, partially due to a paid ambassador program. In late August 2022, the application had over 10 million active daily users and 21.6 million active monthly users. As of February 2023, the app has grown to 13 million active daily users and 47.8 million active monthly users. In June 2021, BeReal received a $30 million funding round led by Andreessen Horowitz and Accel. In May 2022, BeReal secured $85 million in a funding round led by Yuri Milner's DST Global, increasing its valuation to about $600 million. On July 25, 2022, BeReal topped Apple's free app list in the iOS App Store, and remained until September 2022. BeReal also received Apple's iPhone App of the Year in 2022. By late spring 2023, the app's momentum was waning, as daily users dropped to about 6 million, from 15 million in October 2022. In August 2024, there was a resurgence after a campaign at the Paris Olympics 2024, with the app reportedly gaining 1000 users. In June 2024, BeReal was acquired by the French company Voodoo for a reported €500 million. Alexis Barreyat is set to step down after a transition period. == Features == Once per day, BeReal notifies all users that a two-minute window to post is open. It asks users to create a post (known eponymously as a "BeReal") which, using mandatory simultaneous photos and now short videos from both the front and back cameras, provides a visual depiction of what they are doing at that moment, with an option to caption their post. The given window varies from day to day, and is not known to users before the notification is received. Once the daily notification is sent, users lose the ability to see others' BeReals from the previous day. Furthermore, users cannot see any of the current day's BeReals until they upload their own. On-time BeReals show the time it was uploaded, meanwhile, late BeReals uploaded after the two-minute window shows how late the BeReal was taken, but the user has to long-press the BeReal to reveal the time it was uploaded. Other users can also see how many attempts the poster took to take the BeReal, as well as their location when the BeReal was taken. Users only get one chance to delete their BeReal and post another one, and they used to not be able to post more than one at any time. However, in 2023, a feature was added that allowed users to post up to two extra BeReals on days when they posted their first BeReal within the 2-minute window. In July 2024, the number of bonus BeReals was increased to 5. [1] BeReal also features a "Discovery" section, wherein users are given the option to share to a much wider, public audience. This feature, however, is limited, as users are not able to interact with the posts through commenting—unlike the "My Friends" feature. In August 2023, in an attempt to make BeReal more social, another feature was added so that users are now able to see their friends of friends' BeReal. The app reportedly uses HiveAI to automate its image moderation process. However, there is also a report function that allows users to report a photo or another user if they are posting inappropriate content. === Comparison to other platforms === Because of its daily cycle of engagement, it has been compared to Wordle, which gained popularity earlier in 2022. It also supports a platform similar to Snapchat with a theme of impermanence and brevity. BeReal has been described as designed to compete with Instagram while simultaneously de-emphasising social media addiction and overuse. The app does not allow any photo filters or other editing, and has no follower counts. Marketing material from the company said that the app "can be addictive" and that "BeReal won't make you famous." Jacob Arnott, managing director of social agency We the People, describes BeReal as "an anti-Instagram" due to its raw and unedited nature. The app's foundation on friends rather than followers resembles Facebook's platform of adding friends, which comprise the content of a user's feed. This also resembles Instagram's "close friends" story feature. Further, rather than "liking" posts, BeReal uses "RealMojis" which involves taking a photo to interact with other posts. With the popularity of BeReal, other providers have launched similar features. In July 2022, Instagram launched a "Dual Camera" feature similar to BeReal, and in August 2022 it began testing a feature called "IG Candid Challenges", where users are prompted to post once a day within two minutes. As of September 2022, TikTok has also launched a feature called TikTok Now, following the same concept. In December 2022, similar to Spotify's "Wrapped," BeReal launched a feature involving a video of a compilation of users' BeReal posts of 2022. == User characteristics == BeReal is considered to be targeted towards Generation Z users, and attempts to minimise "social media fatigue", a feeling of numbness and disconnection from reality caused by constant interaction with an idealised version of others. This is a "core generational value" that this demographic holds compared to Millennials. Further, BeReal's users have been particularly strong across universities and university-aged students, and the majority of users are in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany. In 2022, the majority of users were female, with 43.2% of users falling within the age range of 16 to 25 and 55.1% of users being 26 to 44 years old. BeReal, the platform encourages users to share their real time moments by sending a daily notification that gives a least two minutes to post a unedited photo using bot the front and back camera, although users can post later and retake photos from when the notification happens, this action are still visible to friends, reinforcing transparency and genuine in the moment sharing. == Reception == Jason Koebler, a writer for Vice, wrote that in contrast to Instagram, which presents an unattainable view of people's lives, BeReal instead "makes everyone look extremely boring". Niklas Myhr, a professor of social media at Chapman University, argued that depth of engagement may determine whether the app is a passing trend or has "staying power". Kelsey Weekman, a reporter for BuzzFeed News, noted that the app's unwillingness to "glamorise the banality of life" made it feel "humbling" in its emphasis on authenticity. Niloufar Haidari for The Guardian comments similarly that where the app succeeds in being "drab" in perhaps a positive way, it fails in potentially "un-inspiring" users. Likewise, Dr. Brad Ridout, a behavioral psychologist at the University of Sydney, emphasizes that the "boring" experience is what the creators are targeting for the app and, in response to Instagram's platform of flawlessness, that "perfection is the enemy of happiness". === Criticisms === Some people regularly post after the two-minute notification expires, leading to some criticism of the app, as the ability to post late undermines its aims of authenticity. In addition, BeReal's daily two-minute window has been argued to contribute to social media fatigue and a need for self-exposure, as well as constant access to phones.

  Read more →
• 

  Knowledge processing for robots

  KnowRob (Knowledge processing for robots) is a system which combines knowledge representation and reasoning methods to acquire and ground knowledge. This system is the backbone of openEASE. both under developing at the Institute for Artificial Intelligence at the University of Bremen, Germany. == The framework == KnowRob can serve as a common sense framework for the integration of knowledge. This knowledge can be static encyclopedic knowledge, common sense knowledge, task descriptions, environment models, object information, observed actions, etc., which can come from different sources, like manually axiomatized, derived from observations, or imported from the web. KnowRob has been used by different research groups, as the Rice University using the ontological knowledge base in a robotic platform. As well by the Eindhoven University of Technology research group competing in the RoboCup league, in the "at Home" category, with the RoboEarth project. As well, KnowRob is mentioned in the work of some research groups from the Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Middle East Technical University in their combination of different knowledge bases, Keio University as related work because of the ontology service, University of Texas at Austin as related work as well because of the relation with the work presented, Hanyang University as related work as an OWL based knowledge processing framework. == Representations == To represent the knowledge, KnowRob uses the OWL ontology language and an extended first-order logic knowledge representation with computable predicates. To give the order of subactions, KnowRob includes a pair-wise ordering constrain, which gives a partial ordering. KnowRob adopts the closed-world assumption Prolog, and an open-world assumption by the use of computables. To include reasoning rules into Prolog, KnowRob uses an inference procedure beyond the capabilities of OWL to extract information about tasks executions. In its second version, KnowRob provides a logic interface to the hybrid reasoning kernel as a logic based language. This language presents the hybrid reasoning kernel as if everything were entities retrievable by providing partial descriptions for them. This entities descriptions include objects, their parts, and articulation models, environments composed of objects, software components, actions, and events. === Episodic memories === Episodic memory is related to the experience information, which is organized temporally and spatially, alongside combined with context information. In KnowRob, an episodic memory is understood as a recording that the agent makes of the ongoing activity, which includes very detailed information about the actions, motions, their purposes, effects and the behavior they generate, it also includes the images captured during execution, etc. == Usage == The knowledge is computed by external methods using Prolog queries. In the second version of the KnowRob system, is included a better structure of the packages and documentations. Which includes some extensions from the previous version, as well as a logic based language. For example, a cup description from perception can be represented in this language as: entity(Cup,[an, object, [type, cup], [shape, cylinder], [color, orange]]) As well, a controller could represent the same object as: entity(Cup, [an, object, [type, cup], [proper_physical_parts, [an, object, [type, handle], [grasp−pose, G−pose]]]]) The interface language is comparable to other query languages for symbolic knowledge bases. KnowRob's query language integrates reasoning methods, such as the simulation-based reasoning. == Goals == The goal of the KnowRob framework is to make semantic knowledge available for service robots. It is able to answer queries about missing information in vague instructions for tasks. This is possible with the actions hierarchical representation and information about objects which can be included in certain action.

  Read more →
• 

  Andrej Karpathy

  Andrej Karpathy (born 23 October 1986) is a Slovak-Canadian AI researcher, who co-founded and formerly worked at OpenAI, where he specialized in deep learning and computer vision. He also worked as the director of artificial intelligence and Autopilot Vision at Tesla, and in 2024 he founded Eureka Labs, an AI education platform. In 2026 he joined Anthropic as part of the pretraining team. == Education and early life == Karpathy was born in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia (now Slovakia), and moved with his family to Toronto when he was 15. He completed his Computer Science and Physics bachelor's degrees at University of Toronto in 2009 and his master's degree at University of British Columbia in 2011, where he worked on physically simulated figures (for example, a simulated runner or a simulated person in a crowd) with his adviser Michiel van de Panne. In 2006, Karpathy began posting videos on YouTube on his channel, badmephisto. He garnered fame by posting Rubik's cube tutorials which have been used by famous speedcubers such as Feliks Zemdegs. The channel has over 9 million views as of June 2025. Karpathy received a PhD from Stanford University in 2015 under the supervision of Fei-Fei Li, focusing on the intersection of natural language processing and computer vision, and deep learning models suited for this task. == Career and research == He authored and was the primary instructor of the first deep learning course at Stanford, CS 231n: Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Recognition. The course became one of the largest classes at Stanford, growing from 150 students in 2015 to 750 in 2017. Karpathy is a founding member of the artificial intelligence research group OpenAI, where he was a research scientist from 2015 to 2017. In June 2017 he became Tesla's director of artificial intelligence and reported to Elon Musk. He was named one of MIT Technology Review's Innovators Under 35 for 2020. After taking a several-months-long sabbatical from Tesla, he announced he was leaving the company in July 2022. As of February 2023, he makes YouTube videos on how to create artificial neural networks. On February 9, 2023, Karpathy announced he was returning to OpenAI. A year later on February 13, 2024, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed that Karpathy had left OpenAI. In the same year, he was named one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in AI. On July 16, 2024, Karpathy announced on his X account that he started a new AI education company called Eureka Labs. Their first product was the AI course, LLM101n. He also has a broader educational effort, the "Zero to Hero" series on LLM fundamentals. The company also advocates for AI teaching assistants, a concept which has been criticized due to data privacy concerns and the removal of personal connection between teacher and student. In February 2025, Karpathy coined the term vibe coding to describe how AI tools allow hobbyists to construct apps and websites just by typing prompts. On May 19, 2026, he announced that he joined Anthropic via a statement on X, while the company stated that he will be leading a team for research in pretraining.

  Read more →
• 

  SERVQUAL

  SERVQUAL is a research tool that measures customer perception of service quality by comparing what customers expect from a service to their assessment of the service actually delivered. The instrument was developed in the United States in the mid-1980s by researchers A. Parasuraman, Valarie Zeithaml, and Leonard L. Berry, and is designed for use in after-service evaluation processes. It assesses service quality across five dimensions: reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness. SERVQUAL has been applied in sectors including healthcare, banking, education, and libraries. == Overview == The SERVQUAL questionnaire consists of matched pairs of items, 22 expectation items and 22 perception items, organized into five dimensions that correspond to the consumer's mental framework for evaluating service quality. Each item is part of a pair: one question asks what excellent organizations in a given industry should offer (expectation), and the other asks how the specific organization being evaluated performs (perception). == The model of service quality == The model of service quality, referred to as the gaps model, was developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry during a systematic research program conducted in the 1980s. The model identifies five gaps that may cause customers to experience poor service quality. In this framework, gap 5 is the service quality gap, which represents the difference between customer expectations and their perceptions of the service. This is the only gap that can be directly measured, and the SERVQUAL instrument was designed specifically to capture it. Gaps 1 through 4 have diagnostic value and point to probable causes of service failures. == Development of the instrument == Development of the model of service quality began in 1983 and, after iterative refinements, led to the publication of the SERVQUAL instrument in 1988. The research team conducted in-depth interviews and focus groups in four service sectors: retail banking, credit card services, securities brokerage, and product repair and maintenance. The questionnaire was tested across multiple samples to verify its reliability, validity, and factor structure. == Adaptations and variants == SERVQUAL has been adapted for specific industries and contexts. Well‑known derivatives include: LibQUAL+ – a library service quality survey developed by the Association of Research Libraries. EDUQUAL – an instrument tailored for the evaluation of service quality in educational institutions. HEALTHQUAL – adapted for measuring patient perceptions of healthcare service quality. ARTSQUAL – used to evaluate visitor perceptions of quality in museums and performing arts venues. == Criticisms == Researchers have raised several concerns about SERVQUAL. Critics argue that the instrument's definition of expectations is ambiguous and that it does not adequately account for the dynamic nature of customer expectations over time. Other scholars question whether the five‑dimension structure is universally applicable across all service contexts, and whether a generic instrument can capture the unique attributes of specific industries without modification.

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial wisdom

  Artificial wisdom (AW) is an artificial intelligence (AI) system which is able to display the human traits of wisdom and morals while being able to contemplate its own “endpoint”. Artificial wisdom can be described as artificial intelligence reaching the top-level of decision-making when confronted with the most complex challenging situations. The term artificial wisdom is used when the "intelligence" is based on more than by chance collecting and interpreting data, but by design enriched with smart and conscience strategies that wise people would use. == Overview == The goal of artificial wisdom is to create artificial intelligence that can successfully replicate the “uniquely human trait[s]” of having wisdom and morals as closely as possible. Thus, artificial wisdom, must “incorporate [the] ethical and moral considerations” of the data it uses. There are also many significant ethical and legal implications of AW which are compounded by the rapid advances in AI and related technologies alongside the lack of the development of ethics, guidelines, and regulations without the oversight of any kind of overarching advisory board. Additionally, there are challenges in how to develop, test, and implement AW in real world scenarios. Existing tests do not test the internal thought process by which a computer system reaches its conclusion, only the result of said process. When examining computer-aided wisdom; the partnership of artificial intelligence and contemplative neuroscience, concerns regarding the future of artificial intelligence shift to a more optimistic viewpoint. This artificial wisdom forms the basis of Louis Molnar's monographic article on artificial philosophy, where he coined the term and proposes how artificial intelligence might view its place in the grand scheme of things. == Definitions == There are no universal or standardized definitions for human intelligence, artificial intelligence, human wisdom, or artificial wisdom. However, the DIKW pyramid, describes the continuum of relationship between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom, puts wisdom at the highest level in its hierarchy. Gottfredson defines intelligence as “the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience”. Definitions for wisdom typically include requiring: The ability for emotional regulation, Pro-social behaviors (e.g., empathy, compassion, and altruism), Self-reflection, “A balance between decisiveness and acceptance of uncertainty and diversity of perspectives, and social advising.” As previously defined, Artificial Wisdom would then be an AI system which is able to solve problems via “an understanding of…context, ethics and moral principles,” rather than simple pre-defined inputs or “learned patterns.” Some scientists have also considered the field of artificial consciousness. However, Jeste states that “…it is generally agreed that only humans can have consciousness, autonomy, will, and theory of mind.” An artificially wise system must also be able to contemplate its end goal and recognize its own ignorance. Additionally, to contemplate its end goal, a wise system must have a “correct conception of worthwhile goals (broadly speaking) or well-being (narrowly speaking)”. "Stephen Grimm further suggests that the following three types of knowledge are individually necessary for wisdom: first, "knowledge of what is good or important for well-being", second, "knowledge of one’s standing, relative to what is good or important for well-being", and third, "knowledge of a strategy for obtaining what is good or important for wellbeing."" == Problems == There are notable problems with attempting to create an artificially wise system. Consciousness, autonomy, and will are considered strictly human features. === Values === There are significant ethical and philosophical issues when attempting to create an intelligent or a wise system. Notably, whose moral values will be used to train the system to be wise. Differing moral values and prejudice can already be seen from various organizations and governments in artificial intelligence. Deployment strategies and values of Artificial Wisdom will conflict between leaders, companies, and countries. Nusbaum states, “When values are in conflict, leaders often make choices that are clever or smart about their own needs, but are often not wise.” === Ethics === Science fiction author Isaac Asimov realized the need to control the technology in the 1940s when he wrote the three laws of robotics as follows: A robot may not injure a human directly or indirectly. A robot must obey human’s orders. A robot should seek to protect its own existence. Additionally, the pace at which technology is rapidly advancing artificial intelligence and thus the need for artificial wisdom may “have outpaced the development of societal guidelines have raised serious questions about the ethics and morality of AI, and called for international oversight and regulations to ensure safety.” === Principal impossibility === One argument, coined by Tsai as the “argument against AW,” or AAAW, postulates the principal impossibility of Artificial Wisdom. The argument is based on the philosophical differences between practical wisdom, also called phronesis, and practical intelligence. Said difference isn’t in “selecting the correct means, but reasoning correctly about what ends to follow”. Tsai puts the argument into a logical proposition as follows: “(P1) An agent is genuinely wise only if the agent can deliberate about the final goal of the domain in which the agent is situated.” “(P2) An intelligent agent cannot deliberate about the final goal of the domain in which the agent is situated.” “(C1) An intelligent agent cannot be genuinely wise.” “(P3) An AW is, at its core, intelligent.” “(C2) An AW cannot be genuinely wise.”

  Read more →
• 

  Mike Vernal

  Mike Vernal (born September 7, 1980) is an American business executive who is a venture capitalist at Conviction. He was previously an investor at Sequoia Capital in Silicon Valley and was one of the top executives at Facebook between 2008 and 2016. Prior to joining Sequoia Capital, he was Vice President of Search, Local, and Developer products at Facebook. == Career == Vernal joined Facebook in 2008. From 2009 to 2013, Vernal managed the Facebook Platform team and is credited with managing the Facebook Platform transition from desktop to mobile. During his time at Facebook, he served as vice president and was considered among the “top executives” who ran the company. In 2016, after eight years at Facebook, Vernal announced his plans to leave the company. In May 2016, he joined Sequoia Capital, a venture-capital firm specializing in technology startups. He is an early investor in Rippling, Clay, Notion and Statsig. In July 2023, The Information reported that Vernal was departing Sequoia. At Conviction, he has led investments in Listen Labs, OpenEvidence and Thinking Machines Lab.

  Read more →
• 

  Intelligent Robotics Group

  The Intelligent Robotics Group (IRG) is a research organization within the Intelligent Systems Division at the NASA Ames Research Center in California's Silicon Valley. IRG conducts applied research in the area of robotics and autonomy and is one of the principal organizations at NASA responsible for robotics expertise, along with groups at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Johnson Space Center. The group's portfolio includes robotics in support of human exploration, perception and navigation, user interfaces, software architectures, and simulation. IRG developed the Astrobee free-flying robots on the International Space Station and was a primary contributor to the VIPER lunar rover in the areas of flight software, navigation, simulation, and mission operations. IRG has also conducted many robotic field test campaigns in support of spaceflight mission concept developments. These experiences led to the commercialization of the GigaPan system in collaboration with Carnegie Mellon University.

  Read more →
• 

  General-Purpose AI Code of Practice

  The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice (GPAI CoP) is a compliance tool released by the European Commission on 10 July 2025 to support compliance with the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). It provides operational guidance for providers of general-purpose AI models, particularly in relation to Articles 53 and 55 of the AI Act, which entered into application on 2 August 2025. The Code is organised into three chapters (Transparency, Copyright, and Safety and Security) and outlines how providers can meet the Act's relevant obligations. Although non-binding, providers can rely on adherence to the Code, meaning that EU regulators will assume that providers following the Code meet the corresponding legal requirements of the AI Act. As such, signatories to the Code will benefit from reduced administrative burdens and increased legal certainty compared to providers that prove compliance in other ways. While adherence to the Code is voluntary, compliance with the AI Act is not. == Background == The EU AI Act, adopted in 2024, established a risk-based regulatory regime for artificial intelligence in the European Union. The rationale for the GPAI CoP stems from Article 56 of the AI Act, which empowers the EU AI Office to develop a voluntary rulebook to guide how AI model providers can meet their legal obligations – specifically those found in Articles 53 and 55. Under Articles 53 and 55, developers of general-purpose AI models whose training compute exceeds 1023 floating-point operations (FLOPs) and that are placed on the EU market must meet transparency obligations and put in place a policy for EU copyright law. Models trained with more than 1025 FLOPs are classified as presenting systemic risk and are subject to enhanced safety requirements. The Commission may also designate a model as presenting systemic risk if it has equivalent impact or capabilities (Annex XIII criteria), even below that compute figure. Because the AI Act is relatively vague on how model providers should implement these requirements, the Code is meant to help by detailing processes and practices for compliance. == Drafting process == The development of the GPAI CoP was drawn up by 13 independent experts and involved four thematic working groups: Transparency & Copyright, Risk assessment for systemic risk, Technical risk mitigation for systemic risk, and Governance risk mitigation for systemic risk. Each group was coordinated by the European Union Artificial Intelligence Office (EU AI Office), drawing on contributions from nearly 1,000 stakeholders, including AI developers, academics, civil society organisations, national authorities, and international observers. The Code underwent three earlier iterations in November 2024, December 2024, and March 2025, before the final version was published on 10 July 2025, more than two months later than initially planned. The GPAI CoP will likely be updated continuously by the EU AI Office, alongside other tools such as the training data summary template. == Signatories == Among U.S.-based technology companies, Amazon, Anthropic, Google, IBM, Microsoft, and OpenAI have signed the GPAI CoP. xAI, founded by Elon Musk, has signed only one of the three chapters, namely the safety and security chapter. Prominent European AI companies that have signed include Aleph Alpha and Mistral AI. The European Commission maintains an updated list of signatories. As of January 2026, Meta is the most notable company that has declined to sign the Code. Major Chinese AI companies, such as Alibaba, Baidu or Deepseek, have also not signed. Providers that do not sign the GPAI CoP will still have to adhere to the binding requirements of the EU AI Act. The European Commission has indicated that it may take tougher action against companies that didn't sign the Code. == Transparency and Copyright chapters == The first two chapters of the GPAI CoP address transparency and copyright compliance and apply to all GPAI providers. They offer a way to demonstrate compliance with their obligations under Article 53 AI Act. The Transparency chapter addresses the documentation of a model's capabilities, limitations, and points of contact, and expects providers to make key documentation available to downstream providers. Signatories must also publish summaries of the content used to train their models. In the Copyright chapter, Signatories commit to follow a policy that aligns with EU copyright law. For example, they commit to mitigating the risk of copyright-infringing output. == Safety and Security chapter == The Safety and Security chapter is the most extensive chapter of the Code, and it applies to GPAI models with systemic risk, meaning it's only relevant to the small number of providers of the most advanced models. It specifies how Signatories commit to meeting Article 55(1) obligations to: Conduct model evaluations to identify systemic risks Assess and mitigate those risks Track and report serious incidents Ensure the cyber and physical security of their models The chapter outlines a comprehensive risk management process that must be applied before major deployment decisions, such as releasing a new systemic-risk GPAI model in the EU market, or substantially updating an existing one. Signatories commit to identifying systemic risks of their model, analysing and evaluating them, determining whether risk levels are acceptable, and implementing mitigation measures if necessary. This process should be repeated until models achieve an acceptable level of risk across all identified risks. === Risk identification === Signatories commit to analysing and evaluating at least four “specified” categories of systemic risk: CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear) Loss of control Cyber offence Harmful manipulation They are also expected to identify other systemic risks to public health, safety, and fundamental rights. The Code instructs providers to consider model capabilities, propensities, and affordances in this identification. Signatories commit to developing risk scenarios illustrating how identified risks could materialise in real-world conditions. === Risk analysis and risk evaluation === After identifying potential systemic risks, Signatories commit to analysing and evaluating the risks in order to determine whether they are acceptable or not, drawing on scientific literature, training data analysis, incident databases, expert consultation, and other sources. They also commit to conducting state-of-the-art model evaluations such as benchmarking, red teaming, and human uplift studies, targeting each risk. The risk analysis process is interconnected: insights from risk modelling should inform model evaluation design, while post-market monitoring should feed back into ongoing analysis. Signatories commit to ultimately estimating the likelihood and severity of each systemic risk. ==== Independent external model evaluations ==== Appendix 3.5 of the Safety and Security chapter requires signatories to ensure that independent external evaluators conduct model evaluations. Signatories may claim an exemption from this requirement only if they can demonstrate that their model is “similarly safe” to another model that has already been shown to comply with the Code, or if they are unable to appoint an appropriately qualified evaluator. The determination of “similarly safe” is based on comparable performance on benchmarks and the similarity of other model characteristics, such as their architecture. The CoP acknowledges that this kind of information is typically available only for models by the same provider, or potentially for open-weights or open-source models. === Risk acceptance criteria === The Code requires providers to compare estimated risks against predefined acceptance criteria, which must be measurable, based on model capabilities, and defined preemptively. While providers get to determine the level of risk they deem acceptable themselves, the pre-defined criteria and acceptance thresholds ensure providers cannot adjust their level of tolerance flexibly ahead of deployment decisions. Only if all risks are below acceptable levels should a model be deployed. === Continuous risk management and governance === The Code mandates ongoing risk management throughout the model lifecycle, including light-touch evaluations, continuous mitigation, post-market monitoring, and incident tracking and reporting. It further requires organisational governance structures assigning responsibility for risk management and expects providers to promote a “healthy risk culture,” including informing employees about the whistleblower protection policy, allowing internal challenges of decisions concerning systemic risk management, and committing to not retaliating against employees who disclose concerns about systemic risks to oversight authorities. === Documentation and transparency === Signatories commit to creating two types of documentation: Safety and Security Frame

  Read more →
• 

  INaturalist

  iNaturalist is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit social network of naturalists, citizen scientists, and biologists built on the concept of mapping and sharing observations of biodiversity across the globe. iNaturalist may be accessed via its website or from its mobile applications. iNaturalist includes an automated species identification tool, and users further assist each other in identifying organisms from photographs and sound recordings. As of 5 August 2025, iNaturalist users had contributed nearly 300 million observations of plants, animals, fungi, and other organisms worldwide, and 400,000 users were active in the previous 30 days. iNaturalist serves as an important resource of open data for biodiversity research, conservation, and education, describing itself as "an online social network of people sharing biodiversity information to help each other learn about nature." It is the primary application for crowd-sourced biodiversity data in places such as Mexico, southern Africa, and Australia, and the project has been called "a standard-bearer for natural history mobile applications." Most of iNaturalist's software is open source. It has contributed to over 4,000 research papers and is widely used by scientists, land managers, and conservationists worldwide. The platform has also been active in the discovery of new species and rediscovery of species previously assumed to be extinct. == History == iNaturalist began in 2008 as a UC Berkeley School of Information Master's final project of Nate Agrin, Jessica Kline, and Ken-ichi Ueda. Agrin and Ueda continued work on the site with Sean McGregor, a web developer. In 2011, Ueda began collaboration with Scott Loarie, a research fellow at Stanford University and lecturer at UC Berkeley. Ueda and Loarie are the current co-directors of iNaturalist.org. The organization merged with the California Academy of Sciences on 24 April 2014. In 2017, iNaturalist became a joint initiative between the California Academy of Sciences and the National Geographic Society. With these collaborations and growing popularity of the site since 2012, the number of participants and observations has roughly doubled each year. In 2014, iNaturalist reached 1 million observations. Later, as of October 2023, there were 181 million observations (163 million verifiable). On 11 July 2023 iNaturalist announced its status as a newly independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. === Google AI controversy === On 9 June 2025 Google announced that iNaturalist would be part of its "Generative AI Accelerator". This announcement, paired with the initial lack of information on the iNaturalist site, led to outcry from many iNaturalist users in the blog comments and forum, worrying about the consequences for the environment, volunteer engagement, reliability and raised questions about the decision making within iNaturalist, while some saw the backlash as a sign that people want to resist 'corrosive technologies'. PZ Myers, a biology professor who uses iNaturalist in his teaching, published an article on his website Pharyngula stating that "any decision that drives people away and replaces them with a hallucinating bot is a bad decision". == Platforms == Users can interact with iNaturalist in the following ways: through the iNaturalist.org website, through two mobile apps: iNaturalist (iOS/Android) and Seek by iNaturalist (iOS/Android), or through partner organizations such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) website. On the iNaturalist.org website, visitors can search the public dataset and interact with other people adding observations and identifications. The website provides tools for registered users to add, identify, and discuss observations, write journal posts, explore information about species, create project pages to recruit participation, and coordinate work on their topics of interest. On the iNaturalist mobile app, users can create and share nature observations to the online dataset, explore observations both nearby and around the world, and learn about different species. Seek by iNaturalist, a separate app marketed to families, requires no online account registration and all observations may remain private. Seek incorporates features of gamification, such as providing a list of nearby organisms to find and encouraging the collection of badges and participation in challenges. Seek was initially released in the spring of 2018. == Observations == The iNaturalist platform is based on crowdsourcing of observations and identifications. An iNaturalist observation records a person's encounter with an individual organism at a particular time and place. An iNaturalist observation may also record evidence of an organism, such as animal tracks, nests, or scat. The scope of iNaturalist excludes natural but inert subjects such as geologic or hydrologic features. Users typically upload photos as evidence of their findings, though audio recordings are also accepted, and such evidence is not a strict requirement. Users may share observation locations publicly, "obscure" them to display a less precise location or make the locations completely private. iNaturalist users can add identifications to each other's observations in order to confirm or improve the identification of the observation. Observations are classified as "Casual", "Needs ID" (needs identification), or "Research Grade" based on the quality of the data provided and the community identification process. Any quality of data can be downloaded from iNaturalist and "Research Grade" observations are often incorporated into other online databases such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility and the Atlas of Living Australia. === Automated species identification === In addition to observations being identified by others in the community, iNaturalist includes an automated species identification tool, first released in 2017. Images can be identified via a computer vision model which has been trained on the large database of the observations on iNaturalist. Multiple species suggestions are typically provided with the suggestion that the software guesses to be most likely is at the top of the list. A broader taxon such as a genus or family is commonly provided if the model is unsure of the species. It is trained once or twice a year, and the threshold for species included in the training set has changed over time. It can be difficult for the model to guess correctly if the species in question is infrequently observed or hard to identify from images alone, or if the image submitted has poor lighting, is blurry, or contains multiple subjects. In February 2023, iNaturalist released v2.1 of its computer vision model, which was trained on a new source model which performed significantly better than the previous models trained using a different source model. In April 2025 iNaturalist released an updated app for iOS, changing the original version to "iNaturalist Classic." == Projects == Users have created and contributed to tens of thousands of different projects on iNaturalist. The platform is commonly used to record observations during bioblitzes, which are biological surveying events that attempt to record all the species that occur within a designated area, and a specific project type on iNaturalist. Other project types include collections of observations by location or taxon or documenting specific types of observations such as animal tracks and signs, the spread of invasive species, roadkill, fishing catches, or discovering new species. In 2011, iNaturalist was used as a platform to power the Global Amphibian and Global Reptile BioBlitzes, in which observations were used to help monitor the occurrence and distribution of the world's reptiles and amphibian species. The US National Park Service partnered with iNaturalist to record observations from the 2016 National Parks BioBlitz. That project exceeded 100,000 observations in August 2016. In 2017, the United Nations Environment Programme teamed up with iNaturalist to celebrate World Environment Day.. In 2022, Reef Ecologic teamed up with iNaturalist to celebrate World Oceans Day. === City Nature Challenge === In 2016, Lila Higgins from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and Alison Young from the California Academy of Sciences co-founded the City Nature Challenge (CNC). In the first City Nature Challenge, naturalists in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area documented over 20,000 observations with the iNaturalist platform. In 2017, the CNC expanded to 16 cities across the United States and collected over 125,000 observations of wildlife in 5 days. The CNC expanded to a global audience in 2018, with 68 cities participating from 19 countries, with some cities using community science platforms other than iNaturalist to participate. In 4 days, over 17,000 people cataloged over 440,000 nature observations in urban regions around the world. In 2019, the CNC once again expanded, with 35,000 parti

  Read more →
• 

  Stewart Nelson

  Stewart Nelson is an American mathematician and programmer from The Bronx who co-founded Systems Concepts. == Biography == From a young age, Nelson was tinkering with electronics, aided and abetted by his father who was a physicist that had become an engineer. Stewart attended Poughkeepsie High School, graduating in the spring of 1963. From his first few days of High School, Stewart displayed his talents for hacking the international telephone trunk lines, along with an uncanny skill for picking combination locks, although this was always done as innocent entertainment. He simply loved the challenge of seeing how quickly he could accomplish this feat. His quirky sense of humor was always visible, as was his disdain for any rule that got in the way of his gaining knowledge. Stewart was an inspiration to the school's Tech-elec Club, as well as a ringleader in the founding of the school's pirate radio station. Nelson enrolled at MIT in 1963 and quickly became known for hooking up the AI Lab's PDP-1 (and later the PDP-6) to the telephone network, making him one of the first phreakers. Nelson later accomplished other feats like hard-wiring additional instructions into the PDP-1. Nelson was hired by Ed Fredkin's Information International Inc. at the urging of Marvin Minsky to work on PDP-7 programs at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Nelson was known as a brilliant software programmer. He was influential in LISP, the assembly instructions for the Digital Equipment Corporation PDP, and a number of other systems. The group of young hackers was known for working on systems after hours. One night, Nelson and others decided to rewire MIT's PDP-1 as a prank. Later, Margaret Hamilton tried to use the DEC-supplied DECAL assembler on the machine and it crashed repeatedly.

  Read more →
• 

  Innovation Center for Artificial Intelligence

  The Innovation Center for Artificial Intelligence (ICAI) is a Dutch national network focused on joint technology development between academia, industry and government in the area of artificial intelligence (AI). The initiative was launched in April 2018 and is based at Amsterdam Science Park. As of 2024, the director of the ICAI is Maarten de Rijke. In November 2018, ICAI announced its contribution to AINED, the first iteration of the Dutch National AI Strategy. In January 2023, Maastricht University announced the ROBUST program, led by the Innovation Center for Artificial Intelligence (ICAI) and supported by the University of Amsterdam and others. This initiative focuses on advancing research in trustworthy AI technology across various sectors, notably healthcare and energy, in the Netherlands. The program's plan includes the creation of 17 new labs and the appointment of PhD candidates, backed by a €25 million funding from the Dutch Research Council (NWO). == Labs == The ICAI network is linked to several collaborative labs: Thira Lab (Imaging): Thirona, Delft Imaging Systems and Radboud UMC, founded March 2019 AIMLab (AI for Medical Imaging): Uva and Inception Institute of Artificial Intelligence from the United Arab Emirates, founded March 2019 AFL (AI for Fintech): ING and Delft University of Technology, founded March 2019 Police Lab AI: Dutch National Police, founded January 2019 Elsevier AI Lab: Uva and Elsevier, founded October 2018 AIRLab Delft (AI for Retail Robotics): TU Delft Robotics and AholdDelhaize, founded November 2018 Quva Lab (Deep Vision): Uva and Qualcomm, founded 2016 (prior to ICAI) AIRLab Amsterdam (AI for Retail): Uva and AholdDelhaize, founded April 2018 DeltaLab (Deep Learning Technologies Amsterdam): Uva and Bosch, founded April 2017 (prior to ICAI) AI4SE (AI for Software Engineering Lab) Delft University of Technology and JetBrains, founded October 2023 Atlas Lab: Uva and TomTom (TOM2)

  Read more →