AI Content Generation Tools

AI Content Generation Tools — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Showbox.com

  Showbox is an online video streaming platform that enables users to stream and download many videos, commonly movies and TV shows, for free. == History == The company opened the platforms to users who registered from its beta in late 2015. The platform was officially launched in February 2016, enabling any visitor to sign up and create videos online. In April 2016, Showbox was featured on the Product Hunt website, coming to the top of the website's lists for that day and week with over 1400 upvotes from the Product Hunt community. Also in April 2016, Showbox partnered with YouTube's leading multi-channel networks, including Fullscreen, BroadbandTV, StyleHaul, AwesomenessTV, and BuzzMyVideos, to enable their communities of creators to access the platform. In June 2016, the company launched Showbox For Brands, a business-oriented video creation platform, enabling companies to create video content in-house and with their communities and influencers. In March 2017, the company launched Showbox Engage, a use case of its B2B product launched in 2016, enabling companies to launch user-generated content campaigns with their communities. In April 2017, Showbox and the United Nations announced a partnership around the 70th anniversary of the declaration of human rights, with an annual, ongoing global campaign in 135 languages, inviting people worldwide to create their part of the declaration in a video from anywhere around the world. In November 2017, Showbox partnered with the Ad:tech and Digital Marketing World Forum conferences (DMWF) in New York to provide their users and communities with a User Generated Content video solution. == Technology == Showbox's video creation technology includes an online green screen feature, proprietary computer vision algorithms, deep learning technology to support the automatic creation of videos in the cloud, and advanced video composition, including special effects. == Coverage and awards == In March 2015, Showbox was nominated as one of the 10 Israeli startups to take over our TV screens this year. In July 2016, Showbox won the Publicis90 award as part of Publicis' "global initiative to foster digital entrepreneurship". In March 2017, Showbox was chosen as one of The Culture Trip's 10 startups to watch for in 2017.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Code Generators Compared (2026)

  Curious about the best AI code generator? An AI code generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

  Read more →
• 

  Weighted automaton

  In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a weighted automaton or weighted finite-state machine is a generalization of a finite-state machine in which the edges have weights, for example real numbers or integers. Finite-state machines are only capable of answering decision problems; they take as input a string and produce a Boolean output, i.e. either "accept" or "reject". In contrast, weighted automata produce a quantitative output, for example a count of how many answers are possible on a given input string, or a probability of how likely the input string is according to a probability distribution. They are one of the simplest studied models of quantitative automata. The definition of a weighted automaton is generally given over an arbitrary semiring R {\displaystyle R} , an abstract set with an addition operation + {\displaystyle +} and a multiplication operation × {\displaystyle \times } . The automaton consists of a finite set of states, a finite input alphabet of characters Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and edges which are labeled with both a character in Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and a weight in R {\displaystyle R} . The weight of any path in the automaton is defined to be the product of weights along the path, and the weight of a string is the sum of the weights of all paths which are labeled with that string. The weighted automaton thus defines a function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} . Weighted automata generalize deterministic finite automata (DFAs) and nondeterministic finite automata (NFAs), which correspond to weighted automata over the Boolean semiring, where addition is logical disjunction and multiplication is logical conjunction. In the DFA case, there is only one accepting path for any input string, so disjunction is not applied. When the weights are real numbers and the outgoing weights for each state add to one, weighted automata can be considered a probabilistic model and are also known as probabilistic automata. These machines define a probability distribution over all strings, and are related to other probabilistic models such as Markov decision processes and Markov chains. Weighted automata have applications in natural language processing where they are used to assign weights to words and sentences, as well as in image compression. They were first introduced by Marcel-Paul Schützenberger in his 1961 paper On the definition of a family of automata. Since their introduction, many extensions have been proposed, for example nested weighted automata, cost register automata, and weighted finite-state transducers. Researchers have studied weighted automata from the perspective of learning a machine from its input-output behavior (see computational learning theory) and studying decidability questions. == Definition == A commutative semiring (or rig) is a set R equipped with two distinguished elements 0 ≠ 1 {\displaystyle 0\neq 1} and addition and multiplication operations ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } and ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } such that ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is commutative and associative with identity 0 {\displaystyle 0} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } is commutative and associative with identity 1 {\displaystyle 1} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } distributes over ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } , and 0 is an absorbing element for ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } . A weighted automaton over R {\displaystyle R} is a tuple A = ( Q , Σ , Δ , I , F ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}=(Q,\Sigma ,\Delta ,I,F)} where: Q {\displaystyle Q} is a finite set of states. Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is a finite alphabet. Δ ⊆ Q × Σ × R × Q {\displaystyle \Delta \subseteq Q\times \Sigma \times R\times Q} is a finite set of transitions ( q , σ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,w,q')} , where σ {\displaystyle \sigma } is called a character and w {\displaystyle w} is called a weight. I : Q → R {\displaystyle I:Q\to R} is an initial weight function. F : Q → R {\displaystyle F:Q\to R} is a final weight function. A path on input w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{}} is a finite path in the graph, where the concatenation of the character labels equals w {\displaystyle w} . The weight of the path q 0 , q 1 , … , q n {\displaystyle q_{0},q_{1},\ldots ,q_{n}} is the product ( ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } ) of the weights along the path, additionally multiplied by the initial and final weights I ( q 0 ) ⊗ F ( q n ) {\displaystyle I(q_{0})\otimes F(q_{n})} . The weight of the word w {\displaystyle w} is the sum ( ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } ) of the weights of all paths on input w {\displaystyle w} (or 0 if there are no accepting paths). In this way the machine defines a function [ [ A ] ] : Σ ∗ → R {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!]:\Sigma ^{}\to R} . == Ambiguity and determinism == Since Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } is a set of transitions, weighted automata allow multiple transitions (or paths) on a single input string. Therefore a weighted automaton can be considered analogous to a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). As is the case with NFAs, restrictions of weighted automata are considered that correspond to the concepts of deterministic finite automaton and unambiguous finite automaton (deterministic weighted automata and unambiguous weighted automata, respectively). First, a preliminary definition: the underlying NFA of A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} is an NFA formed by removing all transitions with weight 0 {\displaystyle 0} and then erasing all of the weights on the transitions Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } , so that the new transition set lies in Q × Σ × Q {\displaystyle Q\times \Sigma \times Q} . The initial states and final states are the set of states q {\displaystyle q} such that I ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle I(q)\neq 0} and F ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle F(q)\neq 0} , respectively. A weighted automaton is deterministic if the underlying NFA is deterministic and unambiguous if the underlying NFA is unambiguous. Every deterministic weighted automaton is unambiguous. In both the deterministic and unambiguous cases, there is always at most one accepting path, so the ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } operation is never applied and can be omitted from the definition. == Variations == The requirement that there is a zero element for ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is sometimes omitted; in this case the machine defines a partial function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} rather than a total function. It is possible to extend the definition to allow epsilon transitions ( q , ϵ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\epsilon ,w,q')} , where ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the empty string. In this case, one must then require that there are no cycles of epsilon transitions. This does not increase the expressiveness of weighted automata. If epsilon transitions are allowed, the initial weights and final weights can be replaced by initial and final sets of states without loss of expressiveness. Some authors omit the initial and final weight functions I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} . Instead, I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} are replaced by a set of initial and final states. If epsilon transitions are not present, this technically decreases expressiveness as it forces [ [ A ] ] ( ε ) {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!](\varepsilon )} to depend only on the number of states that are both initial and final. The transition function can be given as a matrix Δ σ ∈ R Q × Q {\displaystyle \Delta _{\sigma }\in R^{Q\times Q}} with entries in R {\displaystyle R} for each σ {\displaystyle \sigma } , rather than a set of transitions. The entry of the matrix at ( q , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,q')} is the sum of all transitions labeled ( q , σ , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,q')} . Some authors restrict to specific semirings, such as N {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} } or Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} } , particularly when studying decidability results.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Humanizers: Free vs Paid (2026)

  Trying to pick the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI humanizer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

  Read more →
• 

  Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks

  Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks (KANs) are a type of artificial neural network architecture inspired by the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem, also known as the superposition theorem. Unlike traditional multilayer perceptrons (MLPs), which rely on fixed activation functions and linear weights, KANs replace each weight with a learnable univariate function, often represented using splines. == History == KANs (Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks) were proposed by Liu et al. (2024) as a generalization of the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem (KART), aiming to outperform MLPs in small-scale AI and scientific tasks. Before KANs, numerous studies explored KART's connections to neural networks or used it as a basis for designing new network architectures. In the 1980s and 1990s, early research applied KART to neural network design. Kůrková et al. (1992), Hecht-Nielsen (1987), and Nees (1994) established theoretical foundations for multilayer networks based on KART. Igelnik et al. (2003) introduced the Kolmogorov Spline Network using cubic splines to model complex functions. Sprecher (1996, 1997) introduced numerical methods for building network layers, while Nakamura et al. (1993) created activation functions with guaranteed approximation accuracy. These works linked KART's theoretical potential with practical neural network implementation. KART has also been used in other computational and theoretical fields. Coppejans (2004) developed nonparametric regression estimators using B-splines, Bryant (2008) applied it to high-dimensional image tasks, Liu (2015) investigated theoretical applications in optimal transport and image encryption, and more recently, Polar and Poluektov (2021) used Urysohn operators for efficient KART construction, while Fakhoury et al. (2022) introduced ExSpliNet, integrating KART with probabilistic trees and multivariate B-splines for improved function approximation. == Architecture == KANs are based on the Kolmogorov–Arnold representation theorem, which was linked to the 13th Hilbert problem. Given x = ( x 1 , x 2 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle x=(x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n})} consisting of n variables, a multivariate continuous function f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(x)} can be represented as: f ( x ) = f ( x 1 , … , x n ) = ∑ q = 1 2 n + 1 Φ q ( ∑ p = 1 n φ q , p ( x p ) ) {\displaystyle f(x)=f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n})=\sum _{q=1}^{2n+1}\Phi _{q}\left(\sum _{p=1}^{n}\varphi _{q,p}(x_{p})\right)} (1) This formulation contains two nested summations: an outer and an inner sum. The outer sum ∑ q = 1 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{q=1}^{2n+1}} aggregates 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle 2n+1} terms, each involving a function Φ q : R → R {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}:\mathbb {R} \to \mathbb {R} } . The inner sum ∑ p = 1 n {\displaystyle \sum _{p=1}^{n}} computes n terms for each q, where each term φ q , p : [ 0 , 1 ] → R {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}:[0,1]\to \mathbb {R} } is a continuous function of the single variable x p {\displaystyle x_{p}} . The inner continuous functions φ q , p {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}} are universal, independent of f {\displaystyle f} , while the outer functions Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} depend on the specific function f {\displaystyle f} being represented. The representation (1) holds for all multivariate functions f {\displaystyle f} as proved in . If f {\displaystyle f} is continuous, then the outer functions Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} are continuous; if f {\displaystyle f} is discontinuous, then the corresponding Φ q {\displaystyle \Phi _{q}} are generally discontinuous, while the inner functions φ q , p {\displaystyle \varphi _{q,p}} remain the same universal functions. Liu et al. proposed the name KAN. A general KAN network consisting of L layers takes x to generate the output as: K A N ( x ) = ( Φ L − 1 ∘ Φ L − 2 ∘ ⋯ ∘ Φ 1 ∘ Φ 0 ) x {\displaystyle \mathrm {KAN} (x)=(\Phi ^{L-1}\circ \Phi ^{L-2}\circ \cdots \circ \Phi ^{1}\circ \Phi ^{0})x} (3) Here, Φ l {\displaystyle \Phi ^{l}} is the function matrix of the l-th KAN layer or a set of pre-activations. Let i denote the neuron of the l-th layer and j the neuron of the (l+1)-th layer. The activation function φ j , i l {\displaystyle \varphi _{j,i}^{l}} connects (l, i) to (l+1, j): φ j , i l , l = 0 , … , L − 1 , i = 1 , … , n l , j = 1 , … , n l + 1 {\displaystyle \varphi _{j,i}^{l},\quad l=0,\dots ,L-1,\;i=1,\dots ,n_{l},\;j=1,\dots ,n_{l+1}} (4) where nl is the number of nodes of the l-th layer. Thus, the function matrix Φ l {\displaystyle \Phi ^{l}} can be represented as an n l + 1 × n l {\displaystyle n_{l+1}\times n_{l}} matrix of activations: x l + 1 = ( φ 1 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ 1 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ 1 , n l l ( ⋅ ) φ 2 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ 2 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ 2 , n l l ( ⋅ ) ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ φ n l + 1 , 1 l ( ⋅ ) φ n l + 1 , 2 l ( ⋅ ) ⋯ φ n l + 1 , n l l ( ⋅ ) ) x l {\displaystyle x^{l+1}={\begin{pmatrix}\varphi _{1,1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{1,2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{1,n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\\\varphi _{2,1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{2,2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{2,n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\\\vdots &\vdots &\ddots &\vdots \\\varphi _{n_{l+1},1}^{l}(\cdot )&\varphi _{n_{l+1},2}^{l}(\cdot )&\cdots &\varphi _{n_{l+1},n_{l}}^{l}(\cdot )\end{pmatrix}}x^{l}} == Implementations == To make the KAN layers optimizable, the inner function is formed by the combination of spline and basic functions as the formula: φ ( x ) = w b b ( x ) + w s spline ( x ) {\displaystyle \varphi (x)=w_{b}\,b(x)+w_{s}\,{\text{spline}}(x)} where b ( x ) {\displaystyle b(x)} is the basic function, usually defined as s i l u ( x ) = x / ( 1 + e x ) {\displaystyle silu(x)=x/(1+e^{x})} and w b {\displaystyle w_{b}} is the base weight matrix. Also, w s {\displaystyle w_{s}} is the spline weight matrix and spline ( x ) {\displaystyle {\text{spline}}(x)} is the spline function. The spline function can be a sum of B-splines. spline ( x ) = ∑ i c i B i ( x ) {\displaystyle {\text{spline}}(x)=\sum _{i}c_{i}B_{i}(x)} Many studies suggested to use other polynomial and curve functions instead of B-spline to create new KAN variants. == Functions used == The choice of functional basis strongly influences the performance of KANs. Common function families include: B-splines: Provide locality, smoothness, and interpretability; they are the most widely used in current implementations. RBFs (include Gaussian RBFs): Capture localized features in data and are effective in approximating functions with non-linear or clustered structures. Chebyshev polynomials: Offer efficient approximation with minimized error in the maximum norm, making them useful for stable function representation. Rational function: Useful for approximating functions with singularities or sharp variations, as they can model asymptotic behavior better than polynomials. Fourier series: Capture periodic patterns effectively and are particularly useful in domains such as physics-informed machine learning. Wavelet functions (DoG, Mexican hat, Morlet, and Shannon): Used for feature extraction as they can capture both high-frequency and low-frequency data components. Piecewise linear functions: Provide efficient approximation for multivariate functions in KANs. == Usage == In some modern neural architectures like convolutional neural networks (CNNs), recurrent neural networks (RNNs), and Transformers, KANs are typically used as drop-in substitutes for MLP layers. Despite KANs' general-purpose design, researchers have created and used them for a number of tasks: Scientific machine learning (SciML): Function fitting, partial differential equations (PDEs) and physical/mathematical laws. Continual learning: KANs better preserve previously learned information during incremental updates, avoiding catastrophic forgetting due to the locality of spline adjustments. Graph neural networks: Extensions such as Kolmogorov–Arnold Graph Neural Networks (KA-GNNs) integrate KAN modules into message-passing architectures, showing improvements in molecular property prediction tasks. Sensor data processing: Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks (KANs) have recently been applied to sensor data processing due to their ability to model complex nonlinear relationships with relatively few parameters and improved interpretability compared to conventional multilayer perceptrons. Applications include industrial soft sensors, biomedical signal analysis, remote sensing, and environmental monitoring systems. == Drawbacks == KANs can be computationally intensive and require a large number of parameters due to their use of polynomial functions to capture data.

  Read more →
• 

  Linguistic Systems

  Linguistic Systems, Inc., also known as LSI, provides language translation services (conversion) for all media in over 115 languages. LSI focuses on the translation of legal, medical, business, institutional, academic, government and personal documents. LSI is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. == About LSI == Linguistic Systems, Inc. (LSI) was founded in 1967 by Martin Roberts. LSI's translates to/from 115 languages, DTP, audio-visual conversions, software localization, consecutive and simultaneous interpreting services, foreign brand name analysis, and machine translation with post-editing. LSI has provided translation services to over half of the Fortune 500 companies and most of the Fortune 100. Among its clients are AT&T, Boeing, Citigroup, Coca-Cola, DuPont, Exxon-Mobil, General Electric, General Motors, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Simon & Schuster, Time Warner, Verizon, and Walmart. As of 2013, LSI had a network of more than 7,000 translators who translate into their native languages; These include lawyers, scientists, engineers, and other bilingual professionals.

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Logo Maker

  Trying to pick the best AI logo maker? An AI logo maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI logo maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

  Read more →
• 

  Magnetic ink character recognition

  Magnetic ink character recognition code, known in short as MICR code, is a character recognition technology used mainly by the banking industry to streamline the processing and clearance of cheques and other documents. MICR encoding, called the MICR line, is at the bottom of cheques and other vouchers and typically includes the document-type indicator, bank code, bank account number, cheque number, cheque amount (usually added after a cheque is presented for payment), and a control indicator. The format for the bank code and bank account number is country-specific. The technology allows MICR readers to scan and read the information directly into a data-collection device. Unlike barcode and similar technologies, MICR characters can be read easily by humans. MICR encoded documents can be processed much faster and more accurately than conventional OCR encoded documents. == Pre-Unicode standard representation == The ISO standard ISO 2033:1983, and the corresponding Japanese Industrial Standard JIS X 9010:1984 (originally JIS C 6229–1984), define character encodings for OCR-A, OCR-B and E-13B. == International spread == There are two major MICR fonts in use: E-13B and CMC-7. There is no particular international agreement on which countries use which font. In practice, this does not create particular problems as cheques and other vouchers do not usually flow out of a particular jurisdiction. The E-13B font has been adopted as an international standard in ISO 1004-1:2013, and is the standard in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, as well as Central America and much of Asia, besides other countries. The CMC-7 font has been adopted as an international standard in ISO 1004-2:2013, and is widely used in Europe, including France and Italy, Mexico, and South America, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, besides other countries. Israel is the only country that can use both fonts simultaneously, though the practice makes the system significantly less efficient. This situation is the product of the Israelis adopting CMC-7, while the Palestinians opted for E-13B. == Fonts == === E-13B === E-13B is a 14-character set, comprising the 10 decimal digits, and the following symbols: ⑆ (transit: used to delimit a bank code); ⑈ (on-us: used to delimit a customer account number); ⑇ (amount: used to delimit a transaction amount); ⑉ (dash: used to delimit parts of numbers—e.g., routing numbers or account numbers). In the check printing and banking industries the E-13B MICR line is also commonly referred to as the TOAD line. This reference comes from the 4 characters: Transit, On-us, Amount, and Dash. Compared to CMC-7, some pairs of E-13B characters (notably 2 and 5) can produce relatively similar results when magnetically scanned; however, as a fallback if magnetic reading fails, E-13B also performs well under optical character recognition. The E-13B repertoire can be represented in Unicode (see below). The official Unicode names contain misnomers. For example, the ⑈ on-us symbol is official titled "OCR Dash". Prior to Unicode, it could be encoded according to ISO 2033:1983, which encodes digits in their usual ASCII locations, transit as 0x3A, on-us as 0x3C, amount as 0x3B, and dash as 0x3D. For EBCDIC, IBM code page 1001 encodes digits in their usual EBCDIC locations, transit as 0xDB, on-us as 0xEB, amount as 0xCB, and dash as 0xFB. IBM code page 1032 extends code page 1001 by adding alternative encodings for transit at 0x5C, 0x7A and 0xC1, on-us at 0x4C, 0x61 and 0xC3, amount at 0x5B, 0x5E and 0xC2 and dash at 0x60, 0x7E and 0xC4, in addition to a zero-width space at 0x5A. These alternative representations were added for interoperability with Siemens and Océ printers. === CMC-7 === CMC-7 includes 10 numeric digits, 26 capital letters, and 5 control characters: S I (internal), S II (terminator), S III (amount), S IV (an unused character), and S V (routing). CMC-7 has a barcode format, with every character having two distinct large gaps in different places, as well as distinct patterns in between, to minimize any chance for character confusion while reading magnetically; however, these bars are too close and narrow to be reliably recognised at a typical scan resolution if falling back to optical scanning. CMC-7 can also produce superficially successful, but incorrect, scans of upside-down MICR lines. Unicode does not include support for the CMC-7 control symbols. IBM code page 1033 encodes: Digits and capitals in their usual EBCDIC locations S I (internal) as 0x5E, 0x61 or 0xCB; S II (terminator) as 0x4C, 0x5B or 0xEB; S III (amount) as 0x60, 0x7E or 0xFB; S IV as 0x50, 0x7A or 0xDB; S V (routing) as 0x5C, 0x6E or 0xBB. == MICR reader == MICR characters are printed on documents in one of the two MICR fonts, using magnetizable (commonly known as magnetic) ink or toner, usually containing iron oxide. In scanning, the document is passed through a MICR reader, which performs two functions: magnetization of the ink, and detection of the characters. The characters are read by a MICR reader head, a device similar to the playback head of a tape recorder. As each character passes over the head, it produces a unique waveform that can be easily identified by the system. MICR readers are the primary tool for cheque sorting and are used across the cheque distribution network at multiple stages. For example, a merchant will use a MICR reader to sort cheques by bank and send the sorted cheques to a clearing house for redistribution to those banks. Upon receipt, the banks perform another MICR sort to determine which customer's account is charged and to which branch the cheque should be sent on its way back to the customer. However, many banks no longer offer this last step of returning the cheque to the customer. Instead, cheques are scanned and stored digitally. Sorting of cheques is done as per the geographical coverage of banks in a nation. == Unicode == OCR and MICR characters have been included in the Unicode Standard since at least version 1.1 (June 1993). Since the Unicode Character Database only tracks characters starting with version 1.1, they may also have been present in Unicode 1.0 or 1.0.1. The Unicode block that includes OCR and MICR characters is called Optical Character Recognition and covers U+2440–U+245F. Of the characters in this block, four are from the MICR E-13B font: U+2446 ⑆ OCR BRANCH BANK IDENTIFICATION U+2447 ⑇ OCR AMOUNT OF CHECK U+2448 ⑈ OCR DASH (corrected alias MICR ON US SYMBOL) U+2449 ⑉ OCR CUSTOMER ACCOUNT NUMBER (corrected alias MICR DASH SYMBOL) The names of the latter two characters were inadvertently switched when they were named in ISO/IEC 10646:1993, and they have been assigned accurate names as formal aliases. Per the Unicode Stability Policy, the existing names remain, allowing their use as stable identifiers. Additionally, all four characters have informative (non-formal) aliases in the Unicode charts: "transit", "amount", "on-us", and "dash" respectively. Prior to Unicode, these symbols had been encoded by the ISO-IR-98 encoding defined by ISO 2033:1983, in which they were simply named SYMBOL ONE through SYMBOL FOUR. They were encoded immediately following the digits, which were encoded at their ASCII locations. Although ISO 2033 also specifies encoding for OCR-A and OCR-B, its encoding for E-13B is known simply as ISO_2033-1983 by the IANA. == History == Before the mid-1940s, cheques were processed manually using the Sort-A-Matic or Top Tab Key method. The processing and cheque clearing was very time-consuming and was a significant cost in cheque clearance and bank operations. As the number of cheques increased, ways were sought for automating the process. Standards were developed to ensure uniformity in financial institutions. By the mid-1950s, the Stanford Research Institute and General Electric Computer Laboratory had developed the first automated system to process cheques using MICR. The same team also developed the E-13B MICR font. "E" refers to the font being the fifth considered, and "B" to the fact that it was the second version. The "13" refers to the 0.013-inch character grid. The trial of MICR E-13B font was shown to the American Bankers Association (ABA) in July 1956, which adopted it in 1958 as the MICR standard for negotiable documents in the United States. ABA adopted MICR as its standard because machines could read MICR accurately, and MICR could be printed using existing technology. In addition, MICR remained machine readable, even through overstamping, marking, mutilation and more. The first cheques using MICR were printed by the end of 1959. Although compliance with MICR standards was voluntary in the United States, it had been almost universally adopted in the United States by 1963. In 1963, ANSI adopted the ABA's E-13B font as the American standard for MICR printing, and E-13B was also standardized as ISO 1004:1995. Other countries set their own standards, though the MICR readers and m

  Read more →
• 

  Skipper (computer software)

  Skipper is a visualization tool and code/schema generator for PHP ORM frameworks like Doctrine2, Doctrine, Propel, and CakePHP, which are used to create database abstraction layer. Skipper is developed by Czech company Inventic, s.r.o. based in Brno, and was known as ORM Designer prior to rebranding in 2014. == Overview == Generates visual model from the schema definition files Repetitive import/export of schema definitions in supported formats (XML, YML, PHP annotations) Schema definition files are automatically generated from the visual model Visual representation uses ER diagram extended by concepts of inheritance and many-to-many Supports customization using .xml configuration files and JavaScript Does not support direct connections to the database Crude and simplistic visual representation and menus == Architecture == Skipper was built on the Qt framework. Import/export of the schema definitions uses XSL transformations powered by LibXslt library. Imported source files are first converted to XML format: no conversion for XML, simple conversion for YML, creating the Abstract Syntax Tree and its subsequent conversion to XML for PHP annotations. The import/export scripts are configured in JavaScript and can be freely customized. == Supported ORM frameworks == Frameworks supported for visual model and schema files generation: Doctrine2 Doctrine CakePHP == History == Skipper was created as an internal tool for the web applications developed by Inventic. It was first published as a commercial tool under the name ORM Designer in 2009. Application was reworked and optimized in January 2013, and released as ORM Designer 2. In May 2013 ORM Designer became part of the South Moravian Innovation Center Incubator program (support program for innovative technological startups). In June 2014, ORM Designer version 3 was released and rebranded under the name of Skipper

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Content Generator

  Curious about the best AI content generator? An AI content generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI content generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Structured support vector machine

  The structured supportvector machine is a machine learning algorithm that generalizes the support vector machine (SVM) classifier. Whereas the SVM classifier supports binary classification, multiclass classification and regression, the structured SVM allows training of a classifier for general structured output labels. As an example, a sample instance might be a natural language sentence, and the output label is an annotated parse tree. Training a classifier consists of showing pairs of correct sample and output label pairs. After training, the structured SVM model allows one to predict for new sample instances the corresponding output label; that is, given a natural language sentence, the classifier can produce the most likely parse tree. == Training == For a set of n {\displaystyle n} training instances ( x i , y i ) ∈ X × Y {\displaystyle ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})\in {\mathcal {X}}\times {\mathcal {Y}}} , i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\dots ,n} from a sample space X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {X}}} and label space Y {\displaystyle {\mathcal {Y}}} , the structured SVM minimizes the following regularized risk function. min w ‖ w ‖ 2 + C ∑ i = 1 n max y ∈ Y ( 0 , Δ ( y i , y ) + ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y ) ⟩ − ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y i ) ⟩ ) {\displaystyle {\underset {\boldsymbol {w}}{\min }}\quad \|{\boldsymbol {w}}\|^{2}+C\sum _{i=1}^{n}{\underset {y\in {\mathcal {Y}}}{\max }}\left(0,\Delta (y_{i},y)+\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y)\rangle -\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})\rangle \right)} The function is convex in w {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {w}}} because the maximum of a set of affine functions is convex. The function Δ : Y × Y → R + {\displaystyle \Delta :{\mathcal {Y}}\times {\mathcal {Y}}\to \mathbb {R} _{+}} measures a distance in label space and is an arbitrary function (not necessarily a metric) satisfying Δ ( y , z ) ≥ 0 {\displaystyle \Delta (y,z)\geq 0} and Δ ( y , y ) = 0 ∀ y , z ∈ Y {\displaystyle \Delta (y,y)=0\;\;\forall y,z\in {\mathcal {Y}}} . The function Ψ : X × Y → R d {\displaystyle \Psi :{\mathcal {X}}\times {\mathcal {Y}}\to \mathbb {R} ^{d}} is a feature function, extracting some feature vector from a given sample and label. The design of this function depends very much on the application. Because the regularized risk function above is non-differentiable, it is often reformulated in terms of a quadratic program by introducing one slack variable ξ i {\displaystyle \xi _{i}} for each sample, each representing the value of the maximum. The standard structured SVM primal formulation is given as follows. min w , ξ ‖ w ‖ 2 + C ∑ i = 1 n ξ i s.t. ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y i ) ⟩ − ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y ) ⟩ + ξ i ≥ Δ ( y i , y ) , i = 1 , … , n , ∀ y ∈ Y {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{cl}{\underset {{\boldsymbol {w}},{\boldsymbol {\xi }}}{\min }}&\|{\boldsymbol {w}}\|^{2}+C\sum _{i=1}^{n}\xi _{i}\\{\textrm {s.t.}}&\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})\rangle -\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y)\rangle +\xi _{i}\geq \Delta (y_{i},y),\qquad i=1,\dots ,n,\quad \forall y\in {\mathcal {Y}}\end{array}}} == Inference == At test time, only a sample x ∈ X {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {x}}\in {\mathcal {X}}} is known, and a prediction function f : X → Y {\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {X}}\to {\mathcal {Y}}} maps it to a predicted label from the label space Y {\displaystyle {\mathcal {Y}}} . For structured SVMs, given the vector w {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {w}}} obtained from training, the prediction function is the following. f ( x ) = argmax y ∈ Y ⟨ w , Ψ ( x , y ) ⟩ {\displaystyle f({\boldsymbol {x}})={\underset {y\in {\mathcal {Y}}}{\textrm {argmax}}}\quad \langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}},y)\rangle } Therefore, the maximizer over the label space is the predicted label. Solving for this maximizer is the so-called inference problem and similar to making a maximum a-posteriori (MAP) prediction in probabilistic models. Depending on the structure of the function Ψ {\displaystyle \Psi } , solving for the maximizer can be a hard problem. == Separation == The above quadratic program involves a very large, possibly infinite number of linear inequality constraints. In general, the number of inequalities is too large to be optimized over explicitly. Instead the problem is solved by using delayed constraint generation where only a finite and small subset of the constraints is used. Optimizing over a subset of the constraints enlarges the feasible set and will yield a solution that provides a lower bound on the objective. To test whether the solution w {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {w}}} violates constraints of the complete set inequalities, a separation problem needs to be solved. As the inequalities decompose over the samples, for each sample ( x i , y i ) {\displaystyle ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})} the following problem needs to be solved. y n ∗ = argmax y ∈ Y ( Δ ( y i , y ) + ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y ) ⟩ − ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y i ) ⟩ − ξ i ) {\displaystyle y_{n}^{}={\underset {y\in {\mathcal {Y}}}{\textrm {argmax}}}\left(\Delta (y_{i},y)+\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y)\rangle -\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})\rangle -\xi _{i}\right)} The right hand side objective to be maximized is composed of the constant − ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y i ) ⟩ − ξ i {\displaystyle -\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y_{i})\rangle -\xi _{i}} and a term dependent on the variables optimized over, namely Δ ( y i , y ) + ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y ) ⟩ {\displaystyle \Delta (y_{i},y)+\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y)\rangle } . If the achieved right hand side objective is smaller or equal to zero, no violated constraints for this sample exist. If it is strictly larger than zero, the most violated constraint with respect to this sample has been identified. The problem is enlarged by this constraint and resolved. The process continues until no violated inequalities can be identified. If the constants are dropped from the above problem, we obtain the following problem to be solved. y i ∗ = argmax y ∈ Y ( Δ ( y i , y ) + ⟨ w , Ψ ( x i , y ) ⟩ ) {\displaystyle y_{i}^{}={\underset {y\in {\mathcal {Y}}}{\textrm {argmax}}}\left(\Delta (y_{i},y)+\langle {\boldsymbol {w}},\Psi ({\boldsymbol {x}}_{i},y)\rangle \right)} This problem looks very similar to the inference problem. The only difference is the addition of the term Δ ( y i , y ) {\displaystyle \Delta (y_{i},y)} . Most often, it is chosen such that it has a natural decomposition in label space. In that case, the influence of Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } can be encoded into the inference problem and solving for the most violating constraint is equivalent to solving the inference problem.

  Read more →
• 

  Lübke English

  The term Lübke English (or, in German, Lübke-Englisch) refers to nonsensical English created by literal word-by-word translation of German phrases, disregarding differences between the languages in syntax and meaning. Lübke English is named after Heinrich Lübke, a president of Germany in the 1960s, whose limited English made him a target of German humorists. In 2006, the German magazine konkret revealed that most of the statements ascribed to Lübke were in fact invented by the editorship of Der Spiegel, mainly by staff writer Ernst Goyke and subsequent letters to the editor. In the 1980s, comedian Otto Waalkes had a routine called "English for Runaways", which is a nonsensical literal translation of Englisch für Fortgeschrittene (actually an idiom for 'English for advanced speakers' in German – note that fortschreiten divides into fort, meaning "away" or "forward", and schreiten, meaning "to walk in steps"). In this mock "course", he translates every sentence back or forth between English and German at least once (usually from German literally into English). Though there are also other, more complex language puns, the title of this routine has gradually replaced the term Lübke English when a German speaker wants to point out naive literal translations.

  Read more →
• 

  Aldus PhotoStyler

  Aldus PhotoStyler was a graphics software program developed by the Taiwanese company Ulead. Released in June 1991 as the first 24 bit image editor for Windows, it was bought the same year by the Aldus Prepress group. Its main competition was Adobe Photoshop. Version 2.0 (late 1993) introduced a new user interface and improved color calibration. PhotoStyler SE - lacking some features of the version 2.0 - was bundled with scanners like HP ScanJet. The product disappeared from the Adobe product line after Adobe acquired Aldus in 1994.

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Chatbot

  Looking for the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI chatbot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Dynamic topic model

  Within statistics, Dynamic topic models' are generative models that can be used to analyze the evolution of (unobserved) topics of a collection of documents over time. This family of models was proposed by David Blei and John Lafferty and is an extension to Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) that can handle sequential documents. In LDA, both the order the words appear in a document and the order the documents appear in the corpus are oblivious to the model. Whereas words are still assumed to be exchangeable, in a dynamic topic model the order of the documents plays a fundamental role. More precisely, the documents are grouped by time slice (e.g.: years) and it is assumed that the documents of each group come from a set of topics that evolved from the set of the previous slice. == Topics == Similarly to LDA and pLSA, in a dynamic topic model, each document is viewed as a mixture of unobserved topics. Furthermore, each topic defines a multinomial distribution over a set of terms. Thus, for each word of each document, a topic is drawn from the mixture and a term is subsequently drawn from the multinomial distribution corresponding to that topic. The topics, however, evolve over time. For instance, the two most likely terms of a topic at time t could be "network" and "Zipf" (in descending order) while the most likely ones at time t+1 could be "Zipf" and "percolation" (in descending order). == Model == Define α t {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}} as the per-document topic distribution at time t. β t , k {\displaystyle \beta _{t,k}} as the word distribution of topic k at time t. η t , d {\displaystyle \eta _{t,d}} as the topic distribution for document d in time t, z t , d , n {\displaystyle z_{t,d,n}} as the topic for the nth word in document d in time t, and w t , d , n {\displaystyle w_{t,d,n}} as the specific word. In this model, the multinomial distributions α t + 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{t+1}} and β t + 1 , k {\displaystyle \beta _{t+1,k}} are generated from α t {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}} and β t , k {\displaystyle \beta _{t,k}} , respectively. Even though multinomial distributions are usually written in terms of the mean parameters, representing them in terms of the natural parameters is better in the context of dynamic topic models. The former representation has some disadvantages due to the fact that the parameters are constrained to be non-negative and sum to one. When defining the evolution of these distributions, one would need to assure that such constraints were satisfied. Since both distributions are in the exponential family, one solution to this problem is to represent them in terms of the natural parameters, that can assume any real value and can be individually changed. Using the natural parameterization, the dynamics of the topic model are given by β t , k | β t − 1 , k ∼ N ( β t − 1 , k , σ 2 I ) {\displaystyle \beta _{t,k}|\beta _{t-1,k}\sim N(\beta _{t-1,k},\sigma ^{2}I)} and α t | α t − 1 ∼ N ( α t − 1 , δ 2 I ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}|\alpha _{t-1}\sim N(\alpha _{t-1},\delta ^{2}I)} . The generative process at time slice 't' is therefore: Draw topics β t , k | β t − 1 , k ∼ N ( β t − 1 , k , σ 2 I ) ∀ k {\displaystyle \beta _{t,k}|\beta _{t-1,k}\sim N(\beta _{t-1,k},\sigma ^{2}I)\forall k} Draw mixture model α t | α t − 1 ∼ N ( α t − 1 , δ 2 I ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}|\alpha _{t-1}\sim N(\alpha _{t-1},\delta ^{2}I)} For each document: Draw η t , d ∼ N ( α t , a 2 I ) {\displaystyle \eta _{t,d}\sim N(\alpha _{t},a^{2}I)} For each word: Draw topic Z t , d , n ∼ Mult ( π ( η t , d ) ) {\displaystyle Z_{t,d,n}\sim {\textrm {Mult}}(\pi (\eta _{t,d}))} Draw word W t , d , n ∼ Mult ( π ( β t , Z t , d , n ) ) {\displaystyle W_{t,d,n}\sim {\textrm {Mult}}(\pi (\beta _{t,Z_{t,d,n}}))} where π ( x ) {\displaystyle \pi (x)} is a mapping from the natural parameterization x to the mean parameterization, namely π ( x i ) = exp ⁡ ( x i ) ∑ i exp ⁡ ( x i ) {\displaystyle \pi (x_{i})={\frac {\exp(x_{i})}{\sum _{i}\exp(x_{i})}}} . == Inference == In the dynamic topic model, only W t , d , n {\displaystyle W_{t,d,n}} is observable. Learning the other parameters constitutes an inference problem. Blei and Lafferty argue that applying Gibbs sampling to do inference in this model is more difficult than in static models, due to the nonconjugacy of the Gaussian and multinomial distributions. They propose the use of variational methods, in particular, the Variational Kalman Filtering and the Variational Wavelet Regression. == Applications == In the original paper, a dynamic topic model is applied to the corpus of Science articles published between 1881 and 1999 aiming to show that this method can be used to analyze the trends of word usage inside topics. The authors also show that the model trained with past documents is able to fit documents of an incoming year better than LDA. A continuous dynamic topic model was developed by Wang et al. and applied to predict the timestamp of documents. Going beyond text documents, dynamic topic models were used to study musical influence, by learning musical topics and how they evolve in recent history.

  Read more →