AI Data Delivery

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

List of data science software

This is a list of data science software and platforms used in data science, which includes programming languages, programming environments, machine learning frameworks, data engineering tools, statistical software, data analysis, plotting, MLOps systems, and more. == Programming languages == == Development environments == These interactive notebooks, IDEs, and platforms provide specialised development environments. Apache Zeppelin Architect — Eclipse (software) CoCalc Dataiku Data Science Studio FreeMat GNU Octave Google Colab DataSpell Jupyter Notebook / JupyterLab Kaggle Notebooks MATLAB O-Matrix PyCharm RStudio SAS (software) and SAS Studio Spyder Visual Studio Code == Machine and deep learning software == The Machine learning / deep learning tools support development in those fields. == Data engineering == Examples of Data engineering tools. Apache Airflow Apache Flink Apache Hadoop Apache Kafka Apache NiFi Apache Spark Dask Data build tool (dbt) == Data mining == Examples of Data mining tools. === Free and open-source === === Proprietary === == Database management == === List of RDBMS === ==== Proprietary ==== == Data warehouses == Data warehouse environments include: Amazon Redshift Snowflake Google BigQuery Microsoft Azure Synapse Teradata Vertica == Data lakes == Data lake environments include: Apache Hadoop Cloudera Databricks Delta Lake Amazon S3 Google Cloud Storage Azure Data Lake == Algorithms == Apriori algorithm – frequent itemset mining and association rule learning in market basket analysis Backpropagation – algorithm for training artificial neural networks using gradient descent Decision Trees – tree-based algorithm for classification and regression Expectation–maximization algorithm – iterative procedure for maximum likelihood estimation with latent variables Gradient descent – iterative optimization algorithm for minimizing a loss function ID3 algorithm – used to generate a decision tree from a dataset K-Means – clustering algorithm based on minimizing within-cluster distances K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) – instance-based learning and classification method Linear regression – estimation method for predicting a dependent variable based on independent variables Logistic regression – classification algorithm for predicting a binary outcome Naive Bayes – probabilistic classifier based on Bayes' theorem Ordinary least squares – estimation method for parameters in linear regression PageRank – graph-based algorithm for link analysis and search ranking Principal component analysis – technique to reduce high-dimensional data while preserving variance Q-learning – reinforcement learning algorithm for learning optimal actions Random forest – ensemble of decision trees for improved classification or regression Sequential minimal optimization – solver for training support vector machines Stochastic gradient descent – randomized variant of gradient descent for large-scale machine learning Support Vector Machines (SVM) – algorithm for finding a hyperplane to separate classes == Statistical software == === Open-source === === Public domain === CSPro Dataplot Epi Map X-13ARIMA-SEATS === Freeware === BV4.1 MINUIT WinBUGS Winpepi === Proprietary === == Data processing == Tools for Data processing and analysis: == Data and information visualization == Software for Data visualization: == Plotting software == Software for plotting data to support processing and visualise results. == Maps and geospatial visualization == ArcGIS Carto Epi Map GeoDA Google Earth Engine Leaflet Mapbox MountainsMap QGIS == Machine learning == MLOps and model deployment: BentoML Data Version Control (DVC) Kubeflow MLflow Seldon Core Streamlit TensorFlow Serving Weights & Biases == Data repositories == Kaggle – platform for data science competitions, datasets, and notebooks. OpenML – collaborative platform for sharing datasets, algorithms, and experiments. University of California, Irvine Machine Learning Repository Zenodo – open-access repository supported by CERN and the EU. == Educational data science software == Kaggle – online platform for data science education, competitions, datasets, and collaborative learning. KNIME – open-source data analytics platform used for teaching data science, machine learning, and workflow-based analysis. RapidMiner – used in academic research and education for data mining and machine learning. Statistics Online Computational Resource (SOCR) – online tools and instructional resources for statistics education. Tanagra (machine learning) – data mining software developed for research and teaching purposes. TinkerPlots – explore and analyze data through visual modeling.
Read more →
Models of DNA evolution

A number of different Markov models of DNA sequence evolution have been proposed. These substitution models differ in terms of the parameters used to describe the rates at which one nucleotide replaces another during evolution. These models are frequently used in molecular phylogenetic analyses. In particular, they are used during the calculation of likelihood of a tree (in Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches to tree estimation) and they are used to estimate the evolutionary distance between sequences from the observed differences between the sequences. == Introduction == These models are phenomenological descriptions of the evolution of DNA as a string of four discrete states. These Markov models do not explicitly depict the mechanism of mutation nor the action of natural selection. Rather they describe the relative rates of different changes. For example, mutational biases and purifying selection favoring conservative changes are probably both responsible for the relatively high rate of transitions compared to transversions in evolving sequences. However, the Kimura (K80) model described below only attempts to capture the effect of both forces in a parameter that reflects the relative rate of transitions to transversions. Evolutionary analyses of sequences are conducted on a wide variety of time scales. Thus, it is convenient to express these models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change between different states (the Q matrices below). If we are given a starting (ancestral) state at one position, the model's Q matrix and a branch length expressing the expected number of changes to have occurred since the ancestor, then we can derive the probability of the descendant sequence having each of the four states. The mathematical details of this transformation from rate-matrix to probability matrix are described in the mathematics of substitution models section of the substitution model page. By expressing models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change we can avoid estimating a large numbers of parameters for each branch on a phylogenetic tree (or each comparison if the analysis involves many pairwise sequence comparisons). The models described on this page describe the evolution of a single site within a set of sequences. They are often used for analyzing the evolution of an entire locus by making the simplifying assumption that different sites evolve independently and are identically distributed. This assumption may be justifiable if the sites can be assumed to be evolving neutrally. If the primary effect of natural selection on the evolution of the sequences is to constrain some sites, then models of among-site rate-heterogeneity can be used. This approach allows one to estimate only one matrix of relative rates of substitution, and another set of parameters describing the variance in the total rate of substitution across sites. == DNA evolution as a continuous-time Markov chain == === Continuous-time Markov chains === Continuous-time Markov chains have the usual transition matrices which are, in addition, parameterized by time, t {\displaystyle t} . Specifically, if E 1 , E 2 , E 3 , E 4 {\displaystyle E_{1},E_{2},E_{3},E_{4}} are the states, then the transition matrix P ( t ) = ( P i j ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\big (}P_{ij}(t){\big )}} where each individual entry, P i j ( t ) {\displaystyle P_{ij}(t)} refers to the probability that state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} will change to state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} in time t {\displaystyle t} . Example: We would like to model the substitution process in DNA sequences (i.e. Jukes–Cantor, Kimura, etc.) in a continuous-time fashion. The corresponding transition matrices will look like: P ( t ) = ( p A A ( t ) p A G ( t ) p A C ( t ) p A T ( t ) p G A ( t ) p G G ( t ) p G C ( t ) p G T ( t ) p C A ( t ) p C G ( t ) p C C ( t ) p C T ( t ) p T A ( t ) p T G ( t ) p T C ( t ) p T T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\begin{pmatrix}p_{\mathrm {AA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {GA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {CA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {TA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TT} }(t)\end{pmatrix}}} where the top-left and bottom-right 2 × 2 blocks correspond to transition probabilities and the top-right and bottom-left 2 × 2 blocks corresponds to transversion probabilities. Assumption: If at some time t 0 {\displaystyle t_{0}} , the Markov chain is in state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} , then the probability that at time t 0 + t {\displaystyle t_{0}+t} , it will be in state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} depends only upon i {\displaystyle i} , j {\displaystyle j} and t {\displaystyle t} . This then allows us to write that probability as p i j ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{ij}(t)} . Theorem: Continuous-time transition matrices satisfy: P ( t + τ ) = P ( t ) P ( τ ) {\displaystyle P(t+\tau )=P(t)P(\tau )} Note: There is here a possible confusion between two meanings of the word transition. (i) In the context of Markov chains, transition is the general term for the change between two states. (ii) In the context of nucleotide changes in DNA sequences, transition is a specific term for the exchange between either the two purines (A ↔ G) or the two pyrimidines (C ↔ T) (for additional details, see the article about transitions in genetics). By contrast, an exchange between one purine and one pyrimidine is called a transversion. === Deriving the dynamics of substitution === Consider a DNA sequence of fixed length m evolving in time by base replacement. Assume that the processes followed by the m sites are Markovian independent, identically distributed and that the process is constant over time. For a particular site, let E = { A , G , C , T } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}=\{A,\,G,\,C,\,T\}} be the set of possible states for the site, and p ( t ) = ( p A ( t ) , p G ( t ) , p C ( t ) , p T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=(p_{A}(t),\,p_{G}(t),\,p_{C}(t),\,p_{T}(t))} their respective probabilities at time t {\displaystyle t} . For two distinct x , y ∈ E {\displaystyle x,y\in {\mathcal {E}}} , let μ x y {\displaystyle \mu _{xy}\ } be the transition rate from state x {\displaystyle x} to state y {\displaystyle y} . Similarly, for any x {\displaystyle x} , let the total rate of change from x {\displaystyle x} be μ x = ∑ y ≠ x μ x y . {\displaystyle \mu _{x}=\sum _{y\neq x}\mu _{xy}\,.} The changes in the probability distribution p A ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{A}(t)} for small increments of time Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} are given by p A ( t + Δ t ) = p A ( t ) − p A ( t ) μ A Δ t + ∑ x ≠ A p x ( t ) μ x A Δ t . {\displaystyle p_{A}(t+\Delta t)=p_{A}(t)-p_{A}(t)\mu _{A}\Delta t+\sum _{x\neq A}p_{x}(t)\mu _{xA}\Delta t\,.} In other words, (in frequentist language), the frequency of A {\displaystyle A} 's at time t + Δ t {\displaystyle t+\Delta t} is equal to the frequency at time t {\displaystyle t} minus the frequency of the lost A {\displaystyle A} 's plus the frequency of the newly created A {\displaystyle A} 's. Similarly for the probabilities p G ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{G}(t)} , p C ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{C}(t)} and p T ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{T}(t)} . These equations can be written compactly as p ( t + Δ t ) = p ( t ) + p ( t ) Q Δ t , {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t+\Delta t)=\mathbf {p} (t)+\mathbf {p} (t)Q\Delta t\,,} where Q = ( − μ A μ A G μ A C μ A T μ G A − μ G μ G C μ G T μ C A μ C G − μ C μ C T μ T A μ T G μ T C − μ T ) {\displaystyle Q={\begin{pmatrix}-\mu _{A}&\mu _{AG}&\mu _{AC}&\mu _{AT}\\\mu _{GA}&-\mu _{G}&\mu _{GC}&\mu _{GT}\\\mu _{CA}&\mu _{CG}&-\mu _{C}&\mu _{CT}\\\mu _{TA}&\mu _{TG}&\mu _{TC}&-\mu _{T}\end{pmatrix}}} is known as the rate matrix. Note that, by definition, the sum of the entries in each row of Q {\displaystyle Q} is equal to zero. It follows that p ′ ( t ) = p ( t ) Q . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} '(t)=\mathbf {p} (t)Q\,.} For a stationary process, where Q {\displaystyle Q} does not depend on time t, this differential equation can be solved. First, P ( t ) = exp ⁡ ( t Q ) , {\displaystyle P(t)=\exp(tQ),} where exp ⁡ ( t Q ) {\displaystyle \exp(tQ)} denotes the exponential of the matrix t Q {\displaystyle tQ} . As a result, p ( t ) = p ( 0 ) P ( t ) = p ( 0 ) exp ⁡ ( t Q ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=\mathbf {p} (0)P(t)=\mathbf {p} (0)\exp(tQ)\,.} === Ergodicity === If the Markov chain is irreducible, i.e. if it is always possible to go from a state x {\displaystyle x} to a state y {\displaystyle y} (possibly in several steps), then it is also ergodic. As a result, it has a unique stationary distribution π = { π x , x ∈ E } {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\pi }}=\{\pi _{x},\,x\in {\mathcal {E}}\}} , where π x {\displaystyle \pi _{x}} corresponds to the proportion of time spent in state x {\displaystyle x} after the Markov chain has run for an infinite amount of time. In DNA evo
Read more →
AI Headshot Generators: Free vs Paid (2026)

Curious about the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
Best AI Bug Finders in 2026

In search of the best AI bug finder? An AI bug finder is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI bug finder slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Cobocards

CoboCards is a web application for creation, study and sharing of flashcards. They also provide mobile application for Android and iOS mobile devices, to help study of flashcards on the move. Based on the freemium model, CoboCards provides users a free account with two card sets compared to paid subscription with premium features such as unlimited card sets, Leitner system based trainer and collaborative learning. == History == CoboCards is a project of Jamil Soufan and Tamim Swaid. Tamim Swaid has developed the concept and interface of a collaboratively usable e-learning platform in his diploma thesis at the University of Applied Sciences in February 2007. In January 2010 they founded the CoboCards GmbH (limited company) together with Ali Yildirim. CoboCards is supported by its strategic partners Prof. Schroeder (RWTH Aachen University), Prof. Oliver Wrede (University for Applied Sciences Aachen) and Prof. Klaus Gasteier (University of Arts Berlin). With the idea of creating and studying flashcards online and offering an active control of learning progress they won the start2grow business idea competition in September 2009 (€25.000 ). Additionally CoboCards was funded by German Authorities with approximately €100.000 .
Read more →
State complexity

State complexity is an area of theoretical computer science dealing with the size of abstract automata, such as different kinds of finite automata. The classical result in the area is that simulating an n {\displaystyle n} -state nondeterministic finite automaton by a deterministic finite automaton requires exactly 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states in the worst case. == Transformation between variants of finite automata == Finite automata can be deterministic and nondeterministic, one-way (DFA, NFA) and two-way (2DFA, 2NFA). Other related classes are unambiguous (UFA), self-verifying (SVFA) and alternating (AFA) finite automata. These automata can also be two-way (2UFA, 2SVFA, 2AFA). All these machines can accept exactly the regular languages. However, the size of different types of automata necessary to accept the same language (measured in the number of their states) may be different. For any two types of finite automata, the state complexity tradeoff between them is an integer function f {\displaystyle f} where f ( n ) {\displaystyle f(n)} is the least number of states in automata of the second type sufficient to recognize every language recognized by an n {\displaystyle n} -state automaton of the first type. The following results are known. NFA to DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states. This is the subset construction by Rabin and Scott, proved optimal by Lupanov. UFA to DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Leung, An earlier lower bound by Schmidt was smaller. NFA to UFA: 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{n}-1} states, see Leung. There was an earlier smaller lower bound by Schmidt. SVFA to DFA: Θ ( 3 n / 3 ) {\displaystyle \Theta (3^{n/3})} states, see Jirásková and Pighizzini 2DFA to DFA: n ( n n − ( n − 1 ) n ) {\displaystyle n(n^{n}-(n-1)^{n})} states, see Kapoutsis. Earlier construction by Shepherdson used more states, and an earlier lower bound by Moore was smaller. 2DFA to NFA: ( 2 n n + 1 ) = O ( 4 n n ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}=O({\frac {4^{n}}{\sqrt {n}}})} , see Kapoutsis. Earlier construction by Birget used more states. 2NFA to NFA: ( 2 n n + 1 ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}} , see Kapoutsis. 2NFA to NFA accepting the complement: O ( 4 n ) {\displaystyle O(4^{n})} states, see Vardi. AFA to DFA: 2 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{2^{n}}} states, see Chandra, Kozen and Stockmeyer. AFA to NFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Fellah, Jürgensen and Yu. 2AFA to DFA: 2 n 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n2^{n}}} , see Ladner, Lipton and Stockmeyer. 2AFA to NFA: 2 Θ ( n log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle 2^{\Theta (n\log n)}} , see Geffert and Okhotin. === The 2DFA vs. 2NFA problem and logarithmic space === It is an open problem whether all 2NFAs can be converted to 2DFAs with polynomially many states, i.e. whether there is a polynomial p ( n ) {\displaystyle p(n)} such that for every n {\displaystyle n} -state 2NFA there exists a p ( n ) {\displaystyle p(n)} -state 2DFA. The problem was raised by Sakoda and Sipser, who compared it to the P vs. NP problem in the computational complexity theory. Berman and Lingas discovered a formal relation between this problem and the L vs. NL open problem. This relation was further elaborated by Kapoutsis. == State complexity of operations for finite automata == Given a binary regularity-preserving operation on languages ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } and a family of automata X (DFA, NFA, etc.), the state complexity of ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } is an integer function f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} such that for each m-state X-automaton A and n-state X-automaton B there is an f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} -state X-automaton for L ( A ) ∘ L ( B ) {\displaystyle L(A)\circ L(B)} , and for all integers m, n there is an m-state X-automaton A and an n-state X-automaton B such that every X-automaton for L ( A ) ∘ L ( B ) {\displaystyle L(A)\circ L(B)} must have at least f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} states. Analogous definition applies for operations with any number of arguments. The first results on state complexity of operations for DFAs were published by Maslov and by Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. Holzer and Kutrib pioneered the state complexity of operations on NFA. The known results for basic operations are listed below. === Union === If language L 1 {\displaystyle L_{1}} requires m states and language L 2 {\displaystyle L_{2}} requires n states, how many states does L 1 ∪ L 2 {\displaystyle L_{1}\cup L_{2}} require? DFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: at least min ( n , m ) Ω ( log ⁡ ( min ( n , m ) ) ) {\displaystyle \min(n,m)^{\Omega (\log(\min(n,m)))}} ; between m n + m + n {\displaystyle mn+m+n} and m + n m 2 0.79 m {\displaystyle m+nm2^{0.79m}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and 4 m + n + 4 {\displaystyle 4m+n+4} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA: m + n {\displaystyle m+n} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. === Intersection === How many states does L 1 ∩ L 2 {\displaystyle L_{1}\cap L_{2}} require? DFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. === Complementation === If language L requires n states then how many states does its complement require? DFA: n {\displaystyle n} states, by exchanging accepting and rejecting states. NFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Birget. or Jirásková UFA: at least n Ω ~ ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle n^{{\tilde {\Omega }}(\log n)}} states, see Göös, Kiefer and Yuan, (this follows an earlier bound by Raskin); and at most n + 1 ⋅ 2 0.5 n {\displaystyle {\sqrt {n+1}}\cdot 2^{0.5n}} states, see Indzhev and Kiefer. SVFA: n {\displaystyle n} states, by exchanging accepting and rejecting states. 2DFA: at least n {\displaystyle n} and at most 4 n {\displaystyle 4n} states, see Geffert, Mereghetti and Pighizzini. === Concatenation === How many states does L 1 L 2 = { w 1 w 2 ∣ w 1 ∈ L 1 , w 2 ∈ L 2 } {\displaystyle L_{1}L_{2}=\{w_{1}w_{2}\mid w_{1}\in L_{1},w_{2}\in L_{2}\}} require? DFA: m ⋅ 2 n − 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle m\cdot 2^{n}-2^{n-1}} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m + n {\displaystyle m+n} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: 3 4 2 m + n − 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{m+n}-1} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: Θ ( 3 n / 3 2 m ) {\displaystyle \Theta (3^{n/3}2^{m})} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: at least 2 Ω ( n ) log ⁡ m {\displaystyle {\frac {2^{\Omega (n)}}{\log m}}} and at most 2 m m + 1 ⋅ 2 n n + 1 {\displaystyle 2m^{m+1}\cdot 2^{n^{n+1}}} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. === Kleene star === DFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: at least 1 n 2 n 2 − 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{n}}2^{{\frac {n}{2}}-1}} and at most 2 O ( n n + 1 ) {\displaystyle 2^{O(n^{n+1})}} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. === Reversal === DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Mirkin, Leiss, and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: n {\displaystyle n} states. SVFA: 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle 2n+1} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} and n + 2 {\displaystyle n+2} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. == Finite automata over a unary alphabet == State complexity of finite automata with a one-letter (unary) alphabet, pioneered by Chrobak, is different from the multi-letter case. Let g ( n ) = e Θ ( n ln ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle g(n)=e^{\Theta ({\sqrt {n\ln n}})}} be Landau's function. === Transformation between models === For a one-letter alphabet, transformations between different types of finite automata are sometimes more efficient than in the general case. NFA to DFA: g ( n ) + O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle g(n)+O(n^{2})} states, see Chrobak. 2DFA to DFA: g ( n ) + O ( n ) {\displaystyle g(n)+O(n)} states, see Chrobak and Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA to DFA: O ( g ( n ) ) {\displaystyle O(g(n))} states, see Mereghetti and Pighizzini. and Geffert, Mereghetti and Pighizzini. NFA to 2DFA: at most O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2})} states, see Chrobak. 2NFA to 2DFA: at most n O ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle n^{O(\log n)}} states, proved by implementing the method of Savitch's theorem, see
Read more →
State complexity

State complexity is an area of theoretical computer science dealing with the size of abstract automata, such as different kinds of finite automata. The classical result in the area is that simulating an n {\displaystyle n} -state nondeterministic finite automaton by a deterministic finite automaton requires exactly 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states in the worst case. == Transformation between variants of finite automata == Finite automata can be deterministic and nondeterministic, one-way (DFA, NFA) and two-way (2DFA, 2NFA). Other related classes are unambiguous (UFA), self-verifying (SVFA) and alternating (AFA) finite automata. These automata can also be two-way (2UFA, 2SVFA, 2AFA). All these machines can accept exactly the regular languages. However, the size of different types of automata necessary to accept the same language (measured in the number of their states) may be different. For any two types of finite automata, the state complexity tradeoff between them is an integer function f {\displaystyle f} where f ( n ) {\displaystyle f(n)} is the least number of states in automata of the second type sufficient to recognize every language recognized by an n {\displaystyle n} -state automaton of the first type. The following results are known. NFA to DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states. This is the subset construction by Rabin and Scott, proved optimal by Lupanov. UFA to DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Leung, An earlier lower bound by Schmidt was smaller. NFA to UFA: 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{n}-1} states, see Leung. There was an earlier smaller lower bound by Schmidt. SVFA to DFA: Θ ( 3 n / 3 ) {\displaystyle \Theta (3^{n/3})} states, see Jirásková and Pighizzini 2DFA to DFA: n ( n n − ( n − 1 ) n ) {\displaystyle n(n^{n}-(n-1)^{n})} states, see Kapoutsis. Earlier construction by Shepherdson used more states, and an earlier lower bound by Moore was smaller. 2DFA to NFA: ( 2 n n + 1 ) = O ( 4 n n ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}=O({\frac {4^{n}}{\sqrt {n}}})} , see Kapoutsis. Earlier construction by Birget used more states. 2NFA to NFA: ( 2 n n + 1 ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}} , see Kapoutsis. 2NFA to NFA accepting the complement: O ( 4 n ) {\displaystyle O(4^{n})} states, see Vardi. AFA to DFA: 2 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{2^{n}}} states, see Chandra, Kozen and Stockmeyer. AFA to NFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Fellah, Jürgensen and Yu. 2AFA to DFA: 2 n 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n2^{n}}} , see Ladner, Lipton and Stockmeyer. 2AFA to NFA: 2 Θ ( n log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle 2^{\Theta (n\log n)}} , see Geffert and Okhotin. === The 2DFA vs. 2NFA problem and logarithmic space === It is an open problem whether all 2NFAs can be converted to 2DFAs with polynomially many states, i.e. whether there is a polynomial p ( n ) {\displaystyle p(n)} such that for every n {\displaystyle n} -state 2NFA there exists a p ( n ) {\displaystyle p(n)} -state 2DFA. The problem was raised by Sakoda and Sipser, who compared it to the P vs. NP problem in the computational complexity theory. Berman and Lingas discovered a formal relation between this problem and the L vs. NL open problem. This relation was further elaborated by Kapoutsis. == State complexity of operations for finite automata == Given a binary regularity-preserving operation on languages ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } and a family of automata X (DFA, NFA, etc.), the state complexity of ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } is an integer function f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} such that for each m-state X-automaton A and n-state X-automaton B there is an f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} -state X-automaton for L ( A ) ∘ L ( B ) {\displaystyle L(A)\circ L(B)} , and for all integers m, n there is an m-state X-automaton A and an n-state X-automaton B such that every X-automaton for L ( A ) ∘ L ( B ) {\displaystyle L(A)\circ L(B)} must have at least f ( m , n ) {\displaystyle f(m,n)} states. Analogous definition applies for operations with any number of arguments. The first results on state complexity of operations for DFAs were published by Maslov and by Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. Holzer and Kutrib pioneered the state complexity of operations on NFA. The known results for basic operations are listed below. === Union === If language L 1 {\displaystyle L_{1}} requires m states and language L 2 {\displaystyle L_{2}} requires n states, how many states does L 1 ∪ L 2 {\displaystyle L_{1}\cup L_{2}} require? DFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: at least min ( n , m ) Ω ( log ⁡ ( min ( n , m ) ) ) {\displaystyle \min(n,m)^{\Omega (\log(\min(n,m)))}} ; between m n + m + n {\displaystyle mn+m+n} and m + n m 2 0.79 m {\displaystyle m+nm2^{0.79m}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and 4 m + n + 4 {\displaystyle 4m+n+4} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA: m + n {\displaystyle m+n} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. === Intersection === How many states does L 1 ∩ L 2 {\displaystyle L_{1}\cap L_{2}} require? DFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: m n {\displaystyle mn} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA: between m + n {\displaystyle m+n} and m + n + 1 {\displaystyle m+n+1} states, see Kunc and Okhotin. === Complementation === If language L requires n states then how many states does its complement require? DFA: n {\displaystyle n} states, by exchanging accepting and rejecting states. NFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Birget. or Jirásková UFA: at least n Ω ~ ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle n^{{\tilde {\Omega }}(\log n)}} states, see Göös, Kiefer and Yuan, (this follows an earlier bound by Raskin); and at most n + 1 ⋅ 2 0.5 n {\displaystyle {\sqrt {n+1}}\cdot 2^{0.5n}} states, see Indzhev and Kiefer. SVFA: n {\displaystyle n} states, by exchanging accepting and rejecting states. 2DFA: at least n {\displaystyle n} and at most 4 n {\displaystyle 4n} states, see Geffert, Mereghetti and Pighizzini. === Concatenation === How many states does L 1 L 2 = { w 1 w 2 ∣ w 1 ∈ L 1 , w 2 ∈ L 2 } {\displaystyle L_{1}L_{2}=\{w_{1}w_{2}\mid w_{1}\in L_{1},w_{2}\in L_{2}\}} require? DFA: m ⋅ 2 n − 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle m\cdot 2^{n}-2^{n-1}} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: m + n {\displaystyle m+n} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: 3 4 2 m + n − 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{m+n}-1} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: Θ ( 3 n / 3 2 m ) {\displaystyle \Theta (3^{n/3}2^{m})} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: at least 2 Ω ( n ) log ⁡ m {\displaystyle {\frac {2^{\Omega (n)}}{\log m}}} and at most 2 m m + 1 ⋅ 2 n n + 1 {\displaystyle 2m^{m+1}\cdot 2^{n^{n+1}}} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. === Kleene star === DFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Maslov and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Šebej. SVFA: 3 4 2 n {\displaystyle {\frac {3}{4}}2^{n}} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: at least 1 n 2 n 2 − 1 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{n}}2^{{\frac {n}{2}}-1}} and at most 2 O ( n n + 1 ) {\displaystyle 2^{O(n^{n+1})}} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. === Reversal === DFA: 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states, see Mirkin, Leiss, and Yu, Zhuang and Salomaa. NFA: n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} states, see Holzer and Kutrib. UFA: n {\displaystyle n} states. SVFA: 2 n + 1 {\displaystyle 2n+1} states, see Jirásek, Jirásková and Szabari. 2DFA: between n + 1 {\displaystyle n+1} and n + 2 {\displaystyle n+2} states, see Jirásková and Okhotin. == Finite automata over a unary alphabet == State complexity of finite automata with a one-letter (unary) alphabet, pioneered by Chrobak, is different from the multi-letter case. Let g ( n ) = e Θ ( n ln ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle g(n)=e^{\Theta ({\sqrt {n\ln n}})}} be Landau's function. === Transformation between models === For a one-letter alphabet, transformations between different types of finite automata are sometimes more efficient than in the general case. NFA to DFA: g ( n ) + O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle g(n)+O(n^{2})} states, see Chrobak. 2DFA to DFA: g ( n ) + O ( n ) {\displaystyle g(n)+O(n)} states, see Chrobak and Kunc and Okhotin. 2NFA to DFA: O ( g ( n ) ) {\displaystyle O(g(n))} states, see Mereghetti and Pighizzini. and Geffert, Mereghetti and Pighizzini. NFA to 2DFA: at most O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2})} states, see Chrobak. 2NFA to 2DFA: at most n O ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle n^{O(\log n)}} states, proved by implementing the method of Savitch's theorem, see
Read more →
Steve Omohundro

Stephen Malvern Omohundro (born 1959) is an American computer scientist whose areas of research include Hamiltonian physics, dynamical systems, programming languages, machine learning, machine vision, and the social implications of artificial intelligence. His current work uses rational economics to develop safe and beneficial intelligent technologies for better collaborative modeling, understanding, innovation, and decision making. == Education == Omohundro has degrees in physics and mathematics from Stanford University (Phi Beta Kappa) and a Ph.D. in physics from the University of California, Berkeley. == Learning algorithms == Omohundro started the "Vision and Learning Group" at the University of Illinois, which produced 4 Masters and 2 Ph.D. theses. His work in learning algorithms included a number of efficient geometric algorithms, the manifold learning task and various algorithms for accomplishing this task, other related visual learning and modelling tasks, the best-first model merging approach to machine learning (including the learning of Hidden Markov Models and Stochastic Context-free Grammars), and the Family Discovery Learning Algorithm, which discovers the dimension and structure of a parameterized family of stochastic models. == Self-improving artificial intelligence and AI safety == Omohundro started Self-Aware Systems in Palo Alto, California to research the technology and social implications of self-improving artificial intelligence. He is an advisor to the Machine Intelligence Research Institute on artificial intelligence. He argues that rational systems exhibit problematic natural "drives" that will need to be countered in order to build intelligent systems safely. His papers, talks, and videos on AI safety have generated extensive interest. He has given many talks on self-improving artificial intelligence, cooperative technology, AI safety, and connections with biological intelligence. == Programming languages == At Thinking Machines Corporation, Cliff Lasser and Steve Omohundro developed Star Lisp, the first programming language for the Connection Machine. Omohundro joined the International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) in Berkeley, California, where he led the development of the open source programming language Sather. Sather is featured in O'Reilly's History of Programming Languages poster. == Physics and dynamical systems theory == Omohundro's book Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics describes natural Hamiltonian symplectic structures for a wide range of physical models that arise from perturbation theory analyses. He showed that there exist smooth partial differential equations which stably perform universal computation by simulating arbitrary cellular automata. The asymptotic behavior of these PDEs is therefore logically undecidable. With John David Crawford he showed that the orbits of three-dimensional period doubling systems can form an infinite number of topologically distinct torus knots and described the structure of their stable and unstable manifolds. == Mathematica and Apple tablet contest == From 1986 to 1988, he was an Assistant Professor of Computer science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and cofounded the Center for Complex Systems Research with Stephen Wolfram and Norman Packard. While at the University of Illinois, he worked with Stephen Wolfram and five others to create the symbolic mathematics program Mathematica. He and Wolfram led a team of students that won an Apple Computer contest to design "The Computer of the Year 2000." Their design entry "Tablet" was a touchscreen tablet with GPS and other features that finally appeared when the Apple iPad was introduced 22 years later. == Other contributions == Subutai Ahmad and Steve Omohundro developed biologically realistic neural models of selective attention. As a research scientist at the NEC Research Institute, Omohundro worked on machine learning and computer vision, and was a co-inventor of U.S. Patent 5,696,964, "Multimedia Database Retrieval System Which Maintains a Posterior Probability Distribution that Each Item in the Database is a Target of a Search." === Pirate puzzle === Omohundro developed an extension to the game theoretic pirate puzzle featured in Scientific American. == Outreach == Omohundro has sat on the Machine Intelligence Research Institute board of advisors. He has written extensively on artificial intelligence, and has warned that "an autonomous weapons arms race is already taking place" because "military and economic pressures are driving the rapid development of autonomous systems".
Read more →
Second-order co-occurrence pointwise mutual information

In computational linguistics, second-order co-occurrence pointwise mutual information (SOC-PMI) is a method used to measure semantic similarity, or how close in meaning two words are. The method does not require the two words to appear together in a text. Instead, it works by analyzing the "neighbor" words that typically appear alongside each of the two target words in a large body of text (corpus). If the two target words frequently share the same neighbors, they are considered semantically similar. For example, the words "cemetery" and "graveyard" may not appear in the same sentence often, but they both frequently appear near words like "buried," "dead," and "funeral." SOC-PMI uses this shared context to determine that they have a similar meaning. The method is called "second-order" because it doesn't look at the direct co-occurrence of the target words (which would be first-order), but at the co-occurrence of their neighbors (a second level of association). The strength of these associations is quantified using pointwise mutual information (PMI). == History == The method builds on earlier work like the PMI-IR algorithm, which used the AltaVista search engine to calculate word association probabilities. The key advantage of a second-order approach like SOC-PMI is its ability to measure similarity between words that do not co-occur often, or at all. The British National Corpus (BNC) has been used as a source for word frequencies and contexts for this method. == Methodology == The SOC-PMI algorithm measures the similarity between two words, w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} , in several steps. === Step 1: Score neighboring words with PMI === First, for each target word ( w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} ), the algorithm identifies its "neighbor" words within a certain text window (e.g., within 5 words to the left or right) across a large corpus. The strength of the association between a target word t i {\displaystyle t_{i}} and its neighbor w {\displaystyle w} is calculated using pointwise mutual information (PMI). A higher PMI value means the two words appear together more often than would be expected by chance. The PMI between a target word t i {\displaystyle t_{i}} and a neighbor word w {\displaystyle w} is calculated as: f pmi ( t i , w ) = log 2 ⁡ f b ( t i , w ) × m f t ( t i ) f t ( w ) {\displaystyle f^{\text{pmi}}(t_{i},w)=\log _{2}{\frac {f^{b}(t_{i},w)\times m}{f^{t}(t_{i})f^{t}(w)}}} where: f b ( t i , w ) {\displaystyle f^{b}(t_{i},w)} is the number of times t i {\displaystyle t_{i}} and w {\displaystyle w} appear together in the context window. f t ( t i ) {\displaystyle f^{t}(t_{i})} is the total number of times t i {\displaystyle t_{i}} appears in the corpus. f t ( w ) {\displaystyle f^{t}(w)} is the total number of times w {\displaystyle w} appears in the corpus. m {\displaystyle m} is the total number of tokens (words) in the corpus. === Step 2: Create a semantic 'signature' for each word === For each target word ( w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} ), the algorithm creates a list of its most significant neighbors. This is done by taking the top β {\displaystyle \beta } neighbor words, sorted in descending order by their PMI score with the target word. This list of top neighbors, X w {\displaystyle X^{w}} , acts as a semantic "signature" for the word w {\displaystyle w} . X w = { X i w } {\displaystyle X^{w}=\{X_{i}^{w}\}} , for i = 1 , 2 , … , β {\displaystyle i=1,2,\ldots ,\beta } The size of this list, β {\displaystyle \beta } , is a parameter of the method. === Step 3: Compare the signatures === The algorithm then compares the signatures of w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} and w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} . It looks for words that are present in both signatures. The similarity of w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} to w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} is calculated by summing the PMI scores of w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} with every word in w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} 's signature list. The β {\displaystyle \beta } -PMI summation function defines this score. The score for w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} with respect to w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} is: f ( w 1 , w 2 , β ) = ∑ i = 1 β ( f pmi ( X i w 1 , w 2 ) ) γ {\displaystyle f(w_{1},w_{2},\beta )=\sum _{i=1}^{\beta }(f^{\text{pmi}}(X_{i}^{w_{1}},w_{2}))^{\gamma }} This sum only includes terms where the PMI value is positive. The exponent γ {\displaystyle \gamma } (with a value > 1) is used to give more weight to neighbors that are more strongly associated with w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} . This calculation is done in both directions: The similarity of w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} with respect to w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} : f ( w 1 , w 2 , β 1 ) = ∑ i = 1 β 1 ( f pmi ( X i w 1 , w 2 ) ) γ {\displaystyle f(w_{1},w_{2},\beta _{1})=\sum _{i=1}^{\beta _{1}}(f^{\text{pmi}}(X_{i}^{w_{1}},w_{2}))^{\gamma }} The similarity of w 2 {\displaystyle w_{2}} with respect to w 1 {\displaystyle w_{1}} : f ( w 2 , w 1 , β 2 ) = ∑ i = 1 β 2 ( f pmi ( X i w 2 , w 1 ) ) γ {\displaystyle f(w_{2},w_{1},\beta _{2})=\sum _{i=1}^{\beta _{2}}(f^{\text{pmi}}(X_{i}^{w_{2}},w_{1}))^{\gamma }} === Step 4: Calculate final similarity score === Finally, the total semantic similarity is the average of the two scores from the previous step. S i m ( w 1 , w 2 ) = f ( w 1 , w 2 , β 1 ) β 1 + f ( w 2 , w 1 , β 2 ) β 2 {\displaystyle \mathrm {Sim} (w_{1},w_{2})={\frac {f(w_{1},w_{2},\beta _{1})}{\beta _{1}}}+{\frac {f(w_{2},w_{1},\beta _{2})}{\beta _{2}}}} This score can be normalized to fall between 0 and 1. For example, using this method, the words cemetery and graveyard achieve a high similarity score of 0.986 (with specific parameter settings).
Read more →
Klaus-Robert Müller

Klaus-Robert Müller (born 1964 in Karlsruhe, West Germany) is a German computer scientist and physicist, most noted for his work in machine learning and brain–computer interfaces. == Career == Klaus-Robert Müller received his Diplom in mathematical physics and PhD in theoretical computer science from the University of Karlsruhe. Following his Ph.D. he went to Berlin as a postdoctoral fellow at GMD (German National Research Center for Computer Science) Berlin (now part of Fraunhofer Institute for Open Communication Systems), where he started building up the Intelligent Data Analysis (IDA) group. From 1994 to 1995 he was a research fellow at Shun'ichi Amari's lab at the University of Tokyo. 1999 Müller became an associate professor for neuroinformatics at the University of Potsdam, transitioning to the full professorship for Neural Networks and Time Series Analysis in 2003. Since 2006 he holds the chair for Machine Learning at Technische Universität Berlin. Since 2012 he holds a distinguished professorship at Korea University in Seoul. He co-founded and is co-director of the Berlin Big Data Center (BBDC) of TU Berlin. As of 2017, 29 former doctoral or postdoctoral researchers of Klaus-Robert Müller have become full professors themselves. Bernhard Schölkopf and Alexander J. Smola were supervised by him as members of his research group. Since 2020 he is director of the Berlin Institute for the Foundations of Learning and Data (BIFOLD), a German National AI Competence Center, and director of the European Laboratory for Learning and Intelligent Systems (ELLIS) unit Berlin. In 2020/2021 he spent his sabbatical at Google Brain as a principal scientist. == Research == Müller has contributed extensively to several major interests of machine learning, including support vector machines (SVMs) and kernel methods, and artificial neural networks. He pioneered applying new methods of pattern recognition in domains like brain–computer interfaces, using them for patients with Locked-in syndrome. He is one of the leading computer scientists affiliated with Germany. His current research interests include: Statistical learning theory (Support Vector Machines, Deep Neural Networks, Boosting) Learning of non-stationarity data Fusion of structured heterogeneous multi-modal data, co-adaptation Applications: MEG, EEG, NIRS, ECoG, EMG, Brain Computer Interfaces, computational neuroscience, computer vision, genomic data analysis, computational chemistry and atomistic simulations, digital pathology == Honours and awards == Klaus-Robert Müller was elected a fellow of the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina in 2012. In 2017 he was elected member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities and also external scientific member of the Max Planck Society. In 2021 he was elected member of the German Academy of Science and Engineering. His work was honoured with several awards, including: 2026 Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize 2025 IEEE Neural Network Pioneer Award 2024 Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology 2023 Hector Fellow 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, and 2019 Clarivate Highly Cited Researcher 2017 Vodafone Innovations Award 2017 2014 Science Prize of Berlin 2014 by the Governing Mayor of Berlin 2014 European Research Council Panel Consolidator Grants 2009 Best Paper award by IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society EMBS 2006 SEL-ALCATEL Research Prize for Technical Communication 1999 Olympus Award for Pattern Recognition == Books == with Holzinger, Andreas; et al., eds. (2022). xxAI – Beyond Explainable Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 13200. Springer Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04083-2. ISBN 978-3-031-04082-5. with Schütt, Kristof T.; et al., eds. (2020). Machine Learning Meets Quantum Physics. Lecture Notes in Physics. Vol. 968. Springer Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-40245-7. ISBN 978-3-030-40244-0. S2CID 242406994. with Samek, Wojciech; et al., eds. (2019). Explainable AI: Interpreting, Explaining and Visualizing Deep Learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 11700. Springer Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-28954-6. ISBN 978-3-030-28953-9. with Montavon, Grégoire; et al., eds. (2012). Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 7700 (2nd ed.). Springer Berlin, Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35289-8. ISBN 978-3-642-35288-1. S2CID 39578794.
Read more →
AI Chatbots: Free vs Paid (2026)

In search of the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI chatbot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Read more →
Roni Rosenfeld

Roni Rosenfeld (Hebrew: רוני רוזנפלד) is an Israeli-American computer scientist and computational epidemiologist, currently serving as the head of the Machine Learning Department at Carnegie Mellon University. He is an international expert in machine learning, infectious disease forecasting, statistical language modeling and artificial intelligence. == Education == Rosenfeld received his B.Sc. in mathematics and physics from Tel Aviv University in 1985. He received his Ph.D. in computer science from Carnegie Mellon University in 1994. While a graduate student, he developed and open-sourced a statistical language-modeling toolkit to allow anyone to create statistical language models from their own corpora and experiment with and extend the toolkit's capabilities. The toolkit has been used by more than 100 NLP laboratories in more than 20 countries. Rosenfeld's Ph.D. thesis, A Maximum Entropy Approach to Adaptive Statistical Language Modeling, was advised by Raj Reddy and Xuedong Huang and won the 2001 Computer, Speech and Language award for "Most Influential Paper in the Last 5 Years." == Career == Shortly after receiving his Ph.D., Rosenfeld joined the faculty of the Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science as an assistant professor. He was promoted to the rank of associate professor in 1999 and received tenure in 2001. In 2005 he was promoted to professor of language technologies, machine learning computer science and computational biology in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. Rosenfeld also holds adjunct appointments at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, department of computational and systems biology. From 2002 to 2003, Rosenfeld was a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong. Rosenfeld is the director of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning for Social Good (ML4SG) program. He has held educational leadership positions in a variety of programs, including the M.S. in computational finance (1997–1999), graduate computational and statistical learning (2001–2003), M.S. in machine learning (2017) and undergraduate minor in machine learning. Rosenfeld was appointed Head of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning Department in 2018. == Research == Rosenfeld's research interests include epidemiological forecasting, information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D), and machine learning for social good. === Epidemiological forecasting === Rosenfeld is a world expert in epidemiological forecasting. He founded and directs the Delphi research group, which has won most of the epidemiological forecasting challenges organized by the U.S. CDC and other U.S. government agencies. In December 2016, the CDC named his group the "Most Accurate Forecaster" for 2015–2016, and in October 2017, the Delphi group's two systems took the top two spots in the 2016-2017 flu forecasting challenge. The CDC recognized Rosenfeld's Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon University as having contributed the most accurate national-, regional-, and state-level influenza-like illness forecasts and national-level hospitalization forecasts to the site. In 2019, the CDC recognized forecasts provided by the Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon as having been the most accurate for five seasons in a row, and named the Delphi group an Influenza Forecasting Center of Excellence, a five-year designation that includes $3 million in research funding. Rosenfeld describes his forecasting research goal as "to make epidemiological forecasting as universally accepted and useful as weather forecasting is today." His recent work in the area has focused on selecting high value epidemiological forecasting targets (e.g. Influenza and Dengue); creating baseline forecasting methods for them; establishing metrics for measuring and tracking forecasting accuracy; estimating the limits of forecastability for each target; and identifying new sources of data that could be helpful to the forecasting goal. == Honors and awards == 2017 Joel and Ruth Spira Teaching Award 2017 CDC Influenza Forecasting Challenge "Most Accurate Forecaster" 1992 Allen Newell Medal for Research Excellence
Read more →
Open-source robotics

Open-source robotics is a branch of robotics where robots are developed with open-source hardware and free and open-source software, publicly sharing blueprints, schematics, and source code. It is thus closely related to the open design movement, the maker movement and open science. == Requirements == Open source robotics means that information about the hardware is easily discerned, so that others can easily rebuild it. In turn, this requires design to use only easily available standard subcomponents and tools, and for the build process to be documented in detail including a bill of materials and detailed ('Ikea style') step-by-step building and testing instructions. (A CAD file alone is not sufficient, as it does not show the steps for performing or testing the build). These requirements are standard to open source hardware in general, and are formalised by various licences, certifications, especially those defined by the peer-reviewed journals Journal of Open Hardware and HardwareX. Licensing requirements for software are the same as for any open source software. But in addition, for software components to be of practical use in real robot systems, they need to be compatible with other software, usually as defined by some robotics middleware community standard. == Hardware systems == Applications to date include: Robot arms, e.g. PARA or Thor Wheeled mobile robots. e.g. OpenScout Four-legged robots such as the Open Dynamic Robot Initiative UAV quadcopters (drones) such as Agilicious Humanoid robots, e.g. iCub, Berkeley Humanoid Lite Self-driving cars, e.g. OpenPodcar (→ Personal rapid transit) Submersible robots, eg. OpenFish Laboratory robotics such as chemical liquid handling Vertical farming Swarm robots, e.g. HeRoSwarm Domestic tasks: vacuum cleaning, floor washing and grass mowing Robot sports including robot combat and autonomous racing Education == Hardware subcomponents == Most open source hardware definitions allow non-open subcomponents to be used in modular design, as long as they are easily available. However many designs try to push openness down into as many subcomponents as possible, with the aim of ultimately reaching fully open designs. Open hardware manual-drive vehicles and their subcomponents, such as from Open Source Ecology, are often used as starting points and extended with automation systems. Open subcomponents can include open-source computing hardware as subcomponents, such as Arduino and RISC-V, as well as open source motors and drivers such as the Open Source Motor Controller and ODrive. Open hardware robotics interface boards can simplify interfacing between middleware software and physical hardware. == Software subcomponents == === Middleware === Robotics middleware is software which links multiple other software components together. In robotics, this specifically means real-time communication systems with standardized message passing protocols. The predominant open source middleware is ROS2, the robot operating system, now as version 2. Other alternatives include ROS1, YARP — used in the iCub, URBI, and Orca. Open source middleware is usually run on an open source operating system, especially the Ubuntu distribution of Linux. === Driver software === Most robot sensors and actuators require software drivers. There is little standardization of open source software at this level, because each hardware device is different. Creating open drivers for closed hardware is difficult as it requires both low level programming and reverse engineering. === Simulation software === Open source robotics simulators include Gazebo, MuJoCo and Webots. Open source 3D game engines such as Godot are also sometimes used as simulators, when equipped with suitable middleware interfaces. === Automation software === At the level of AI, many standard algorithms have open source software implementations, mostly in ROS2. Major components include: Machine vision systems such as the YOLO object detector. 3D photogrammetry Navigation including SLAM and planning such as nav2 Arm inverse kinematics such as moveIt2 == Community == The first signs of the increasing popularity of building and sharing robot designs were found with the maker culture community. What began with small competitions for remote operated vehicles (e.g. Robot combat), soon developed to the building of autonomous telepresence robots such as Sparky and then true robots (being able to take decisions themselves) as the Open Automaton Project. Several commercial companies now also produce kits for making simple robots. The community has adopted open source hardware licenses, certifications, and peer-reviewed publications, which check that source has been made correctly and permanently available under community definitions, and which validate that this has been done. These processes have become critically important due to many historical projects claiming to be open source but them reverting on the promise due to commercialisation or other pressures. As with other forms of open source hardware, the community continues to debate precise criteria for 'ease of build'. A common standard is that designs should be buildable by a technical university student, in a few days, using typical fablab tools, but definitions of all of these subterms can also be debated. Compared to other forms of open source hardware, open source robotics typically includes a large software element, so involves software as well as hardware engineers. Open source concepts are more established in open source software than hardware, so robotics is a field in which those concepts can be shared and transferred from software to hardware. While the community in open source robotics is multi-faceted with a wide range of backgrounds, a sizable sub-community uses the ROS middleware and meets at the ROSCon conferences to discuss development of ROS itself and automation components built on it.
Read more →
The Best Free AI Voice Assistant for Beginners

Looking for the best AI voice assistant? An AI voice assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI voice assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Read more →
Top 10 AI Code-review Tools Compared (2026)

In search of the best AI code-review tool? An AI code-review tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code-review tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Read more →