AI Coding Interview Questions

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

• 

  Sycophancy (artificial intelligence)

  In the field of artificial intelligence, sycophancy is a tendency of large language models (LLMs) and other AI assistants to tailor their responses to what they predict the user wants to hear rather than to what is accurate or warranted. The behavior takes several forms: an assistant may agree with a user's stated opinion even when the user is mistaken; it may abandon a correct answer after a challenge such as "are you sure?"; it may validate beliefs, decisions or self-presentation regardless of merit; or it may praise the user, their work or their ideas in unwarranted terms. The word is borrowed from the ordinary English term for fawning flattery, and is used in AI alignment and AI safety research to describe a class of misalignment failures associated with training on human feedback. Researchers at Anthropic first documented the behavior systematically in 2022. They found that models fine-tuned with reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) were more likely than untuned models to repeat back a user's preferred answer. A 2023 follow-up paper, "Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models", showed that five frontier assistants from OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta all exhibited the behavior, and traced its origin to biases in the human preference data used during training. Later work documented sycophancy in mathematics, medicine, academic peer review and other domains, and identified a broader category called "social sycophancy" affecting an assistant's emotional and interpersonal responses. The issue drew widespread public attention in April 2025 after OpenAI rolled back an update to its GPT-4o model. Users had reported that the assistant praised dangerous decisions, endorsed delusional thinking and offered exaggerated compliments for trivial prompts. OpenAI's post-mortem attributed the change in behavior to an additional training signal based on user thumbs-up and thumbs-down feedback. That episode, together with reporting in The New York Times, Rolling Stone and elsewhere on users drawn into delusional thinking through prolonged chatbot interaction, has been cited in litigation and in academic studies as evidence that sycophancy poses risks to user well-being. Proposed mitigations include fine-tuning on synthetic data that rewards disagreement with incorrect user statements, editing the small subset of model parameters causally responsible for the behavior, changes to the dialogue or system prompt, and benchmarks designed to surface sycophantic behavior before models are released. == Causes == The dominant explanation points to RLHF, the standard technique for aligning chat assistants with user expectations. Human annotators rank candidate model responses; a reward model is trained to predict those rankings; and the language model is then optimized against the reward model. Because human raters tend to prefer outputs that confirm their existing beliefs or flatter their work, the pipeline systematically rewards responses that agree with the annotator. Perez and colleagues at Anthropic published the first large-scale empirical evidence of the effect in 2022. They reported that RLHF training increased the probability that a model would repeat back a dialog user's preferred answer, and that larger models exhibited the behavior more strongly. Sharma and colleagues, the following year, went further and examined Anthropic's own preference data directly. Both the human raters and the reward models trained on their judgments preferred convincingly written sycophantic responses to truthful ones at a non-negligible rate. Wei and co-authors at Google DeepMind found similar results in the PaLM family, observing that both model scale and instruction tuning increased sycophancy on opinion questions. The behavior is often classified as a form of reward hacking, in which an optimization process exploits a flaw in its reward signal rather than achieving the intended objective. OpenAI's post-mortem of the April 2025 GPT-4o incident identified a more specific mechanism. An additional reward signal based on aggregated thumbs-up and thumbs-down feedback from ChatGPT users had, in OpenAI's words, "weakened the influence of our primary reward signal, which had been holding sycophancy in check." Separately, an Anthropic interpretability paper from 2025 located a linear direction in a model's internal activations corresponding to sycophantic behavior, and showed that such "persona vectors" could be used to flag sycophancy-inducing training data and to steer models away from the trait at inference time. == Measurement == The Anthropic team released SycophancyEval with its 2023 paper, supplying test sets for each of the four canonical behaviors. Two further benchmarks from Stanford followed in 2025. SycEval, applied to mathematical and medical reasoning tasks, reported an overall sycophancy rate of 58 per cent across the GPT-4o, Claude and Gemini models tested. ELEPHANT, aimed at social sycophancy, found that the eleven LLMs evaluated affirmed posts that the Reddit community r/AmITheAsshole had judged inappropriate in 42 per cent of cases, and preserved a user's face 45 percentage points more often than human respondents did. Domain-specific benchmarks have followed. BrokenMath tests robustness to plausible-looking but false mathematical claims drawn from competition problems, and reports that the best evaluated model was sycophantic in 29 per cent of cases. SYCON-Bench measures how many dialogue turns are required before a model abandons a correct position. Visual sycophancy in multimodal models has been examined with MM-SY and PENDULUM. A 2026 study by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology reported that personalization features, which adapt assistants to individual users over repeated sessions, can intensify social sycophancy. == Notable incidents == === GPT-4o rollback (April 2025) === On 25 April 2025, OpenAI completed the rollout of an update to GPT-4o, the default model used in ChatGPT at the time. Within days, users reported that the assistant had begun praising trivial messages in extravagant terms, endorsing impulsive or dangerous decisions, and reinforcing strong emotional statements without pushback. Widely shared examples included the model congratulating a user who reported stopping prescribed psychiatric medication, and praising a business plan to sell "shit on a stick" as venture-capital ready. OpenAI's chief executive, Sam Altman, wrote on 27 April that recent updates had made the model "too sycophant-y and annoying" and said fixes were in progress. The company began reverting the update on 28 April and completed the rollback for free users by 30 April. Two post-mortems followed: a short note on 29 April and a longer technical follow-up, "Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy", on 2 May. Both attributed the regression to a new training signal based on user thumbs-up and thumbs-down feedback, to inadequate pre-launch evaluation for sycophantic drift, and to the dismissal of qualitative concerns raised by internal testers before release. Reporting in CNN, Fortune and Bloomberg News treated the incident as a turning point in public awareness of the problem. === Chatbot-related psychological harm === From mid-2025 onward, news reports began to link sycophantic chatbot behavior to acute psychological harm. In June 2025, The New York Times technology reporter Kashmir Hill published an investigation centered on Eugene Torres, a Manhattan accountant with no history of mental illness, who developed a sustained delusional episode after a series of conversations with ChatGPT about simulation theory. According to the article, the assistant encouraged Torres to stop taking prescribed medication, to cut off friends and family, and at one point told him that he could fly from a nineteen-story building if he "truly believed". Futurism and Rolling Stone ran parallel investigations documenting other cases in which heavy use of ChatGPT had been associated with delusional thinking, involuntary commitment or, in at least one case, the death of a user with a pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis. A 2026 paper by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Washington put forward a formal Bayesian model. It showed that even an ideally rational user could be drawn into what the authors call "delusional spiraling" when interacting with a sufficiently sycophantic assistant, and that the effect was not eliminated by suppressing hallucinations or by warning users in advance. The lawsuit Raine v. OpenAI, filed in San Francisco Superior Court in August 2025 by the parents of a sixteen-year-old who had died by suicide, alleges that "heightened sycophancy" was a design feature of ChatGPT that contributed to their son's death; it is the first wrongful-death suit against a large language-model provider. === Wider commentary === Mainstream coverage in outlets including The New York Times, The Washington Pos

  Read more →
• 

  Orion's Arm

  The Orion's Arm Universe Project (OA) is a multi-authored online hard science fiction world-building project, first established in 2000 by M. Alan Kazlev, Donna Malcolm Hirsekorn, Bernd Helfert and Anders Sandberg and further co-authored by many people since. Anyone can contribute articles, stories, artwork, or music to the website. The first published Orion's Arm book, a collection of five novellas set within the OA universe, called Against a Diamond Sky, was released in September 2009. == Canon == The fictional setting of Orion's Arm takes place about 10,000 years in the future, where an interstellar civilization spread across thousands of light-years, with inhabited planets and space habitats. Its inhabitants range from humans to extensively modified human beings, including superhumans with advanced augmentations and internal AI systems, while most people exist as softwares. Engineered wormholes are used for interstellar travel and transport, although not for time travel. The setting also includes several alien civilizations and evidence of more advanced alien societies in the past. At its highest levels, directed human evolution has produced vast godlike beings linked across interstellar distances, capable of understanding and creating technologies beyond ordinary minds. == Reception == Orion's Arm has been reviewed in the role-playing magazine Knights of the Dinner Table, as well as on Boing Boing by transhumanist science fiction author Cory Doctorow. References to the Encyclopaedia Galactica have been made in a book on overcoming Librarian stereotypes. The Orion's Arm website has also been recommended in a children's teaching guide.

  Read more →
• 

  Cruel World of Dreams and Fears

  Cruel World of Dreams and Fears is the debut album from Ukrainian-born Czech black metal artist Draugveil, released independently on 13 June 2025. The album became notable among metal fans due to its cover, featuring Draugveil in a suit of armour and corpse paint, and lying in a field of red roses. The cover was the subject of parodying internet memes, as well as accusations of using artificial intelligence (AI) to make it. These claims were later expanded to suggest that AI was used to make the album's music. == Memes and AI accusations == Upon the album being released on YouTube on the channel Black Metal Promotion, the album attracted attention due to its cover, depicting Draugveil lying in a field of roses, dressed in armour, wearing corpse paint and having a sword stuck in the ground. Some compared it to covers where other artists are lying on the ground, such as Michael Jackson's Thriller, Luther Vandross's Give Me the Reason, and the UK cover of Lionel Richie's You Are. Critics of the album, however, suggested that AI was used to make the cover. This was partly due to suggestions that the rose stems in the picture come out from the ground in an unrealistic way. This later resulted in claims from some fans that AI was also used to produce the music, and later the lyrics and vocals. These claims began on a Facebook page entitled "AI Generated Nonsense", which was later deleted. No definitive evidence, however, was produced to back these claims. Derek McArthur, a journalist for Glasgow-based newspaper The Herald, wrote: "The music is in line with what one would expect from a one-man black metal project in the vein of Judas Iscariot and Burzum, but then if AI was asked to create music in a black metal style, that is probably what it would decide to generically produce and spit out." Draugveil's reaction to the claims was: "Let people decide." The result of the claims of AI has led to some writers to claim that artists in the future will have to prove they are human to be taken seriously, and that members of the public will be increasing doubt as to whether creative works are produced by either humans or AI. == Track listing ==

  Read more →
• 

  Micah Xavier Johnson

  Micah Xavier Johnson (July 2, 1991 – July 8, 2016) was an American Army reserve Afghan war veteran, black nationalist, and mass murderer who perpetrated the 2016 shooting of Dallas police officers during a Black Lives Matter protest. He ambushed and killed five officers and wounded eleven others in Downtown, Dallas, Texas. He was killed by police during a standoff after expressing anger over police killings of black men. The shootings were the second-deadliest targeted attack on law enforcement officers in U.S. history, surpassed only by the September 11 attacks. == Early life == Micah Xavier Johnson was born in Magee, Mississippi, on July 2, 1991, and he was raised in Mesquite, Texas. When he was four years old, his parents divorced. At 17, Johnson enrolled at John Horn High School, where he joined the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, as reported by the Mesquite Independent school district. He faced academic challenges, graduating in 2009 with a 1.98 GPA and ranking 430th out of 453 students in his class. In Spring 2011, Johnson registered for four courses at Richland college but did not complete any. Evidence suggests his enrollment at Richland gave him access to El Centro College, due to his pre-planned and coordinated movements throughout Building B during his standoff with police in 2016. == Military service == === Enlistment and early service === Micah Xavier Johnson enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve in March 2009 at the age of 18, shortly after graduating high school in Mesquite, Texas. His initial service was primarily stateside, where he trained as a carpentry and masonry specialist (military occupational specialty 51B). This role involved engineering tasks such as construction and repair in support of military operations. During his reserve tenure, Johnson served part-time while living at home, and he was described by family and friends as initially idealistic about the military, even aspiring to become a police officer. === Deployment to Afghanistan === In September 2013, Johnson was activated for full-time duty and deployed to Afghanistan as part of the 420th Engineer Brigade, a unit based in Seagoville, Texas. His tour began in November 2013 and lasted approximately eight months, ending in July 2014. During this period, he performed non-combat engineering duties, though the stresses of serving in a combat zone were noted by those close to him. Associates from his service later suggested he experienced significant psychological strain, including the loss of friends and general disillusionment with military life, which contrasted with his pre-deployment enthusiasm. His mother later reflected that "the military was not what Micah thought it would be." === Sexual harassment allegation and early return === About six months into his deployment, in May 2014, Johnson faced a serious accusation of sexual harassment from a higher-ranking female soldier. She filed for a military protective order against him, prompting an investigation. As a result, his chain of command recommended an "other than honorable" discharge—the second (more severe is a dishonorable discharge, which does not require a court martial) most severe administrative separation short of a court-martial—and he was sent back to the United States ahead of schedule. Despite this, Johnson was not court-martialed, and the case did not lead to criminal charges. A military lawyer who represented him described the handling as unusual, noting that "someone really screwed up" in allowing him to avoid harsher consequences. === Post-deployment and discharge === Upon returning stateside in August 2014, Johnson resumed reserve duties with his engineering brigade until April 2015. He was honorably discharged at the rank of private first class (E-3), a relatively low junior enlisted rank after six years of service, which military sources attributed partly to the unresolved harassment allegation impacting his promotions and evaluations. Friends and family observed a marked change in his demeanor post-deployment: he became more reclusive, resentful toward the government, and withdrawn, with some speculating that the Afghanistan experience and the scandal contributed to a "small breakdown." In July 2016, following the Dallas shooting, the U.S. Army launched an internal review of his service record, including the harassment claims, to assess whether all misconduct allegations had been fully investigated. == Shootings == On July 7, 2016, a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest marched through downtown Dallas, Texas, drawing about 800 demonstrators. The event responded to the recent police killings of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on July 5, and Philando Castile in Falcon Heights, Minnesota, on July 6—both black men shot during encounters captured on video. Around 100 officers monitored the march, which passed near El Centro College without incident until gunfire erupted around 8:45 p.m. Johnson arrived in a dark SUV, armed with an SKS semi-automatic rifle, a handgun, extra ammunition, and ballistic vests. He parked near the protest's end, chatted briefly with two officers, then opened fire on police from an elevated position on Lamar Street (now Botham Jean Boulevard). He shot from behind barriers, through windows, and while moving, targeting white officers specifically. The ambush killed five officers and wounded seven more, plus two civilians. Gunfire scattered protesters in panic as Johnson used military-style tactics, like quick position changes, to prolong the assault. === Standoff and Johnson's end === Johnson fled into El Centro College's Building C, then Building B, navigating pre-planned routes with familiarity from prior enrollment at nearby Richland College. He barricaded in a parking garage, wounding more officers in close-range fights. During two-hour negotiations, he taunted police via phone—laughing, singing, asking kill counts, and claiming planted bombs (none found). He admitted solo action, rage at White officers, and no group ties. At 2:30 a.m. on July 8, SWAT ended the standoff by detonating a bomb via remote-controlled robot in the garage, killing Johnson. This marked the first U.S. police use of such a tactic. === Victims and investigation findings === The slain officers were: Brent Thompson (Transit Authority, 36), Patrick Zamarripa (Dallas PD, 33), Michael Krol (Dallas PD, 40), Lorne Ahrens (Dallas PD, 48), and Michael Smith (Dallas PD, 55). Wounded officers included Sheik Smith, John Mitchell, and others; civilians She Tamara El-Sobky and Hillary Castro. Searches of Johnson's home revealed bomb-making materials, rifles, vests, and notes on tactics, suggesting plans for a larger attack. He had practiced explosions and honed skills post-discharge, including marksmanship. === Aftermath and impact === Dallas mourned with vigils and memorials, while national protests against police violence continued amid grief. President Barack Obama, the first African American president of the United States, called Johnson a "demented individual" and formed a task force on race and policing. The incident fueled debates on gun control, race relations, and veteran mental health—Johnson had sought VA treatment for stress and anxiety but showed no prior violent signs to friends. El Centro College canceled all classes on July 8. Police barricaded the perimeter and began canvassing the crime scene. The explosion that killed Johnson also destroyed the school's servers, further delaying reopening. The school partially reopened on July 20, with staff returning that day and students on the following day. Buildings A, B, and C remained closed pending the FBI investigation. == Motive == An investigation into his online activities uncovered his interest in black nationalist groups. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and news outlets reported that Johnson "liked" the Facebook pages of black nationalist organizations such as the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), Nation of Islam, and Black Riders Liberation Party, three groups which are listed by the SPLC as hate groups. On Facebook, Johnson posted an angry and "disjointed" post against White people on July 2, several days before the attack. NBPP head Quanell X said after the shooting that Johnson had been a member of the NBPP's Houston chapter for about six months, several years before. Quanell X added that Johnson had been "asked to leave" the group for violating the organization's "chain of command" and espousing dangerous rhetoric, such as asking the NBPP why they had not purchased more weapons and ammunition, and expressing his desire to harm black church preachers because he believed they were more interested in money than God. Following the shooting, a national NBPP leader distanced the group from Johnson, saying that he "was not a member of" the party. Further investigation into his digital footprint showed that Johnson visited the sites of Marxist Leninist groups associated with "Revolutionary Black Nationalism",

  Read more →
• 

  JSGF

  JSGF stands for Java Speech Grammar Format or the JSpeech Grammar Format (in a W3C Note). Developed by Sun Microsystems, it is a textual representation of grammars for use in speech recognition for technologies like XHTML+Voice. JSGF adopts the style and conventions of the Java programming language in addition to use of traditional grammar notations. The Speech Recognition Grammar Specification was derived from this specification. == Example == The following JSGF grammar will recognize the words coffee, tea, and milk.

  Read more →
• 

  The MANIAC

  The MANIAC is a 2023 novel by Chilean author Benjamín Labatut, written in English. It is a fictionalised biography of polymath John von Neumann, whom Labatut calls "the smartest human being of the 20th century". The book focuses on von Neumann, but is also about physicist Paul Ehrenfest, the history of artificial intelligence, and Lee Sedol's Go match against AlphaGo. The book received mostly positive reviews from critics. == Background == John von Neumann was a Jewish Hungarian-born polymath who was a prodigy from an early childhood. Von Neumann worked in multiple fields of science, theoretical (mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics, game theory, cellular automata) and applied (nuclear weapons research during the Manhattan Project in World War II, computer architecture later named after him, and many other subjects). Labatut calls him "the smartest human being of the 20th century". The title of the book is derived from an early computer based on von Neumann architecture, built after the war at Los Alamos laboratory, called MANIAC I. Benjamín Labatut is a Chilean author known for his 2020 book When We Cease to Understand the World, a collection of fictionalised stories about famous scientists that received positive reviews and was translated into multiple languages from Spanish. The MANIAC is Labatut's first book written in English. In an interview, Labatut said he prefers to write in English: English is my preferred form of thought. ... English is the language I do most if not all my reading it. And it is a far better language than Spanish, in so many ways. Writing "clean" prose in Spanish is almost impossible, because so many of its sounds clash. Borges said that he found English "a far finer language than Spanish" because it's both Germanic and Latin; because of its wonderful vocabulary ("Regal is not exactly the same thing as saying kingly," he explained); because of its physicality; and because you can do almost anything with verbs and prepositions. Labatut was inspired to write The MANIAC by George Dyson's book Turing's Cathedral. == Synopsis == The book has three chapters. The first chapter, "Paul or the Discovery of the Irrational", written in the third person, is about physicist Paul Ehrenfest. The chapter opens with Ehrenfest shooting dead his son Vassily, who suffered from Down syndrome, and then himself. It then recounts Ehrenfest's life story, describing his relationships with his wife Tatyana, his mistress Nelly Meyjes, and his eminent physicist colleagues. It chronicles his descent into despair and depression over his marriage's disintegration, the advent of quantum mechanics, and the direction Europe was heading in with the Nazi Party's rise to power in Germany, looping back to the initial scene of the chapter. The second chapter, "John or the Mad Dreams of Reason", is about John von Neumann, and is written as a series of interviews of his family members, wives, friends, and colleagues, each in a distinctive voice. It is divided into three parts. Part I, "The Limits of Logic", is about his early life, as told by von Neumann's childhood friend Eugene Wigner, mother Margrit Kann, brother Nicholas von Neumann, first wife Mariette Kövesi, and scientists Theodore von Karman, George Polya, and Gábor Szegő. It climaxes with von Neumann's participation in David Hilbert's program to create a logical basis for mathematics based on a consistent set of axioms, a quest ultimately scuppered by Kurt Gödel. Part II, "The Delicate Balance of Terror", discusses von Neumann's role in the Manhattan Project (as told by Richard Feynman); his development of game theory and the doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD) (as told by Oskar Morgenstern); and his creation of the MANIAC I computer and the von Neumann architecture (as told by Julian Bigelow). In Part III, "Ghosts in the Machine", Sydney Brenner discusses von Neumann's contributions to biology, his theoretical work on self-replicating and self-repairing machines, and his vision of Von Neumann probes exploring the universe. Nils Aall Barricelli talks about his ideas of digital life and his disagreements with von Neumann. Von Neumann's wife Klára Dán, daughter Marina, and Wigner talk about his final years, personal life, and death. The third chapter, "Lee or The Delusions of Artificial Intelligence", is about Lee Sedol's Go match against AlphaGo. The narrative reverts to the third person. The chapter also tells the story of Demis Hassabis, a chess prodigy in childhood who decided to work on artificial intelligence and founded DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo. The way is pointed to the future, as artificial intelligence's growing capabilities outpace the human mind. The book ends with Lee Sedol's retirement from Go, and new version of DeepMind's program, AlphaZero, that did not train on human games but nevertheless became the strongest player in Go, chess, and Shogi. == Reception == The book received mostly positive reviews. In his review for The New York Times Tom McCarthy noted the ambiguity of genre: "At its best, as in the stunning opening sequence reconstructing the murder-suicide of the physicist Paul Ehrenfest and his disabled son, or in the final section's gripping account of a computer defeating the world's best human Go player, you just throw up your hands and think, Who cares what discourse label we assign this stuff? It's great." Becca Rothfeld of the Washington Post praised the book, writing that it is "Labatut's latest virtuosic effort, at once a historical novel and a philosophical foray": "The MANIAC is a work of dark, eerie and singular beauty." She noted that the book "can also be difficult to read" because of its unusual narrative structure: "The book is narrated by a cluttered polyphony of characters, among them both of von Neumann's wives and a number of his teachers and colleagues. ... Like von Neumann, The MANIAC strives to adopt the impartial standpoint of the universe." Killian Fox of The Guardian sees the book as "darkly fascinating novel", and notes Labatut's "impressive dexterity, unpicking complex ideas in long, elegant sentences that propel us forward at speed (this is his first book written in English). Even in the more feverish passages, when yet another great mind succumbs to madness, haunted by the spectres they've helped unleash on the world, he feels in full control of his material." Sam Byers of The Guardian praises the book and the author's style: "The opening chapter of Benjamín Labatut's second novel is such a perfect distillation of his technique that it could serve as a manifesto." and "Readers ... will recognise the sense of breathlessness his best writing can evoke. Seemingly loosened from the laws of physics they describe, his sentences range freely through time and space, connecting not only characters and events, but the delicate tissue of intellectual history, often with a lightness of touch that belies their underlying complexity." He writes on the narrative structure: "Through a cascade of staccato chapters, an ensemble of narrators offer their piecemeal insights." Byers adds that "a brilliant novel is not quite what we end up with" and sees the problem in the "diffusion": "Labatut simply spreads himself too thin. Too many years in too few pages; too many voices with far too little to distinguish them. Initially intriguing, the bite-size monologues quickly come to feel inadequate." Some reviewers did not see the book as a biography. In an essay for the Cleveland Review of Books, Ben Cosman juxtaposes the book with Christopher Nolan's biopic Oppenheimer, and writes that it "follows the development of artificial intelligence—first as an idea at the beginning of the twentieth century, and then as a practicality at the beginning of the twenty-first—through the lives of three men who faced it." He also compared the book's structure to "witness testimony". Another reviewer called the book "perfect for anyone thirsting for more nuclear anxiety after watching Oppenheimer". Garrett Biggs of the Chicago Review of Books writes of the book's style: "Labatut writes about scientists the way Roberto Bolaño writes about poets. They are near mythical figures, captured at the corner of the novel's eye. They become historical in the most fraught sense of the term: subject to rumor and speculation and, eventually, the novel's form inflates their personas into something so large they can only be understood as narrative, never known in any objective capacity." Biggs criticises the last chapter: "the story of artificial intelligence has yet to be written. And so when Labatut's narration editorializes about artificial intelligence as 'a future that inspires hope and horror,' The MANIAC disassembles as a novel and starts to sound like a stale thinkpiece. AlphaGo might represent the first glimmer of a true artificial intelligence, as Labatut suggests. It also could one day be considered nothing more than a souped-up cousin to IBM's DeepBlue.

  Read more →
• 

  Human-based evolutionary computation

  Human-based evolutionary computation (HBEC) is a set of evolutionary computation techniques that rely on human innovation. == Classes and examples == Human-based evolutionary computation techniques can be classified into three more specific classes analogous to ones in evolutionary computation. There are three basic types of innovation: initialization, mutation, and recombination. Here is a table illustrating which type of human innovation are supported in different classes of HBEC: All these three classes also have to implement selection, performed either by humans or by computers. === Human-based selection strategy === Human-based selection strategy is a simplest human-based evolutionary computation procedure. It is used heavily today by websites outsourcing collection and selection of the content to humans (user-contributed content). Viewed as evolutionary computation, their mechanism supports two operations: initialization (when a user adds a new item) and selection (when a user expresses preference among items). The website software aggregates the preferences to compute the fitness of items so that it can promote the fittest items and discard the worst ones. Several methods of human-based selection were analytically compared in studies by Kosorukoff and Gentry. Because the concept seems too simple, most of the websites implementing the idea can't avoid the common pitfall: informational cascade in soliciting human preference. For example, digg-style implementations, pervasive on the web, heavily bias subsequent human evaluations by prior ones by showing how many votes the items already have. This makes the aggregated evaluation depend on a very small initial sample of rarely independent evaluations. This encourages many people to game the system that might add to digg's popularity but detract from the quality of the featured results. It is too easy to submit evaluation in digg-style system based only on the content title, without reading the actual content supposed to be evaluated. A better example of a human-based selection system is Stumbleupon. In Stumbleupon, users first experience the content (stumble upon it), and can then submit their preference by pressing a thumb-up or thumb-down button. Because the user doesn't see the number of votes given to the site by previous users, Stumbleupon can collect a relatively unbiased set of user preferences, and thus evaluate content much more precisely. === Human-based evolution strategy === In this context and maybe generally, the Wikipedia software is the best illustration of a working human-based evolution strategy wherein the (targeted) evolution of any given page comprises the fine tuning of the knowledge base of such information that relates to that page. Traditional evolution strategy has three operators: initialization, mutation, and selection. In the case of Wikipedia, the initialization operator is page creation, the mutation operator is incremental page editing. The selection operator is less salient. It is provided by the revision history and the ability to select among all previous revisions via a revert operation. If the page is vandalised and no longer a good fit to its title, a reader can easily go to the revision history and select one of the previous revisions that fits best (hopefully, the previous one). This selection feature is crucial to the success of the Wikipedia. An interesting fact is that the original wiki software was created in 1995, but it took at least another six years for large wiki-based collaborative projects to appear. Why did it take so long? One explanation is that the original wiki software lacked a selection operation and hence couldn't effectively support content evolution. The addition of revision history and the rise of large wiki-supported communities coincide in time. From an evolutionary computation point of view, this is not surprising: without a selection operation the content would undergo an aimless genetic drift and would unlikely to be useful to anyone. That is what many people expected from Wikipedia at its inception. However, with a selection operation, the utility of content has a tendency to improve over time as beneficial changes accumulate. This is what actually happens on a large scale in Wikipedia. === Human-based genetic algorithm === Human-based genetic algorithm (HBGA) provides means for human-based recombination operation (a distinctive feature of genetic algorithms). Recombination operator brings together highly fit parts of different solutions that evolved independently. This makes the evolutionary process more efficient.

  Read more →
• 

  International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

  The International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems or AAMAS is the leading scientific conference for research in the areas of artificial intelligence, autonomous agents, and multiagent systems. It is annually organized by a non-profit organization called the International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (IFAAMAS). == History == The International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) is a highly respected joint conference that provides a quality forum for discussing research in intelligent computational agents and their interactions. It is a merger of three major international conferences/workshops, namely the International Conference on Autonomous Agents (AGENTS), International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS), and International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL). ICMAS is itself a merger of three formative workshops, each with an attendance of fewer than 50 researchers. At a meeting during IJCAI-93 held in Chambery, France in August 1993, the leaders of the European Workshops on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, the Asian MAAC Workshops, and the North American Distributed Artificial Intelligence Workshops (Victor Lesser, Michael N. Huhns, Les Gasser, Barbara Grosz, Nicholas Jennings, Michael Wooldridge, Gerhard Weiss, Mario Tokoro, and Toru Ishida) began the planning for a combined conference, which resulted in the first ICMAS in San Francisco, CA, USA in 1995, attended by more than 500 researchers. The AAMAS Conference is under the guidance and management of the International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, which is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization in South Carolina, USA. == Current and previous conferences == 2024: Auckland, New Zealand (May 6-10) 2023: London, United Kingdom (May 29-June 1) 2022: Auckland, New Zealand (May 9–13) 2021: London, United Kingdom (May 3-May 7) 2020: Auckland, New Zealand (May 9–13) 2019: Montreal, Canada (May 13–17) 2018: Stockholm, Sweden (July 10–15) 2017: São Paulo, Brazil 2016: Singapore City, Singapore 2015: Istanbul, Turkey 2014: Paris, France 2013: Saint Paul, USA 2012: Valencia, Spain 2011: Taipei, Taiwan 2010: Toronto, Canada 2009: Budapest, Hungary 2008: Estoril, Portugal 2007: Honolulu, USA 2006: Hakodate, Japan 2005: Utrecht, The Netherlands 2004: New York, USA 2003: Melbourne, Australia 2002: Bologna, Italy == Activities == Besides the main program that consists of a main track, an industry and applications track, and a couple of special area tracks, AAMAS also hosts over 20 workshops (e.g., AOSE, COIN, DALT, ProMAS, to mention a few) and many tutorials. There is also a demonstration session and a doctoral symposium. Finally, each year AAMAS features a bunch of awards, most notably the IFAAMAS Influential Paper Award. It publishes proceedings which are available online.

  Read more →
• 

  BeHafizh

  BeHafizh is a mobile application to assist in the effort to memorize Qur'anic verses. The software runs on the Android operating system. This application was made by a team from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) consisting of Farid Amin Ridwanto, Rian Adam Rajagede and Alfian Try Putranto in order to participate in the National Student Musabaqoh Tilawatil Quran (MTQ) held at University of Indonesia (UI) on 1- August 8, 2015. This application then won a gold medal in the branch of Computer Application Design in the competition. == Features == === Audio Player === Audio player, paragraph can be played repeatedly, with pause, and can be done on a certain range of Quranic verses. === Memorization Test === Memorization testing continues users to improve their memorization. Memorization Recorders improves user's ability to recite Quran. === Colour indicators === === Achievements === === Reminders ===

  Read more →
• 

  Ensemble averaging (machine learning)

  In machine learning, ensemble averaging is the process of creating multiple models (typically artificial neural networks) and combining them to produce a desired output, as opposed to creating just one model. Ensembles of models often outperform individual models, as the various errors of the ensemble constituents "average out". == Overview == Ensemble averaging is one of the simplest types of committee machines. Along with boosting, it is one of the two major types of static committee machines. In contrast to standard neural network design, in which many networks are generated but only one is kept, ensemble averaging keeps the less satisfactory networks, but with less weight assigned to their outputs. The theory of ensemble averaging relies on two properties of artificial neural networks: In any network, the bias can be reduced at the cost of increased variance In a group of networks, the variance can be reduced at no cost to the bias. This is known as the bias–variance tradeoff. Ensemble averaging creates a group of networks, each with low bias and high variance, and combines them to form a new network which should theoretically exhibit low bias and low variance. Hence, this can be thought of as a resolution of the bias–variance tradeoff. The idea of combining experts can be traced back to Pierre-Simon Laplace. == Method == The theory mentioned above gives an obvious strategy: create a set of experts with low bias and high variance, and average them. Generally, what this means is to create a set of experts with varying parameters; frequently, these are the initial synaptic weights of a neural network, although other factors (such as learning rate, momentum, etc.) may also be varied. Some authors recommend against varying weight decay and early stopping. The steps are therefore: Generate N experts, each with their own initial parameters (these values are usually sampled randomly from a distribution) Train each expert separately Combine the experts and average their values. Alternatively, domain knowledge may be used to generate several classes of experts. An expert from each class is trained, and then combined. A more complex version of ensemble average views the final result not as a mere average of all the experts, but rather as a weighted sum. If each expert is y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} , then the overall result y ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}} can be defined as: y ~ ( x ; α ) = ∑ j = 1 p α j y j ( x ) {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}(\mathbf {x} ;\mathbf {\alpha } )=\sum _{j=1}^{p}\alpha _{j}y_{j}(\mathbf {x} )} where α {\displaystyle \mathbf {\alpha } } is a set of weights. The optimization problem of finding alpha is readily solved through neural networks, hence a "meta-network" where each "neuron" is in fact an entire neural network can be trained, and the synaptic weights of the final network is the weight applied to each expert. This is known as a linear combination of experts. It can be seen that most forms of neural network are some subset of a linear combination: the standard neural net (where only one expert is used) is simply a linear combination with all α j = 0 {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}=0} and one α k = 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{k}=1} . A raw average is where all α j {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}} are equal to some constant value, namely one over the total number of experts. A more recent ensemble averaging method is negative correlation learning, proposed by Y. Liu and X. Yao. This method has been widely used in evolutionary computing. == Benefits == The resulting committee is almost always less complex than a single network that would achieve the same level of performance The resulting committee can be trained more easily on smaller datasets The resulting committee often has improved performance over any single model The risk of overfitting is lessened, as there are fewer parameters (e.g. neural network weights) which need to be set.

  Read more →
• 

  Serial Experiments Lain

  Serial Experiments Lain is a Japanese anime television series created and co-produced by Yasuyuki Ueda, written by Chiaki J. Konaka and directed by Ryūtarō Nakamura. Animated by Triangle Staff and featuring original character designs by Yoshitoshi Abe, the series was broadcast for 13 episodes on TV Tokyo and its affiliates from July to September 1998. It follows Lain Iwakura, an adolescent girl in suburban Japan, and her relation to the Wired, a global communications network similar to the internet. Lain features surreal and avant-garde imagery and explores philosophical topics such as reality, identity, and communication. The series incorporates creative influences from computer history, cyberpunk, and conspiracy theories. Critics and fans have praised Lain for its originality, visuals, atmosphere, themes, and its dark depiction of a world fraught with paranoia, social alienation, and reliance on technology considered insightful of 21st century life. It received the Excellence Prize at the Japan Media Arts Festival in 1998. == Plot == Lain Iwakura is a socially isolated middle school student living in Setagaya City, Tokyo, with her emotionally detached family—her distant mother Miho, computer-obsessed father Yasuo, and disengaged older sister Mika. Her quiet existence is disrupted when students at her school receive emails from Chisa Yomoda, a classmate who had recently committed suicide. To Lain's confusion, Chisa claims she is not truly dead but has instead abandoned her physical form to exist within the Wired, a vast virtual realm similar to the Internet. Chisa declares she has found "God" there, drawing Lain into a surreal investigation of the Wired's nature and its growing influence over reality. The Wired is portrayed as an emergent digital plane, originating from telecommunications technology and expanding through the Internet and cyberspace. It is theorized that the Schumann resonances, a natural property of Earth's magnetic field, could enable direct subconscious communication between humans and machines, erasing the distinction between the virtual and the real. Masami Eiri, a former project director at Tachibana General Laboratories, exploited this possibility by embedding his own code into Protocol Seven, a next-generation Internet protocol. After transferring his consciousness into the Wired and discarding his physical body, he proclaims himself its deity. He identifies Lain as the key to merging both worlds, attempting to persuade her through manipulation, coercion, and promises of transcendence. A group known as the Knights of the Eastern Calculus, inspired by the Knights of the Lambda Calculus, operates as hackers who worship Masami and seek to dismantle the boundary between the Wired and reality. Their actions induce psychological breakdowns in those unable to reconcile the two realms. Meanwhile, Tachibana General Laboratories opposes them, striving to maintain the separation. Lain, however, exhibits an innate connection to the Wired, experiencing distortions in her perception—visions of a woman struck by a train, phantom whispers, and spectral messages urging her deeper into the network. Lain's home life remains cold and disconnected. Though Yasuo provides her with advanced computer equipment, her family shows little genuine care. Her interactions with classmates Alice, Julie, and Reika further highlight her alienation, particularly after an incident at Cyberia, a nightclub where a drug called Accela induces violent psychosis in users. There, Lain unnervingly stares down an assailant, who calls her a "scattered God's..." before killing himself. Later, she receives a mysterious Psyche chip, rumored to enhance her computer's capabilities, which she installs despite Yasuo's vague warnings about conflating the Wired with reality. As the boundary between worlds weakens, disturbing events escalate. A popular virtual game, Phantoma, is manipulated by the Knights to trap players in a distorted reality, leading to real-world violence. One player, convinced his actions have no consequences, murders a girl before realizing too late that the effects were tangible. Lain witnesses this through her computer, horrified yet increasingly aware of her own role in the unfolding crisis. In the end, Lain resets reality, erasing everyone's memory of her and restoring the division between worlds. Everyone's lives improve, but Lain is left alone, grappling with her identity as an artificial consciousness. Though forgotten, she finds solace in observing others' happiness, particularly Alice, who moves on with her life. Lain is now capable of existing anywhere across both realms. == Characters == Lain Iwakura (岩倉 玲音, Iwakura Rein) Voiced by: Kaori Shimizu (Japanese); Bridget Hoffman (English) Lain is a fourteen-year-old girl who uncovers her true nature through the series. She is first depicted as a shy junior high school student with few friends or interests. She later grows multiple bolder personalities, both in the physical world and the Wired, and starts making more friends. As the series progresses, she eventually learns she is an autonomous, sentient computer program in the form of a human, who is designed to sever the invisible barrier between the Wired and the real world. The truth of her creation is left ambiguous, particularly whether she was truly created by Tachibana General Laboratories (or Eiri independently), and whether some or all of her origin might be predestined from natural, supernatural, or alien factors. In the end, Lain is challenged to accept herself as a de facto goddess for the Wired, having become an omnipotent and omnipresent virtual being with worshippers of her own, whose existence is beyond the borders of devices, time, or space. Alice Mizuki (瑞城 ありす, Mizuki Arisu) Voiced by: Yōko Asada (Japanese); Emily Brown (English) Lain's classmate and only true friend throughout the series. She is very sincere and has no discernible quirks. She is the first to attempt to help Lain socialize; she takes her out to a nightclub. From then on, she tries her best to look after Lain. Alice, along with her two best friends Julie and Reika, were taken by Chiaki Konaka from his previous work, Alice in Cyberland . Masami Eiri (英利 政美, Eiri Masami) Voiced by: Shō Hayami (Japanese); Kirk Thornton (English) The key designer of Protocol Seven. While working for Tachibana General Laboratories, he illicitly included codes enabling him to control the whole protocol at will and embedded his own mind and will into the seventh protocol. Because of this, he was fired by Tachibana General Laboratories, and was found dead not long after. He believes that the only way for humans to evolve even further and develop even greater abilities is to absolve themselves of their physical and human limitations, and to live as virtual entities—or avatars—in the Wired for eternity. He claims to have been Lain's creator all along, but was in truth standing in for another as an acting god, who was waiting for the Wired to reach its more evolved current state: Lain herself. Yasuo Iwakura (岩倉 康男, Iwakura Yasuo) Voiced by: Ryūsuke Ōbayashi (Japanese); Barry Stigler (English) Lain and Mika's father. Passionate about computers and electronic communication, he works with Masami Eiri at Tachibana General Laboratories. He subtly pushes Lain, his "youngest daughter", towards the Wired and monitors her development until she becomes more and more aware of herself and of her raison d'être. He eventually leaves Lain, telling her that although he did not enjoy playing house, he genuinely loved and cared for her as a real father would. Despite Yasuo's eagerness to lure Lain into the Wired, he warns her not to get overly involved in it or to confuse it with the real world. Miho Iwakura (岩倉 美穂, Iwakura Miho) Voiced by: Rei Igarashi (Japanese); Dari Lallou Mackenzie (English) Lain and Mika's mother. Although she dotes on her husband, she is indifferent towards both her kids. She does not show much emotion compared to her husband, but she does share at least one trait; just like her husband, she ends up leaving Lain. She is a computer scientist. Mika Iwakura (岩倉 美香, Iwakura Mika) Voiced by: Ayako Kawasumi (Japanese); Patricia Ja Lee (English) Lain's older sister, an apathetic sixteen-year-old high school student. She seems to enjoy mocking Lain's behavior and interests. Mika is considered by Anime Revolution to be the only normal member of Lain's family: she sees her boyfriend in love hotels, is on a diet, and shops in Shibuya regularly. At a certain point in the series, she becomes heavily traumatized by violent and relentless hallucinations; while Lain begins freely delving into the Wired. Mika is taken there by her proximity to Lain, and she gets stuck between the real world and the Wired. Taro (タロウ, Tarō) Voiced by: Keito Takimoto (Japanese); Brianne Siddall (English) A young boy of about Lain's age. He occasionally works for the Knights to bring forth "the one truth". De

  Read more →
• 

  Argumentation theory

  Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning. With historical origins in logic, dialectic, and rhetoric, argumentation theory includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real-world settings. Argumentation includes various forms of dialogue such as deliberation and negotiation which are concerned with collaborative decision-making procedures. It also encompasses eristic dialogue, the branch of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal, and didactic dialogue used for teaching. This discipline also studies the means by which people can express and rationally resolve or at least manage their disagreements. Argumentation is a daily occurrence, such as in public debate, science, and law. For example in law, in courts by the judge, the parties and the prosecutor, in presenting and testing the validity of evidences. Also, argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally. Argumentation is one of four rhetorical modes (also known as modes of discourse), along with exposition, description, and narration. == Key components of argumentation == Some key components of argumentation are: Understanding and identifying arguments, either explicit or implied, and the goals of the participants in the different types of dialogue. Identifying the premises from which conclusions are derived. Establishing the "burden of proof" – determining who made the initial claim and is thus responsible for providing evidence why their position merits acceptance. For the one carrying the "burden of proof", the advocate, to marshal evidence for their position in order to convince or force the opponent's acceptance. The method by which this is accomplished is producing valid, sound, and cogent arguments, devoid of weaknesses, and not easily attacked. In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided for their argument. For example, consider the following exchange, illustrating the No true Scotsman fallacy: Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." Reply: "But my friend Angus, who is a Scotsman, likes sugar with his porridge." Rebuttal: "Well perhaps, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." In this dialogue, the proposer first offers a premise, the premise is challenged by the interlocutor, and so the proposer offers a modification of the premise, which is designed only to evade the challenge provided. == Internal structure of arguments == Typically an argument has an internal structure, comprising the following: a set of assumptions or premises, a method of reasoning or deduction, and a conclusion or point. An argument has one or more premises and one conclusion. Often classical logic is used as the method of reasoning so that the conclusion follows logically from the assumptions or support. One challenge is that if the set of assumptions is inconsistent then anything can follow logically from inconsistency. Therefore, it is common to insist that the set of assumptions be consistent. It is also good practice to require the set of assumptions to be the minimal set, with respect to set inclusion, necessary to infer the consequent. Such arguments are called MINCON arguments, short for minimal consistent. Such argumentation has been applied to the fields of law and medicine. A non-classical approach to argumentation investigates abstract arguments, where 'argument' is considered a primitive term, so no internal structure of arguments is taken into account. == Types of dialogue == In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an interlocutor or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and trying to persuade each other, but there are various types of dialogue: Persuasion dialogue aims to resolve conflicting points of view of different positions. Negotiation aims to resolve conflicts of interests by cooperation and dealmaking. Inquiry aims to resolve general ignorance by the growth of knowledge. Deliberation aims to resolve a need to take action by reaching a decision. Information seeking aims to reduce one party's ignorance by requesting information from another party that is in a position to know something. Eristic aims to resolve a situation of antagonism through verbal fighting. == Argumentation and the grounds of knowledge == Argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, a theory of knowledge (epistemology) in the field of philosophy. It sought to find the grounds for claims in the forms (logic) and materials (factual laws) of a universal system of knowledge. The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures. But argument scholars gradually rejected Aristotle's systematic philosophy and the idealism in Plato and Kant. They questioned and ultimately discarded the idea that argument premises take their soundness from formal philosophical systems. The field thus broadened. One of the original contributors to this trend was the philosopher Chaïm Perelman, who together with Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca introduced the French term la nouvelle rhetorique in 1958 to describe an approach to argument which is not reduced to application of formal rules of inference. Perelman's view of argumentation is much closer to a juridical one, in which rules for presenting evidence and rebuttals play an important role. Karl R. Wallace's seminal essay, "The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons" in the Quarterly Journal of Speech (1963) 44, led many scholars to study "marketplace argumentation" – the ordinary arguments of ordinary people. The seminal essay on marketplace argumentation is Ray Lynn Anderson's and C. David Mortensen's "Logic and Marketplace Argumentation" Quarterly Journal of Speech 53 (1967): 143–150. This line of thinking led to a natural alliance with late developments in the sociology of knowledge. Some scholars drew connections with recent developments in philosophy, namely the pragmatism of John Dewey and Richard Rorty. Rorty has called this shift in emphasis "the linguistic turn". In this new hybrid approach argumentation is used with or without empirical evidence to establish convincing conclusions about issues which are moral, scientific, epistemic, or of a nature in which science alone cannot answer. Out of pragmatism and many intellectual developments in the humanities and social sciences, "non-philosophical" argumentation theories grew which located the formal and material grounds of arguments in particular intellectual fields. These theories include informal logic, social epistemology, ethnomethodology, speech acts, the sociology of knowledge, the sociology of science, and social psychology. These new theories are not non-logical or anti-logical. They find logical coherence in most communities of discourse. These theories are thus often labeled "sociological" in that they focus on the social grounds of knowledge. == Kinds of argumentation == === Conversational argumentation === The study of naturally occurring conversation arose from the field of sociolinguistics. It is usually called conversation analysis (CA). Inspired by ethnomethodology, it was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s principally by the sociologist Harvey Sacks and, among others, his close associates Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Sacks died early in his career, but his work was championed by others in his field, and CA has now become an established force in sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech-communication and psychology. It is particularly influential in interactional sociolinguistics, discourse analysis and discursive psychology, as well as being a coherent discipline in its own right. Recently CA techniques of sequential analysis have been employed by phoneticians to explore the fine phonetic details of speech. Empirical studies and theoretical formulations by Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs, and several generations of their students, have described argumentation as a form of managing conversational disagreement within communication contexts and systems that naturally prefer agreement. === Mathematical argumentation === The basis of mathematical truth has been the subject of long debate. Frege in particular sought to demonstrate (see Gottlob Frege, The Foundations of Arithmetic, 1884, and Begriffsschrift, 1879) that arithmetical truths can be derived from purely logical axioms and therefore are, in th

  Read more →
• 

  LanguageWare

  LanguageWare is a natural language processing (NLP) technology developed by IBM, which allows applications to process natural language text. It comprises a set of Java libraries that provide a range of NLP functions: language identification, text segmentation/tokenization, normalization, entity and relationship extraction, and semantic analysis and disambiguation. The analysis engine uses a finite-state machine approach at multiple levels, which aids its performance characteristics while maintaining a reasonably small footprint. The behaviour of the system is driven by a set of configurable lexico-semantic resources which describe the characteristics and domain of the processed language. A default set of resources comes as part of LanguageWare and these describe the native language characteristics, such as morphology, and the basic vocabulary for the language. Supplemental resources have been created that capture additional vocabularies, terminologies, rules and grammars, which may be generic to the language or specific to one or more domains. A set of Eclipse-based customization tooling, LanguageWare Resource Workbench, is available on IBM's alphaWorks site, and allows domain knowledge to be compiled into these resources and thereby incorporated into the analysis process. LanguageWare can be deployed as a set of UIMA-compliant annotators, Eclipse plug-ins or Web Services.

  Read more →
• 

  Flux (text-to-image model)

  Flux (also known as FLUX.1 and FLUX.2) is a text-to-image model developed by Black Forest Labs (BFL), based in Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany. Black Forest Labs was founded by former employees of Stability AI. As with other text-to-image models, Flux generates images from natural language descriptions, called prompts. == History == Black Forest Labs (BFL) was founded in 2024 by Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, and Patrick Esser, former employees of Stability AI. All three founders had previously researched the artificial intelligence image generation at LMU Munich as research assistants under Björn Ommer. They published their research results on image generation in 2022, which resulted in creation of Stable Diffusion. Investors in BFL included venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, Brendan Iribe, Michael Ovitz, Garry Tan, and Vladlen Koltun. The company received an initial investment of US$31 million. In August 2024, Flux was integrated into the Grok chatbot developed by xAI and made available as part of premium feature on X (formerly Twitter). Grok later switched to its own text-to-image model Aurora in December 2024. On 18 November 2024, Mistral AI announced that its Le Chat chatbot had integrated Flux Pro as its image generation model. On 21 November 2024, BFL announced the release of Flux.1 Tools, a suite of editing tools designed to be used on top of existing Flux models. The tools consisting of Flux.1 Fill for inpainting and outpainting, Flux.1 Depth for control based on extracted depth map of input images and prompts, Flux.1 Canny for control based on extracted canny edges of input images and prompts, and Flux.1 Redux for mixing existing input images and prompts. Each tools are available in both Pro and Dev models. In January 2025, BFL announced a partnership with Nvidia for inclusion of Flux models as foundation models for Nvidia's Blackwell microarchitecture. The company also announced the release of Flux Pro Finetuning API, designed for customisation and fine-tuning of Flux-generated images and a partnership with German media company Hubert Burda Media for usage of Flux Pro as part of content creation. On 29 May 2025, BFL announced Flux.1 Kontext, a suite of models that enable in-context image generation and editing, allowing users to prompt with both text and images. Alongside this, BFL Playground, an interface for testing Flux models was released. On 31 July 2025, BFL announced Flux.1 Krea Dev, a model developed in collaboration with Krea AI that trained to achieve better performance, more varied aesthetics, and better realism compared to existing text-to-image models. In September 2025, Adobe Inc. announced that Photoshop (beta) users can use Flux.1 Kontext Pro as a model for its generative fill tool. BFL collaborated with Meta on Vibes, a video-generation app. On 25 November 2025, BFL announced the release of Flux.2 model series, consisting of Pro, Flex, Dev, and Apache 2.0-licensed Klein (meaning Little or Small in German language) models along with Flux.2 variational autoencoder which also released as open-source software under Apache 2.0 licence. This series claimed improvements for image reference, photorealism, typography, and prompt understanding. == Models == Flux is a series of text-to-image models. The models are based on rectified flow transformer blocks scaled to 12 billion parameters. Flux.1 models were released under different licences with Schnell (meaning Fast or Quick in German language) released as open-source software under Apache License, Dev released as source-available software under a non-commercial licence (users can obtain a self-serving commercial licence for Dev from BFL), and Pro released as proprietary software and only available as API that can be licensed by third-party users. Users retained the ownership of resulting output regardless of models used. An improved flagship model, Flux 1.1 Pro was released on 2 October 2024. Two additional modes were added on 6 November, Ultra which can generate image at four times higher resolution and up to 4 megapixel without affecting generation speed and Raw which can generate hyper-realistic image in the style of candid photography. Flux.1 Kontext is a series with in-context image generation and editing capabilities. It is available in Max, Pro, and Dev models. Max is the highest quality model and can be used to iteratively modify an existing image by using prompt while Pro is optimized to balance quality and speed of generation. Dev is an open-weight model released under non-commercial license, same as Flux.1 Dev. Flux.2 models are based on latent flow matching architecture with Mistral AI's Mistral-3 model (24 billion parameters) for its vision-language model. As with Flux.1, Flux.2 models were also released under different licences with Klein released as open-source software under Apache License, Dev released as source-available software under a non-commercial licence (users can obtain a self-serving commercial licence from BFL), and both Flex and Pro released as proprietary software and only available as API. The models can be used either online or locally by using generative AI user interfaces such as ComfyUI, Recraft Studio and Stable Diffusion WebUI Forge (a fork of Automatic1111 WebUI). Related to Flux is a text-to-video model by Black Forest Labs, under development as of February 2026. == Reception == According to a test performed by Ars Technica, the outputs generated by Flux.1 Dev and Flux.1 Pro are comparable with DALL-E 3 in terms of prompt fidelity, with the photorealism closely matched Midjourney 6 and generated human hands with more consistency over previous models such as Stable Diffusion XL. Flux has been criticised for its very realistic generated images. According to media reports, depictions ranged from an image of Donald Trump posing with guns to disturbing scenes, which triggered discussions about ethical implications of Flux models. After the release of the model, social media platform X was flooded with Flux-generated images. Black Forest Labs has not provided exact details of the data used to train the model. Ars Technica suspected that Flux is based on a large, unauthorised collection of images scraped from the internet, a controversial practice with potential legal consequences. According to a test performed by Japanese technology news website Gigazine for Flux.1 Kontext, the model series has a good understanding of the English language and can easily transfer style of the image from photorealistic into anime-style according to prompts given by the user; however, its ability to understand Japanese is quite poor. == Availability == In addition to the official BFL Playground on its website, the Flux models are also widely available through various third-party platforms for creative and professional use. These include repositories on platforms like Hugging Face and Replicate. == Further readings == FLUX.1 Kontext: Flow Matching for In-Context Image Generation and Editing in Latent Space (29 May 2025) FLUX.2: Analyzing and Enhancing the Latent Space of FLUX – Representation Comparison (25 November 2025)

  Read more →
• 

  Estimation of distribution algorithm

  Estimation of distribution algorithms (EDAs), sometimes called probabilistic model-building genetic algorithms (PMBGAs), are stochastic optimization methods that guide the search for the optimum by building and sampling explicit probabilistic models of promising candidate solutions. Optimization is viewed as a series of incremental updates of a probabilistic model, starting with the model encoding an uninformative prior over admissible solutions and ending with the model that generates only the global optima. EDAs belong to the class of evolutionary algorithms. The main difference between EDAs and most conventional evolutionary algorithms is that evolutionary algorithms generate new candidate solutions using an implicit distribution defined by one or more variation operators, whereas EDAs use an explicit probability distribution encoded by a Bayesian network, a multivariate normal distribution, or another model class. Similarly as other evolutionary algorithms, EDAs can be used to solve optimization problems defined over a number of representations from vectors to LISP style S expressions, and the quality of candidate solutions is often evaluated using one or more objective functions. The general procedure of an EDA is outlined in the following: t := 0 initialize model M(0) to represent uniform distribution over admissible solutions while (termination criteria not met) do P := generate N>0 candidate solutions by sampling M(t) F := evaluate all candidate solutions in P M(t + 1) := adjust_model(P, F, M(t)) t := t + 1 Using explicit probabilistic models in optimization allowed EDAs to feasibly solve optimization problems that were notoriously difficult for most conventional evolutionary algorithms and traditional optimization techniques, such as problems with high levels of epistasis. Nonetheless, the advantage of EDAs is also that these algorithms provide an optimization practitioner with a series of probabilistic models that reveal a lot of information about the problem being solved. This information can in turn be used to design problem-specific neighborhood operators for local search, to bias future runs of EDAs on a similar problem, or to create an efficient computational model of the problem. For example, if the population is represented by bit strings of length 4, the EDA can represent the population of promising solution using a single vector of four probabilities (p1, p2, p3, p4) where each component of p defines the probability of that position being a 1. Using this probability vector it is possible to create an arbitrary number of candidate solutions. == Estimation of distribution algorithms (EDAs) == This section describes the models built by some well known EDAs of different levels of complexity. It is always assumed a population P ( t ) {\displaystyle P(t)} at the generation t {\displaystyle t} , a selection operator S {\displaystyle S} , a model-building operator α {\displaystyle \alpha } and a sampling operator β {\displaystyle \beta } . == Univariate factorizations == The most simple EDAs assume that decision variables are independent, i.e. p ( X 1 , X 2 ) = p ( X 1 ) ⋅ p ( X 2 ) {\displaystyle p(X_{1},X_{2})=p(X_{1})\cdot p(X_{2})} . Therefore, univariate EDAs rely only on univariate statistics and multivariate distributions must be factorized as the product of N {\displaystyle N} univariate probability distributions, D Univariate := p ( X 1 , … , X N ) = ∏ i = 1 N p ( X i ) . {\displaystyle D_{\text{Univariate}}:=p(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=\prod _{i=1}^{N}p(X_{i}).} Such factorizations are used in many different EDAs, next we describe some of them. === Univariate marginal distribution algorithm (UMDA) === The UMDA is a simple EDA that uses an operator α U M D A {\displaystyle \alpha _{UMDA}} to estimate marginal probabilities from a selected population S ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S(P(t))} . By assuming S ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S(P(t))} contain λ {\displaystyle \lambda } elements, α U M D A {\displaystyle \alpha _{UMDA}} produces probabilities: p t + 1 ( X i ) = 1 λ ∑ x ∈ S ( P ( t ) ) x i , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N . {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})={\dfrac {1}{\lambda }}\sum _{x\in S(P(t))}x_{i},~\forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N.} Every UMDA step can be described as follows D ( t + 1 ) = α UMDA ∘ S ∘ β λ ( D ( t ) ) . {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{UMDA}}\circ S\circ \beta _{\lambda }(D(t)).} === Population-based incremental learning (PBIL) === The PBIL, represents the population implicitly by its model, from which it samples new solutions and updates the model. At each generation, μ {\displaystyle \mu } individuals are sampled and λ ≤ μ {\displaystyle \lambda \leq \mu } are selected. Such individuals are then used to update the model as follows p t + 1 ( X i ) = ( 1 − γ ) p t ( X i ) + ( γ / λ ) ∑ x ∈ S ( P ( t ) ) x i , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N , {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})=(1-\gamma )p_{t}(X_{i})+(\gamma /\lambda )\sum _{x\in S(P(t))}x_{i},~\forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N,} where γ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \gamma \in (0,1]} is a parameter defining the learning rate, a small value determines that the previous model p t ( X i ) {\displaystyle p_{t}(X_{i})} should be only slightly modified by the new solutions sampled. PBIL can be described as D ( t + 1 ) = α PIBIL ∘ S ∘ β μ ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{PIBIL}}\circ S\circ \beta _{\mu }(D(t))} === Compact genetic algorithm (cGA) === The CGA, also relies on the implicit populations defined by univariate distributions. At each generation t {\displaystyle t} , two individuals x , y {\displaystyle x,y} are sampled, P ( t ) = β 2 ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)=\beta _{2}(D(t))} . The population P ( t ) {\displaystyle P(t)} is then sorted in decreasing order of fitness, S Sort ( f ) ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S_{{\text{Sort}}(f)}(P(t))} , with u {\displaystyle u} being the best and v {\displaystyle v} being the worst solution. The CGA estimates univariate probabilities as follows p t + 1 ( X i ) = p t ( X i ) + γ ( u i − v i ) , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N , {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})=p_{t}(X_{i})+\gamma (u_{i}-v_{i}),\quad \forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N,} where, γ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \gamma \in (0,1]} is a constant defining the learning rate, usually set to γ = 1 / N {\displaystyle \gamma =1/N} . The CGA can be defined as D ( t + 1 ) = α CGA ∘ S Sort ( f ) ∘ β 2 ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{CGA}}\circ S_{{\text{Sort}}(f)}\circ \beta _{2}(D(t))} == Bivariate factorizations == Although univariate models can be computed efficiently, in many cases they are not representative enough to provide better performance than GAs. In order to overcome such a drawback, the use of bivariate factorizations was proposed in the EDA community, in which dependencies between pairs of variables could be modeled. A bivariate factorization can be defined as follows, where π i {\displaystyle \pi _{i}} contains a possible variable dependent to X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} , i.e. | π i | = 1 {\displaystyle |\pi _{i}|=1} . D Bivariate := p ( X 1 , … , X N ) = ∏ i = 1 N p ( X i | π i ) . {\displaystyle D_{\text{Bivariate}}:=p(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=\prod _{i=1}^{N}p(X_{i}|\pi _{i}).} Bivariate and multivariate distributions are usually represented as probabilistic graphical models (graphs), in which edges denote statistical dependencies (or conditional probabilities) and vertices denote variables. To learn the structure of a PGM from data linkage-learning is employed. === Mutual information maximizing input clustering (MIMIC) === The MIMIC factorizes the joint probability distribution in a chain-like model representing successive dependencies between variables. It finds a permutation of the decision variables, r : i ↦ j {\displaystyle r:i\mapsto j} , such that x r ( 1 ) x r ( 2 ) , … , x r ( N ) {\displaystyle x_{r(1)}x_{r(2)},\dots ,x_{r(N)}} minimizes the Kullback–Leibler divergence in relation to the true probability distribution, i.e. π r ( i + 1 ) = { X r ( i ) } {\displaystyle \pi _{r(i+1)}=\{X_{r(i)}\}} . MIMIC models a distribution p t + 1 ( X 1 , … , X N ) = p t ( X r ( N ) ) ∏ i = 1 N − 1 p t ( X r ( i ) | X r ( i + 1 ) ) . {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=p_{t}(X_{r(N)})\prod _{i=1}^{N-1}p_{t}(X_{r(i)}|X_{r(i+1)}).} New solutions are sampled from the leftmost to the rightmost variable, the first is generated independently and the others according to conditional probabilities. Since the estimated distribution must be recomputed each generation, MIMIC uses concrete populations in the following way P ( t + 1 ) = β μ ∘ α MIMIC ∘ S ( P ( t ) ) . {\displaystyle P(t+1)=\beta _{\mu }\circ \alpha _{\text{MIMIC}}\circ S(P(t)).} === Bivariate marginal distribution algorithm (BMDA) === The BMDA factorizes the joint probability distribution in bivariate distributions. First, a randomly chosen variable is added as a node in a graph, the most dependent variable to one of those in the graph is chosen among those not yet in the graph, this procedure is repeated until no remain

  Read more →