AI Content Humanizer

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

• 

  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 →
• 

  Xaitment

  xaitment is a German-based company that develops and sells artificial intelligence (AI) software to video game developers and simulation developers. The company was founded in 2004 by Dr. Andreas Gerber, and is a spin-off of the German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence, or DFKI. xaitment has its main office in Quierschied, Germany, and field offices in San Francisco and China. == Products == xaitment currently sells two AI software modules: xaitMap and xaitControl. xaitMap provides runtime libraries and graphical tools for navigation mesh generation (also called NavMesh generation), pathfinding, dynamic collision avoidance, and individual and crowd movement. xaitControl is a finite-state machine for game logic and character behavior modeling that also includes a real-time debugger. On January 11, 2012, xaitment announced that it making its source code for these modules available to "all current and future US and European licensees". On February 22, 2012 xaitment released two new plug-ins, xaitMap and xaitControl for the Unity Game Engine. The full versions are available for PC (Windows and Linux), PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii. The pathfinding plug-in is available with a Windows dev environment, but can deployed on iOS, Mac, Android and the Unity Web Player. == Partners == xaitment's AI software is currently integrated into the Unity game engine, Havok's Vision Engine, Bohemia Interactive's VBS2 Simulation Engine, GameBase's Gamebryo game engine. == Customers == xaitment sells its AI software products to video game developers and military and civil simulation developers. Current customers include Tencent, gamania, TML Studios, Emobi Games, IP Keys and others. A full list of customers can be found on xaitment's website.

  Read more →
• 

  Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. season 4

  The fourth season of the American television series Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., based on the Marvel Comics spy organization S.H.I.E.L.D., follows Phil Coulson and other S.H.I.E.L.D. agents and allies after the signing of the Sokovia Accords. It is set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) and acknowledges the continuity of the franchise's films. The season was produced by ABC Studios, Marvel Television, and Mutant Enemy Productions, with Jed Whedon, Maurissa Tancharoen, and Jeffrey Bell serving as showrunners. Clark Gregg reprises his role as Coulson from the film series, starring alongside the returning series regulars Ming-Na Wen, Chloe Bennet, Iain De Caestecker, Elizabeth Henstridge, and Henry Simmons. They are joined by John Hannah who was promoted from his recurring guest role in the third season. The fourth season was ordered in March 2016, with production taking place from that July until the following April. Due to its broadcast schedule, the season was split into three "pods": Ghost Rider for the first eight episodes, featuring recurring guest star Gabriel Luna as the supernatural Robbie Reyes / Ghost Rider and exploring mysticism in the MCU alongside the film Doctor Strange (2016); LMD, referring to the new Life Model Decoy program, for the next seven episodes which focus on recurring guest star Mallory Jansen as the LMD Aida; and Agents of Hydra for the final seven episodes, partly set in a "what if" virtual reality that allowed the return of former series regular Brett Dalton as Grant Ward. The season is also affected by the events of the film Captain America: Civil War (2016), and continues storylines established in the canceled series Agent Carter. The first episode premiered at a screening on September 19, 2016, with the season then airing for 22 episodes on ABC, from September 20, 2016, until May 16, 2017. The premiere debuted to 3.58 million viewers, down from previous season premieres but average for the series. Critical response to the season was positive, with many feeling that each pod was better than the last and in particular praising the visual effects and tone of Ghost Rider, the writing and acting of LMD, and the character development and political commentary explored during Agents of Hydra. The season saw series low viewership, but was still considered to have solved ABC's problem during its new Tuesday night timeslot, and the series was renewed for a fifth season in May 2017. == Episodes == == Cast and characters == == Production == === Development === Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was renewed for a fourth season on March 3, 2016, earlier than usual for the series. Executive producer Jed Whedon said on this, "We're thrilled to know going into the end of [season three] with certainty that we will be returning, because we can build our story accordingly." Executive producer Maurissa Tancharoen also noted that logistics for hiring directors for the season in advance would be easier, "which is a very nice privilege to have...that's a luxury". The end of the episode "What If..." features an onscreen tribute to Bill Paxton, who died in February 2017 and had portrayed John Garrett in the series' first season. The series paid additional tribute to Paxton in "All the Madame's Men" with promos during The Bakshi Report news segment showcasing John Garrett as a fallen American hero. The end of "World's End" features a similar onscreen tribute to Powers Boothe, who died in May 2017 and had portrayed Gideon Malick in the series' third season. === Writing === The season shifted to the later 10 pm timeslot, allowing it to take on a darker, more mature tone than previous seasons. According to Tancharoen, "The whole tagline for this year is 'Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. After Dark'". The timeslot gave the series the opportunity to present an increased level of violence and partial nudity, as well as take more risks and present edgier themes. Following the third-season finale, Tancharoen stated that the fourth season would explore the guilt Daisy Johnson has over Lincoln Campbell's death. Executive producer Jeffrey Bell noted the writers tried to continue the tradition of "finding new combinations and new conflicts" between different sets of characters, given "a lot of procedurals [see] the same people doing the same thing for five years". Pairings that would be explored included Coulson and Mack, continuing from the end of season three, who have a mutual respect for one another due to their relationships with Daisy, and Leo Fitz and Holden Radcliffe, who work together. The Fitz-Simmons relationship was also explored more, examining the new challenges it presented for the two "working together, loving each other and living together". Following the third season's dealing with the themes of Captain America: Civil War (2016), such as the opposing reactions to the Inhumans, Whedon said that the question of "How do you deal with a war with powered people at that level, a government level?" was one that they wanted to answer in the fourth season. Tancharoen called the Inhumans "a permanent part of our universe now", with Whedon adding, "we have a quick-fire way of introducing people with powers. It gives us a lot of leeway in our world, and it lets us explore the metaphors of what it is like to be different. We will never close that chapter." With the Inhumans film being removed from Marvel Studios' release schedule, the series had "a little more freedom" and were "able to do a little bit more" with the species, including the potential of introducing some of the "classic" Inhumans, though the series would focus less on Inhumans than the third season which saw "a real significant Inhuman agenda story". It was not intended to be a spin-off of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. On the evolution of S.H.I.E.L.D. to featuring so many powered characters, Whedon said "the dynamic in the world has changed. There was one person with powers, and then by The Avengers there were maybe six total ... now they're much more prevalent, so there's reaction from the public based on that." The season is structured into three "pods" based on its airing schedule: the first eight episodes, subtitled Ghost Rider; LMD (Life Model Decoy) for the subsequent seven episodes; and a third pod for the final seven episodes called Agents of Hydra. Elements and characters cross over between the different pods, but the sections "definitely have a different feel" from one another, as Bell explained that 22 episodes "is a long time to hold a big bad or a single plot line, especially for an audience", and for the past two seasons, the series was able to have two separated halves that "allows us to introduce a big bad. And then, something happens and we rise somebody new ... Now, there's three of those." "Financial considerations" were also taken into account in creating the pods for the season, as using LMDs does not "cost as much as setting a guy's head on fire via CGI". In terms of writing the "complicated season", Whedon said the writers were "aware that our fans are our fans and have spent some time with these characters and are clever and see things coming sometimes ... Part of our job is to create not just what we are presenting on plot, but letting the audience be one step ahead of us and being one step ahead of that." He added that the writers knew that they wanted to tell a Ghost Rider story, an LMD story, and a "what if" scenario, and the hardest part was making each pod still fit together as a single season. The major connection ultimately became the Darkhold, which leads from the magic of Ghost Rider to the advanced science of LMD and then the Framework in Agents of Hydra. Ghost Rider also reappears in the final episode of the season, "World's End", as an additional connection. ==== Ghost Rider ==== While planning the fourth season, Marvel suggested that the series introduce Ghost Rider, after the character's film rights had returned to Marvel from Sony in May 2013. Loeb felt that this made the season unquestionably "the series' biggest" with the "most ambitious story yet". He added that "one of the things that we talked about is, S.H.I.E.L.D. always looked out for the weird, the unusual, the things that were and could be a problem for the public", and Marvel realized that Ghost Rider's abilities, which are more mystical than anything seen in the series to date, opened up "a quarter of the universe that we haven't really spent a lot of time exploring ... what happens if our very real, our very grounded agents who are very much a family have to take on something that is as bizarre and powerful and unique as Ghost Rider." Bell added that the producers would have been willing to give an entire season of the show to a Ghost Rider arc if the season was 13 episodes or less, but 22 episodes seemed too long to "feel like one flavor". The Robbie Reyes version of Ghost Rider was chosen over other versions of the character from the comics because of his relationship with his brother Gabe, w

  Read more →
• 

  Computing Machinery and Intelligence

  "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" is a paper written by Alan Turing on the topic of artificial intelligence. The paper, published in 1950 in Mind, was the first to introduce his concept of what is now known as the Turing test to the general public. Turing's paper considers the question "Can machines think?" Turing says that since the words "think" and "machine" cannot clearly be defined, we should "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words." To achieve this objective, Turing proposes a three-step approach. First, he identifies a simple and unambiguous concept to substitute for the term "think." Second, he delineates the specific "machines" under consideration. Third, armed with these tools, he poses a new question related to the first, which he believes he can answer in the affirmative. == Turing's test == Rather than trying to determine if a machine is thinking, Turing suggests we should ask if the machine can win a game, called the "Imitation Game". The original Imitation game, that Turing described, is a simple party game involving three players. Player A is a man, player B is a woman and player C (who plays the role of the interrogator) can be of either sex. In the Imitation Game, player C is unable to see either player A or player B (and knows them only as X and Y), and can communicate with them only through written notes or any other form that does not give away any details about their gender. By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man and which is the woman. Player A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator in making the right one. Turing proposes a variation of this game that involves the computer: We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" So the modified game becomes one that involves three participants in isolated rooms: a computer (which is being tested), a human, and a (human) judge. The human judge can converse with both the human and the computer by typing into a terminal. Both the computer and the human try to convince the judge that they are the human. If the judge cannot consistently tell which is which, then the computer wins the game. Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. As Stevan Harnad notes, the question has become "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" In other words, Turing is no longer asking whether a machine can "think"; he is asking whether a machine can act indistinguishably from the way a thinker acts. This question avoids the difficult philosophical problem of pre-defining the verb "to think" and focuses instead on the performance capacities that being able to think makes possible, and how a causal system can generate them. Since Turing introduced his test, it has been both highly influential and widely criticised, and has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. Some of its criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are themselves controversial. Some have taken Turing's question to have been "Can a computer, communicating over a teleprinter, fool a person into believing it is human?" but it seems clear that Turing was not talking about fooling people but about generating human cognitive capacity. == Digital machines == Turing also notes that we need to determine which "machines" we wish to consider. He points out that a human clone, while man-made, would not provide a very interesting example. Turing suggested that we should focus on the capabilities of digital machinery—machines which manipulate the binary digits of 1 and 0, rewriting them into memory using simple rules. He gave two reasons. First, there is no reason to speculate whether or not they can exist. They already did in 1950. Second, digital machinery is "universal". Turing's research into the foundations of computation had proved that a digital computer can, in theory, simulate the behaviour of any other digital machine, given enough memory and time. (This is the essential insight of the Church–Turing thesis and the universal Turing machine.) Therefore, if any digital machine can "act like it is thinking", then every sufficiently powerful digital machine can. Turing writes, "all digital computers are in a sense equivalent." This allows the original question to be made even more specific. Turing now restates the original question as "Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C. Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?" Hence, Turing states that the focus is not on "whether all digital computers would do well in the game nor whether the computers that are presently available would do well, but whether there are imaginable computers which would do well". What is more important is to consider the advancements possible in the state of our machines today regardless of whether we have the available resource to create one or not. == Nine common objections == Having clarified the question, Turing turned to answering it: he considered the following nine common objections, which include all the major arguments against artificial intelligence raised in the years since his paper was first published. Religious Objection: This states that thinking is a function of man's immortal soul; therefore, a machine cannot think. "In attempting to construct such machines," wrote Turing, "we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates." 'Heads in the Sand' Objection: "The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so." This thinking is popular among intellectual people, as they believe superiority derives from higher intelligence and the possibility of being overtaken is a threat (as machines have efficient memory capacities and processing speed, machines exceeding the learning and knowledge capabilities are highly probable). This objection is a fallacious appeal to consequences, confusing what should not be with what can or cannot be (Wardrip-Fruin, 56). The Mathematical Objection: This objection uses mathematical theorems, such as Gödel's incompleteness theorem, to show that there are limits to what questions a computer system based on logic can answer. Turing suggests that humans are too often wrong themselves and pleased at the fallibility of a machine. (This argument would be made again by philosopher John Lucas in 1961 and physicist Roger Penrose in 1989, and later would be called Penrose–Lucas argument.) Argument From Consciousness: This argument, suggested by Professor Geoffrey Jefferson in his 1949 Lister Oration (acceptance speech for his 1948 award of Lister Medal) states that "not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain." Turing replies by saying that we have no way of knowing that any individual other than ourselves experiences emotions, and that therefore we should accept the test. He adds, "I do not wish to give the impression that I think there is no mystery about consciousness ... [b]ut I do not think these mysteries necessarily need to be solved before we can answer the question [of whether machines can think]." (This argument, that a computer can't have conscious experiences or understanding, would be made in 1980 by philosopher John Searle in his Chinese room argument. Turing's reply is now known as the "other minds reply". See also Can a machine have a mind? in the philosophy of AI.) Arguments from various disabilities. These arguments all have the form "a computer will never do X". Turing offers a selection:Be kind, resourceful, beautiful, friendly, have initiative, have a sense of humour, tell right from wrong, make mistakes, fall in love, enjo

  Read more →
• 

  Buckeye Corpus

  The Buckeye Corpus of conversational speech is a speech corpus created by a team of linguists and psychologists at Ohio State University led by Prof. Mark Pitt. It contains high-quality recordings from 40 speakers in Columbus, Ohio conversing freely with an interviewer. The interviewer's voice is heard only faintly in the background of these recordings. The sessions were conducted as Sociolinguistics interviews, and are essentially monologues. The speech has been orthographically transcribed and phonetically labeled. The audio and text files, together with time-aligned phonetic labels, are stored in a format for use with speech analysis software (Xwaves and Wavesurfer). Software for searching the transcription files is also available at the project web site. The corpus is available to researchers in academia and industry. The project was funded by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders and the Office of Research at Ohio State University.

  Read more →
• 

  TuVox

  TuVox is a company that produces VXML-based telephone speech-recognition applications to replace DTMF touch-tone systems for their clients. == History == TuVox was founded in 2001 by Steven S. Pollock and Ashok Khosla, formerly of Apple Computer Corporation and Claris Corporation. Since then, TuVox has grown to over 150 employees and has US offices in Cupertino, California and Boca Raton, Florida as well as international offices in London, Vancouver and Sydney. In 2005, TuVox acquired the customers and hosting facilities of Net-By-Tel. In 2007, the company raised $20m for its speech recognition, and phone menu software. On July 22, 2010, West Interactive — a subsidiary of West Corporation — announced its acquisition of TuVox. == Customers == TuVox clients include: 1-800-Flowers.com, AMC Entertainment, American Airlines, British Airways, M&T Bank, Canon Inc., Gateway, Inc., Motorola, Progress Energy Inc., Telecom New Zealand, Time, Inc., BECU, Virgin America and USAA.

  Read more →
• 

  Computer-automated design

  Design Automation usually refers to electronic design automation, or Design Automation which is a Product Configurator. Extending Computer-Aided Design (CAD), automated design and Computer-Automated Design (CAutoD) are more concerned with a broader range of applications, such as automotive engineering, civil engineering, composite material design, control engineering, dynamic system identification and optimization, financial systems, industrial equipment, mechatronic systems, steel construction, structural optimisation, and the invention of novel systems. The concept of CAutoD perhaps first appeared in 1963, in the IBM Journal of Research and Development, where a computer program was written. to search for logic circuits having certain constraints on hardware design to evaluate these logics in terms of their discriminating ability over samples of the character set they are expected to recognize. More recently, traditional CAD simulation is seen to be transformed to CAutoD by biologically-inspired machine learning, including heuristic search techniques such as evolutionary computation, and swarm intelligence algorithms. == Guiding designs by performance improvements == To meet the ever-growing demand of quality and competitiveness, iterative physical prototyping is now often replaced by 'digital prototyping' of a 'good design', which aims to meet multiple objectives such as maximised output, energy efficiency, highest speed and cost-effectiveness. The design problem concerns both finding the best design within a known range (i.e., through 'learning' or 'optimisation') and finding a new and better design beyond the existing ones (i.e., through creation and invention). This is equivalent to a search problem in an almost certainly, multidimensional (multivariate), multi-modal space with a single (or weighted) objective or multiple objectives. == Normalized objective function: cost vs. fitness == Using single-objective CAutoD as an example, if the objective function, either as a cost function J ∈ [ 0 , ∞ ) {\displaystyle J\in [0,\infty )} , or inversely, as a fitness function f ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle f\in (0,1]} , where f = J 1 + J {\displaystyle f={\tfrac {J}{1+J}}} , is differentiable under practical constraints in the multidimensional space, the design problem may be solved analytically. Finding the parameter sets that result in a zero first-order derivative and that satisfy the second-order derivative conditions would reveal all local optima. Then comparing the values of the performance index of all the local optima, together with those of all boundary parameter sets, would lead to the global optimum, whose corresponding 'parameter' set will thus represent the best design. However, in practice, the optimization usually involves multiple objectives and the matters involving derivatives are a lot more complex. == Dealing with practical objectives == In practice, the objective value may be noisy or even non-numerical, and hence its gradient information may be unreliable or unavailable. This is particularly true when the problem is multi-objective. At present, many designs and refinements are mainly made through a manual trial-and-error process with the help of a CAD simulation package. Usually, such a posteriori learning or adjustments need to be repeated many times until a ‘satisfactory’ or ‘optimal’ design emerges. == Exhaustive search == In theory, this adjustment process can be automated by computerised search, such as exhaustive search. As this is an exponential algorithm, it may not deliver solutions in practice within a limited period of time. == Search in polynomial time == One approach to virtual engineering and automated design is evolutionary computation such as evolutionary algorithms. === Evolutionary algorithms === To reduce the search time, the biologically-inspired evolutionary algorithm (EA) can be used instead, which is a (non-deterministic) polynomial algorithm. The EA based multi-objective "search team" can be interfaced with an existing CAD simulation package in a batch mode. The EA encodes the design parameters (encoding being necessary if some parameters are non-numerical) to refine multiple candidates through parallel and interactive search. In the search process, 'selection' is performed using 'survival of the fittest' a posteriori learning. To obtain the next 'generation' of possible solutions, some parameter values are exchanged between two candidates (by an operation called 'crossover') and new values introduced (by an operation called 'mutation'). This way, the evolutionary technique makes use of past trial information in a similarly intelligent manner to the human designer. The EA based optimal designs can start from the designer's existing design database, or from an initial generation of candidate designs obtained randomly. A number of finely evolved top-performing candidates will represent several automatically optimized digital prototypes. There are websites that demonstrate interactive evolutionary algorithms for design. allows you to evolve 3D objects online and have them 3D printed. allows you to do the same for 2D images.

  Read more →
• 

  Murderbot (TV series)

  Murderbot is an American science fiction action comedy television series created by Paul Weitz and Chris Weitz for Apple TV+. It is based on All Systems Red, the first book of the series The Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells, who serves as a consulting producer. The series stars Alexander Skarsgård as the titular character. The first season premiered on May 16, 2025 and received positive reviews. In July 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. == Premise == A media-obsessed private security construct (manufactured from cloned human tissue and mechanical parts) calling itself Murderbot must hide its newly acquired autonomy while completing dangerous assignments and being simultaneously drawn to humans, and appalled by their weakness. == Cast and characters == === Main === Alexander Skarsgård as Murderbot Noma Dumezweni as Ayda Mensah, a terraforming specialist, the President of Preservation Alliance and the leader of the science team protected by Murderbot David Dastmalchian as Gurathin, a tech expert and augmented human Sabrina Wu as Pin-Lee, a scientist and legal counsel to the team Akshay Khanna as Ratthi, a wormhole expert Tamara Podemski as Bharadwaj, a geochemist Tattiawna Jones as Arada, a biologist === Recurring === Cast of show-within-a-show The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon John Cho as Eknie Jef Chem (playing Captain Hossein) Jack McBrayer as Breiller MocJac (playing Navigation Officer Hordööp-Sklanch) Clark Gregg as Arletty (playing Lieutenant Kullervv) DeWanda Wise as Pordron Bretney III Roche (playing NawBot 337 Alt 66) === Guest === Anna Konkle as Leebeebee, a member of another survey team on the planet. The character does not appear in the novella. Amanda Brugel as GrayCris Blue Leader David Reale as GrayCris Yellow == Episodes == == Production == The book series was optioned in the late 2010s, and its film adaptation was considered. In 2021, book series author Martha Wells said that a potential TV series adaptation was in development and that she had read the script and was "really excited about it". The series was green lit by Apple TV+ in 2022, with Wells serving as a consulting producer. The production design team, led by Sue Chan, started work in the autumn. Tommy Arnold, the Murderbot Diaries special edition illustrator, created the concept art for the show. After the casting was delayed by the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, in December 2023 it was announced that Alexander Skarsgård would produce and star in the series. He developed the character and the world of Murderbot with the showrunners. In February 2024, David Dastmalchian and Noma Dumezweni joined the cast. In March, Sabrina Wu, Tattiawna Jones, Akshay Khanna, and Tamara Podemski joined the cast. On July 10, 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. Showrunners Chris and Paul Weitz suggested the second season would combine the next three books of the series and will have longer episodes. === Filming === Principal photography for the first season took place from March–June 2024, in Toronto and parts of Ontario, Canada. Most of the filming was done on location, with the Sanctuary Moon scenes filmed on a virtual production stage. Principal photography for the second season began in mid-2026, in Madrid, Spain. It is planned to last 71 days, with Martha Wells also visiting the set. == Release == The first two episodes of Murderbot premiered on Apple TV+ on May 16, 2025, with subsequent episodes released weekly. The first season consists of ten episodes. == Reception == Even before the release of the show, numerous media sources had commented on the titular character as being coded as autistic and agender. On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, Murderbot has an approval rating of 96% with an average score of 7.5/10, based on 76 critics' reviews. The website's critical consensus states, "Alexander Skarsgård's superbly dry wit brings a lot of heart to Murderbot, making for a refreshingly jaunty sci-fi saga about finally coming out of one's shell". Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned a score of 70 out of 100, based on 28 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. Some reviewers have criticized Murderbot's changes to Wells' original books. Angela Watercutter of Wired noted that the series has significant tonal differences from the books and noted the show's changes to characters, particularly Murderbot and Dr. Mensah, and Wells' social commentary. === Accolades === Murderbot was a finalist for the 2025 Dragon Award for Best Science Fiction or Fantasy TV Series. Tommy Arnold won the 2025 Concept Art Association Award in the category of Live-Action Series Character Art for his work on Murderbot. Alexander Skarsgård was nominated for a Critics' Choice Award for Best Actor in a Comedy Series. Carrie Grace and Laura Jean Shannon were nominated for a Costume Designers Guild Award in the category of Excellence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Television for their work on FreeCommerce. Amanda Jones was nominated for a Composers & Lyricists Award for Outstanding Original Title Sequence for a Television Production.

  Read more →
• 

  Glossary of machine vision

  The following are common definitions related to the machine vision field. General related fields Machine vision Computer vision Image processing Signal processing == 0-9 == 1394. FireWire is Apple Inc.'s brand name for the IEEE 1394 interface. It is also known as i.Link (Sony's name) or IEEE 1394 (although the 1394 standard also defines a backplane interface). It is a personal computer (and digital audio/digital video) serial bus interface standard, offering high-speed communications and isochronous real-time data services. 1D. One-dimensional. 2D computer graphics. The computer-based generation of digital images—mostly from two-dimensional models (such as 2D geometric models, text, and digital images) and by techniques specific to them. 3D computer graphics. 3D computer graphics are different from 2D computer graphics in that a three-dimensional representation of geometric data is stored in the computer for the purposes of performing calculations and rendering 2D images. Such images may be for later display or for real-time viewing. Despite these differences, 3D computer graphics rely on many of the same algorithms as 2D computer vector graphics in the wire frame model and 2D computer raster graphics in the final rendered display. In computer graphics software, the distinction between 2D and 3D is occasionally blurred; 2D applications may use 3D techniques to achieve effects such as lighting, and primarily 3D may use 2D rendering techniques. 3D scanner. This is a device that analyzes a real-world object or environment to collect data on its shape and possibly color. The collected data can then be used to construct digital, three dimensional models useful for a wide variety of applications. == A == Aberration. Optically, defocus refers to a translation along the optical axis away from the plane or surface of best focus. In general, defocus reduces the sharpness and contrast of the image. What should be sharp, high-contrast edges in a scene become gradual transitions. Algebraic distance or algebraic error. The algebraic distance from a point xi to a curve or surface defined by f ( x , β ) = 0 {\displaystyle f(x,\beta )=0} is the value of f ( x i , β ) {\displaystyle f(x_{i},\beta )} , i.e. the residual in the least squares problem with data point (xi, 0) and model function f. This term is mainly used in computer vision.[1][2] Aperture. In context of photography or machine vision, aperture refers to the diameter of the aperture stop of a photographic lens. The aperture stop can be adjusted to control the amount of light reaching the film or image sensor. aspect ratio (image). The aspect ratio of an image is its displayed width divided by its height (usually expressed as "x:y"). Angular resolution. Describes the resolving power of any image forming device such as an optical or radio telescope, a microscope, a camera, or an eye. Automated optical inspection. == B == Barcode. A barcode (also bar code) is a machine-readable representation of information in a visual format on a surface. Blob discovery. Inspecting an image for discrete blobs of connected pixels (e.g. a black hole in a grey object) as image landmarks. These blobs frequently represent optical targets for machining, robotic capture, or manufacturing failure. Bitmap. A raster graphics image, digital image, or bitmap, is a data file or structure representing a generally rectangular grid of pixels, or points of color, on a computer monitor, paper, or other display device. == C == Camera. A camera is a device used to take pictures, either singly or in sequence. A camera that takes pictures singly is sometimes called a photo camera to distinguish it from a video camera. Camera Link. Camera Link is a serial communication protocol designed for computer vision applications based on the National Semiconductor interface Channel-link. It was designed for the purpose of standardizing scientific and industrial video products including cameras, cables and frame grabbers. The standard is maintained and administered by the Automated Imaging Association, or AIA, the global machine vision industry's trade group. Charge-coupled device. A charge-coupled device (CCD) is a sensor for recording images, consisting of an integrated circuit containing an array of linked, or coupled, capacitors. CCD sensors and cameras tend to be more sensitive, less noisy, and more expensive than CMOS sensors and cameras. CIE 1931 Color Space. In the study of the perception of color, one of the first mathematically defined color spaces was the CIE XYZ color space (also known as CIE 1931 color space), created by the International Commission on Illumination (CIE) in 1931. CMOS. CMOS ("see-moss")stands for complementary metal-oxide semiconductor, is a major class of integrated circuits. CMOS imaging sensors for machine vision are cheaper than CCD sensors but more noisy. CoaXPress. CoaXPress (CXP) is an asymmetric high speed serial communication standard over coaxial cable. CoaXPress combines high speed image data, low speed camera control and power over a single coaxial cable. The standard is maintained by JIIA, the Japan Industrial Imaging Association. Color. The perception of the frequency (or wavelength) of light, and can be compared to how pitch (or a musical note) is the perception of the frequency or wavelength of sound. Color blindness. Also known as color vision deficiency, in humans is the inability to perceive differences between some or all colors that other people can distinguish Color temperature. "White light" is commonly described by its color temperature. A traditional incandescent light source's color temperature is determined by comparing its hue with a theoretical, heated black-body radiator. The lamp's color temperature is the temperature in kelvins at which the heated black-body radiator matches the hue of the lamp. Color vision. CV is the capacity of an organism or machine to distinguish objects based on the wavelengths (or frequencies) of the light they reflect or emit. computer vision. The study and application of methods which allow computers to "understand" image content. Contrast. In visual perception, contrast is the difference in visual properties that makes an object (or its representation in an image) distinguishable from other objects and the background. C-Mount. Standardized adapter for optical lenses on CCD - cameras. C-Mount lenses have a back focal distance 17.5 mm vs. 12.5 mm for "CS-mount" lenses. A C-Mount lens can be used on a CS-Mount camera through the use of a 5 mm extension adapter. C-mount is a 1" diameter, 32 threads per inch mounting thread (1"-32UN-2A.) CS-Mount. Same as C-Mount but the focal point is 5 mm shorter. A CS-Mount lens will not work on a C-Mount camera. CS-mount is a 1" diameter, 32 threads per inch mounting thread. == D == Data matrix. A two dimensional Barcode. Depth of field. In optics, particularly photography and machine vision, the depth of field (DOF) is the distance in front of and behind the subject which appears to be in focus. Depth perception. DP is the visual ability to perceive the world in three dimensions. It is a trait common to many higher animals. Depth perception allows the beholder to accurately gauge the distance to an object. Diaphragm. In optics, a diaphragm is a thin opaque structure with an opening (aperture) at its centre. The role of the diaphragm is to stop the passage of light, except for the light passing through the aperture. == E == Edge detection. ED marks the points in a digital image at which the luminous intensity changes sharply. It also marks the points of luminous intensity changes of an object or spatial-taxon silhouette. Electromagnetic interference. Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) is electromagnetic radiation which is emitted by electrical circuits carrying rapidly changing signals, as a by-product of their normal operation, and which causes unwanted signals (interference or noise) to be induced in other circuits. == F == FireWire. FireWire (also known as i. Link or IEEE 1394) is a personal computer (and digital audio/video) serial bus interface standard, offering high-speed communications. It is often used as an interface for industrial cameras. Fixed-pattern noise. Flat-field correction. Frame grabber. An electronic device that captures individual, digital still frames from an analog video signal or a digital video stream. Fringe Projection Technique. 3D data acquisition technique employing projector displaying fringe pattern on a surface of measured piece, and one or more cameras recording image(s). Field of view. The field of view (FOV) is the part which can be seen by the machine vision system at one moment. The field of view depends from the lens of the system and from the working distance between object and camera. Focus. An image, or image point or region, is said to be in focus if light from object points is converged about as well as possible in the image; conversely, it is out of focus if light is not w

  Read more →
• 

  Course of Action Display and Evaluation Tool

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

  Read more →
• 

  2024 Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League

  On 27 April 2024, the inaugural race of the Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League was held at the Yas Marina Circuit in Abu Dhabi. The race, originally scheduled to last eight laps, was ultimately shortened to six laps due to various complications, including subpar performance. It involved four self-driving race cars, only two of which – German cars Hailey and Constructor AI – finished the race; the other two did not finish. == Background == === Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) === The A2RL is an autonomous racing championship based in Abu Dhabi and organized by ASPIRE, part of the Advanced Technology Research Council. It is one of two active autonomous car racing championships, the second being the US-based Indy Autonomous Challenge. Unlike the IAC, which primarily focuses on time trials, simulated races, and challenges for teams, the A2RL's car races are closer to a standard grand prix formula race format. Both use Dallara-supplied racecars; the IAC uses the AV-24 chassis derived from Indy NXT's IL-15, while the A2RL chassis is designated EAV-24 and is derived from the SF-23 chassis used in Japanese Super Formula races. === Entrants === In total, eight teams were part of the A2RL in 2024, but only four would compete in the race proper. The list of teams in 2024 is: Fly Eagle (China/UAE) Code19 Racing (United States) Constructor University (Germany) Kinetiz (Singapore/UAE) Humda Lab (Hungary) PoliMove (Italy) Unimore (Italy) Technical University of Munich (Germany) Most teams come from universities and many, such as PoliMove and TUM, already have experience with autonomous racing, primarily from competing in the IAC. All teams had two months to code and test their AIs. Unlike most international open-wheel racing tournaments, such as Formula 1 or Formula E, no free practice sessions were undertaken. === TII Pre-race demonstration === Prior to the race itself, a mock 1v1 duel between former F1 driver Danill Kvyat and a self-driving car from the non-competing TII Racing team took place; the autonomous car was green and had number 01, while Kvyat's car was red and had number 00. Kvyat spent most of the duel in the pits. Kvyat himself said: "I'm not racing autonomous cars here. It won't be a flat-out race". == Qualifying == === Qualifying report === As only four of the eight entrants would compete in the main event, qualifying time trials were held to determine the four main race competitors, as well as their positions in the grid. Only the cars with the four best lap times over three time trial sessions held on Friday and Saturday would qualify. Multiple errors and setbacks occurred during qualifying. In the first session, Maveric AI, Code19's car, left the track and stopped just after turn 14 due to connectivity issues. Fly Eagle's car, Feiying, had multiple upsets; at one point, Feiying ran into localization issues and began swerving left and right before stopping just before turn 10. Later, Feiying swerved again and nearly hit the wall at the back straight, near the support pits, due to further localization issues. Sparkz, the Kinetiz team's car, swerved and crashed into the wall near yacht berths 51-56 after turn 11, damaging the front right wheel's axle and partially detaching the forward wings. Sparkz would be the only car to not have a set time at the end of the time trials. PoliMove car Eva braked hard without warning at the straight, the LED status indicator turning off, suggesting the AI computer had a system crash or shut itself down. After the sun went down, during the second session, Hailey, the car from the TUM team, went off-track after turn 9 and stopped, its status indicator flashing red, meaning Hailey's AI disengaged itself. Eva had further issues, once again braking hard and spinning out into turn 1. Later, the same thing happened to Feiying; it later swerved left and right and stopped due to further localization issues. The morning after, during the third and final session, Hailey went off-track after turn 5, and were unable to regain the pole position. === Qualifying classification === == Attack/Defend challenge == === Attack/Defend challenge report === In this part of the event, cars would be put on a series of 1v1 duels to see how well they could defend their position or attack to gain one higher. During one such duel, an incident occurred where Hailey rear-ended Eva, sending both off the track and prematurely ending the duel. The challenge was otherwise uneventful. === Attack/Defend challenge results === == Main race == === Race report === Eventually, at around 20:30 Gulf Standard Time on the night of 27 April, the main event (termed the "Grand Final" on-stream) would begin. The starting order was Eva first, Gianna second, Hailey third, and Constructor AI last. The race began with a rolling start. As a safety measure, the first two laps were conducted under virtual safety car (VSC) to make sure the cars stayed together, making them de facto formation laps, even if they counted towards race distance. However, Hailey ended up stopping at the final turn and strayed too far from the cars ahead, and as a result, the VSC conditions were extended for another lap. According to the livestream's on-screen graphics, Hailey was upwards of one minute and 22.3 seconds behind Gianna after the former started moving again. On lap 4, halfway through the planned race, and with Hailey more than 30 seconds behind Gianna, the VSC was lifted, and the green flag finally dropped. At first, the two Italian cars were leading the pack, Eva was the race leader with Gianna 3.2 seconds behind, however, as it entered the chicane, Eva hit the brakes and spun out, with Gianna briefly stopping as it passed Eva. Eva's spin automatically triggered a full-course yellow flag. Normally, under yellow flag conditions, overtaking is not permitted, but with Eva stopped and being moved off the track, it was theoretically permitted to overtake Eva. However, presumably due to an oversight in the AI's code, the cars assumed overtaking Eva, despite being off the track, was not permitted. As a result, both Gianna and Constructor AI stopped as they did not want to overtake Eva due to the yellow flag, with Hailey following suit as it approached. Constructor AI's status indicator was solid red, suggesting the AI had disengaged; however, Gianna's status indicator remained solid purple, showing the AI was still in control. Eva's status indicator was also solid purple, but was soon flashing green, suggesting the AI had disengaged but was ready to take control again. With all cars stalled, and Eva being off the track, the race was effectively red-flagged and suspended. Hailey, Gianna, and Constructor AI drove themselves back to their team's pits; Eva did not, it was towed to the main pits on a flatbed truck. Constructor was the first to arrive at the pits, followed by Gianna and Hailey, in that order. This incident, combined with loss of internet connection, led to Eva retiring - it did not finish the race. Eventually, it was decided to resume the race. With Eva retired, the restart order was Gianna first, Hailey second, and Constructor AI third. The race was also shortened - from eight laps to six. With lap 5 under full-course yellow, this meant all three remaining teams would effectively restart the race on the sixth and final lap. The trio left the pits at 22:25 Gulf Standard Time, and the race resumed two minutes later. At first, Gianna was winning with Hailey 2.6 seconds behind, but then Gianna stopped on turn 5, giving Hailey the lead. Constructor AI also overtook Gianna, but not without briefly stopping. Gianna remained stopped, its status indicator solid red - it did not finish either. With both Italian teams out of the picture, Hailey finished first and won A2RL 2024, with Constructor AI finishing second, 27.2 seconds behind. === Final race classification ===

  Read more →
• 

  Refik Anadol

  Refik Anadol (born November 7, 1985) is a Turkish American media artist and the co-founder of Refik Anadol Studio and Dataland. Recognized as a pioneer in the aesthetics of data visualization and AI arts, his work merges art, technology, science, and architecture. Through media embedded into existing architecture, live audio-visual performances, immersive rooms, exhibitions, AI data paintings and sculptures, and digital collections, Anadol explores collective memories, humanity's relationship to nature, the perception of space and time, and human-machine collaborations. His work has been exhibited in more than seventy cities on six continents. == Early life and education == Anadol was born and raised in Istanbul and grew up in a family of teachers. He taught himself basic programming on a Commodore 64 when he was eight. His connection to machines began with coding and video games. Anadol saw Blade Runner for the first time when he was eight; his mother said the way he perceived his surroundings shifted the day after he saw the film. He was fascinated with its futuristic depiction of downtown Los Angeles, and transfixed by as a scene during which a replicant discovers that her memories are an implanted component of her machine mind, In a 2024 interview with the Financial Times, he said: "Since that moment, one of my inspirations has been that question: 'What can a machine do with someone else's memories?" Anadol attended Istanbul Bilgi University, where he received a BA in photography and video in 2009 and an MFA in visual communication in 2011. In 2014 he earned an MFA in design media arts at UCLA. He was mentored by Casey Reas, Jennifer Steinkamp, and Christian Moeller. == Career and selected works == === 2008–2012: Data painting, Quadrature and Quadrangle, Istanbul Biennial === As an undergraduate, Anadol read a paper by Lev Manovich on augmented space. Manovich's assertion that collaborations between architects and artists could make the "invisible flow of data visible" triggered Anadol's imagination, and in 2008, he altered built space for the first time. Bringing a projector outside, he projected large-scale images onto a concrete to create the illusion of movement. Coining the term "data painting," the piece inspired Anadol to use light as material and data as pigment. In 2010 he created Quadrature with Alican Aktürk, a fellow graduate student, at the SantralIstanbul Art and Culture Center's main gallery building. A live audio-visual performance that examined the relationship between architecture and media, Quadrature used video projection techniques to manipulate footage of quadrilaterals. He followed Quadrature with Quadrangle at SANAA School of Design in Essen, Germany, using the entire 360 degrees of the building as a canvas. In 2011, he was invited to create a media installation at the Istanbul Biennial on the heavily trafficked İstiklal Avenue. He created a site-specific large-scale interpretation of sounds he recorded during different times of day, and used nine projectors to project reinterpreted images. The work was titled Augmented Structures v1.0. Anadol's first solo exhibition, Sceptical Interventions, was held at the Piveneli Gallery in Istanbul in early 2012. Later that year he moved to Los Angeles to attend UCLA's Design Media Arts program. The first place he went after his arrival was downtown Los Angeles. [6] === 2013–2016: Visions of America: Amériques, Infinity Room, Google AMI === In 2013, at Microsoft Research's annual Design Expo, Anadol presented his idea to use the external walls of Walt Disney Concert Hall as a canvas. His presentation brought him to the attention of Gehry Technologies, and with the support of Gehry and his team, Anadol was offered the use of the original 3D model of the concert hall. For his 2014 thesis project, with assistance from architects and UCLA researchers, he created a site-specific architectural video installation inside the concert hall that accompanied a Los Angeles Philharmonic performance of Edgard Varèse's Amérique. Titled Visions of America: Amériques, Anadol used algorithmic sound analysis to listen and respond to the music in real-time. He tracked conductor Esa-Pekka Salonen's heartbeat with a sensor and used a 3-D camera system to integrate Salonen's movements. He created Infinity Room at the Zorlu PSM for the 2015 Istanbul Biennial. Rather than creating an illusion only with mirrors, Anadol used pixel and 3D projection mapping to transform every surface of the room into an abstract infinite moving space. A temporary immersive environment, Infinity Room was also exhibited at events including South by Southwest in Austin, Texas, the New Zealand Festival in Wellington, New Zealand, and Jeffrey Deitch in Los Angeles. In 2016, Anadol was awarded the first Google Artists and Machine Intelligence Artist Residency; it was just after a team at Google opened up the algorithm for DeepDream, a computer vision program that prompted Anadol's realization that if a machine could learn, it could remember, dream, and hallucinate. === 2017–2018: Winds of Boston, Archive Dreaming, Melting Memories, WDCH Dreams === In 2017, he created the data painting Winds of Boston, a 6' x 13' foot video installation in the lobby of a Boston office building, using software he created to read, analyze and visualize wind speed, direction, and gust patterns along with time and temperature at 20-second intervals recorded over a one-year period at Logan International Airport. Later in the year, he used AI to generate infinite new outputs based on a massive dataset for Archive Dreaming, an immersive installation at Salt Research, a contemporary gallery and library in Istanbul. Inspired by his idea of consciousness and its context within AI, as well as Jorge Luis Borges' The Library of Babel, Anadol used AI and machine learning to look at and discover interactions and correlations between 1.7 million items culled from 40,000 publications covering Turkish contemporary and modern art, architecture, and economics from 1997 to 2010. Archive Dreaming, which could be controlled by users with a joystick, dreamed of unexpected correlations among documents when idle. In 2018, after his uncle was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, Anadol created Melting Memories. Working with scientists from the neuroscape laboratory at the University of California, San Francisco, he used academic data from the neuroscience archives and EEG scans of an anonymous Alzheimer's disease dataset to create AI-generated visuals related to memory, health, degeneration, and decay.Melting Memories was projected on the walls of Pilevneli Gallery; visitors to the exhibition could watch as millions of pixels reconstructed people's memories. Anadol won the Lumen Prize Gold Award for Melting Memories. Anadol was commissioned by the Los Angeles Philharmonic to create an installation to celebrate the orchestra's centennial anniversary in 2018. He worked with Google's Kenric MacDowell to create WDCH Dreams, using algorithmic visualizations of data to mimic the process of human dreaming. Projected across the exterior walls of Walt Disney Concert Hall using 42 large-scale projectors with 50K visual resolution, 8-channel sound, and 1.2M luminance, Anadol painted with data points culled from the orchestra's archives, including 587,763 images, 1,880 videos, 1,483 metadata files, and 17,773 audio files. Because Gehry gave him access to the 3D architectural files of Walt Disney Concert Hall, Anadol knew the exact contours of the building. WDCH Dreams debuted in September 2018. A 12-minute performance in three parts staged every 30 minutes over ten nights, "Centennial Memories,” the first piece, used 44.5 terabytes of historical data from the Phil's archives. It was followed by "Consciousness", which processed every note the orchestra has ever recorded, using billions of data points to generate connections; and "Dream," which merged "Centennial Memories" and "Consciousness" to create hallucinations that were described in the New York Times as "a sort of combinatorial Fantasia. === 2019–2021: Machine Hallucinations: NYC, Machine Hallucinations: Nature Dreams, Machine Memories: Space, Quantum Memories === In 2019, Refik Anadol presented Latent History at Fotografiska Stockholm. The site specific installation transformed photographic archives of Stockholm into a large scale, machine generated visual projection displayed in the museum’s main exhibition hall. Drawing on thousands of archival images spanning approximately 150 years, the work used artificial intelligence to reinterpret the city’s historical imagery as a continuously evolving visual narrative.. Anadol began thinking about the work that would become the Machine Hallucinations series while in residence at Google. In 2019, he completed the first work in the series, Machine Hallucinations: NYC, which used 300 million photos of New York City and 113 million additional data points, including subway sounds, ra

  Read more →
• 

  PlantUML

  PlantUML is an open-source tool allowing users to create diagrams from a plain text language. Besides various UML diagrams, PlantUML has support for various other software development related formats (such as Archimate, Block diagram, BPMN, C4, Computer network diagram, ERD, Gantt chart, Mind map, and WBD), as well as visualisation of JSON and YAML files. The language of PlantUML is an example of a domain-specific language. Besides its own DSL, PlantUML also understands AsciiMath, Creole, DOT, and LaTeX. It uses Graphviz software to lay out its diagrams and Tikz for LaTeX support. Images can be output as PNG, SVG, LaTeX and even ASCII art. PlantUML has also been used to allow blind people to design and read UML diagrams. == Applications that use PlantUML == There are various extensions or add-ons that incorporate PlantUML. Atom has a community maintained PlantUML syntax highlighter and viewer. Confluence wiki has a PlantUML plug-in for Confluence Server, which renders diagrams on-the-fly during a page reload. There is an additional PlantUML plug-in for Confluence Cloud. Doxygen integrates diagrams for which sources are provided after the startuml command. Eclipse has a PlantUML plug-in. Google Docs has an add-on called PlantUML Gizmo that works with the PlantUML.com server. IntelliJ IDEA can create and display diagrams embedded into Markdown (built-in) or in standalone files (using a plugin). LaTeX using the Tikz package has limited support for PlantUML. LibreOffice has Libo_PlantUML extension to use PlantUML diagrams. MediaWiki has a PlantUML plug-in which renders diagrams in pages as SVG or PNG. Microsoft Word can use PlantUML diagrams via a Word Template Add-in. There is an additional Visual Studio Tools for Office add-in called PlantUML Gizmo that works in a similar fashion. NetBeans has a PlantUML plug-in. Notepad++ has a PlantUML plug-in. Obsidian has a PlantUML plug-in. Org-mode has a PlantUML org-babel support. Rider has a PlantUML plug-in. Sublime Text has a PlantUML package called PlantUmlDiagrams for Sublime Text 2 and 3. Visual Studio Code has various PlantUML extensions on its marketplace, most popular being PlantUML by jebbs. Vnote open source notetaking markdown application has built in PlantUML support. Xcode has a community maintained Source Editor Extension to generate and view PlantUML class diagrams from Swift source code. == Text format to communicate UML at source code level == PlantUML uses well-formed and human-readable code to render the diagrams. There are other text formats for UML modelling, but PlantUML supports many diagram types, and does not need an explicit layout, though it is possible to tweak the diagrams if necessary. +--------------------------------------+ | TEDx Talks Recommendation | | System | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | Visitor | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + View Recommended Talks | | | | + Search Talks | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+ | | V +--------------------------------------+ | Authenticated User | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | User | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + View Recommended Talks | | | | + Search Talks | | | | + Save Favorite Talks | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+ | | V +--------------------------------------+ | Admin | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | Admin | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + CRUD Talks | | | | + Manage Users | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+

  Read more →
• 

  TCEC Season 14

  The 14th season of the Top Chess Engine Championship took place between 17 November 2018 and 24 February 2019. Stockfish was the defending champion, having defeated Komodo in the previous season's superfinal. The season is notable for two things: the emergence of two strong, new engines, the Komodo variant Komodo Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS) and the neural network engine Leela Chess Zero, and the dramatic superfinal. Komodo MCTS and Leela fought their way from Division 4 and Division 3 respectively to the Premier Division, with Leela further qualifying for the superfinal against Stockfish. The superfinal was a topsy-turvy affair with the lead changing hands several times. It finished as the closest superfinal TCEC has ever seen, with Stockfish winning by a single game, 50.5–49.5 (+10 =81 -9). == Overview == === Structure === The season comprised five divisions: from the lowest Division 4 to the Premier Division. The top two engines of each division promote to the division above, while the bottom two engines relegate. The top two engines of the Premier Division contest a 100-game superfinal. The lengths of the opening books used increases as the divisions progress. The superfinal itself used a custom opening book designed by Jeroen Noomen. === Rules === The TCEC draw and win rules were slightly modified for Season 14. The game is now adjudicated as drawn if, after move 30, both engines have evals ±0.08 for five consecutive moves, and there are neither pawn moves nor a capture. Win adjudication now occurs if both engines have an eval of ±10 for five consecutive moves. Following the controversy over DeusX's participation last season, the uniqueness rule for neural networks was modified such that at least two of the following three hallmarks must be unique: The code for training the neural network The neural network (and weights file) itself The engine that executes this network This change meant DeusX did not meet the uniqueness criteria and therefore did not participate. Aside from this change, the season used the standard rules of the TCEC. == Results == === Division 4 === New entrant Komodo MCTS dominated Division 4, winning by a clear four points, although it did lose a game to second-place finisher rofChade. Fellow new entrant Scorpio NN performed badly and finished last, drawing only one game and losing the rest. === Division 3 === The neural network engine Leela Chess Zero had just missed promotion to Division 2 in the previous season. Since its relatively weak performance last season was partly due to hardware problems, and since it had shown a lot of improvement in strength, it was the hot favourite in this division. Leela lived up to its billing by comprehensively defeating everyone else. In a portent of future divisions however, Leela surprisingly dropped a game to third-place Arasan. Komodo MCTS was also improving quickly, and an updated version finished second behind Leela. The gap between second and third was 6.5 points, illustrating the gulf in class. === Division 2 === Although Division 2 engines are significantly stronger than Division 3, Leela and Komodo MCTS continued to dominate the competition, and again finished first and second. Komodo MCTS only lost one game to Leela, while Leela's tendency to occasionally lose to weaker engines saw her losing a game to 4th-placed Booot. Third place finisher Xiphos gave Leela and Komodo MCTS a run for their money, and was in the running up until the final rounds when it lost a crucial game to Leela. This loss left it one point behind Komodo MCTS in the final standings. === Division 1 === Leela and Komodo MCTS's rampage through the lower divisions continued, and they again finished first and second. In a demonstration of how much it had improved, Leela scored 20/28 in this division, the same score it had achieved in Division 2. This was also a TCEC points record for this division. However, Leela dropped a game against fourth-place finisher Chiron. Komodo MCTS, which had yet to lose a game in the lower divisions except to Leela, also conceded its first loss to third-place Fizbo. At the other end of the table, former champions Jonny and Fritz, which had not been updated, found themselves outclassed and finished second-last and last respectively; however with fellow competitor Ginkgo crashing five times (and therefore being disqualified), Jonny managed to stay in the division. The penultimate game for this division set a new TCEC moves record for a decisive game: 308 moves before Leela defeated Fritz. === Premier division === This was the strongest premier division ever, with multiple-time champions Stockfish, Komodo, and Houdini in the mix. Right from the start it became clear that Stockfish was in a league of its own, and it dominated the division, scoring wins against every other engine without losing a game. Second place however was a hotly-contested affair, with Leela, Komodo and Houdini neck-and-neck for most of the division. Houdini took the early lead, but Komodo gained second after winning two games by forfeit when its sibling Komodo MCTS crashed. This led to murmurs of a "Konspiracy". However, when both Komodo and Houdini failed to score more wins against the lower half of the field, Leela was able to take the lead. Halfway through the division the race was upended again when Leela went through a bad streak, losing three games in a row to Stockfish, Komodo, and Fire. This led to Komodo regaining second place, only for Komodo MCTS to crash yet again. By TCEC rules this meant Komodo MCTS was disqualified and all its scores were zeroed out, which put Leela back in second place. With three games left, Leela missed a win against Andscacs, which would've more or less secured her a place in the superfinal. Meanwhile, Komodo kept the division interesting by winning two of its last three games. Because Komodo had superior tiebreakers to Leela, this meant Komodo would qualify for the superfinal unless Leela managed to hold Stockfish to a draw with Black in the last game of the division. In a tense final game, Stockfish came close to winning, but missed the winning line. Leela managed to draw and qualified for the superfinal. At the other end of the table, it was quickly apparent that Ethereal and Andscacs were the weakest engines and would likely relegate. However, when Komodo MCTS was disqualified (and therefore relegated), it threw both engines a lifeline, since they could now stay in the division by beating the other. Andscacs was able to score a head-to-head win against Ethereal, but was crushed by Stockfish (+0 =2 -4) and Leela (+0 =3 -3). Ethereal didn't manage to score a win in the entire division, but did manage to score more draws than Andscacs, condemning Andscacs to relegation. === Superfinal === Going into the superfinal expectations were high for Leela: she had received a new network and had just won her first major competition when she defeated Houdini in the second TCEC cup. However, she had won the tournament without having played Stockfish (who had been surprisingly eliminated by Houdini in the semifinals). That, plus the fact that Stockfish dominated Premier Division and had never lost a match to Leela, left it unclear which engine was superior, although most spectators favored Stockfish. The superfinal turned out to be a roller-coaster. It began with Stockfish drawing first blood in game 7, and then scoring another win in game 10. Leela hit back with wins in game 11 and 13, but then lost games 20, 21, and 22. This gave Stockfish a 3-point lead. However, in the next 30 games, Leela was the only one to score wins: it first equalized by winning games 25, 27, and 29, and then took the lead by winning games 49 and 53. Stockfish won game 56, but Leela won game 63, maintaining her lead. There followed two dramatic games. In game 65, Leela built up a winning position. Stockfish showed a +153 evaluation, indicating that it had found a forced line leading to an endgame tablebase win; indeed analysis with 7-piece tablebases showed that Leela's position was winning. Under previous seasons' rules, the game would have been adjudicated as a win because Leela's evaluation was above 6.5. However under the new rules, Leela's +8.92 evaluation was not enough to adjudicate. It turned out that Leela could not see the winning line, and shuffled her pieces aimlessly, leading to a 50-move draw. In game 66, Stockfish was given a substantial advantage by the opening, but failed to make the most of it. The evaluations were leveling out to zero when the internet connection to the GPU servers was cut off. By tournament rules, this meant the game was replayed from scratch. After a further internet disconnection and restart, Stockfish handled the opening better and won, leaving Leela with a 1-point lead. In the last third of the superfinal, there followed more drama as Leela often built up strong advantages, but Stockfish showed great resourcefulness in defending inferior positions. Meanwh

  Read more →
• 

  Possibility theory

  Possibility theory is a mathematical theory for dealing with certain types of uncertainty and is an alternative to probability theory. It uses measures of possibility and necessity between 0 and 1, ranging from impossible to possible and unnecessary to necessary, respectively. Professor Lotfi Zadeh first introduced possibility theory in 1978 as an extension of his theory of fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. Didier Dubois and Henri Prade further contributed to its development. Earlier, in the 1950s, economist G. L. S. Shackle proposed the min/max algebra to describe degrees of potential surprise. == Formalization of possibility == For simplicity, assume that the universe of discourse Ω is a finite set. A possibility measure is a function Π {\displaystyle \Pi } from 2 Ω {\displaystyle 2^{\Omega }} to [0, 1] such that: Axiom 1: Π ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle \Pi (\varnothing )=0} Axiom 2: Π ( Ω ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (\Omega )=1} Axiom 3: Π ( U ∪ V ) = max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cup V)=\max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)} for any disjoint subsets U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} . It follows that, like probability on finite probability spaces, the possibility measure is determined by its behavior on singletons: Π ( U ) = max ω ∈ U Π ( { ω } ) . {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=\max _{\omega \in U}\Pi (\{\omega \}).} Axiom 1 can be interpreted as the assumption that Ω is an exhaustive description of future states of the world, because it means that no belief weight is given to elements outside Ω. Axiom 2 could be interpreted as the assumption that the evidence from which Π {\displaystyle \Pi } was constructed is free of any contradiction. Technically, it implies that there is at least one element in Ω with possibility 1. Axiom 3 corresponds to the additivity axiom in probabilities. However, there is an important practical difference. Possibility theory is computationally more convenient because Axioms 1–3 imply that: Π ( U ∪ V ) = max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cup V)=\max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)} for any subsets U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} . Because one can know the possibility of the union from the possibility of each component, it can be said that possibility is compositional with respect to the union operator. Note however that it is not compositional with respect to the intersection operator. Generally: Π ( U ∩ V ) ≤ min ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) ≤ max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) . {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cap V)\leq \min \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)\leq \max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right).} When Ω is not finite, Axiom 3 can be replaced by: For all index sets I {\displaystyle I} , if the subsets U i , i ∈ I {\displaystyle U_{i,\,i\in I}} are pairwise disjoint, Π ( ⋃ i ∈ I U i ) = sup i ∈ I Π ( U i ) . {\displaystyle \Pi \left(\bigcup _{i\in I}U_{i}\right)=\sup _{i\in I}\Pi (U_{i}).} == Necessity == Whereas probability theory uses a single number, the probability, to describe how likely an event is to occur, possibility theory uses two concepts, the possibility and the necessity of the event. For any set U {\displaystyle U} , the necessity measure is defined by N ( U ) = 1 − Π ( U ¯ ) {\displaystyle N(U)=1-\Pi ({\overline {U}})} . In the above formula, U ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {U}}} denotes the complement of U {\displaystyle U} , that is the elements of Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } that do not belong to U {\displaystyle U} . It is straightforward to show that: N ( U ) ≤ Π ( U ) {\displaystyle N(U)\leq \Pi (U)} for any U {\displaystyle U} and that: N ( U ∩ V ) = min ( N ( U ) , N ( V ) ) {\displaystyle N(U\cap V)=\min(N(U),N(V))} . Note that contrary to probability theory, possibility is not self-dual. That is, for any event U {\displaystyle U} , we only have the inequality: Π ( U ) + Π ( U ¯ ) ≥ 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)+\Pi ({\overline {U}})\geq 1} However, the following duality rule holds: For any event U {\displaystyle U} , either Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} , or N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} Accordingly, beliefs about an event can be represented by a number and a bit. == Interpretation == There are four cases that can be interpreted as follows: N ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle N(U)=1} means that U {\displaystyle U} is necessary. U {\displaystyle U} is certainly true. It implies that Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} . Π ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=0} means that U {\displaystyle U} is impossible. U {\displaystyle U} is certainly false. It implies that N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} . Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} means that U {\displaystyle U} is possible. I would not be surprised at all if U {\displaystyle U} occurs. It leaves N ( U ) {\displaystyle N(U)} unconstrained. N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} means that U {\displaystyle U} is unnecessary. I would not be surprised at all if U {\displaystyle U} does not occur. It leaves Π ( U ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U)} unconstrained. The intersection of the last two cases is N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} and Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} meaning that I believe nothing at all about U {\displaystyle U} . Because it allows for indeterminacy like this, possibility theory relates to the graduation of a many-valued logic, such as intuitionistic logic, rather than the classical two-valued logic. Note that unlike possibility, fuzzy logic is compositional with respect to both the union and the intersection operator. The relationship with fuzzy theory can be explained with the following classic example. Fuzzy logic: When a bottle is half full, it can be said that the level of truth of the proposition "The bottle is full" is 0.5. The word "full" is seen as a fuzzy predicate describing the amount of liquid in the bottle. Possibility theory: There is one bottle, either completely full or totally empty. The proposition "the possibility level that the bottle is full is 0.5" describes a degree of belief. One way to interpret 0.5 in that proposition is to define its meaning as: I am ready to bet that it's empty as long as the odds are even (1:1) or better, and I would not bet at any rate that it's full. == Possibility theory as an imprecise probability theory == There is an extensive formal correspondence between probability and possibility theories, where the addition operator corresponds to the maximum operator. A possibility measure can be seen as a consonant plausibility measure in the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. The operators of possibility theory can be seen as a hyper-cautious version of the operators of the transferable belief model, a modern development of the theory of evidence. Possibility can be seen as an upper probability: any possibility distribution defines a unique credal set of admissible probability distributions by K = { P ∣ ∀ S P ( S ) ≤ Π ( S ) } . {\displaystyle K=\{\,P\mid \forall S\ P(S)\leq \Pi (S)\,\}.} This allows one to study possibility theory using the tools of imprecise probabilities. == Necessity logic == We call generalized possibility every function satisfying Axiom 1 and Axiom 3. We call generalized necessity the dual of a generalized possibility. The generalized necessities are related to a very simple and interesting fuzzy logic called necessity logic. In the deduction apparatus of necessity logic the logical axioms are the usual classical tautologies. Also, there is only a fuzzy inference rule extending the usual modus ponens. Such a rule says that if α and α → β are proved at degree λ and μ, respectively, then we can assert β at degree min{λ,μ}. It is easy to see that the theories of such a logic are the generalized necessities and that the completely consistent theories coincide with the necessities (see for example Gerla 2001).

  Read more →