AI Data Center

AI Data Center — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

FIRST Global Challenge

The FIRST Global Challenge is a yearly robotics competition organized by the International First Committee Association. It promotes STEM education and careers for youth and was created by Dean Kamen in 2016 as an expansion of FIRST, an organization with similar objectives. == History == FIRST Global is a trade name for the International First Committee Association, a nonprofit corporation based in Manchester, New Hampshire, with a 501(c)(3) designation from the IRS. The nonprofit was founded by the co-founder of FIRST, Dean Kamen, with the objective of promoting STEM education and careers in the developing world through Olympics-style robotics competitions. Former US Congressman, Joe Sestak was the organization's president in 2017, but left after the 2017 Challenge. Each year, the FIRST Global Challenge is held in a different city. For example, Mexico City was selected to host the 2018 Challenge after the United States hosted the 2017 edition in Washington, DC. This is a change from FIRST's system of championships, where one city hosts for several years at a time. In May 2020, it was announced that FIRST Global would not host a traditional challenge in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and shifted to a remote model. One of the three champions were Team Bangladesh. In 2022, FIRST Global returned to in-person events with the 2022 Challenge in Geneva, Switzerland. == Editions == === Washington, D.C. 2017 === The 2017 FIRST Global Challenge was held in Washington, D.C., from July 16–18, and the challenge was the use of robots to separate different colored balls, representing clean water and impurities in water, symbolizing the Engineering Grand Challenge (based on the Millennium Development Goal) of improving access to clean water in the developing world. Around 160 teams composed of 15- to 18-year-olds from 157 countries participated, and around 60% of teams were created or led by young women. Six continental teams also participated. === Mexico City 2018 === The 2018 FIRST Global Challenge was held in Mexico City from August 15–18. The 2018 Challenge was called Energy Impact and explored the impact of various types of energy on the world and how they can be made more sustainable. In the challenge, robots worked together in teams of three to give cubes to human players, turn a crank, and score cubes in goals in order to generate electrical power. The challenge was based on three Engineering Grand Challenges; making solar energy affordable, making fusion energy a reality, and creating carbon sequestration methods. === Dubai 2019 === The 2019 challenge, called Ocean Opportunities, was held in Dubai from October 24–27 and was the first challenge hosted outside of North America. The challenge was themed around clearing the ocean of pollutants, and had two alliances of three teams each attempting to score large and small balls representing pollutants into processing areas and a processing barge. The processing barge had multiple levels, with higher levels worth more points. At the end of the match, robots "docked" with the barge by driving onto or climbing up it, with climbing worth more points. The event was opened by Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed Al Maktoum, Crown Prince of Dubai. === Geneva 2022 === The 2022 challenge called Carbon Capture, was held in Geneva from October 13–16. The challenge was themed around removing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the atmosphere. In the Carbon Capture game, six different countries worked together to capture and store black balls representing carbon particles. The storage tower had multiple cantilevered bars that the robots mounted to, with the higher bars worth a greater multiplier. At the end of a match, robots "docked" on the storage tower's base or climbed the bars with their alliance indicator ball. Each match started with a "global alliance" of six countries, then divided into two "regional alliances" each consisting of three countries. The event was opened by Dr. Martina Hirayama, Switzerland State Secretary for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI). === Singapore 2023 === The 2023 challenge, called Hydrogen Horizons, was held in Singapore from October 7–10. The challenge is themed around renewable energy with a focus on hydrogen technologies. === Athens 2024 === The 2024 challenge was hosted in the Peace and Friendship Stadium in Attica, Greece. === Panama 2025 === The 2025 challenge, Eco Equilibrium, was hosted in the Panama Convention Centre in Panama City, Panama. == Subordinate programs == === Global STEM Corps === The Global STEM Corps is a FIRST Global initiative that connects qualified volunteer mentors with students in developing countries to prepare them for competitions. === New Technology Experience === The New Technology Experience (NTE) is an annual component of the FIRST Global Challenge that was added to the organization's offerings in 2021. It was established as a means for the student community to stay current with cutting-edge technology and is integrated with each year's theme. The 2021 NTE was the CubeSat Prototype Challenge. The 2022 NTE, Carbon Countermeasures, was presented in partnership with XPRIZE.
Read more →
Harvey (software)

Harvey is a generative artificial intelligence (AI) product developed by the Counsel AI Corporation for the legal industry. The product has been described as a provider of customised large language models (LLMs) for law firms and in-house legal teams. It is named after the lead character of the legal drama Suits, Harvey Specter. == History == Harvey was founded in the summer of 2022 by Winston Weinberg, who was a securities and antitrust litigator at O'Melveny & Myers, and Gabriel Pereyra, who was a research scientist at Google DeepMind and Meta. Pereyra and Weinberg were roommates in Los Angeles. Pereyra was brainstorming startup ideas with his research colleagues. He showed Weinberg OpenAI's GPT-3 text-generating system, and Weinberg realized that it could be used to improve legal workflows. They developed an early chain-of-thought prompt based on GPT-3, focused on California tenant law. They ran the model on 100 legal questions from a public forum and hired three attorneys to evaluate the answers and determine whether they could be sent to clients unchanged. Out of those 100 questions, 86 were approved. After that, Pereyra and Weinberg contacted Sam Altman and Jason Kwon, General Counsel at OpenAI, about their results. Shortly after, on July 4, 2022, they met with OpenAI's C-suite, and OpenAI became their seed investor. OpenAI also gave Pereyra and Weinberg early access to GPT-4. Gordon Moodie, a corporate partner at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, also joined Harvey in July 2023 as the company's chief product officer. In March 2024, Harvey had 82 employees and stated that it intended to double that figure by the end of 2024. The company has reportedly hired a large number of lawyers, including from White & Case, Latham & Watkins, Skadden, Gunderson Dettmer, Katten Muchin Rosenman, and Paul Weiss. Harvey CEO Weinberg explained that many members of the company's sales team were formerly attorneys at 'Big Law', i.e. large US law firms, and that the sales team's experience was useful in convincing attorneys to trial the company's software. The integration of former 'Big Law' attorneys into product and sales teams has been attributed as a major factor in Harvey's success. In February 2026, Harvey announced its first brand partnership with actor Gabriel Macht, who portrayed the character Harvey Specter in Suits, to launch the company's Instagram page. In May 2026, it was announced the company is sponsoring the Golden State Valkyries and the New York Liberty. == Funding == In November 2022, it was reported that Harvey raised US$5 million in funding led by the OpenAI Startup Fund, together with other investors such as Jeff Dean, the head of Google AI, Elad Gil, the founder of Mixer Labs, Sarah Guo, the founder of Conviction, and other angel investors. Harvey raised another $23 million in April 2023 in a funding round led by Sequoia Capital. Harvey announced in December 2023 that it had raised $80 million in a Series B funding round led by Elad Gil and Kleiner Perkins which valued the company at $715 million. Other investors in the round included Sequoia Capital and the OpenAI Startup Fund. In July 2024, Harvey announced that it had raised $100 million in a Series C funding round that valued the company at $1.5 billion. The round was led by venture capital firm GV, and other participants included OpenAI, Kleiner Perkins, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil, and SV Angel. In February 2025, Harvey announced it had raised $300 million in a Series D funding round that valued the company at $3 billion. Just months later, in June 2025, Harvey closed a $300 million Series E co-led by Kleiner Perkins and Coatue, again with participation from Conviction, Elad Gil, OpenAI, and Sequoia, boosting its valuation to about $5 billion and supporting international growth and expanded legal product offerings. In December 2025, Harvey secured a $160 million Series F round led by Andreessen Horowitz, with continued participation from investors including EQT, WndrCo, Sequoia, Kleiner Perkins, Conviction, and Elad Gil, valuing the legal AI company at roughly $8 billion. In March 2026, Harvey raised $200 million at a valuation of $11 billion, in a round co-led by GIC and Sequoia Capital. == Features == In May 2024, Harvey launched its products on Microsoft Azure and stated that it would offer a Harvey on Azure version of its product going forward. It was also reported that Harvey would begin offering general commercial access to some of its products, such as its case law models, as well as product bundles that included its AI assistant, specialised models, and its Vault feature for running prompts on large document collections. == Applications == Various law firms around the world are customers of Harvey. US law firm Paul Weiss began testing Harvey within the firm in January 2023, and became a client of the company later that year. Gina Lynch, the firm's chief knowledge and innovation officer, explained that the firm was not using hard metrics, such as time saved, to assess productivity gains because the time and effort needed to carefully review the output made efficiency gains difficult to measure. In February 2023, the UK law firm, Allen & Overy (now A&O Shearman), announced that it had been trialing Harvey since November 2022 within its Markets Innovation Group. This was reported to be the first known use of a generative AI product within the UK magic circle law firms. According to Allen & Overy, during the trial, 3,500 lawyers had used Harvey for around 40,000 queries in the course of their day to day work. The firm's press release stated that "Whilst the output needs careful review by an A&O lawyer, Harvey can help generate insights, recommendations and predictions based on large volumes of data". David Wakeling, head of the Markets Innovation Group, also cautioned that "You must validate everything coming out of the system. You have to check everything". The Irish law firm, A&L Goodbody, announced in February 2024 that it would be working with Harvey to enhance its services in relation to document analysis, due diligence, litigation, and regulatory compliance. In June 2024, UK law firm Ashurst announced that it would partner with Harvey and roll out its services to its branches worldwide. In September 2024, PwC announced that it would be adopting Harvey to empower its lawyers in Singapore. Singapore law firm WongPartnership also announced that month that it had become the first Southeast Asian law firm to test Harvey's generative AI solutions.
Read more →
Early-exit network

Early-exit networks are a class of dynamic neural networks designed for efficient inference by allowing models to make confident predictions at intermediate layers, rather than processing the full network. Early-exit mechanisms are methods for deep neural networks that add intermediate classifiers, allowing inference to stop at earlier layers for inputs assessed as low uncertainty. Decisions to exit are typically based on confidence measures such as softmax-derived scores, classification margins, or entropy-based criteria, with the goal of reducing computational cost. These approaches are commonly paired with specialized training procedures and system-level optimizations to improve efficiency while preserving accuracy. The main idea behind the technology is to stop excessive calculations when a good answer can already be given with a high degree of probability, which can save both computation and time. Early-exit networks have also been extended with expert-based exit criteria, where intermediate classifiers are treated as multiple “experts” whose predictions and confidence scores can be aggregated to decide whether to stop computation early. Hardware implementations are also being developed.
Read more →
LipNet

LipNet is a deep neural network for audio-visual speech recognition (ASVR). It was created by University of Oxford researchers Yannis Assael, Brendan Shillingford, Shimon Whiteson, and Nando de Freitas. The researchers stated that could match mouth movements to text with 93 percent accuracy, though it was criticized for its test using a limited dataset of words and grammar. It was used in Nvidia's autonomous "backseat driver" prototype Co-Pilot.
Read more →
POP-11

POP-11 is a reflective, incrementally compiled programming language with many of the features of an interpreted language. It is the core language of the Poplog programming environment developed originally by the University of Sussex, and recently in the School of Computer Science at the University of Birmingham, which hosts the main Poplog website. POP-11 is an evolution of the language POP-2, developed in Edinburgh University, and features an open stack model (like Forth, among others). It is mainly procedural, but supports declarative language constructs, including a pattern matcher, and is mostly used for research and teaching in artificial intelligence, although it has features sufficient for many other classes of problems. It is often used to introduce symbolic programming techniques to programmers of more conventional languages like Pascal, who find POP syntax more familiar than that of Lisp. One of POP-11's features is that it supports first-class functions. POP-11 is the core language of the Poplog system. The availability of the compiler and compiler subroutines at run-time (a requirement for incremental compiling) gives it the ability to support a far wider range of extensions (including run-time extensions, such as adding new data-types) than would be possible using only a macro facility. This made it possible for (optional) incremental compilers to be added for Prolog, Common Lisp and Standard ML, which could be added as required to support either mixed language development or development in the second language without using any POP-11 constructs. This made it possible for Poplog to be used by teachers, researchers, and developers who were interested in only one of the languages. The most successful product developed in POP-11 was the Clementine data mining system, developed by ISL. After SPSS bought ISL, they renamed Clementine to SPSS Modeler and decided to port it to C++ and Java, and eventually succeeded with great effort, and perhaps some loss of the flexibility provided by the use of an AI language. POP-11 was for a time available only as part of an expensive commercial package (Poplog), but since about 1999 it has been freely available as part of the open-source software version of Poplog, including various added packages and teaching libraries. An online version of ELIZA using POP-11 is available at Birmingham. At the University of Sussex, David Young used POP-11 in combination with C and Fortran to develop a suite of teaching and interactive development tools for image processing and vision, and has made them available in the Popvision extension to Poplog. == Simple code examples == Here is an example of a simple POP-11 program: define Double(Source) -> Result; Source2 -> Result; enddefine; Double(123) => That prints out: 246 This one includes some list processing: define RemoveElementsMatching(Element, Source) -> Result; lvars Index; [[% for Index in Source do unless Index = Element or Index matches Element then Index; endunless; endfor; %]] -> Result; enddefine; RemoveElementsMatching("the", [[the cat sat on the mat]]) => ;;; outputs [[cat sat on mat]] RemoveElementsMatching("the", [[the cat] [sat on] the mat]) => ;;; outputs [[the cat] [sat on] mat] RemoveElementsMatching([[= cat]], [[the cat]] is a [[big cat]]) => ;;; outputs [[is a]] Examples using the POP-11 pattern matcher, which makes it relatively easy for students to learn to develop sophisticated list-processing programs without having to treat patterns as tree structures accessed by 'head' and 'tail' functions (CAR and CDR in Lisp), can be found in the online introductory tutorial. The matcher is at the heart of the SimAgent (sim_agent) toolkit. Some of the powerful features of the toolkit, such as linking pattern variables to inline code variables, would have been very difficult to implement without the incremental compiler facilities.
Read more →
20Q

20Q is a computerized game of twenty questions that began as a test in artificial intelligence (AI). It was invented by Robin Burgener in 1988. The game was made handheld by Radica in 2003, but was discontinued in 2011 because Techno Source took the license for 20Q handheld devices. The game 20Q is based on the spoken parlor game known as twenty questions, and is both a website and a handheld device. 20Q asks the player to think of something and will then try to guess what they are thinking of with twenty yes-or-no questions. If it fails to guess in 20 questions, it will ask an additional 5 questions. If it fails to guess even with 25 (or 30) questions, the player is declared the winner. Sometimes the first guess of the object can be asked at question 14. == Principle and history == The principle is that the player thinks of something and the 20Q artificial intelligence asks a series of questions before guessing what the player is thinking. This artificial intelligence learns on its own with the information relayed back to the players who interact with it, and is not programmed. The player can answer these questions with: Yes, No, Unknown, and Sometimes. The experiment is based on the classic word game of Twenty Questions, and on the computer game "Animals," popular in the early 1970s, which used a somewhat simpler method to guess an animal. The 20Q AI uses an artificial neural network to pick the questions and to guess. After the player has answered the twenty questions posed (sometimes fewer), 20Q makes a guess. If it is incorrect, it asks more questions, then guesses again. It makes guesses based on what it has learned; it is not programmed with information or what the inventor thinks. Answers to any question are based on players’ interpretations of the questions asked. Newer editions were made for different categories, such as music 20Q which has the player think of a song, and Harry Potter 20Q, which has the player think of something from the world of the Harry Potter series. The 20Q AI can draw its own conclusions on how to interpret the information. It can be described as more of a folk taxonomy than a taxonomy. Its knowledge develops with every game played. In this regard, the online version of the 20Q AI can be inaccurate because it gathers its answers from what people think rather than from what people know. Limitations of taxonomy are often overcome by the AI itself because it can learn and adapt. For example, if the player was thinking of a "Horse" and answered "No" to the question "Is it an animal?," the AI will, nevertheless, guess correctly, despite being told that a horse is not an animal. Patent applications in the US and Europe were submitted in 2005. In August 2014, 20Q.net Inc., with Brashworks Studios, developed and released an iOS iPad version available at the Apple iTunes store. == Game show == On June 13, 2009, GSN began a TV version of the game, hosted by Cat Deeley, with Hal Sparks as the voice of Mr. Q.
Read more →
Vivid knowledge

Vivid knowledge refers to a specific kind of knowledge representation. The idea of a vivid knowledge base is to get an interpretation mostly straightforward out of it – it implies the interpretation. Thus, any query to such a knowledge base can be reduced to a database-like query. == Propositional knowledge base == A propositional knowledge base KB is vivid iff KB is a complete and consistent set of literals (over some vocabulary). Such a knowledge base has the property that it as exactly one interpretation, i.e. the interpretation is unique. A check for entailment of a sentence can simply be broken down into its literals and those can be answered by a simple database-like check of KB. == First-order knowledge base == A first-order knowledge base KB is vivid iff for some finite set of positive function-free ground literals KB+, KB = KB+ ∪ Negations ∪ DomainClosure ∪ UniqueNames, whereby Negations ≔ { ¬p | p is atomic and KB ⊭ p }, DomainClosure ≔ { (ci ≠ cj) | ci, cj are distinct constants }, UniqueNames ≔ { ∀x: (x = c1) ∨ (x = c2) ∨ ..., where the ci are all the constants in KB+ }. All interpretations of a vivid first-order knowledge base are isomorphic.
Read more →
OpenVX

OpenVX is an open, royalty-free standard for cross-platform acceleration of computer vision applications. It is designed by the Khronos Group to facilitate portable, optimized and power-efficient processing of methods for vision algorithms. This is aimed for embedded and real-time programs within computer vision and related scenarios. It uses a connected graph representation of operations. == Overview == OpenVX specifies a higher level of abstraction for programming computer vision use cases than compute frameworks such as OpenCL. The high level makes the programming easy and the underlying execution will be efficient on different computing architectures. This is done while having a consistent and portable vision acceleration API. OpenVX is based on a connected graph of vision nodes that can execute the preferred chain of operations. It uses an opaque memory model, allowing to move image data between the host (CPU) memory and accelerator, such as GPU memory. As a result, the OpenVX implementation can optimize the execution through various techniques, such as acceleration on various processing units or dedicated hardware. This architecture facilitates applications programmed in OpenVX on different systems with different power and performance, including battery-sensitive, vision-enabled, wearable displays. OpenVX is complementary to the open source vision library OpenCV. OpenVX in some applications offers a better optimized graph management than OpenCV. == History == OpenVX 1.0 specification was released in October 2014. OpenVX sample implementation was released in December 2014. OpenVX 1.1 specification was released on May 2, 2016. OpenVX 1.2 was released on May 1, 2017. Updated OpenVX adopters program and OpenVX 1.2 conformance test suite was released on November 21, 2017. OpenVX 1.2.1 was released on November 27, 2018. OpenVX 1.3 was released on October 22, 2019. == Implementations, frameworks and libraries == AMD MIVisionX Archived 2019-08-05 at the Wayback Machine - for AMD's CPUs and GPUs. Cadence - for Cadence Design Systems's Tensilica Vision DSPs. Imagination - for Imagination Technologies's PowerVR GPUs Synopsys - for Synopsys' DesignWare EV Vision Processors Texas Instruments’ OpenVX (TIOVX) - for Texas Instruments’ Jacinto™ ADAS SoCs. NVIDIA VisionWorks - for CUDA-capable Nvidia GPUs and SoCs. OpenVINO - for Intel's CPUs, GPUs, VPUs, and FPGAs.
Read more →
Human–AI interaction

Human–AI interaction is a developing field of research and a sub-field of human–computer interaction (HCI). HCI is a field of research that explores the interactions between humans and computer-based technology, focusing on design implementation, user experience, and psychological factors. With the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI), there has developed a sub-section of HCI research dedicated specifically to artificial intelligence and how people interact with and are impacted by it. This is human–AI interaction, abbreviated either as HAX or HAII. == Introduction == Artificial intelligence (AI), in general, has fluid definitions and varied research applications, but in brief can be applied to mechanizing tasks that would require human intelligence to complete. AI are tools designed to replicate the human abilities of navigating uncertainty, active learning, and processing information in different contexts. Within the context of HCI and HAX research, artificial intelligence can be broken into two sub-fields, natural language processing (NLP) and computer vision (CV). AI technologies notably include machine-learning, deep-learning and neural networks, and large-language models (LLMs). As a new and rapidly developing technology, AI is changing how computers work and therefore changing how humans interact with computers. Unlike the traditional human-computer interaction, where a human directs a machine, human-AI interaction is characterized by a more collaborative relationship between the computer program (the AI) and the human user, as AI is perceived as an active agent rather than a tool. This changing dynamic creates new questions and necessitates new research methods that are not present in traditional HCI research. According to a scoping review on the state of the discipline, the HAX field comprises research on the "design, development, and evaluation of AI systems" and encompasses the themes of human-AI collaboration, human-AI competition, human-AI conflict, and human-AI symbiosis. == Design == Machine learning and artificial intelligence have been used for decades in targeted advertising and to recommend content in social media. Ethical Guidelines (Framework for ethical AI development) == User Experience (UX) == This section should handle research on how users interact with tools. What techniques do they use, do they develop habits, what types of programs and devices are they using to access these tools, what do they use these tools to do exactly. === Cognitive Frameworks in AI Tool Users === AI has been viewed with various expectations, attributions, and often misconceptions. Many people exclusively understand AI as the LLM chatbots they interact with, like ChatGPT or Claude, or other generative AI programs. [Insert section: discuss how people interact with these specific AI tools as a connection to the following paragraphs] Most fundamentally, humans have a mental model of understanding AI's reasoning and motivation for its decision recommendations, and building a holistic and precise mental model of AI helps people create prompts to receive more valuable responses from AI. However, these mental models are not whole because people can only gain more information about AI through their limited interaction with it; more interaction with AI builds a better mental model that a person may build to produce better prompt outcomes. Research on human-AI interaction has emphasized that users develop mental models of AI systems and revise those models through repeated use, feedback, and explanation, while design research has stressed the importance of communicating capabilities and limitations early and supporting trust calibration through explanation and correction. In a 2025 SSRN working paper, John DeVadoss proposed "Hypothetico-Deductive Interaction" (HDI), a framework that describes human-AI interaction as a mutual process of conjecture and refutation in which users test assumptions about an AI system's capabilities while the system infers and updates assumptions about user goals through its responses and clarifying questions. DeVadoss argued that this framing helps explain prompt iteration, weak capability awareness, and trust miscalibration, and suggested design responses such as clearer communication of uncertainty, easier correction, actionable explanations, and safer failure modes. == Research themes == === Human-AI collaboration === Human-AI collaboration occurs when the human and AI supervise the task on the same level and extent to achieve the same goal. Some collaboration occurs in the form of augmenting human capability. AI may help human ability in analysis and decision-making through providing and weighing a volume of information, and learning to defer to the human decision when it recognizes its unreliability. It is especially beneficial when the human can detect a task that AI can be trusted to make few errors so that there is not a lot of excessive checking process required on the human's end. Some findings show signs of human-AI augmentation, or human–AI symbiosis, in which AI enhances human ability in a way that co-working on a task with AI produces better outcomes than a human working alone. For example: the quality and speed of customer service tasks increase when a human agent collaborates with AI, training on specific models allows AI to improve diagnoses in clinical settings, and AI with human-intervention can improve creativity of artwork while fully AI-generated haikus were rated negatively. Human-AI synergy, a concept in which human-AI collaboration would produce more optimal outcomes than either human or AI working alone could explain why AI does not always help with performance. Some AI features and development may accelerate human-AI synergy, while others may stagnate it. For example, when AI updates for better performance, it sometimes worsens the team performance with human and AI by reducing the compatibility with the new model and the mental model a user has developed on the previous version. Research has found that AI often supports human capabilities in the form of human-AI augmentation and not human-AI synergy, potentially because people rely too much on AI and stop thinking on their own. Prompting people to actively engage in analysis and think when to follow AI recommendations reduces their over-reliance, especially for individuals with higher need for cognition. === Human-AI competition === Robots and computers have substituted routine tasks historically completed by humans, but agentic AI has made it possible to also replace cognitive tasks including taking phone calls for appointments and driving a car. At the point of 2016, research has estimated that 45% of paid activities could be replaced by AI by 2030. Perceived autonomy of robots is known to increase people's negative attitude toward them, and worry about the technology taking over leads people to reject it. There has been a consistent tendency of algorithm aversion in which people prefer human advice over AI advice. However, people are not always able to tell apart tasks completed by AI or other humans. See AI takeover for more information. It is also notable that this sentiment is more prominent in the Western cultures as Westerners tend to show less positive views about AI compared to East Asians. == Research on the psychological impacts of AI == === Perception on others who use AI === As much as people perceive and make judgment about AI itself, they also form impressions of themselves and others who use AI. In the workplace, employees who disclose the use of AI in their tasks are more likely to receive feedback that they are not as hardworking as those who are in the same job who receive non-AI help to complete the same tasks. AI use disclosure diminishes the perceived legitimacy in the employee's task and decision making which ultimately leads observers to distrust people who use AI. Although these negative effects of AI use disclosure are weakened by the observers who use AI frequently themselves, the effect is still not attenuated by the observers' positive attitude towards AI. === Bias, AI, and human === Although AI provides a wide range of information and suggestions to its users, AI itself is not free of biases and stereotypes, and it does not always help people reduce their cognitive errors and biases. People are prone to such errors by failing to see other potential ideas and cases that are not listed by AI responses and committing to a decision suggested by AI that directly contradicts the correct information and directions that they are already aware of. Gender bias is also reflected as the female gendering of AI technologies which conceptualizes females as a helpful assistant. == Emotional connection with AI == Human-AI interaction has been theorized in the context of interpersonal relationships mainly in social psychology, communications and media studies, and as a technology interface through the lens of hu
Read more →
Computational theory of mind

In philosophy of mind, the computational theory of mind (CTM), also known as computationalism, is a family of views that hold that the human mind is an information processing system and that cognition and consciousness together are a form of computation. It is closely related to functionalism, a broader theory that defines mental states by what they do rather than what they are made of. == History == Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts (1943) were the first to suggest that neural activity is computational. They argued that neural computations explain cognition. A version of the theory was put forward by Peter Putnam and Robert W. Fuller in 1964. The theory was proposed in its modern form by Hilary Putnam in 1960 and 1961, aided by his then PhD student, philosopher and cognitive scientist Jerry Fodor, who continued the research as a post-doc in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. It was later criticized by Putnam himself, John Searle, and others. == Classical computational theory of mind == The CTM holds that the human mind is a computational system that is realized (i.e., physically implemented) by neural activity in the brain. The theory can be elaborated in many ways and varies largely based on how the term computation is understood. In classical computational theory of mind (CCTM), computation is modeled in terms of Turing machines which manipulate symbols according to a rule, in combination with the internal state of the machine. A Turing machine is an abstract machine with unlimited time and storage. CCTM does not pretend that the mind looks like a Turing machine, but instead uses Turing machines as a formalism. Alan Turing argued that any symbolic algorithm executed by a human brain can in theory be replicated on a Turing machine. The critical aspect of such a computational model is that it allows to abstract away from particular physical details of the machine that is implementing the computation. For example, the appropriate computation could be implemented either by silicon chips or biological neural networks, so long as there is a series of outputs based on manipulations of inputs and internal states, performed according to a rule. Computational theories of mind are often said to require mental representation because 'input' into a computation comes in the form of symbols or representations of other objects. A computer cannot compute an actual object but must interpret and represent the object in some form and then compute the representation. Unlike CTM, the representational theory of mind shifts the focus to the symbols being manipulated. This approach better accounts for systematicity and productivity. In Fodor's view, the mind is a computational system that processes the language of thought. == Variants == Connectionist computationalism models the mind as a neural network. Steven Pinker and Alan Prince distinguish two types of connectionists: eliminative and implementationist. Eliminative connectionists generally reject classical CTMs and the idea of a structured, symbolic mind, whereas implementationists view neural networks and Turing machines as two potentially complementary levels of analysis. It is indeed possible in theory to implement a neural network in a Turing machine, or a Turing machine in a neural network. Building from the tradition of McCulloch and Pitts, the computational theory of cognition (CTC) states that neural computations explain cognition. The computational theory of mind asserts that not only cognition, but also phenomenal consciousness or qualia, are computational. That is to say, CTM entails CTC. While phenomenal consciousness could fulfill some other functional role, computational theory of cognition leaves open the possibility that some aspects of the mind could be non-computational. CTC, therefore, provides an important explanatory framework for understanding neural networks, while avoiding counter-arguments that center around phenomenal consciousness. == "Computer metaphor" == Computational theory of mind is not the same as the computer metaphor, comparing the mind to a modern-day digital computer. While the computer metaphor draws an analogy between the mind as software and the brain as hardware, CTM is the claim that the mind is literally a computational system. "Computational system" is not intended to mean a modern-day electronic computer. == Pancomputationalism == CTM raises a question that remains a subject of debate: what does it take for a physical system (such as a mind, or an artificial computer) to perform computations? A very straightforward account is based on a simple mapping between abstract mathematical computations and physical systems: a system performs computation C if and only if there is a mapping between a sequence of states individuated by C and a sequence of states individuated by a physical description of the system. Putnam (1988) and Searle (1992) argue that this simple mapping account (SMA) trivializes the empirical import of computational descriptions. As Putnam put it, "everything is a Probabilistic Automaton under some Description". Even rocks, walls, and buckets of water—contrary to appearances—are computing systems. Gualtiero Piccinini identifies different versions of pancomputationalism. Searle wrote:the wall behind my back is right now implementing the WordStar program, because there is some pattern of molecule movements that is isomorphic with the formal structure of WordStar. But if the wall is implementing WordStar, if it is a big enough wall it is implementing any program, including any program implemented in the brain.In response to the trivialization criticism, and to restrict SMA, philosophers of mind have offered different accounts of computational systems. These typically include causal account, semantic account, syntactic account, and mechanistic account. Instead of a semantic restriction, the syntactic account imposes a syntactic restriction. The mechanistic account was first introduced by Gualtiero Piccinini in 2007. == Criticism == A range of arguments have been proposed against physicalist conceptions used in computational theories of mind. An early, though indirect, criticism of the computational theory of mind comes from philosopher John Searle. In his thought experiment known as the Chinese room, Searle attempts to refute the claims that artificially intelligent agents can be said to have intentionality and understanding and that these systems, because they can be said to be minds themselves, are sufficient for the study of the human mind. Searle asks us to imagine that there is a man in a room with no way of communicating with anyone or anything outside of the room except for a piece of paper with symbols written on it that is passed under the door. With the paper, the man is to use a series of provided rule books to return paper containing different symbols. Unknown to the man in the room, these symbols are of a Chinese language, and this process generates a conversation that a Chinese speaker outside of the room can actually understand. Searle contends that the man in the room does not understand the Chinese conversation. This was originally written as a repudiation of the idea that computers work like minds. Objections like Searle's might be called insufficiency objections. They claim that computational theories of mind fail because computation is insufficient to account for some capacity of the mind. Arguments from qualia, such as Frank Jackson's knowledge argument, can be understood as objections to computational theories of mind in this way—though they take aim at physicalist conceptions of the mind in general, and not computational theories specifically. Objections have also been put forth that are directly tailored for computational theories of mind. Jerry Fodor himself argues that the mind is still a very long way from having been explained by the computational theory of mind. The main reason for this shortcoming is that most cognition is abductive and global, hence sensitive to all possibly relevant background beliefs to (dis)confirm a belief. This creates, among other problems, the frame problem for the computational theory, because the relevance of a belief is not one of its local, syntactic properties but context-dependent. Putnam himself (see in particular Representation and Reality and the first part of Renewing Philosophy) became a prominent critic of computationalism for a variety of reasons, including ones related to Searle's Chinese room arguments, questions of world-word reference relations, and thoughts about the mind-body problem. Regarding functionalism in particular, Putnam has claimed along lines similar to, but more general than Searle's arguments, that the question of whether the human mind can implement computational states is not relevant to the question of the nature of mind, because "every ordinary open system realizes every abstract finite automaton." Computationalists have responded by aiming to develop criteri
Read more →
Information Processing Language

Information Processing Language (IPL) is a programming language created by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw, and Herbert A. Simon at RAND Corporation and the Carnegie Institute of Technology about 1956. Newell had the job of language specifier-application programmer, Shaw was the system programmer, and Simon had the job of application programmer-user. IPL included features to facilitate AI programming, specifically problem solving. such as lists, dynamic memory allocation, data types, recursion, functions as arguments, generators, and cooperative multitasking. IPL also introduced the concepts of symbol processing and list processing. Unfortunately, all of these innovations were cast in a difficult assembly-language style. Nonetheless, IPL-V (the only public version of IPL) ran on many computers through the mid 1960s. == Basics of IPL == An IPL computer has: A set of symbols. All symbols are addresses, and name cells. Unlike symbols in later languages, symbols consist of a character followed by a number, and are written H1, A29, 9–7, 9–100. Cell names beginning with a letter are regional, and are absolute addresses. Cell names beginning with "9-" are local, and are meaningful within the context of a single list. One list's 9-1 is independent of another list's 9–1. Other symbols (e.g., pure numbers) are internal. A set of cells. Lists are made from several cells including mutual references. Cells have several fields: P, a 3-bit field used for an operation code when the cell is used as an instruction, and unused when the cell is data. Q, a 3-valued field used for indirect reference when the cell is used as an instruction, and unused when the cell is data. SYMB, a symbol used as the value in the cell. A set of primitive processes, which would be termed primitive functions in modern languages. The data structure of IPL is the list, but lists are more intricate structures than in many languages. A list consists of a singly linked sequence of symbols, as might be expected—plus some description lists, which are subsidiary singly linked lists interpreted as alternating attribute names and values. IPL provides primitives to access and mutate attribute value by name. The description lists are given local names (of the form 9–1). So, a list named L1 containing the symbols S4 and S5, and described by associating value V1 to attribute A1 and V2 to A2, would be stored as follows. 0 indicates the end of a list; the cell names 100, 101, etc. are automatically generated internal symbols whose values are irrelevant. These cells can be scattered throughout memory; only L1, which uses a regional name that must be globally known, needs to reside in a specific place. IPL is an assembly language for manipulating lists. It has a few cells which are used as special-purpose registers. H1, for example, is the program counter. The SYMB field of H1 is the name of the current instruction. However, H1 is interpreted as a list; the LINK of H1 is, in modern terms, a pointer to the beginning of the call stack. For example, subroutine calls push the SYMB of H1 onto this stack. H2 is the free-list. Procedures which need to allocate memory grab cells off of H2; procedures which are finished with memory put it on H2. On entry to a function, the list of parameters is given in H0; on exit, the results should be returned in H0. Many procedures return a Boolean result indicating success or failure, which is put in H5. Ten cells, W0-W9, are reserved for public working storage. Procedures are "morally bound" (to quote the CACM article) to save and restore the values of these cells. There are eight instructions, based on the values of P: subroutine call, push/pop S to H0; push/pop the symbol in S to the list attached to S; copy value to S; conditional branch. In these instructions, S is the target. S is either the value of the SYMB field if Q=0, the symbol in the cell named by SYMB if Q=1, or the symbol in the cell named by the symbol in the cell named by SYMB if Q=2. In all cases but conditional branch, the LINK field of the cell tells which instruction to execute next. IPL has a library of some 150 basic operations. These include such operations as: Test symbols for equality Find, set, or erase an attribute of a list Locate the next symbol in a list; insert a symbol in a list; erase or copy an entire list Arithmetic operations (on symbol names) Manipulation of symbols; e.g., test if a symbol denotes an integer, or make a symbol local I/O operations "Generators", which correspond to iterators and filters in functional programming. For example, a generator may accept a list of numbers and produce the list of their squares. Generators could accept suitably designed functions—strictly, the addresses of code of suitably designed functions—as arguments. == History == IPL was first utilized to demonstrate that the theorems in Principia Mathematica which were proven laboriously by hand, by Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead, could in fact be proven by computation. According to Simon's autobiography Models of My Life, this application was originally developed first by hand simulation, using his children as the computing elements, while writing on and holding up note cards as the registers which contained the state variables of the program. IPL was used to implement several early artificial intelligence programs, also by the same authors: the Logic Theorist (1956), the General Problem Solver (1957), and their computer chess program NSS (1958). Several versions of IPL were created: IPL-I (never implemented), IPL-II (1957 for JOHNNIAC), IPL-III (existed briefly), IPL-IV, IPL-V (1958, for IBM 650, IBM 704, IBM 7090, Philco model 212, many others. Widely used). IPL-VI was a proposal for an IPL hardware. A co-processor “IPL-VC” for the CDC 3600 at Argonne National Libraries was developed which could run IPL-V commands. It was used to implement another checker-playing program. This hardware implementation did not improve running times sufficiently to “compete favorably with a language more directly oriented to the structure of present-day machines”. IPL was soon displaced by Lisp, which had much more powerful features, a simpler syntax, and the benefit of automatic garbage collection. == Legacy to computer programming == IPL arguably introduced several programming language features: List manipulation—but only lists of atoms, not general lists Property lists—but only when attached to other lists Higher-order functions—while assembly programming had always allowed computing with the addresses of functions, IPL was an early attempt to generalize this property of assembly language in a principled way Computation with symbols—though symbols have a restricted form in IPL (letter followed by number) Virtual machine Many of these features were generalized, rationalized, and incorporated into Lisp and from there into many other programming languages during the next several decades.
Read more →
Knowledge Engineering Environment

Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) is a frame-based development tool for expert systems. It was developed and sold by IntelliCorp, and was first released in 1983. It ran on Lisp machines, and was later ported to Lucid Common Lisp with the CLX library, an X Window System (X11) interface for Common Lisp. This version was available on several different UNIX workstations. On KEE, several extensions were offered: Simkit, a frame-based simulation library KEEconnection, database connection between the frame system and relational databases In KEE, frames are called units. Units are used for both individual instances and classes. Frames have slots and slots have facets. Facets can describe, for example, a slot's expected values, its working value, or its inheritance rule. Slots can have multiple values. Behavior can be implemented using a message passing model. KEE provides an extensive graphical user interface (GUI) to create, browse, and manipulate frames. KEE also includes a frame-based rule system. In the KEE knowledge base, rules are frames. Both forward chaining and backward chaining inference are available. KEE supports non-monotonic reasoning through the concepts of worlds. Worlds allow providing alternative slot-values of frames. Through an assumption-based truth or reason maintenance system, inconsistencies can be detected and analyzed. ActiveImages allows graphical displays to be attached to slots of Units. Typical examples are buttons, dials, graphs, and histograms. The graphics are also implemented as Units via KEEPictures, a frame-based graphics library.
Read more →
Concordancer

A concordancer is a computer program that automatically constructs a concordance—an alphabetised index of every occurrence of a word or phrase in a body of text, each entry displayed with its surrounding context. Concordancers are primary tools in corpus linguistics, lexicography, computer-assisted translation, and language teaching. The most common display format is the key word in context (KWIC) layout, in which each hit appears centred on a line with a fixed span of words to its left and right, enabling rapid scanning of usage patterns across many occurrences. == History == === Pre-computational concordances === The compilation of concordances predates computers by many centuries. Around 1230, the French Dominican cardinal Hugh of Saint-Cher directed a team of friars in assembling a concordance of the Latin Vulgate Bible, generally regarded as the first systematic concordance of any text. To help readers locate passages, Hugh divided each biblical chapter into lettered sections. Later milestones include a Hebrew Old Testament concordance compiled by Rabbi Mordecai Nathan (1448), Alexander Cruden's Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures (1737), and the manuscript Asaf ha-Mazkir, an unfinished concordance to the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Moses Rigotz around the turn of the 19th century. === First computer concordance === The first concordance produced with computing assistance was the Index Thomisticus, a comprehensive lexical index of the writings of and around Thomas Aquinas, totalling approximately 10.6 million Latin words. The Italian Jesuit priest Roberto Busa conceived the project in 1946 and secured the sponsorship of IBM in 1949 after a meeting with chairman Thomas J. Watson. Keypunch operators in Gallarate, Italy, encoded the texts onto punched cards from around 1950. IBM executive Paul Tasman developed the processing methods. The full 56-volume printed edition was completed around 1980, followed by a CD-ROM edition in 1989 and a web-accessible version in 2005. === The KWIC format === The key word in context (KWIC) display was formalised as a computational technique by Hans Peter Luhn, a researcher at IBM, in a 1960 paper in American Documentation. In KWIC output, each instance of the search term (the node word) is centred on a line with a fixed window of words to each side; sorting the resulting lines alphabetically by the immediately adjacent word reveals collocational and phraseological patterns at a glance. === COCOA === One of the first dedicated concordancing programs was COCOA (COunt and COncordance Generation on Atlas), created in 1965 by D. B. Russell at University College London and the Atlas Computer Laboratory in Harwell, Oxfordshire. Written in approximately 4,000 cards of FORTRAN, it processed text annotated with flat, non-hierarchical markup tags and could produce word counts and concordances in multiple languages. Within its first six months COCOA had been applied to texts in at least six languages. A second version designed for multiple mainframe platforms was distributed to British computing centres in the mid-1970s. Growing dissatisfaction with its interface and the eventual withdrawal of Atlas Laboratory support prompted British funding bodies to commission a successor program. === Oxford Concordance Program === The Oxford Concordance Program (OCP) was designed and written in FORTRAN by Susan Hockey and Ian Marriott at Oxford University Computing Services (OUCS) between 1979 and 1980 and first released in 1981. Hockey and Marriott acknowledged that OCP owed much to COCOA and the CLOC system at the University of Birmingham. OCP accepted COCOA-format markup to encode metadata such as author, act, scene, and line number, and was described by its authors as "a machine-independent text analysis program for producing word lists, indices and concordances in a variety of languages and alphabets." By the mid-1980s it had been licensed to approximately 240 institutions in 23 countries. A personal computer version, Micro-OCP, was developed for the IBM PC and sold by Oxford University Press from the late 1980s. Version 2 was rewritten in 1985–86 and documented in the same 1987 article by Hockey and co-author John Martin. === Personal computer era === The availability of affordable personal computers in the 1980s and 1990s enabled standalone concordancing applications that analysts could run locally without specialist computing facilities. MicroConcord, developed by Mike Scott and Tim Johns and published by Oxford University Press in 1993 for MS-DOS, was among the first concordancers designed specifically for classroom language teaching. WordSmith Tools, also developed by Mike Scott, was first released in 1996 and became one of the most widely used corpus analysis suites in academic linguistics research. Other tools from this era include TACT (University of Toronto, 1989), a suite of MS-DOS freeware programs for literary text analysis, and MonoConc, a Windows concordancer created by Michael Barlow. === Web-based concordancers === From the late 1990s onwards, web-based concordancers hosted on remote servers gave researchers browser access to large preloaded corpora without requiring local storage or processing. The Sketch Engine, developed by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý (Masaryk University), was launched commercially in July 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited and introduced word sketches—automatically generated one-page profiles of a word's typical grammatical relations and collocations. AntConc, created by Laurence Anthony at Waseda University, Tokyo, was first released in 2002 as freeware for Windows, macOS, and Linux. == Features == Modern concordancers typically offer a range of analytical functions beyond basic KWIC display. These commonly include: KWIC display with the node word centred and context words in aligned columns, sortable by the word one, two, or three positions to the left or right of the node (L1–L3 and R1–R3) Concordance plots, visualising the distribution of hits as marks along a scaled bar representing each text in the corpus Frequency and word lists, both alphabetical and ranked by frequency Collocation statistics, identifying words that co-occur with the search term more often than chance, quantified by measures such as mutual information, the t-score, or log-likelihood Keyword analysis, comparing word frequencies between a study corpus and a reference corpus to identify statistically distinctive items N-gram analysis, finding frequently recurring word sequences of a specified length Part-of-speech tagging integration, allowing searches filtered to particular grammatical categories Unicode support for multilingual text Bilingual and parallel concordancers additionally display aligned text in two or more languages side by side, enabling comparison of translation equivalents across language pairs. == Notable concordancers == === WordSmith Tools === Created by Mike Scott and first released in 1996, WordSmith Tools is a Windows corpus analysis suite that evolved from MicroConcord. Its three core modules are Concord (KWIC concordances), WordList (frequency and alphabetical word lists), and Keywords (statistical keyword identification relative to a reference corpus). Oxford University Press used WordSmith Tools for dictionary preparation work. Version 4.0 is freely available; later versions are sold by Lexical Analysis Software Limited. === AntConc === AntConc is a freeware, multiplatform concordancing toolkit created by Laurence Anthony, Professor of Applied Linguistics at Waseda University, Tokyo. First released in 2002 and formally described in a 2005 academic paper, it runs on Windows, macOS, and Linux. Its tools include a KWIC concordancer, a concordance plot for visualising distribution across texts, a collocates tool, a keyword list, and an n-gram analysis module. Because it is free and requires only plain text files, AntConc is widely used in linguistics courses and independent research worldwide. === Sketch Engine === The Sketch Engine is a corpus management and query system co-created by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý and launched in 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited. It provides browser-based access to over 800 corpora in more than 100 languages. Beyond concordance searching, it offers word sketches, collocation analysis, distributional thesaurus construction, keyword and terminology extraction, and diachronic analysis. It is used by major publishers including Macmillan and Oxford University Press for lexicographic research. A subset tool, SKELL (Sketch Engine for Language Learning), is freely accessible to individual learners. === Wmatrix === Wmatrix is a web-based corpus processing environment developed by Paul Rayson at the University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language (UCREL), Lancaster University. Alongside concordances and frequency lists, Wmatrix integrates CLAWS part-of-speech tagging and the USAS semantic tagger, enabling keyword analysis simultane
Read more →
Kaggle

Kaggle is a data science competition platform and online community for data scientists and machine learning practitioners under Google LLC. Kaggle enables users to find and publish datasets, explore and build models in a web-based data science environment, work with other data scientists and machine learning engineers, and enter competitions to solve data science challenges. Kaggle has also facilitated the use of unethical and unreliable data in medical research. == History == Kaggle was founded by Anthony Goldbloom in April 2010. Jeremy Howard, one of the first Kaggle users, joined in November 2010 and served as the President and Chief Scientist. Also on the team was Nicholas Gruen serving as the founding chair. In 2011, the company raised $12.5 million and Max Levchin became the chairman. On March 8, 2017, Fei-Fei Li, Chief Scientist at Google, announced that Google was acquiring Kaggle. In June 2017, Kaggle surpassed 1 million registered users, and as of October 2023, it has over 15 million users in 194 countries. In 2022, founders Goldbloom and Hamner stepped down from their positions and D. Sculley became the CEO. In February 2023, Kaggle introduced Models, allowing users to discover and use pre-trained models through deep integrations with the rest of Kaggle’s platform. In April 2025, Kaggle partnered with Wikimedia Foundation. == Site overview == === Competitions === Many machine-learning competitions have been run on Kaggle since the company was founded. Notable competitions include gesture recognition for Microsoft Kinect, making a association football AI for Manchester City, coding a trading algorithm for Two Sigma Investments, and improving the search for the Higgs boson at CERN. The competition host prepares the data and a description of the problem; the host may choose whether it's going to be rewarded with money or be unpaid. Participants experiment with different techniques and compete against each other to produce the best models. Work is shared publicly through Kaggle Kernels to achieve a better benchmark and to inspire new ideas. Submissions can be made through Kaggle Kernels, via manual upload or using the Kaggle API. For most competitions, submissions are scored immediately (based on their predictive accuracy relative to a hidden solution file) and summarized on a live leaderboard. After the deadline passes, the competition host pays the prize money in exchange for "a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable and royalty-free license [...] to use the winning Entry", i.e. the algorithm, software and related intellectual property developed, which is "non-exclusive unless otherwise specified". Alongside its public competitions, Kaggle also offers private competitions, which are limited to Kaggle's top participants. Kaggle offers a free tool for data science teachers to run academic machine-learning competitions. Kaggle also hosts recruiting competitions in which data scientists compete for a chance to interview at leading data science companies like Facebook, Winton Capital, and Walmart. Kaggle's competitions have resulted in successful projects such as furthering HIV research, chess ratings and traffic forecasting. Geoffrey Hinton and George Dahl used deep neural networks to win a competition hosted by Merck. Vlad Mnih (one of Hinton's students) used deep neural networks to win a competition hosted by Adzuna. This resulted in the technique being taken up by others in the Kaggle community. Tianqi Chen from the University of Washington also used Kaggle to show the power of XGBoost, which has since replaced Random Forest as one of the main methods used to win Kaggle competitions. Several academic papers have been published based on findings from Kaggle competitions. A contributor to this is the live leaderboard, which encourages participants to continue innovating beyond existing best practices. The winning methods are frequently written on the Kaggle Winner's Blog. === Progression system === Kaggle has implemented a progression system to recognize and reward users based on their contributions and achievements within the platform. This system consists of five tiers: Novice, Contributor, Expert, Master, and Grandmaster. Each tier is achieved by meeting specific criteria in competitions, datasets, kernels (code-sharing), and discussions. The highest tier, Kaggle Grandmaster, is awarded to users who have ranked at the top of multiple competitions including high ranking in a solo team. As of April 2, 2025, out of 23.29 million Kaggle accounts, 2,973 have achieved Kaggle Master status and 612 have achieved Kaggle Grandmaster status. === Kaggle Notebooks === Kaggle includes a free, browser-based online integrated development environment, called Kaggle Notebooks, designed for data science and machine learning. Users can write and execute code in Python or R, import datasets, use popular libraries, and train models on CPUs, GPUs, or TPUs directly in the cloud. This environment is often used for competition submissions, tutorials, education, and exploratory data analysis. == Medical Research Problems == In December 2025, an article was published in The Transmitter titled "Exclusive: Springer Nature retracts, removes nearly 40 publications that trained neural networks on ‘bonkers’ dataset". The dataset in question was uploaded to Kaggle containing photographs of autistic and non-autistic children's faces. This dataset contained more than 2,900 images and it is unlikely that these children or their families gave consent for the photos for use in medical research or the images were ethically approved for research. The articles using the dataset in Springer Nature were retracted from the scientific literature. At least 90 other publications cite a version of the dataset. In April 2026, another two datasets were identified on Kaggle with no data provenance having been published in Nature titled: "Dozens of AI disease-prediction models were trained on dubious data". These datasets were used in 124 clinical prediction models, at least two of which have been used in hospitals in Indonesia and Spain, while one article using the dataset was referenced in a medical device patent. As of April 17, 2026, three of the articles using these datasets have been retracted from the scientific literature. In May 2026, an additional research publication using two image datasets from Kaggle is under investigation in Scientific Reports. An article in Retraction Watch "‘Comically bad’ datasets used to train clinical models for stroke and diabetes" highlighted the images included famous actors such as Sylvester Stallone as Rambo, George Clooney, Angelina Jolie and Daniel Craig as well as children. It would be unethical for the use of these child images in medical research without consent. Reverse searching images saw some of the images were not for stroke but for bell's palsy. One of the datasets is no longer available on Kaggle while the other one still remains and mentions the images may be subject to copyright. Kaggle relies on the community self-reporting metadata and provenance and mentions the stroke and diabetes dataset identified in "Evidence of unreliable data and poor data provenance in clinical prediction model research and clinical practice" does not violate their terms of service and they would have been removed if they had.
Read more →
Lethal autonomous weapon

A lethal autonomous weapon (LAW), also known as a lethal autonomous weapon system (LAWS), autonomous weapon system (AWS), robotic weapon, or killer robot, is a type of military drone or military robot, which is autonomous in that it can independently search for and engage targets based on programmed constraints and descriptions. As of 2025, most military drones (including unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned combat aerial vehicles) and military robots are not truly autonomous. LAWs may engage in drone warfare in the air, on land, on water, underwater, or in space. == Definitions == In weapons development, the term "autonomous" is somewhat ambiguous and can vary hugely between different scholars, nations and organizations. There is no definition of lethal autonomous weapon systems that is generally agreed upon among different countries. The official United States Department of Defense Policy on Autonomy in Weapon Systems (Department of Defense Directive 3000.09) defines an Autonomous Weapon System as one that "...once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator." Heather Roff, a writer for Case Western Reserve University School of Law, describes autonomous weapon systems as "... capable of learning and adapting their 'functioning in response to changing circumstances in the environment in which [they are] deployed,' as well as capable of making firing decisions on their own." The British Ministry of Defence states "Whilst definitions can vary, the key difference is that an automated system is capable of carrying out complicated tasks but is incapable of complex decision-making, whereas an autonomous system is capable of deciding a course of action without depending on human oversight and control." Scholars such as Peter Asaro and Mark Gubrud believe that any weapon system that is capable of releasing a lethal force without the operation, decision, or confirmation of a human supervisor can be deemed autonomous. == Automatic defensive systems == Some definitions of autonomous weapon systems are broad enough to include land mines and naval mines, simple automatically-triggered lethal weapons that have been in use for centuries. Some current examples of LAWs are automated "hardkill" active protection systems, such as a radar-guided close-in weapon systems (CIWS) used to defend ships that have been in use since the 1970s (e.g., the US Phalanx CIWS). Such systems can autonomously identify and attack oncoming missiles, rockets, artillery fire, aircraft, and surface vessels according to criteria set by the human operator. Similar systems exist for tanks, such as the Russian Arena, the Israeli Trophy, and the German AMAP-ADS. Several types of stationary sentry guns, which can fire at humans and vehicles, are used in South Korea and Israel. Many missile defence systems, such as Iron Dome, also have autonomous targeting capabilities. The main reason for not having a "human in the loop" in these systems is the need for rapid response. They have generally been used to protect personnel and installations against incoming projectiles. == Autonomous offensive systems == According to The Economist in 2018, as technology advances, applications of uncrewed undersea vehicles could include mine clearance, mine-laying, anti-submarine sensor networking in contested waters, patrolling with active sonar, resupplying manned submarines, and becoming low-cost missile platforms. In 2017 the Russian Federation was developing artificially intelligent missiles, drones, unmanned vehicles, military robots and medic robots. In 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review alleged that Russia was developing a "new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo" named "Status 6". Israeli Minister Ayoob Kara stated in 2017 that Israel is developing military robots, including ones as small as flies. In October 2018, Zeng Yi, a senior executive at the Chinese defense firm Norinco, gave a speech in which he said that "In future battlegrounds, there will be no people fighting", and that the use of lethal autonomous weapons in warfare is "inevitable". In 2019, US Defense Secretary Mark Esper lashed out at China for selling drones capable of taking life with no human oversight. As of 2020, DARPA was working on making swarms of 250 autonomous lethal drones available to the American military. The US Navy is developing unmanned surface vehicles, also called sea drones, including Ghost Fleet Overlord, with plans to equip them with weapons and with the potential to use them semi-autonomously. In 2020 a Kargu 2 drone hunted down and attacked a human target in Libya, according to a report from the UN Security Council's Panel of Experts on Libya, published in March 2021. This may have been the first time an autonomous killer robot armed with lethal weaponry attacked human beings. In May 2021 Israel conducted an AI-guided combat drone swarm attack in Gaza. In the Russo-Ukrainian war, Ukraine has developed advanced drones with integrated artificial intelligence for a range of drone warfare purposes, including to attack infrastructure in Russia, although as of May 2026, Al Jazeera reported that humans remain in control of operation. == Ethical and legal issues == === Degree of human control === Three classifications of the degree of human control of autonomous weapon systems were laid out by Bonnie Docherty in a 2012 Human Rights Watch report. human-in-the-loop: a human must instigate the action of the weapon (in other words not fully autonomous). human-on-the-loop: a human may abort an action. human-out-of-the-loop: no human action is involved. === Standard used in US policy === Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 states that "Autonomous … weapons systems shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force." However, as noted in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the policy requires that autonomous weapon systems that kill people or use kinetic force, selecting and engaging targets without further human intervention, be certified as compliant with "appropriate levels" and other standards, not that such weapon systems cannot meet these standards and are therefore forbidden. "Semi-autonomous" hunter-killers that autonomously identify and attack targets do not even require certification. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert O. Work said in 2016 that the Defense Department would "not delegate lethal authority to a machine to make a decision", but might need to reconsider this since "authoritarian regimes" may do so. In October 2016 President Barack Obama stated that early in his career he was wary of a future in which a US president making use of drone warfare could "carry on perpetual wars all over the world, and a lot of them covert, without any accountability or democratic debate". In the US, security-related AI has fallen under the purview of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence since 2018. On October 31, 2019, the United States Department of Defense's Defense Innovation Board published the draft of a report outlining five principles for weaponized AI and making 12 recommendations for the ethical use of artificial intelligence by the Department of Defense that would ensure a human operator would always be able to look into the 'black box' and understand the kill-chain process. A major concern is how the report will be implemented. === Possible violations of ethics and international acts === Stuart Russell, professor of computer science from University of California, Berkeley stated the concern he has with LAWs is that his view is that it is unethical and inhumane. The main issue with this system is it is hard to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. There is concern by some economists and legal scholars about whether LAWs would violate International Humanitarian Law, especially the principle of distinction, which requires the ability to discriminate combatants from non-combatants, and the principle of proportionality, which requires that damage to civilians be proportional to the military aim. This concern is often invoked as a reason to ban "killer robots" altogether - but it is doubtful that this concern can be an argument against LAWs that do not violate International Humanitarian Law. A 2021 report by the American Congressional Research Service states that "there are no domestic or international legal prohibitions on the development of use of LAWs," although it acknowledges ongoing talks at the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). LAWs are said by some to blur the boundaries of who is responsible for a particular killing. Philosopher Robert Sparrow argues that autonomous weapons are causally but not morally responsible, similar to child soldiers. In each case, he argues there is a risk of atrocities occurring without an appropriate subject to hold responsible, which violates jus in bell
Read more →