AI Data Delivery F5

AI Data Delivery F5 — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  AIOps

  AIOps (Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations) refers to the use of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and big data analytics to automate and enhance data center management. It helps organizations manage complex IT environments by detecting, diagnosing, and resolving issues more efficiently than traditional methods. == History == AIOps was first defined by Gartner in 2016, combining "artificial intelligence" and "IT operations" to describe the application of AI and machine learning to enhance IT operations. This concept was introduced to address the increasing complexity and data volume in IT environments, aiming to automate processes such as event correlation, anomaly detection, and causality determination. == Definition == AIOps refers to multi-layered, complex technology platforms that enhance and automate IT operations by using machine learning and analytics to analyze the large amounts of data collected from various DevOps devices and tools, automatically identifying and responding to issues in real-time. AIOps represents a shift from isolated IT data to aggregated observational data (e.g., job logs and monitoring systems) and interaction data (such as ticketing, events, or incident records) within a big data platform. AIOps applies machine learning and analytics to this data, resulting in continuous visibility that, when combined with automation, can lead to ongoing improvements. AIOps connects three IT disciplines (automation, service management, and performance management) to achieve continuous visibility and improvement. This new approach in modern, accelerated, and hyper-scaled IT environments leverages advances in machine learning and big data to overcome previous limitations. == Components == AIOps includes, but is not limited to, the following processes and techniques: Anomaly Detection Log Analysis Root Cause Analysis Cohort Analysis Event Correlation Predictive Analytics Hardware Failure Prediction Automated Remediation Performance Prediction Incident Management Causality Determination Queue Management Resource Scheduling and Optimization Predictive Capacity Management Resource Allocation Service Quality Monitoring Deployment and Integration Testing System Configuration Auto-diagnosis and Problem Localization Efficient ML Training and Inferencing Using LLMs for Cloud Ops Auto Service Healing Data Center Management Customer Support Security and Privacy in Cloud Operations == Comparison with DevOps == AIOps is increasingly compared with DevOps in terms of impact on operational efficiency. While DevOps focuses on collaboration between development and operations teams to accelerate software delivery, AIOps integrates artificial intelligence to enhance monitoring, automation, and predictive capabilities. Various industry analyses have explored the similarities and differences between the two approaches, including discussions on how organizations can combine them to improve incident management and resource optimization. == Results == AI optimizes IT operations in five ways: First, intelligent monitoring powered by AI helps identify potential issues before they cause outages, improving metrics like Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) by 15-20%. Second, performance data analysis and insights enable quick decision-making by ingesting and analyzing large data sets in real time. Third, AI-driven automated infrastructure optimization efficiently allocates resources and thereby reducing cloud costs. Fourth, enhanced IT service management reduces critical incidents by over 50% through AI-driven end-to-end service management. Lastly, intelligent task automation accelerates problem resolution and automates remedial actions with minimal human intervention. In 2025, Atera Networks was identified as a leader in AIOps by the software review platform G2. == AIOps vs. MLOps == AIOps tools use big data analytics, machine learning algorithms, and predictive analytics to detect anomalies, correlate events, and provide proactive insights. This automation reduces the burden on IT teams, allowing them to focus on strategic tasks rather than routine operational issues. AIOps is widely used by IT operations teams, DevOps, network administrators, and IT service management (ITSM) teams to enhance visibility and enable quicker incident resolution in hybrid cloud environments, data centers, and other IT infrastructures. In contrast to MLOps (Machine Learning Operations), which focuses on the lifecycle management and operational aspects of machine learning models, AIOps focuses on optimizing IT operations using a variety of analytics and AI-driven techniques. While both disciplines rely on AI and data-driven methods, AIOps primarily targets IT operations, whereas MLOps is concerned with the deployment, monitoring, and maintenance of ML models. == Conferences == There are several conferences that are specific to AIOps: AIOps Summit AI Dev Summit IBM Think conference

  Read more →
• 

  Wiki survey

  Wiki surveys or wikisurveys are a software-based survey method that crowdsource discussions and help participants to find areas of agreement. Other names include bridging systems and collective response systems. The approach, inspired by Wikipedia, is to open up surveys where participants can shape the questions, instead of traditional 'closed' surveys where participants can only respond to the questions asked. Wiki surveys have been used for purposes including facilitating deliberative democracy, crowdsourcing opinions from experts and figuring out common beliefs on a given topic. A notable usage of wiki surveys is in Taiwan's government system, where citizens can participate in crowdsourced lawmaking through Pol.is wiki surveys. == Implementations == === All Our Ideas === All Our Ideas founders coined the term "wiki survey," explaining how they took inspiration from the organic evolution of Wikipedia and hoped to create something similar for surveys. They hosted 5000 surveys between 2010 and 2014. A 2020 survey using the tool found 3 of its top 10 findings were user-generated. === Decidim === Decidim has been used by governments throughout Spain and Europe to help with participatory budgeting and other public policy decisions. === Polis === Polis (also known as Pol.is) was developed in 2012. The focus of Polis is to project participants into an 'opinion space' where they can see how their voting behavior compares to other participants. The opinion space clusters participants into groups of similar opinion and is designed in a way to avoid tyranny of the majority by being able to include groups that have small numbers of participants. The questions participants are presented with are agree/disagree/pass on a single 'comment' submitted by a participant. The code for Polis is free and open-source software under the GNU AGPL. === Remesh === Remesh was founded in 2013 and has partnered with the United Nations and Alliance for Middle East Peace efforts to bring peaceful resolutions to conflicts. Participants are anonymous and the algorithm can be fine-tuned to better understand local dialects in specific regions. == Examples == PlaNYC used All Our Ideas to gather ideas on how to establish New York City's sustainability plan vTaiwan, a citizen-lead government process in Taiwan, uses Polis for enabling large amounts of citizens to deliberate and consequently provide input on Taiwan's legislative decisions OECD used All Our Ideas to gather ideas from the public prior to meeting for a forum and meeting on which skills are most important to invest in for the 21st century March On, an offshoot of the Women's March Movement, used Polis to understand the opinions of people wanting to support the movement Residents of Harrogate use Polis to debate issues in their community, with the results being released publicly to everyone == Characteristics == Wiki surveys often have these three characteristics: === Collaborativeness === Wiki surveys allow participants to contribute questions, as well as answer questions created by its participants. === Adaptivity === Wiki surveys adapt to elicit the most useful information from its participants. One example involves changing the ordering of questions based on the voting behavior of previous participants so as to maximize consensus. The heuristic determining the ordering of questions highly values showing the comments that have been voted on the least. === 'Greediness' === In the context of wiki surveys, 'greediness' simply means making full use of information that participants are willing to provide. Wiki surveys do not require participants to answer a fixed amount of questions, so participants can answer as little or as much as they want. This is intended to be more efficient in capturing participants' preferences by allowing more organic sharing of their perspectives. == Traditional survey methods vs. wiki surveys == Questions in traditional survey methods fall into two categories: Open and closed questions. Open questions ask the person taking the survey to write an open response while closed questions give a fixed set of responses to select from. Wiki surveys are like a hybrid of the two, enabling insightful consensus in certain situations where traditional survey methods may lack. Closed questions are easy to analyze quantitively, but the limited options to select from for a given question may cause bias. Open questions are not as subject to bias, but are difficult to analyze quantitatively at scale. Wiki surveys allow for open responses by the users' contribution of survey questions (also called 'items'), and uses machine learning techniques to (at least partially) automate the quantitative analysis of the responses to those questions.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic management

  Algorithmic management is a term used to describe certain labor management practices in the contemporary digital economy. In scholarly uses, the term was initially coined in 2015 by Min Kyung Lee, Daniel Kusbit, Evan Metsky, and Laura Dabbish to describe the managerial role played by algorithms on the Uber and Lyft platforms, but has since been taken up by other scholars to describe more generally the managerial and organisational characteristics of platform economies. However, digital direction of labor was present in manufacturing already since the 1970s and algorithmic management is becoming increasingly widespread across a wide range of industries. The concept of algorithmic management can be broadly defined as the delegation of managerial functions to algorithmic and automated systems. Algorithmic management has been enabled by "recent advances in digital technologies" which allow for the real-time and "large-scale collection of data" which is then used to "improve learning algorithms that carry out learning and control functions traditionally performed by managers". The term does not refer to a specific underlying technology, and encompasses the design choices, organisational policies, and governance that surround the managerial use of algorithms in workplaces. In the contemporary workplace, firms employ an ecology of accounting devices, such as "rankings, lists, classifications, stars and other symbols' in order to effectively manage their operations and create value without the need for traditional forms of hierarchical control." Many of these devices fall under the label of what is called algorithmic management, and were first developed by companies operating in the sharing economy or gig economy, functioning as effective labor and cost cutting measures. The Data&Society explainer of the term, for example, describes algorithmic management as 'a diverse set of technological tools and techniques that structure the conditions of work and remotely manage workforces. Data&Society also provides a list of five typical features of algorithmic management: Prolific data collection and surveillance of workers through technology; Real-time responsiveness to data that informs management decisions; Automated or semi-automated decision-making; Transfer of performance evaluations to rating systems or other metrics; and The use of "nudges" and penalties to indirectly incentivize worker behaviors. Proponents of algorithmic management claim that it "creates new employment opportunities, better and cheaper consumer services, transparency and fairness in parts of the labour market that are characterised by inefficiency, opacity and capricious human bosses." On the other hand, critics of algorithmic management claim that the practice leads to several issues, especially as it impacts the employment status of workers managed by its new array of tools and techniques. == History of the term == "Algorithmic management" was first described by Lee, Kusbit, Metsky, and Dabbish in 2015 in their study of the Uber and Lyft platforms. In their study, Lee et al. termed "software algorithms that assume managerial functions and surrounding institutional devices that support algorithms in practice" algorithmic management. Software algorithms, it was said, are increasingly used to "allocate, optimize, and evaluate work" by platforms in managing their vast workforces. In Lee et al.'s paper on Uber and Lyft this included the use of algorithms to assign work to drivers, as mechanisms to optimise pricing for services, and as systems for evaluating driver performance. In 2016, Alex Rosenblat and Luke Stark sought to extend on this understanding of algorithmic management "to elucidate on the automated implementation of company policies on the behaviours and practices of Uber drivers." Rosenblat and Stark found in their study that algorithmic management practices contributed to a system beset by power asymmetries, where drivers had little control over "critical aspects of their work", whereas Uber had far greater control over the labor of its drivers. Since this time, studies of algorithmic management have extended the use of the term to describe the management practices of various firms, where, for example, algorithms "are taking over scheduling work in fast food restaurants and grocery stores, using various forms of performance metrics ad even mood... to assign the fastest employees to work in peak times." Algorithmic management is seen to be especially prevalent in gig work on platforms, such as on Upwork and Deliveroo, and in the sharing economy, such as in the case of Airbnb. Furthermore, recent research has defined sub-constructs that fall under the umbrella term of algorithmic management, for example, "algorithmic nudging". A Harvard Business Review article published in 2021 explains: "Companies are increasingly using algorithms to manage and control individuals not by force, but rather by nudging them into desirable behavior — in other words, learning from their personalized data and altering their choices in some subtle way." While the concept builds on nudging theory popularized by University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler and Harvard Law School professor Cass Sunstein, "due to recent advances in AI and machine learning, algorithmic nudging is much more powerful than its non-algorithmic counterpart. With so much data about workers' behavioral patterns at their fingertips, companies can now develop personalized strategies for changing individuals' decisions and behaviors at large scale. These algorithms can be adjusted in real-time, making the approach even more effective." == Relationships with other labor management practices == Algorithmic management has been compared and contrasted with other forms of management, such as Scientific management approaches, as pioneered by Frederick Taylor in the early 1900s. Henri Schildt has called algorithmic management "Scientific management 2.0", where management "is no longer a human practice, but a process embedded in technology." Similarly, Kathleen Griesbach, Adam Reich, Luke Elliott-Negri, and Ruth Milkman suggest that, while "algorithmic control over labor may be relatively new, it replicates many features of older mechanisms of labor control." On the other hand, some commentators have argued that algorithmic management is not simply a new form of Scientific management or digital Taylorism, but represents a distinct approach to labor control in platform economies. David Stark and Ivana Pais, for example, state that, "In contrast to Scientific Management at the turn of the twentieth century, in the algorithmic management of the twenty-first century there are rules but these are not bureaucratic, there are rankings but not ranks, and there is monitoring but it is not disciplinary. Algorithmic management does not automate bureaucratic structures and practices to create some new form of algorithmic bureaucracy. Whereas the devices and practices of Taylorism were part of a system of hierarchical supervision, the devices and practices of algorithmic management take place within a different economy of attention and a new regime of visibility. Triangular rather than vertical, and not as a panopticon, the lines of vision in algorithmic management are not lines of supervision." Similarly, Data&Society's explainer for algorithmic management claims that the practice represents a marked departure from earlier management structures that more strongly rely on human supervisors to direct workers. In analyzing the difference and the similarities to previous management styles, David Stark and Pieter Vanden Broeck expand the applicability of algorithmic management beyond the workplace. They develop a theory of algorithmic management in terms of broader changes in the shape and structure of organization in the 21st century, attentive to the erosion of organization's boundaries whereby heterogeneous actors, assets, and activities, are coopted regardless of their place in organizational space. Stark and Vanden Broeck propose the following means of differentiating algorithmic management from other historical managerial paradigms: == Issues == Algorithmic management can provide an effective and efficient means of workforce control and value creation in the contemporary digital economy. However, commentators have highlighted several issues that algorithmic management poses, especially for the workers it manages. Criticisms of the practice often highlight several key issues pertaining to algorithmic management practices, such as the imperfection and scope of its surveillance and control measures, which also threaten to lock workers out of key decision-making processes; its lack of transparency for users and information asymmetries; its potential for bias and discrimination; its dehumanizing tendencies; and its potential to create conditions which sidestep traditional employer-employee accountability. This last point has been especi

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial intelligence in Brazilian industry

  In 2022, 16.9% (1,620) of the 9,586 Brazilian industrial companies with 100 or more employees used artificial intelligence in their operations Among the companies that used AI, the areas of administration (73.8%), product project development (65.9%), processes, services and marketing (65.1%) were those that used it the most, followed by the areas of production (56.4%) and logistics (48.4%). == Current scenario == === Adoption in Brazilian industrial sectors === In senior management, the majority (56%) of executives have a long-term vision for its use. The study also shows that IT, Innovation, and Marketing are the areas where AI use is most widespread, and that 43% of companies are developing or adapting the algorithms they use. The majority of large institutions that reported some type of AI use purchased these solutions from other companies (76%). Some factors for the adoption of artificial intelligence in companies include the establishment of an autonomous strategy by the company (87.0%), and the influence of suppliers and/or customers (63.0%) and the main difficulties in using technologies were high costs (80.8%), lack of qualified personnel in the company (54.6%) and excessive economic risks (49.5%). Three variables are considered the most relevant to explain the option to use AI: the implementation of a digital security policy, the size of companies with 250 or more employees and the characteristics of the company related to information and communication. When analyzing AI use by company size in Brazil, large companies have the highest proportion of AI use, mainly due to their investment capacity and technology experimentation. However, when comparing Brazil and Europe, indicators show an acceleration in AI use among large European companies, while in Brazil the situation remains stable. In 2023, 30% of large companies in the European bloc used some type of AI, a figure that rose to 41% in 2024, while in Brazil these proportions were 41% in 2023 and 38% in 2024. === Workforce === The challenge of upskilling begins with employees who are capable of understanding recent technological changes. Similarly, companies must create the environment and conditions for workforce development conducive to innovation, and universities must be prepared to provide knowledge aligned with the transition process, which in turn must be supported by public policies. The concern with training a specialized workforce in AI can be seen in the low number of graduates and PhDs in computer science and computer engineering in Brazil, compared to the number shown in other countries. As recorded in the document Recommendations for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in Brazil, 2019 data from the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) indicate that "the number of PhDs graduated annually in computing remained below 400 in 2016, and is not expected to have increased during the Covid-19 pandemic" (ABC, 2023). In the United States, by contrast, the number of PhDs graduated in these two areas has remained around 1,800 for the past 11 years, and during this period, the number of PhDs specializing in AI jumped from 10% to 19%. Based on data from the CNPq Lattes Platform (October 2019), it is possible to observe that the number of professionals in the AI field in Brazil is 4,429 specialists. This is still a small number compared to the 415,166 IT jobs in the country's business sector alone. === R&D, scientific production and integration with industry === China and the United States lead in the number of publications. These two countries are followed by the G7 members: India, Austria, South Korea, and Spain. Brazil appears in the next group, alongside the Netherlands, Russia, Indonesia, and Ireland. Regarding the promotion of research and technologies related to AI, public entities such as the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Capes) and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) stood out as the main funders. Currently, different countries and territories have been promoting the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). In the Brazilian case, one of the main initiatives is the creation of Engineering Research Centers/Applied Research Centers (CPE/CPA) in AI by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), in collaboration with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI), the Ministry of Communications (MC) and the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br). In terms of the number of patents filed and the volume of investments, the leading nations in AI are the United States, China, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia, India, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Ireland, Singapore, Canada, Israel, and Italy. Brazil appears among the top twenty countries in some rankings, mainly due to its good number of publications (approximately 10% of the number of articles published by the United States). The US is home to approximately 60% of the world's top AI researchers, followed by China (11%), Europe (10%), and Canada (6%). To change this scenario, in August 2024, the Brazilian government announced an investment of R$23 billion until 2028 in artificial intelligence, seeking to “transform the country into a global reference in innovation”. == Future challenges == The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2020) report highlighted three factors that hinder the digital transformation journey and application of AI in Brazil: insufficient infrastructure, high costs due to the tax system, and financial limitations, such as limited access to financing. The costs of adopting technology, its incompatibility with the business, and the lack of training also represent obstacles that Brazilian industry must overcome. There are also inherent obstacles for companies. A McKinsey review emphasizes that once a company chooses one or more sectors to focus on, it must select specific applications. Buyers aren't interested in artificial intelligence simply because it's a breakthrough technology; they want AI to generate a good return on investment, whether by solving specific problems, saving money, or increasing sales. If an AI vendor tried to offer a horizontal solution, the value proposition might not be as compelling. Part of the solution to Brazil's technological backwardness involves building an ecosystem fueled by private institutions, universities, and governments.

  Read more →
• 

  Zamzar

  Zamzar is an online file converter and compressor, created by brothers Mike and Chris Whyley in England in 2006. It allows users to convert files online, without downloading a software tool, and supports over 1,200 different conversion types. Since its formation, the service has converted over 510 million files for users from 245 different countries. The service supports the conversion of documents, images, audio, video, e-Books, CAD files and compressed file formats. Users can type in a URL or upload one or more files (if they are all of the same format) from their computer; Zamzar will then convert the file(s) to another user-specified format, such as an Adobe PDF file to a Microsoft Word document. Once conversion is complete, users can immediately download the file from their web browser. Users can also choose to receive an email with a link to download the converted file. In February 2021 Zamzar expanded their tool and announced a new file compression service. The compressor is visually similar to the conversion tool with a drag and drop download feature. As with the converter, users have the option to subscribe for a paid plan if they wish to compress multiple or larger files than the free service permits == File conversion API == in 2015 Zamzar launched a file conversion API, allowing users to integrate file conversion capabilities into their own websites and applications. Sample code is provided to allow users to integrate file conversion capabilities in C#, Java, Node.js, PHP, Python and cURL. Zamzar also maintains a project on GitHub which allows users to perform file conversion from the command line on Linux, MacOS or Windows systems. == Email file conversion == It is also possible to send files for conversion by emailing them to Zamzar. Zamzar launched this capability in 2012, allowing users to email files to dedicated email addresses for the file to be automatically converted to a different format. A link is then emailed back to the end user to allow them to download their converted file. == User privilege levels == Zamzar is currently free to use, but there is a limit of two conversions per hour for files up to 100MB. Users can pay a monthly subscription in order to access preferential features, such as unlimited file conversions, online file management, shorter response and queuing times and other benefits. == Name == Its name comes from Franz Kafka's The Metamorphosis. Its main character is called Gregor Samsa and it is from his surname that Zamzar is derived. The founders of the service considered three other names – Konvertieren, Khamailen and Obrogo – before settling on Zamzar.

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial intelligence industry in Canada

  The artificial intelligence industry in Canada is a rapidly expanding sector. Although Canada held a pioneering role in the early development of artificial intelligence, transforming research excellence into broad commercial adoption has proven challenging. Despite globally recognized scientific achievements and a deep pool of skilled experts, by June 2024, Canada recorded the lowest rate of AI integration among OECD countries, with only 12% of firms implementing AI in their products or services. However, AI adoption has shown significant momentum—doubling from mid-2024 to mid-2025, rising from 6.1% to 12.2%. As of September 2025, Statistics Canada indicated that while about one-third of Canadian businesses had no plans to adopt artificial intelligence in the next year, 14.5% reported intentions to begin using AI for producing goods or delivering services. The primary reasons for not moving forward with AI were lack of relevance, insufficient knowledge, and privacy concerns. According to Public Works Canada (PwC), the pace of AI adoption in Canada is roughly three-quarters of the United States rate, highlighting a notable gap between the two countries in business integration of this technology. British-Canadian computer scientist Geoffrey Hinton stated in 2025 that Canadian companies are adopting artificial intelligence at a slower pace, which may result in the loss of the country's early advantages in the field. At the "All In AI" conference held in Montreal in September 2025, the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation Evan Solomon, described "Building digital sovereignty" as the most pressing democratic issue of the time. He introduced a 26-person task force focused on updating Canada's AI strategy. In their 2024 report " "Learning Together for Responsible Artificial Intelligence" report, the Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada stressed that public awareness, trust, and AI literacy are essential for the responsible adoption and governance of AI in Canada. Montreal workshops in 2021 expanded the OECD's 2019 definition of AI as "the set of computer techniques that enable a machine (e.g., a computer or telephone) to perform tasks that typically require intelligence, such as reasoning or learning. It is also referred to as the automation of intelligent tasks. Scientific developments in AI, such as deep-learning techniques, have made it possible to design access to huge amounts of data and ever-increasing computing power. These new techniques have been rapidly deployed on a large scale in all areas of social life, in transport, education, culture and health." == Federal investments and policy == The 2025 federal budget allocates over $1 billion over the next five years to bolster Canada's artificial intelligence and quantum computing ecosystem. == Industry landscape or research hubs == AlexNet, an influential deep convolutional neural network developed at the University of Toronto by Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton, marked a pivotal turning point in modern artificial intelligence. In 2012, it achieved a dramatic reduction in error rates for the ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC), showcasing the practical power of deep learning and GPU acceleration. The success of AlexNet helped cement Canada’s reputation for AI leadership and inspired rapid adoption of deep learning across the technology sector, with ongoing impact in both academic and commercial domains. In healthcare, AlexNet has been adapted for medical imaging to assist with analyzing radiographs, mammograms, and other scans, including identifying abnormalities and supporting clinical diagnosis. In 2015, the Ottawa-based start-up Advanced Symbolics Inc. (ASI) began developing Polly, an artificial intelligence system designed to analyze and anticipate how target audiences behave—enabling more effective communication strategies and advertising campaigns. Polly was named after its first assignment analyzing the politics of Brexit. The AI gained widespread attention in 2016 for accurately forecasting both the Brexit referendum and the 2016 U.S. presidential election won by Donald Trump. The company states that Polly is used by organizations in diverse sectors—including healthcare, politics, entertainment, and mental health research—to support decision-making based on predictive analytics. Chartwatch, an AI tool developed in Canada, has been shown to reduce unexpected hospital deaths by 26% according to a 2024 study. The system analyzes patient data to detect subtle signs of deterioration, supporting healthcare teams in providing timely interventions. === Notable figures in AI in Canada === Geoffrey Hinton's decades-long work eventually formed the foundation of artificial intelligence, which earned him the Nobel Prize for physics in 2024. Yoshua Bengio, who won the Turing Award in 2018 for his pioneering work in deep learning, founded what would become Mila in 1993. Mila, is currently a collaboration between four Montreal-based academic partners.—the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy includes Alberta's Amii, Toronto's Vector Institute, and Mila. Fakhreddine Karray's work on operational AI has had tangible impact across several Canadian-relevant sectors, notably intelligent transportation systems, virtual healthcare, and driver safety. === AI in the oil and gas industry === According to a 2020 Ernst & Young report the oil and gas industry in Canada is using AI in automating routine, repetitive, and dangerous tasks with technologies like robotic process automation and machine learning; optimizing production and processing; enhancing transportation logistics; improving equipment operation and monitoring; and enabling preventative maintenance. AI is also deployed for data analysis to improve prediction and decision-making, and is expected to automate up to 50% of job competencies in upstream oil and gas by 2040. Oilsands giant Suncor Energy operates a large fleet of autonomous trucks and has started using AI in its dispatch system at the Mildred Lake mine. As of 2024, AI manages routine tasks such as allocating trucks to dump stations and sending them to refuelling locations. === Indigenous and Inuit Innovation in AI === Indigenous organizations have been working on the creation of new technologies for language revitalization in partnership with National Research Council of Canada since the mid-2010s. In 2025, Inuit researchers and technology partners launched an AI-powered initiative to support the revitalization and preservation of Inuktitut, demonstrating how artificial intelligence can be adapted for Indigenous language and cultural priorities. A 2025 CBC article notes that, while AI can help revitalize Inuktitut, Inuit leaders emphasize concerns about data sovereignty, information ownership, and the need for Indigenous leadership to ensure transparency, privacy, and accountability in AI development. == Regulation == Canada's Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) was proposed in November 2022, as part of the Digital Charter Implementation Act (Bill C-27). As well voluntary codes, such as the September 2023 Code of Conduct for Generative AI, and landmark investments in advanced computing infrastructure and the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute (CAISI) reflect Canada's commitment to both safety and global competitiveness. == AI infrastructure == Canada has undertaken efforts to expand its AI computing infrastructure at both provincial and federal levels. The federal government's Canadian Sovereign AI Compute Strategy, allocated up to C$2 billion in Budget 2024, aims to enhance computing capacity to support domestic AI industry growth and AI adoption across the economy, with up to C$700 million designated to mobilize private sector investment in new or expanded data centres. Alberta has introduced an AI Data Centres Strategy to position itself as a leading North American destination for data centre investment, targeting C$100 billion worth of AI data centres under development by 2030. One major project under Alberta's strategy is the Wonder Valley AI Data Centre Park near Grande Prairie, which was exempted from provincial environmental impact assessment in April 2026 but still requires permits demonstrating safe construction and operation. According to Statista, as of April 2026, Canada has 287 data centres.

  Read more →
• 

  Regulation of algorithms

  Regulation of algorithms, or algorithmic regulation, is the creation of laws, rules and public sector policies for promotion and regulation of algorithms, particularly in artificial intelligence and machine learning. For the subset of AI algorithms, the term regulation of artificial intelligence is used. The regulatory and policy landscape for artificial intelligence (AI) is an emerging issue in jurisdictions globally, including in the European Union. Regulation of AI is considered necessary to both encourage AI and manage associated risks, but challenging. Another emerging topic is the regulation of blockchain algorithms (Use of the smart contracts must be regulated) and is mentioned along with regulation of AI algorithms. Many countries have enacted regulations of high frequency trades, which is shifting due to technological progress into the realm of AI algorithms. The motivation for regulation of algorithms is the apprehension of losing control over the algorithms, whose impact on human life increases. Multiple countries have already introduced regulations in case of automated credit score calculation—right to explanation is mandatory for those algorithms. For example, The IEEE has begun developing a new standard to explicitly address ethical issues and the values of potential future users. Bias, transparency, and ethics concerns have emerged with respect to the use of algorithms in diverse domains ranging from criminal justice to healthcare—many fear that artificial intelligence could replicate existing social inequalities along race, class, gender, and sexuality lines. == Regulation of artificial intelligence == === Public discussion === In 2016, Joy Buolamwini founded Algorithmic Justice League after a personal experience with biased facial detection software in order to raise awareness of the social implications of artificial intelligence through art and research. In 2017 Elon Musk advocated regulation of algorithms in the context of the existential risk from artificial general intelligence. According to NPR, the Tesla CEO was "clearly not thrilled" to be advocating for government scrutiny that could impact his own industry, but believed the risks of going completely without oversight are too high: "Normally the way regulations are set up is when a bunch of bad things happen, there's a public outcry, and after many years a regulatory agency is set up to regulate that industry. It takes forever. That, in the past, has been bad but not something which represented a fundamental risk to the existence of civilisation." In response, some politicians expressed skepticism about the wisdom of regulating a technology that is still in development. Responding both to Musk and to February 2017 proposals by European Union lawmakers to regulate AI and robotics, Intel CEO Brian Krzanich has argued that artificial intelligence is in its infancy and that it is too early to regulate the technology. Instead of trying to regulate the technology itself, some scholars suggest to rather develop common norms including requirements for the testing and transparency of algorithms, possibly in combination with some form of warranty. One suggestion has been for the development of a global governance board to regulate AI development. In 2020, the European Union published its draft strategy paper for promoting and regulating AI. Algorithmic tacit collusion is a legally dubious antitrust practise committed by means of algorithms, which the courts are not able to prosecute. This danger concerns scientists and regulators in EU, US and beyond. European Commissioner Margrethe Vestager mentioned an early example of algorithmic tacit collusion in her speech on "Algorithms and Collusion" on March 16, 2017, described as follows: "A few years ago, two companies were selling a textbook called The Making of a Fly. One of those sellers used an algorithm which essentially matched its rival’s price. That rival had an algorithm which always set a price 27% higher than the first. The result was that prices kept spiralling upwards, until finally someone noticed what was going on, and adjusted the price manually. By that time, the book was selling – or rather, not selling – for 23 million dollars a copy." In 2018, the Netherlands employed an algorithmic system SyRI (Systeem Risico Indicatie) to detect citizens perceived being high risk for committing welfare fraud, which quietly flagged thousands of people to investigators. This caused a public protest. The district court of Hague shut down SyRI referencing Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In 2020, algorithms assigning exam grades to students in the UK sparked open protest under the banner "Fuck the algorithm." This protest was successful and the grades were taken back. In 2024, the Munich Convention on AI, Data and Human Rights was introduced as part of growing international efforts to regulate artificial intelligence through a human rights lens. Developed through a collaborative drafting process involving scholars from the Technical University of Munich, Stellenbosch University, Ulster University, and KNUST, the initiative calls for an international conversation on a binding treaty to safeguard human rights and the principles enshrined in the UN Charter in the age of AI. === Implementation === AI law and regulations can be divided into three main topics, namely governance of autonomous intelligence systems, responsibility and accountability for the systems, and privacy and safety issues. The development of public sector strategies for management and regulation of AI has been increasingly deemed necessary at the local, national, and international levels and in fields from public service management to law enforcement, the financial sector, robotics, the military, and international law. There are many concerns that there is not enough visibility and monitoring of AI in these sectors. In the United States financial sector, for example, there have been calls for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to more closely examine source code and algorithms when conducting audits of financial institutions' non-public data. In the United States, on January 7, 2019, following an Executive Order on 'Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence', the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy released a draft Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications, which includes ten principles for United States agencies when deciding whether and how to regulate AI. In response, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has released a position paper, the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence has published an interim report, and the Defense Innovation Board has issued recommendations on the ethical use of AI. In April 2016, for the first time in more than two decades, the European Parliament adopted a set of comprehensive regulations for the collection, storage, and use of personal information, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)1 (European Union, Parliament and Council 2016). The GDPR's policy on the right of citizens to receive an explanation for algorithmic decisions highlights the pressing importance of human interpretability in algorithm design. In 2016, China published a position paper questioning the adequacy of existing international law to address the eventuality of fully autonomous weapons, becoming the first permanent member of the U.N. Security Council to broach the issue, and leading to proposals for global regulation. In the United States, steering on regulating security-related AI is provided by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. In 2017, the U.K. Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill imposes liability on the owner of an uninsured automated vehicle when driving itself and makes provisions for cases where the owner has made "unauthorized alterations" to the vehicle or failed to update its software. Further ethical issues arise when, e.g., a self-driving car swerves to avoid a pedestrian and causes a fatal accident. In 2021, the European Commission proposed the Artificial Intelligence Act. == Algorithm certification == There is a concept of algorithm certification emerging as a method of regulating algorithms. Algorithm certification involves auditing whether the algorithm used during the life cycle 1) conforms to the protocoled requirements (e.g., for correctness, completeness, consistency, and accuracy); 2) satisfies the standards, practices, and conventions; and 3) solves the right problem (e.g., correctly model physical laws), and satisfies the intended use and user needs in the operational environment. == Regulation of blockchain algorithms == Blockchain systems provide transparent and fixed records of transactions and hereby contradict the goal of the European GDPR, which is to give individuals full control of their private data. By implementing the Decree on Development of Digital Economy, Bel

  Read more →
• 

  Xulvi-Brunet–Sokolov algorithm

  Xulvi-Brunet and Sokolov's algorithm generates networks with chosen degree correlations. This method is based on link rewiring, in which the desired degree is governed by parameter ρ. By varying this single parameter it is possible to generate networks from random (when ρ = 0) to perfectly assortative or disassortative (when ρ = 1). This algorithm allows to keep network's degree distribution unchanged when changing the value of ρ. == Assortative model == In assortative networks, well-connected nodes are likely to be connected to other highly connected nodes. Social networks are examples of assortative networks. This means that an assortative network has the property that almost all nodes with the same degree are linked only between themselves. The Xulvi-Brunet–Sokolov algorithm for this type of networks is the following. In a given network, two links connecting four different nodes are chosen randomly. These nodes are ordered by their degrees. Then, with probability ρ, the links are randomly rewired in such a way that one link connects the two nodes with the smaller degrees and the other connects the two nodes with the larger degrees. If one or both of these links already existed in the network, the step is discarded and is repeated again. Thus, there will be no self-connected nodes or multiple links connecting the same two nodes. Different degrees of assortativity of a network can be achieved by changing the parameter ρ. Assortative networks are characterized by highly connected groups of nodes with similar degree. As assortativity grows, the average path length and clustering coefficient increase. == Disassortative model == In disassortative networks, highly connected nodes tend to connect to less-well-connected nodes with larger probability than in uncorrelated networks. Examples of such networks include biological networks. The Xulvi-Brunet and Sokolov's algorithm for this type of networks is similar to the one for assortative networks with one minor change. As before, two links of four nodes are randomly chosen and the nodes are ordered with respect to their degrees. However, in this case, the links are rewired (with probability p) such that one link connects the highest connected node with the node with the lowest degree and the other link connects the two remaining nodes randomly with probability 1 − ρ. Similarly, if the new links already existed, the previous step is repeated. This algorithm does not change the degree of nodes and thus the degree distribution of the network.

  Read more →
• 

  Caspio

  Caspio, Inc. is an American software company providing a low-code platform for building cloud-based business applications. Founded in 2000 by Frank Zamani, the company is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, with operations in Poland, the Philippines, and Spain. Caspio’s platform allows organizations to create online database applications and workflow tools without extensive coding. == History == Caspio was founded by Frank Zamani in 2000. The company initially focused on simplifying custom cloud applications and reducing development time and cost as compared to traditional software development. Caspio released the first version of its platform, Caspio Bridge, in 2001. In 2014, Caspio released a HIPAA-Compliant Edition of its low-code application development platform. Caspio also released an EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Compliance Edition of its low-code application development platform in 2016. Caspio's second European Software Development Center opened in Kraków, Poland in 2017. In 2019, Forrester Research listed Caspio and three other platforms in its highest of four ranked tiers of twelve low-code platforms for business developers based on rankings of offerings and strategy at that time. Caspio also opened data centers in Montreal, Canada and India in 2020.

  Read more →
• 

  Pol.is

  Polis (or Pol.is) is wiki survey software designed for large group collaborations. As a civic technology, Polis allows people to share their opinions and ideas, and its algorithm is intended to elevate ideas that can facilitate better decision-making, especially when there are lots of participants. Polis has been credited for assisting the passage of legislation in Taiwan. Pol.is has been used by governments in the United States, Canada, Singapore, Philippines, Finland, Spain and elsewhere. == History == Pol.is was founded by Colin Megill, Christopher Small, and Michael Bjorkegren after the Occupy Wall Street and Arab Spring movements. In Taiwan, pol.is has been "one of the key parts" of vTaiwan's suite of open-source tools for its citizen engagement efforts arising out of the Sunflower Student Movement. vTaiwan claims that of the 26 national issues related to technology discussed on the platform, 80% led to government action. Pol.is is also utilized by "Join," a national platform for online deliberation run by the Taiwanese government. In 2022, Wired reported that Polis was an influence on the Community Notes project at Twitter. In 2023, Megill advised OpenAI on how to facilitate deliberation at scale in a way that was more efficient than Polis, which still required significant human labor and analysis at the time. He helped to award $1 million in grants to teams working on solving the problem of deliberation at scale. In 2023, Anthropic was also exploring steering model behavior using Polis. In 2025, it helped the county that includes Bowling Green, Kentucky make a 25 year plan by facilitating the collection and review of ideas from thousands of residents, representing 10% of the county. 2,370 of 3,940 unique ideas were agreed-upon by over 80% of survey respondents. Ideas were screened by volunteers if they were redundant to an existing idea, off-topic or obscene. == How it works == Pol.is participants are anonymous and cannot reply directly to others posts, in an effort to avoid personal attacks for users. Its algorithms are designed not for engagement and scrolling, but to find areas of agreement to better understand the nuances of a wide range of opinions. Participants are prompted for ideas and vote on other participants' ideas. == Reception == Andrew Leonard, The Financial Times, and VentureBeat describe Pol.is as a possible antidote to the divisiveness of traditional internet discourse by gamifying consensus. Audrey Tang agreed saying, "Polis is quite well known in that it's a kind of social media that instead of polarizing people to drive so called engagement or addiction or attention, it automatically drives bridge making narratives and statements. So only the ideas that speak to both sides or to multiple sides will gain prominence in Polis." Niall Ferguson argues that the approach to utilize tools like Pol.is and Join in Taiwan empowers ordinary people instead of the elite and protects individual freedoms, providing a contrast to the AI-enhanced panopticon model seen in China. Carl Miller praised the technology as having "gamified finding consensus." Darshana Narayanan, in an op-ed in the Economist, argues that open-source machine-learning-based tools like Polis can help to bypass the influence of special interests or experts. Jamie Susskind cited polis and vTaiwan as a model for democracies, particularly around digital policy issues.

  Read more →
• 

  Generalized distributive law

  The generalized distributive law (GDL) is a generalization of the distributive property which gives rise to a general message passing algorithm. It is a synthesis of the work of many authors in the information theory, digital communications, signal processing, statistics, and artificial intelligence communities. The law and algorithm were introduced in a semi-tutorial by Srinivas M. Aji and Robert J. McEliece with the same title. == Introduction == "The distributive law in mathematics is the law relating the operations of multiplication and addition, stated symbolically, a ∗ ( b + c ) = a ∗ b + a ∗ c {\displaystyle a(b+c)=ab+ac} ; that is, the monomial factor a {\displaystyle a} is distributed, or separately applied, to each term of the binomial factor b + c {\displaystyle b+c} , resulting in the product a ∗ b + a ∗ c {\displaystyle ab+ac} " – Britannica. As it can be observed from the definition, application of distributive law to an arithmetic expression reduces the number of operations in it. In the previous example the total number of operations reduced from three (two multiplications and an addition in a ∗ b + a ∗ c {\displaystyle ab+ac} ) to two (one multiplication and one addition in a ∗ ( b + c ) {\displaystyle a(b+c)} ). Generalization of distributive law leads to a large family of fast algorithms. This includes the FFT and Viterbi algorithm. This is explained in a more formal way in the example below: α ( a , b ) = d e f ∑ c , d , e ∈ A f ( a , c , b ) g ( a , d , e ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,\,b){\stackrel {\mathrm {def} }{=}}\displaystyle \sum \limits _{c,d,e\in A}f(a,\,c,\,b)\,g(a,\,d,\,e)} where f ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle f(\cdot )} and g ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle g(\cdot )} are real-valued functions, a , b , c , d , e ∈ A {\displaystyle a,b,c,d,e\in A} and | A | = q {\displaystyle |A|=q} (say) Here we are "marginalizing out" the independent variables ( c {\displaystyle c} , d {\displaystyle d} , and e {\displaystyle e} ) to obtain the result. When we are calculating the computational complexity, we can see that for each q 2 {\displaystyle q^{2}} pairs of ( a , b ) {\displaystyle (a,b)} , there are q 3 {\displaystyle q^{3}} terms due to the triplet ( c , d , e ) {\displaystyle (c,d,e)} which needs to take part in the evaluation of α ( a , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,\,b)} with each step having one addition and one multiplication. Therefore, the total number of computations needed is 2 ⋅ q 2 ⋅ q 3 = 2 q 5 {\displaystyle 2\cdot q^{2}\cdot q^{3}=2q^{5}} . Hence the asymptotic complexity of the above function is O ( n 5 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{5})} . If we apply the distributive law to the RHS of the equation, we get the following: α ( a , b ) = d e f ∑ c ∈ A f ( a , c , b ) ⋅ ∑ d , e ∈ A g ( a , d , e ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,\,b){\stackrel {\mathrm {def} }{=}}\displaystyle \sum \limits _{c\in A}f(a,\,c,\,b)\cdot \sum _{d,\,e\in A}g(a,\,d,\,e)} This implies that α ( a , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,\,b)} can be described as a product α 1 ( a , b ) ⋅ α 2 ( a ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}(a,\,b)\cdot \alpha _{2}(a)} where α 1 ( a , b ) = d e f ∑ c ∈ A f ( a , c , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}(a,b){\stackrel {\mathrm {def} }{=}}\displaystyle \sum \limits _{c\in A}f(a,\,c,\,b)} and α 2 ( a ) = d e f ∑ d , e ∈ A g ( a , d , e ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}(a){\stackrel {\mathrm {def} }{=}}\displaystyle \sum \limits _{d,\,e\in A}g(a,\,d,\,e)} Now, when we are calculating the computational complexity, we can see that there are q 3 {\displaystyle q^{3}} additions in α 1 ( a , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}(a,\,b)} and α 2 ( a ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{2}(a)} each and there are q 2 {\displaystyle q^{2}} multiplications when we are using the product α 1 ( a , b ) ⋅ α 2 ( a ) {\displaystyle \alpha _{1}(a,\,b)\cdot \alpha _{2}(a)} to evaluate α ( a , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,\,b)} . Therefore, the total number of computations needed is q 3 + q 3 + q 2 = 2 q 3 + q 2 {\displaystyle q^{3}+q^{3}+q^{2}=2q^{3}+q^{2}} . Hence the asymptotic complexity of calculating α ( a , b ) {\displaystyle \alpha (a,b)} reduces to O ( n 3 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{3})} from O ( n 5 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{5})} . This shows by an example that applying distributive law reduces the computational complexity which is one of the good features of a "fast algorithm". == History == Some of the problems that used distributive law to solve can be grouped as follows: Decoding algorithms: A GDL like algorithm was used by Gallager's for decoding low density parity-check codes. Based on Gallager's work Tanner introduced the Tanner graph and expressed Gallagers work in message passing form. The tanners graph also helped explain the Viterbi algorithm. It is observed by Forney that Viterbi's maximum likelihood decoding of convolutional codes also used algorithms of GDL-like generality. Forward–backward algorithm: The forward backward algorithm helped as an algorithm for tracking the states in the Markov chain. And this also was used the algorithm of GDL like generality Artificial intelligence: The notion of junction trees has been used to solve many problems in AI. Also the concept of bucket elimination used many of the concepts. == The MPF problem == MPF or marginalize a product function is a general computational problem which as special case includes many classical problems such as computation of discrete Hadamard transform, maximum likelihood decoding of a linear code over a memory-less channel, and matrix chain multiplication. The power of the GDL lies in the fact that it applies to situations in which additions and multiplications are generalized. A commutative semiring is a good framework for explaining this behavior. It is defined over a set K {\displaystyle K} with operators " + {\displaystyle +} " and " . {\displaystyle .} " where ( K , + ) {\displaystyle (K,\,+)} and ( K , . ) {\displaystyle (K,\,.)} are a commutative monoids and the distributive law holds. Let p 1 , … , p n {\displaystyle p_{1},\ldots ,p_{n}} be variables such that p 1 ∈ A 1 , … , p n ∈ A n {\displaystyle p_{1}\in A_{1},\ldots ,p_{n}\in A_{n}} where A {\displaystyle A} is a finite set and | A i | = q i {\displaystyle |A_{i}|=q_{i}} . Here i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\ldots ,n} . If S = { i 1 , … , i r } {\displaystyle S=\{i_{1},\ldots ,i_{r}\}} and S ⊂ { 1 , … , n } {\displaystyle S\,\subset \{1,\ldots ,n\}} , let A S = A i 1 × ⋯ × A i r {\displaystyle A_{S}=A_{i_{1}}\times \cdots \times A_{i_{r}}} , p S = ( p i 1 , … , p i r ) {\displaystyle p_{S}=(p_{i_{1}},\ldots ,p_{i_{r}})} , q S = | A S | {\displaystyle q_{S}=|A_{S}|} , A = A 1 × ⋯ × A n {\displaystyle \mathbf {A} =A_{1}\times \cdots \times A_{n}} , and p = { p 1 , … , p n } {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} =\{p_{1},\ldots ,p_{n}\}} Let S = { S j } j = 1 M {\displaystyle S=\{S_{j}\}_{j=1}^{M}} where S j ⊂ { 1 , . . . , n } {\displaystyle S_{j}\subset \{1,...\,,n\}} . Suppose a function is defined as α i : A S i → R {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}:A_{S_{i}}\rightarrow R} , where R {\displaystyle R} is a commutative semiring. Also, p S i {\displaystyle p_{S_{i}}} are named the local domains and α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} as the local kernels. Now the global kernel β : A → R {\displaystyle \beta :\mathbf {A} \rightarrow R} is defined as: β ( p 1 , . . . , p n ) = ∏ i = 1 M α ( p S i ) {\displaystyle \beta (p_{1},...\,,p_{n})=\prod _{i=1}^{M}\alpha (p_{S_{i}})} Definition of MPF problem: For one or more indices i = 1 , . . . , M {\displaystyle i=1,...\,,M} , compute a table of the values of S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} -marginalization of the global kernel β {\displaystyle \beta } , which is the function β i : A S i → R {\displaystyle \beta _{i}:A_{S_{i}}\rightarrow R} defined as β i ( p S i ) = ∑ p S i c ∈ A S i c β ( p ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(p_{S_{i}})\,=\displaystyle \sum \limits _{p_{S_{i}^{c}}\in A_{S_{i}^{c}}}\beta (p)} Here S i c {\displaystyle S_{i}^{c}} is the complement of S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} with respect to { 1 , . . . , n } {\displaystyle \mathbf {\{} 1,...\,,n\}} and the β i ( p S i ) {\displaystyle \beta _{i}(p_{S_{i}})} is called the i t h {\displaystyle i^{th}} objective function, or the objective function at S i {\displaystyle S_{i}} . It can observed that the computation of the i t h {\displaystyle i^{th}} objective function in the obvious way needs M q 1 q 2 q 3 ⋯ q n {\displaystyle Mq_{1}q_{2}q_{3}\cdots q_{n}} operations. This is because there are q 1 q 2 ⋯ q n {\displaystyle q_{1}q_{2}\cdots q_{n}} additions and ( M − 1 ) q 1 q 2 . . . q n {\displaystyle (M-1)q_{1}q_{2}...q_{n}} multiplications needed in the computation of the i th {\displaystyle i^{\text{th}}} objective function. The GDL algorithm which is explained in the next section can reduce this computational complexity. The following is an example of the MPF problem. Let p 1 , p 2 , p 3 , p 4 , {\displaystyle p_{1},\,p_{2},\,p_{3},\,p_{4},} and p 5 {\displaystyle p_{5}} be variables such that p 1 ∈ A 1 , p 2 ∈ A 2 , p 3 ∈ A 3 , p 4 ∈ A 4 , {\displaystyle p_{1}\in

  Read more →
• 

  Living lab

  The concept of the living lab has been defined in multiple ways. A definition from the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) is used most widely, describing them as "user-centred open innovation ecosystems” that integrate research and innovation through co-creation in real-world environments.[1] Emerging at the intersection of ambient intelligence research and user experience methodologies in the late 1990s, the concept was pioneered at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) as a way to study human interaction with new technologies in natural settings. Over time, living labs have evolved beyond their origins as controlled research environments, becoming dynamic platforms for participatory design, collaborative experimentation, and iterative innovation across various domains, including urban development, healthcare, sustainability, and digital technology. Characterized by principles such as real-world experimentation, active user involvement, and multi-stakeholder collaboration, living labs enable the continuous adaptation and validation of solutions in everyday contexts. Today, they are implemented globally, supported by networks like the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL), and increasingly recognized as vital tools for addressing local and global transformation agendas. == Background == The term "living lab" has emerged in parallel from the ambient intelligence (AmI) research communities context and from the discussion on experience and application research (EAR). The emergence of the term is based on the concept of user experience and ambient intelligence. The term dates back to the late 1990s when Professor William J. Mitchell, Kent Larson, and Alex (Sandy) Pentland at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology were credited with first exploring the concept of a living laboratory. It was first associated with MIT's Media Lab as a concept for studying real-life contexts, where they described a living lab as a controlled environment designed to test new information and communication technology (ICT) innovations in a simulated home setting. This was also when some of the key characteristics often assigned to living labs today began to take shape. They argued that a living lab represents a user-centric research methodology for sensing, prototyping, validating and refining complex solutions in multiple and evolving real-life contexts. Research on living labs has expanded since the 1990s, especially in the 2010s, with growing interest in co-creation and participatory design. Particularly in Europe, the living lab evolved into a model that focused on studying user interactions with technology in real-world environments. This shift was influenced by earlier experiences in participatory design and social experiments with ICT. As interest grew, the term began to encompass a broader array of initiatives and projects, leading to variations in its interpretation and implementation. Today, living labs are used in various fields, such as technology, healthcare, and urban sustainability, showing a transition from a narrow focus on their role as controlled environments to a more wide-ranging understanding of collaborative innovation addressing real societal challenges, while also being referred to with various descriptions and definitions available from different sources. == Description == The ENoLL definition that refers to living labs as "user-centred open innovation ecosystems” that integrate research and innovation through co-creation in real-world environments is the most widely accepted description of living labs in academic literature. In simple terms, living labs can be described as an organization or experimental space, that can be both virtually or physically located, bringing different stakeholders from research, business, government, and citizens together to design and test solutions to be implemented in a real world environment. A common definition for the living lab term still does not exist to this day, which is due to the fact that living labs are interpreted and implemented across different contexts and can cover a wide range of activities and organizations, leading to different understandings of how living labs should function. Living labs also often operate in various territorial contexts (e.g. city, agglomeration, region, campus), and can vary in their methodological approach integrating concurrent research and innovation processes within a public-private-people partnership. Despite these variations, common characteristics include user-centricity, real-world experimentation, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and iterative innovation processes. The systematic user co-creation approach refers to integrating research and innovation processes through the co-creation, exploration, experimentation and evaluation of innovative ideas, scenarios, concepts and related technological artefacts in real life use cases. Such use cases involve user communities, not only as observed subjects but also as a source of creation. This approach allows all involved stakeholders to concurrently consider both the global performance of a product or service and its potential adoption by users. This consideration may be made at the earlier stage of research and development and through all elements of the product life-cycle, from design up to recycling. User-centred research methods, such as action research, community informatics, contextual design, user-centered design, participatory design, empathic design, emotional design, and other usability methods, already exist but fail to sufficiently empower users for co-creating into open development environments. More recently, the Web 2.0 has demonstrated the positive impact of involving user communities in new product development (NPD) such as mass collaboration projects (e.g. crowdsourcing, Wisdom of Crowds) in collectively creating new contents and applications. Real-world experimentation emphasizes conducting activities in real-life settings to ensure that the results of the projects and solutions are applicable to actual market conditions. Multi-stakeholder collaboration refers to an approach that involved various stakeholders, such as users, businesses, researchers, and government entities, working together towards a common goal. This is an important characteristics of living lab because collaboration of these diverse groups allows for exchange of ideas and perspectives, which are thought to enhance innovation processes. Iterative innovation processes involve a cyclical method of developing products or services, where stages such as research, development, testing, and implementation are revisited multiple times based on feedback and evaluation. This process allows for continuous improvement of the innovation, product, or service being developed. In particular, the ongoing involvement of the user creates feedback mechanisms that are ultimately key to successful development and implementation of products and services. A living lab is not similar to a testbed as its philosophy is to turn users, from being traditionally considered as observed subjects for testing modules against requirements, into value creation in contributing to the co-creation and exploration of emerging ideas, breakthrough scenarios, innovative concepts and related artefacts. Hence, a living lab rather constitutes an experiential environment, which could be compared to the concept of experiential learning, where users are immersed in a creative social space for designing and experiencing their own future. Living labs could also be used by policy makers and users/citizens for designing, exploring, experiencing and refining new policies and regulations in real-life scenarios for evaluating their potential impacts before their implementations. == European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) == The European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) is an international, non-profit, independent association of certified living labs, which popularized the living lab concept in the aim to increase user involvement in innovation. Formed in November 2006 under the guidance of the Finnish European Presidency, ENoLL is composed of a variety of stakeholders, including municipalities and research institutes, businesses, and users. Its primary role is to support the collaboration among living labs across Europe and includes many living labs focused on user-driven innovation across sectors. ENoLL focuses on facilitating knowledge exchange, joint actions and project partnerships among its historically labelled +/- 500 members, influencing EU policies, promoting living labs and enabling their implementation worldwide. ENoLL serves as a platform for linking living labs around the globe, which enables knowledge sharing and collaborative learning among diverse cultural environments. Membership to the platform is open to organizations worldwide, and ENoLL has expanded beyond Europe to include global members. ENoLL follows an application and accreditation pro

  Read more →
• 

  ActivTrak

  ActivTrak is an American company that produces workforce analytics and productivity software. The company was founded in 2009 by Birch Grove Software and is headquartered in Austin, Texas. The company has raised US$77.5 million in funding and is backed by Sapphire Ventures and Elsewhere Partners. == History == ActivTrak was founded in 2009 by Herb Axilrod and Anton Seidler in Dallas, Texas. ActivTrak's first on-demand software product launched in 2012, and the workforce analytics platform launched in 2015. It uses data sourced from more than 9,500 customers and 900,000 users. In 2019, ActivTrak raised $20 million in a Series A round of funding with Elsewhere Partners, a growth-stage venture capital firm that principally invests in B2B startups. Rita Selvaggi assumed the role of CEO. In 2020, ActivTrak raised $50M in a Series B round of funding with Sapphire Ventures and Elsewhere Partners. The company also introduced the ActivTrak Productivity Lab, an online resource about workforce productivity research, industry benchmark data, and best practices. == Product == ActivTrak is a workforce analytics and productivity platform that uses reports, dashboards, and data analysis. The platform uses machine learning (AI) to collect and analyze user activity data and produce reports about workforce productivity. The software runs on Microsoft Windows, Mac, Chrome, Terminal Services, and VDI. It includes the ActivTrak Agent, which runs in the background and collects data. It responds to user activity, sensing mouse and keyboard movement in the active window(s) of the user's device. This data is collected and stored in a database that aggregates the data based on the user's request. ActivTrak does not utilize keystroke logging, content scraping, camera access, video recording or mobile device monitoring. The database leverages data analytics to generate account and team benchmarks, and identify productivity patterns and outliers. == Awards == Built In, 100 Best Midsize Places to Work in Austin, 2025 G2, Winter: Best Estimated ROI, High Performer, Best Relationship, Best Support, Users Most Likely to Recommend, Easiest Setup, Easiest Admin, Best Meets Requirements, Users Love Us, 2025 TrustRadius, Buyer’s Choice, 2025 Deloitte Technology Fast 500, No. 468 Fastest-Growing Company, 2024 Product Marketing Alliance, AI Marketing Innovation, 2024 Fortune Best Workplaces in Technology™, 2024 Inc. 5000, No. 2335 of America’s Fastest-Growing Private Companies, 2024 Fortune Best Workplaces in Texas™, 2024 Reworked IMPACT Gold Award: Most Innovative Workplace Productivity Solution, 2024 TrustRadius, Most Loved, 2024 Great Place To Work-Certified™, 2024 Inc. 5000 Regionals: Southwest, 2024 Brandon Hall Group, Best Advance in HR Predictive Analytics Technology, 2024

  Read more →
• 

  Recording format

  A recording format is a format for encoding data for storage on a storage medium. The format can be container information such as sectors on a disk, or user/audience information (content) such as analog stereo audio. Multiple levels of encoding may be achieved in one format. For example, a text encoded page may contain HTML and XML encoding, combined in a plain text file format, using either EBCDIC or ASCII character encoding, on a UDF digitally formatted disk. In electronic media, the primary format is the encoding that requires hardware to interpret (decode) data; while secondary encoding is interpreted by secondary signal processing methods, usually computer software. == Recording container formats == A container format is a system for dividing physical storage space or virtual space for data. Data space can be divided evenly by a system of measurement, or divided unevenly with meta data. A grid may divide physical or virtual space with physical or virtual (dividers) borders, evenly or unevenly. Just as a physical container (such as a file cabinet) is divided by physical borders (such as drawers and file folders), data space is divided by virtual borders. Meta data such as a unit of measurement, address, or meta tags act as virtual borders in a container format. A template may be considered an abstract format for containing a solution as well as the content itself. Systems of measurement Metric system Geographic coordinate system Page grid Film formats Audio data format Video tape format Disk format File format Meta data Text formatting Template Data structure == Raw content formats == A raw content format is a system of converting data to displayable information. Raw content formats may either be recorded in secondary signal processing methods such as a software container format (e.g. digital audio, digital video) or recorded in the primary format. A primary raw content format may be directly observable (e.g. image, sound, motion, smell, sensation) or physical data which only requires hardware to display it, such as a phonographic needle and diaphragm or a projector lamp and magnifying glass.

  Read more →
• 

  Pointer jumping

  Pointer jumping or path doubling is a design technique for parallel algorithms that operate on pointer structures, such as linked lists and directed graphs. Pointer jumping allows an algorithm to follow paths with a time complexity that is logarithmic with respect to the length of the longest path. It does this by "jumping" to the end of the path computed by neighbors. The basic operation of pointer jumping is to replace each neighbor in a pointer structure with its neighbor's neighbor. In each step of the algorithm, this replacement is done for all nodes in the data structure, which can be done independently in parallel. In the next step when a neighbor's neighbor is followed, the neighbor's path already followed in the previous step is added to the node's followed path in a single step. Thus, each step effectively doubles the distance traversed by the explored paths. Pointer jumping is best understood by looking at simple examples such as list ranking and root finding. == List ranking == One of the simpler tasks that can be solved by a pointer jumping algorithm is the list ranking problem. This problem is defined as follows: given a linked list of N nodes, find the distance (measured in the number of nodes) of each node to the end of the list. The distance d(n) is defined as follows, for nodes n that point to their successor by a pointer called next: If n.next is nil, then d(n) = 0. For any other node, d(n) = d(n.next) + 1. This problem can easily be solved in linear time on a sequential machine, but a parallel algorithm can do better: given n processors, the problem can be solved in logarithmic time, O(log N), by the following pointer jumping algorithm: The pointer jumping occurs in the last line of the algorithm, where each node's next pointer is reset to skip the node's direct successor. It is assumed, as in common in the PRAM model of computation, that memory access are performed in lock-step, so that each n.next.next memory fetch is performed before each n.next memory store; otherwise, processors may clobber each other's data, producing inconsistencies. The following diagram follows how the parallel list ranking algorithm uses pointer jumping for a linked list with 11 elements. As the algorithm describes, the first iteration starts initialized with all ranks set to 1 except those with a null pointer for next. The first iteration looks at immediate neighbors. Each subsequent iteration jumps twice as far as the previous. Analyzing the algorithm yields a logarithmic running time. The initialization loop takes constant time, because each of the N processors performs a constant amount of work, all in parallel. The inner loop of the main loop also takes constant time, as does (by assumption) the termination check for the loop, so the running time is determined by how often this inner loop is executed. Since the pointer jumping in each iteration splits the list into two parts, one consisting of the "odd" elements and one of the "even" elements, the length of the list pointed to by each processor's n is halved in each iteration, which can be done at most O(log N) time before each list has a length of at most one. == Root finding == Following a path in a graph is an inherently serial operation, but pointer jumping reduces the total amount of work by following all paths simultaneously and sharing results among dependent operations. Pointer jumping iterates and finds a successor — a vertex closer to the tree root — each time. By following successors computed for other vertices, the traversal down each path can be doubled every iteration, which means that the tree roots can be found in logarithmic time. Pointer doubling operates on an array successor with an entry for every vertex in the graph. Each successor[i] is initialized with the parent index of vertex i if that vertex is not a root or to i itself if that vertex is a root. At each iteration, each successor is updated to its successor's successor. The root is found when the successor's successor points to itself. The following pseudocode demonstrates the algorithm. algorithm Input: An array parent representing a forest of trees. parent[i] is the parent of vertex i or itself for a root Output: An array containing the root ancestor for every vertex for i ← 1 to length(parent) do in parallel successor[i] ← parent[i] while true for i ← 1 to length(successor) do in parallel successor_next[i] ← successor[successor[i]] if successor_next = successor then break for i ← 1 to length(successor) do in parallel successor[i] ← successor_next[i] return successor The following image provides an example of using pointer jumping on a small forest. On each iteration the successor points to the vertex following one more successor. After two iterations, every vertex points to its root node. == History and examples == Although the name pointer jumping would come later, JáJá attributes the first uses of the technique in early parallel graph algorithms and list ranking. The technique has been described with other names such as shortcutting, but by the 1990s textbooks on parallel algorithms consistently used the term pointer jumping. Today, pointer jumping is considered a software design pattern for operating on recursive data types in parallel. As a technique for following linked paths, graph algorithms are a natural fit for pointer jumping. Consequently, several parallel graph algorithms utilizing pointer jumping have been designed. These include algorithms for finding the roots of a forest of rooted trees, connected components, minimum spanning trees, and biconnected components. However, pointer jumping has also shown to be useful in a variety of other problems including computer vision, image compression, and Bayesian inference.

  Read more →