AI Data Trainer

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

Powerset (company)

Powerset was an American company based in San Francisco, California, that, in 2006, was developing a natural language search engine for the Internet. On July 1, 2008, Powerset was acquired by Microsoft for an estimated $100 million (~$143 million in 2024). Powerset was working on building a natural language search engine that could find targeted answers to user questions (as opposed to keyword based search). For example, when confronted with a question like "Which U.S. state has the highest income tax?", conventional search engines ignore the question phrasing and instead do a search on the keywords "state", "highest", "income", and "tax". Powerset on the other hand, attempts to use natural language processing to understand the nature of the question and return pages containing the answer. The company was in the process of "building a natural language search engine that reads and understands every sentence on the Web". The company has licensed natural language technology from PARC, the former Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. On May 11, 2008, the company unveiled a tool for searching a fixed subset of English Wikipedia using conversational phrases rather than keywords. Acquisition by Microsoft: One significant milestone in Powerset's history was its acquisition by Microsoft on July 1, 2008, for an estimated $100 million. This acquisition was part of Microsoft's broader strategy to enhance its search capabilities and compete more effectively with other search engine providers, particularly Google. Natural Language Search Engine: Powerset's primary focus was on developing a natural language search engine capable of understanding and interpreting user queries in a more human-like manner. Instead of simply matching keywords, Powerset aimed to comprehend the meaning behind the words, allowing for more accurate and contextually relevant search results. Technology and Partnerships: Powerset had licensed natural language technology from PARC, the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. This technology likely played a crucial role in the development of Powerset's NLP capabilities. Wikipedia Search Tool: In May 2008, Powerset unveiled a search tool that allowed users to search a fixed subset of English Wikipedia using conversational phrases rather than traditional keywords. This demonstrated the potential of Powerset's NLP technology in providing more precise and relevant search results. == Powerlabs == In a form of beta testing, Powerset opened an online community called Powerlabs on September 17, 2007. Business Week said: "The company hopes the site will marshal thousands of people to help build and improve its search engine before it goes public next year." Said The New York Times: "[Powerset Labs] goes far beyond the 'alpha' or 'beta' testing involved in most software projects, when users put a new product through rigorous testing to find its flaws. Powerset doesn’t have a product yet, but rather a collection of promising natural language technologies, which are the fruit of years of research at Xerox PARC." Powerlabs' initial search results are taken from Wikipedia. == Notable people == Barney Pell (born March 18, 1968, in Hollywood, California) was co-founder and CEO of Powerset. Pell received his Bachelor of Science degree in symbolic systems from Stanford University in 1989, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and was a National Merit Scholar. Pell received a PhD in computer science from Cambridge University in 1993, where he was a Marshall Scholar. He has worked at NASA, as chief strategist and vice president of business development at StockMaster.com (acquired by Red Herring in March, 2000) and at Whizbang! Labs. Prior to joining Powerset, Pell was an Entrepreneur-in-Residence at Mayfield Fund, a venture capital firm in Silicon Valley. Pell is also a founder of Moon Express, Inc., a U.S. company awarded a $10M commercial lunar contract by NASA and a competitor in the Google Lunar X PRIZE. Steve Newcomb was the COO and co-founder of Powerset. Prior to joining Powerset, he was a co-founder of Loudfire, General Manager at Promptu, and was on the board of directors at Jaxtr. He left Powerset in October 2007 to form Virgance, a social startup incubator. Lorenzo Thione (born in Como, Italy) was the product architect and co-founder of Powerset. Prior to joining Powerset, he worked at FXPAL in natural language processing and related research fields. Thione earned his master's degree in software engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. Ronald Kaplan, former manager of research in Natural Language Theory and Technology at PARC, served as the company's CTO and CSO. Ryan Ferrier is a member of the founding team of Powerset. He managed personnel and internal operations. After 2008 he went on to co-found Serious Business, which made Facebook applications and was later bought by Zynga. Another Powerset alumnus, Alex Le, became CTO of Serious Business and went on to become an executive producer at Zynga when it bought the company. Siqi Chen founded a stealth startup in mobile computing after leaving Powerset. Tom Preston-Werner worked at Powerset and left after the acquisition to found GitHub. == Investors == Powerset attracted a wide range of investors, many of whom had considerable experience in the venture capital field. The company received $12.5 million (~$18.2 million in 2024) in Series A funding during November 2007, co-led by the venture capital firms Foundation Capital and The Founders Fund. Among the better-known investors: Esther Dyson, founding chairman of ICANN, founder of the newsletter Release 1.0 and editor at Cnet Peter Thiel, founder and former CEO of PayPal Luke Nosek, founder of PayPal Todd Parker. Managing Partner, Hidden River Ventures Reid Hoffman, executive vice president of PayPal and founder of LinkedIn First Round Capital, seed-stage venture firm
Read more →
Social bot

A social bot, refers to fully or partially automated social media accounts designed to perform most regular users’ actions, such as liking, posting content, and chatting with other users. Although their levels of autonomy vary, and often include a human-in-the-loop, social bots can use artificial intelligence to perform social media actions and can use large language models to mimic human dialogue. Social bots can operate alone or in groups that coordinate messaging as part of a network of coordinated inauthentic behavior. Social bots are often used to perform ad fraud by artificially boosting viewership and engagement metrics and to spread disinformation on social media. == Uses == Social bots are used for a large number of purposes on a variety of social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. One common use of social bots is to inflate a social media user's apparent popularity, usually by artificially manipulating their engagement metrics with large volumes of fake likes, reposts, or replies. Social bots can similarly be used to artificially inflate a user's follower count with fake followers, creating a false perception of a larger and more influential online following than is the case. The use of social bots to create the impression of a large social media influence allows individuals, brands, and organizations to attract a higher number of human followers and boost their online presence. Fake engagement can be bought and sold in the black market of social media engagement. Corporations typically use automated customer service agents on social media to affordably manage high levels of support requests. Social bots are used to send automated responses to users’ questions, sometimes prompting the user to private message the support account with additional information. The increased use of automated support bots and virtual assistants has led to some companies laying off customer-service staff. Social bots are also often used to influence public opinion. Autonomous bot accounts can flood social media with large numbers of posts expressing support for certain products, companies, or political campaigns, creating the impression of organic grassroots support. This can create a false perception of the number of people who support a certain position, which may also have effects on the direction of stock prices or on elections. Messages with similar content can also influence fads or trends. Many social bots are also used to amplify phishing attacks. These malicious bots are used to trick a social media user into giving up their passwords or other personal data. This is usually accomplished by posting links claiming to direct users to news articles that would in actuality direct to malicious websites containing malware. Scammers often use URL shortening services such as TinyURL and bit.ly to disguise a link's domain address, increasing the likelihood of a user clicking the malicious link. The presence of fake social media followers and high levels of engagement help convince the victim that the scammer is in fact a trusted user. Social bots can be a tool for computational propaganda. Bots can also be used for algorithmic curation, algorithmic radicalization, and/or influence-for-hire, a term that refers to the selling of an account on social media platforms. == History == Bots have coexisted with computer technology since the earliest days of computing. Social bots have their roots in the 1950s with Alan Turing, whose work focused on machine intelligence with the development of the Turing Test. The following decades saw further progress made towards the goal of creating programs capable of mimicking human behavior, notably with Joseph Weizenbaum’s creation of ELIZA. Considered to be one of the first Chatbots, ELIZA could simulate natural conversations with human users through pattern matching. Its most famous script was DOCTOR, a simulation of a Rogerian psychotherapist that was programmed to chat with patients and respond to questions. With the growth of social media platforms in the early 2000s, these bots could be used to interact with much larger user groups in an inconspicuous manner. Early instances of autonomous agents on social media could be found on sites like MySpace, with social bots being used by marketing firms to inflate activity on a user’s page in an effort to make them appear more popular. Social bots have been observed on a large variety of social media websites, with Twitter being one of the most widely observed examples. The creation of Twitter bots is generally against the site’s terms of service when used to post spam or to automatically like and follow other users, but some degree of automation using Twitter’s API may be permitted if used for “entertainment, informational, or novelty purposes.” Other platforms such as Reddit and Discord also allow for the use of social bots as long as they are not used to violate policies regarding harmful content and abusive behavior. Social media platforms have developed their own automated tools to filter out messages that come from bots, although they cannot detect all bot messages. == Legal regulation == Due to the difficulty of recognizing social bots and separating them from "eligible" automation via social media APIs, it is unclear how legal regulation can be enforced. Social bots are expected to play a role in shaping public opinion by autonomously acting as influencers. Some social bots have been used to rapidly spread misinformation, manipulate stock markets, influence opinion on companies and brands, promote political campaigns, and engage in malicious phishing campaigns. In the United States, some states have started to implement legislation in an attempt to regulate the use of social bots. In 2019, California passed the Bolstering Online Transparency Act (the B.O.T. Act) to make it unlawful to use automated software to appear indistinguishable from humans for the purpose of influencing a social media user's purchasing and voting decisions. Other states such as Utah and Colorado have passed similar bills to restrict the use of social bots. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) in the European Union is the first comprehensive law governing the use of Artificial Intelligence. The law requires transparency in AI to prevent users from being tricked into believing they are communicating with another human. AI-generated content on social media must be clearly marked as such, preventing social bots from using AI in a manner that mimics human behavior. == Detection == The first generation of bots could sometimes be distinguished from real users by their often superhuman capacities to post messages. Later developments have succeeded in imprinting more "human" activity and behavioral patterns in the agent. With enough bots, it might be even possible to achieve artificial social proof. To unambiguously detect social bots as what they are, a variety of criteria must be applied together using pattern detection techniques, some of which are: cartoon figures as user pictures sometimes also random real user pictures are captured (identity fraud) reposting rate temporal patterns sentiment expression followers-to-friends ratio length of user names variability in (re)posted messages engagement rate (like/followers rate) analysis of the time series of social media posts Social bots are always becoming increasingly difficult to detect and understand. The bots' human-like behavior, ever-changing behavior of the bots, and the sheer volume of bots covering every platform may have been a factor in the challenges of removing them. Social media sites, like Twitter, are among the most affected, with CNBC reporting up to 48 million of the 319 million users (roughly 15%) were bots in 2017. Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) is a public Web service that checks the activity of a Twitter account and gives it a score based on how likely the account is to be a bot. The system leverages over a thousand features. An active method for detecting early spam bots was to set up honeypot accounts that post nonsensical content, which may get reposted (retweeted) by the bots. However, bots evolve quickly, and detection methods have to be updated constantly, because otherwise they may get useless after a few years. One method is the use of Benford's Law for predicting the frequency distribution of significant leading digits to detect malicious bots online. This study was first introduced at the University of Pretoria in 2020. Another method is artificial-intelligence-driven detection. Some of the sub-categories of this type of detection would be active learning loop flow, feature engineering, unsupervised learning, supervised learning, and correlation discovery. Some operations of bots work together in a synchronized way. For example, ISIS used Twitter to amplify its Islamic content by numerous orchestrated accounts which further pushed an item to the Hot List news, thus further a
Read more →
Social bot

A social bot, refers to fully or partially automated social media accounts designed to perform most regular users’ actions, such as liking, posting content, and chatting with other users. Although their levels of autonomy vary, and often include a human-in-the-loop, social bots can use artificial intelligence to perform social media actions and can use large language models to mimic human dialogue. Social bots can operate alone or in groups that coordinate messaging as part of a network of coordinated inauthentic behavior. Social bots are often used to perform ad fraud by artificially boosting viewership and engagement metrics and to spread disinformation on social media. == Uses == Social bots are used for a large number of purposes on a variety of social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. One common use of social bots is to inflate a social media user's apparent popularity, usually by artificially manipulating their engagement metrics with large volumes of fake likes, reposts, or replies. Social bots can similarly be used to artificially inflate a user's follower count with fake followers, creating a false perception of a larger and more influential online following than is the case. The use of social bots to create the impression of a large social media influence allows individuals, brands, and organizations to attract a higher number of human followers and boost their online presence. Fake engagement can be bought and sold in the black market of social media engagement. Corporations typically use automated customer service agents on social media to affordably manage high levels of support requests. Social bots are used to send automated responses to users’ questions, sometimes prompting the user to private message the support account with additional information. The increased use of automated support bots and virtual assistants has led to some companies laying off customer-service staff. Social bots are also often used to influence public opinion. Autonomous bot accounts can flood social media with large numbers of posts expressing support for certain products, companies, or political campaigns, creating the impression of organic grassroots support. This can create a false perception of the number of people who support a certain position, which may also have effects on the direction of stock prices or on elections. Messages with similar content can also influence fads or trends. Many social bots are also used to amplify phishing attacks. These malicious bots are used to trick a social media user into giving up their passwords or other personal data. This is usually accomplished by posting links claiming to direct users to news articles that would in actuality direct to malicious websites containing malware. Scammers often use URL shortening services such as TinyURL and bit.ly to disguise a link's domain address, increasing the likelihood of a user clicking the malicious link. The presence of fake social media followers and high levels of engagement help convince the victim that the scammer is in fact a trusted user. Social bots can be a tool for computational propaganda. Bots can also be used for algorithmic curation, algorithmic radicalization, and/or influence-for-hire, a term that refers to the selling of an account on social media platforms. == History == Bots have coexisted with computer technology since the earliest days of computing. Social bots have their roots in the 1950s with Alan Turing, whose work focused on machine intelligence with the development of the Turing Test. The following decades saw further progress made towards the goal of creating programs capable of mimicking human behavior, notably with Joseph Weizenbaum’s creation of ELIZA. Considered to be one of the first Chatbots, ELIZA could simulate natural conversations with human users through pattern matching. Its most famous script was DOCTOR, a simulation of a Rogerian psychotherapist that was programmed to chat with patients and respond to questions. With the growth of social media platforms in the early 2000s, these bots could be used to interact with much larger user groups in an inconspicuous manner. Early instances of autonomous agents on social media could be found on sites like MySpace, with social bots being used by marketing firms to inflate activity on a user’s page in an effort to make them appear more popular. Social bots have been observed on a large variety of social media websites, with Twitter being one of the most widely observed examples. The creation of Twitter bots is generally against the site’s terms of service when used to post spam or to automatically like and follow other users, but some degree of automation using Twitter’s API may be permitted if used for “entertainment, informational, or novelty purposes.” Other platforms such as Reddit and Discord also allow for the use of social bots as long as they are not used to violate policies regarding harmful content and abusive behavior. Social media platforms have developed their own automated tools to filter out messages that come from bots, although they cannot detect all bot messages. == Legal regulation == Due to the difficulty of recognizing social bots and separating them from "eligible" automation via social media APIs, it is unclear how legal regulation can be enforced. Social bots are expected to play a role in shaping public opinion by autonomously acting as influencers. Some social bots have been used to rapidly spread misinformation, manipulate stock markets, influence opinion on companies and brands, promote political campaigns, and engage in malicious phishing campaigns. In the United States, some states have started to implement legislation in an attempt to regulate the use of social bots. In 2019, California passed the Bolstering Online Transparency Act (the B.O.T. Act) to make it unlawful to use automated software to appear indistinguishable from humans for the purpose of influencing a social media user's purchasing and voting decisions. Other states such as Utah and Colorado have passed similar bills to restrict the use of social bots. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) in the European Union is the first comprehensive law governing the use of Artificial Intelligence. The law requires transparency in AI to prevent users from being tricked into believing they are communicating with another human. AI-generated content on social media must be clearly marked as such, preventing social bots from using AI in a manner that mimics human behavior. == Detection == The first generation of bots could sometimes be distinguished from real users by their often superhuman capacities to post messages. Later developments have succeeded in imprinting more "human" activity and behavioral patterns in the agent. With enough bots, it might be even possible to achieve artificial social proof. To unambiguously detect social bots as what they are, a variety of criteria must be applied together using pattern detection techniques, some of which are: cartoon figures as user pictures sometimes also random real user pictures are captured (identity fraud) reposting rate temporal patterns sentiment expression followers-to-friends ratio length of user names variability in (re)posted messages engagement rate (like/followers rate) analysis of the time series of social media posts Social bots are always becoming increasingly difficult to detect and understand. The bots' human-like behavior, ever-changing behavior of the bots, and the sheer volume of bots covering every platform may have been a factor in the challenges of removing them. Social media sites, like Twitter, are among the most affected, with CNBC reporting up to 48 million of the 319 million users (roughly 15%) were bots in 2017. Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) is a public Web service that checks the activity of a Twitter account and gives it a score based on how likely the account is to be a bot. The system leverages over a thousand features. An active method for detecting early spam bots was to set up honeypot accounts that post nonsensical content, which may get reposted (retweeted) by the bots. However, bots evolve quickly, and detection methods have to be updated constantly, because otherwise they may get useless after a few years. One method is the use of Benford's Law for predicting the frequency distribution of significant leading digits to detect malicious bots online. This study was first introduced at the University of Pretoria in 2020. Another method is artificial-intelligence-driven detection. Some of the sub-categories of this type of detection would be active learning loop flow, feature engineering, unsupervised learning, supervised learning, and correlation discovery. Some operations of bots work together in a synchronized way. For example, ISIS used Twitter to amplify its Islamic content by numerous orchestrated accounts which further pushed an item to the Hot List news, thus further a
Read more →
AS2

AS2 (Applicability Statement 2) is a specification on how to transport structured business-to-business data securely and reliably over the Internet. Security is achieved by using digital certificates and encryption. == Background == AS2 was created in 2002 by the IETF to replace AS1, which they created in the early 1990s. The adoption of AS2 grew rapidly throughout the early 2000s because major players in the retail and fast-moving consumer goods industries championed AS2. Walmart was the first major retailer to require its suppliers to use the AS2 protocol instead of relying on dial-up modems for ordering goods. Amazon, Target, Lowe's, Bed, Bath, & Beyond and thousands of others followed suit. Many other industries use the AS2 protocol, including healthcare, as AS2 meets legal HIPAA requirements. In some cases, AS2 is a way to bypass expensive value-added networks previously used for data interchange. == Technical overview == AS2 is specified in RFC 4130, and is based on HTTP and S/MIME. It was the second AS protocol developed and uses the same signing, encryption and MDN (as defined by RFC3798) conventions used in the original AS1 protocol introduced in the late 1990s by IETF. In other words: Files are encoded as "attachments" in a standardized S/MIME message (an AS2 message). AS2 does not specify the contents of the files. Usually, the file contents are in a standardized format that is separately agreed upon, such as XML or EDIFACT. AS2 messages are always sent using the HTTP or HTTPS protocol (Secure Sockets Layer — also known as SSL — is implied by HTTPS) and usually use the "POST" method (use of "GET" is rare). Messages can be signed, but do not have to be. Messages can be encrypted, but do not have to be. Messages may request a Message Disposition Notification (MDN) back if all went well, but do not have to request such a message. If the original AS2 message requested an MDN: Upon the receipt of the message and its successful decryption or signature validation (as necessary) a "success" MDN will be sent back to the original sender. This MDN is typically signed but never encrypted (unless temporarily encrypted in transit via HTTPS). Upon the receipt and successful verification of the signature on the MDN, the original sender will "know" that the recipient got their message (this provides the "Non-repudiation" element of AS2). If there are any problems receiving or interpreting the original AS2 message, a "failed" MDN may be sent back. However, part of the AS2 protocol states that the client must treat a lack of an MDN as a failure as well, so some AS2 receivers will not return an MDN in this case. Like any other AS file transfer, AS2 file transfers typically require both sides of the exchange to trade X.509 certificates and specific "trading partner" names before any transfers can take place. AS2 trading partner names can usually be any valid phrase. === MDN options === Unlike AS1 or AS3 file transfers, AS2 file transfers offer several "MDN return" options instead of the traditional options of "yes" or "no". Specifically, the choices are: ==== AS2 w/ "Sync" MDNs ==== Return Synchronous MDN via HTTP(S) ("AS2 Sync") - This popular option allows AS2 MDNs to be returned to AS2 message sender clients over the same HTTP connection they used to send the original message. This "MDN while you wait" capability makes "AS2 Sync" transfers the fastest of any type of AS file transfer, but it also keeps this flavor of MDN requests from being used with large files (which may time out in low-bandwidth situations). ==== AS2 w/ "ASync" MDNs ==== Return Asynchronous MDN via HTTP(S) (a.k.a. "AS2 Async") - This popular option allows AS2 MDNs to be returned to the AS2 message sender's server later over a different HTTP connection. This flavor of MDN request is usually used if large files are involved or if your trading partner's AS2 server has poor Internet service. ==== AS2 w/ "Email" MDNs ==== Return (Asynchronous) MDN via Email - This rarely used option allows AS2 MDNs to be returned to AS2 message senders via email rather than HTTP. Otherwise, it is similar to "AS2 Async (HTTP)". ==== AS2 w/ No MDNs ==== Do not return MDN - This option works like it does in any other AS protocol: the receiver of an AS2 message with this option set simply does not try to return an MDN to the AS2 message sender. ==== Filename preservation ==== AS2 filename preservation feature will be used to communicate the filename to the trading partner. The banking industry relies on filenames being communicated between trading partners. AS2 vendors are currently certifying that implementation of filename communication conforms to the standard and is interoperable. There are two profiles for filename preservation being optionally tested under AS2 testing: Filename preservation without MDN responses Filename preservation with an associated MDN response certification Walmart recommends contacting Drummond Group, LLC for more information on EDIINT AS2, or for a list of interoperable-testing AS2 software providers. == Benefits == For many businesses, the use of AS2 and electronic data interchange (EDI) is not a choice so much as it is a requirement of doing business with a large customer or partner. That said, AS2 is a universal protocol that has benefits, from both business and technology vantage points. === Business case === Cut costs by using the web for EDI file transfers, AS2 reduces the cost of transactions from expensive VANs. Extend EDI to more partners; with lower costs and universal web connectivity, AS2 allows organizations to implement EDI with partners worldwide that have little EDI infrastructure. Save time by eliminating the need to manually process orders. Eliminate errors by turning manual processes into automated processes. Universal solution — AS2 is established and tested, so no one has to re-invent the wheel. === Technological advantages === Leverage the web: if an organization can share data securely via the web, they already have much of the infrastructure for AS2. Unlimited EDI data — there are no practical limitations on transaction sizes via the web, and AS2 includes features for managing large transfers. Payload Agnostic — AS2 can be used to transport any type of document. While EDI X12, EDIFACT and XML are common, any mutually agreed-upon format may be transferred.
Read more →
Fyuse

Fyuse is a spatial photography app which lets users capture and share interactive 3D images. By tilting or swiping one's smartphone, one can view such "fyuses" from various angles — as if one were walking around an object or subject. The app blends photography and video to create an interactive medium and was first published for iOS in April 2014. The Android version was released at the end of 2014. == The app == Fyuse lets users capture panoramas, selfies, and full 360° views of objects and allows one to view captured moments from different angles. It has its own personal gallery, social network and standalone web integration. With the app, Fyusion also created a social networking platform similar to Instagram. Fyuses can be shared, commented on, liked and re-shared to one's followers (called Echoes). One can build a network of followers and with engagement tracking, one can see how many times an image has been interacted with The images can also be saved for private, offline view, or shared to other social networks, like Facebook or Twitter, or embedded on a website where the images can be interacted with by desktop users via dragging the mouse. Furthermore, in the compass tab other fyuses can be discovered using the app's system of tags and categories. One's Fyuse feed is prepopulated with top users, and one can follow people to see when they post a new fyuse. The app will also find one's friends if one signs up with Facebook or connects it with one's Twitter account. To create a fyuse one moves around a person or object with one's phone's camera in one direction or moving/tilting one's phone around while holding one's finger on the screen. By combining photography and video the app allows one to capture moments that one may not have otherwise been able to capture by recording not one moment in time but stitched together little moments. According to Fyusion CEO Radu Rusu, a photo freezes a moment in time, while a video captures moments in a linear timeline — both still flat, when viewed. A fyuse image captures a moment in space, where one can not only see one side of something, but also around it. When it is done rendering, fyuses can also be edited – one can trim the fyuse for length and edit the brightness, contrast, exposure, saturation and sharpness. One can also add a vignette and apply a filters, with options to adjust their intensity. After editing, one can write a description, add hashtags, and tag parts of the fyuse before one can (voluntarily) publish and share it. Version 1.0 has been described as "alpha prototype" and version 2.0 was released on 17 December 2014. Version 3.0 introduced 3D tagging by which users can layer 3D graphic that animate accordingly with each interaction to add some context to the content. Version 4.0 was released on December 21, 2016 for iOS. Since January 2016 (v3.2) the app allows the export of fyuses as Live Photos. The app has also been described as a more sophisticated version of 3D stickers and flip images. == Applications == The app has many applications for e-commerce such as for fashion designers who want to showcase a garment from every angle, or real estate listings and Airbnb-type sites that want to make their rental properties seem as enticing as possible. The app can also be used for interactive art, 360° panoramas and selfies. == History == San Francisco-based Fyusion Inc.'s three founders — Radu B. Rusu, CTO Stefan Holzer, and VP of Engineering Stephen Miller — worked together at Willow Garage, the robotics research lab started by early Google employee Scott Hassan in the area of "personal robotics" — Hassan decided to turn the lab into more of an incubator, suggesting that the members spin off their technologies into consumer-facing enterprises. Rusu first set out with an open-source 3D perception software startup called Open Perception. Fyusion was officially founded in 2013, and soon after Rusu and his cofounders patented the technology for spatial photography. The company closed a seed funding round at the end of May, raising $3.35 million from investors, including an angel investment from Sun Microsystems cofounder Andreas Bechtolsheim. In 2014 the Fyuse team consisted of 13 employees, mostly engineers and designers, recruited from around the globe. In March 2015 the team displayed their app at Katy Perry's premiere for the movie "Prismatic World Tour on Epix" where Perry also took Fyuse for a test run. == Augmented reality == In September 2016 Fyusion unveiled its platform for creating augmented reality content using ones smartphone. It takes the images from ones smartphone and converts them into 3D holographic images, which one can then view on an AR headset. According to Rusu "by making it easy for people to capture their surroundings on any mobile device, [Fyusion is] revolutionizing the way that people view the world around them" and also states that for "AR to be successful, anyone should be able to create content for it" opposed to the current "small number of content creators and an even smaller number of hardware players". According to him "the applications of [Fyusion's] technology for consumers and businesses are incredibly limitless". The platform uses the company's patented 3D spatio-temporal platform that uses advanced sensor fusion, machine learning and computer vision algorithms and part of the platform is built into the Fyuse app. Before committing to releasing a separate consumer product the company intends to wait until the HoloLens device becomes available to the public. Until then any Fyuse representation created using Fyuse is AR ready and will be able to be shown in HoloLens in the future. == Fyuse - Point of No Return == Fyuse - Point of No Return is a science fiction short advert for Fyuse 3.0 in which Fyuse's digital medium is extrapolated into the future. In the film a woman uses a mini scanning-drone to 3D scan a tree with Fyuse and later recreate it as an augmented reality object at another place.
Read more →
Trace zero cryptography

First proposed by Gerhard Frey in 1998, trace zero cryptography refers to the use of trace zero varieties (TZV) for cryptographic purpose. Trace zero varieties are subgroups of the divisor class group on a low genus hyperelliptic curve defined over a finite field. These groups can be used to establish asymmetric cryptography using the discrete logarithm problem as cryptographic primitive. Trace zero varieties feature a better scalar multiplication performance than elliptic curves. This allows fast arithmetic in these groups, which can speed up the calculations with a factor 3 compared with elliptic curves and hence speed up the cryptosystem. Another advantage is that for groups of cryptographically relevant size, the order of the group can simply be calculated using the characteristic polynomial of the Frobenius endomorphism. This is not the case, for example, in elliptic curve cryptography when the group of points of an elliptic curve over a prime field is used for cryptographic purpose. However, to represent an element of the trace zero variety more bits are needed compared with elements of elliptic or hyperelliptic curves. Another disadvantage is the fact that it is possible to reduce the security of the TZV of 1/6th of the bit length using cover attack. == Mathematical background == A hyperelliptic curve C of genus g over a prime field F q {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q}} where q = pn (p prime) of odd characteristic is defined as C : y 2 + h ( x ) y = f ( x ) , {\displaystyle C:~y^{2}+h(x)y=f(x),} where f monic, deg(f) = 2g + 1 and deg(h) ≤ g. The curve has at least one F q {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q}} -rational Weierstraßpoint. The Jacobian variety J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} of C is for all finite extension F q n {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q^{n}}} isomorphic to the ideal class group Cl ⁡ ( C / F q n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Cl} (C/\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} . With the Mumford's representation it is possible to represent the elements of J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} with a pair of polynomials [u, v], where u, v ∈ F q n [ x ] {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q^{n}}[x]} . The Frobenius endomorphism σ is used on an element [u, v] of J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} to raise the power of each coefficient of that element to q: σ([u, v]) = [uq(x), vq(x)]. The characteristic polynomial of this endomorphism has the following form: χ ( T ) = T 2 g + a 1 T 2 g − 1 + ⋯ + a g T g + ⋯ + a 1 q g − 1 T + q g , {\displaystyle \chi (T)=T^{2g}+a_{1}T^{2g-1}+\cdots +a_{g}T^{g}+\cdots +a_{1}q^{g-1}T+q^{g},} where ai in Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} } With the Hasse–Weil theorem it is possible to receive the group order of any extension field F q n {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q^{n}}} by using the complex roots τi of χ(T): | J C ( F q n ) | = ∏ i = 1 2 g ( 1 − τ i n ) {\displaystyle |J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})|=\prod _{i=1}^{2g}(1-\tau _{i}^{n})} Let D be an element of the J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} of C, then it is possible to define an endomorphism of J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} , the so-called trace of D: Tr ⁡ ( D ) = ∑ i = 0 n − 1 σ i ( D ) = D + σ ( D ) + ⋯ + σ n − 1 ( D ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Tr} (D)=\sum _{i=0}^{n-1}\sigma ^{i}(D)=D+\sigma (D)+\cdots +\sigma ^{n-1}(D)} Based on this endomorphism one can reduce the Jacobian variety to a subgroup G with the property, that every element is of trace zero: G = { D ∈ J C ( F q n ) | Tr ( D ) = 0 } , ( 0 neutral element in J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle G=\{D\in J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})~|~{\text{Tr}}(D)={\textbf {0}}\},~~~({\textbf {0}}{\text{ neutral element in }}J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} G is the kernel of the trace endomorphism and thus G is a group, the so-called trace zero (sub)variety (TZV) of J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} . The intersection of G and J C ( F q ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q})} is produced by the n-torsion elements of J C ( F q ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q})} . If the greatest common divisor gcd ( n , | J C ( F q ) | ) = 1 {\displaystyle \gcd(n,|J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q})|)=1} the intersection is empty and one can compute the group order of G: | G | = | J C ( F q n ) | | J C ( F q ) | = ∏ i = 1 2 g ( 1 − τ i n ) ∏ i = 1 2 g ( 1 − τ i ) {\displaystyle |G|={\dfrac {|J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})|}{|J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q})|}}={\dfrac {\prod _{i=1}^{2g}(1-\tau _{i}^{n})}{\prod _{i=1}^{2g}(1-\tau _{i})}}} The actual group used in cryptographic applications is a subgroup G0 of G of a large prime order l. This group may be G itself. There exist three different cases of cryptographical relevance for TZV: g = 1, n = 3 g = 1, n = 5 g = 2, n = 3 == Arithmetic == The arithmetic used in the TZV group G0 based on the arithmetic for the whole group J C ( F q n ) {\displaystyle J_{C}(\mathbb {F} _{q^{n}})} , But it is possible to use the Frobenius endomorphism σ to speed up the scalar multiplication. This can be archived if G0 is generated by D of order l then σ(D) = sD, for some integers s. For the given cases of TZV s can be computed as follows, where ai come from the characteristic polynomial of the Frobenius endomorphism : For g = 1, n = 3: s = q − 1 1 − a 1 mod ℓ {\displaystyle s={\dfrac {q-1}{1-a_{1}}}{\bmod {\ell }}} For g = 1, n = 5: s = q 2 − q − a 1 2 q + a 1 q + 1 q − 2 a 1 q + a 1 3 − a 1 2 + a 1 − 1 mod ℓ {\displaystyle s={\dfrac {q^{2}-q-a_{1}^{2}q+a_{1}q+1}{q-2a_{1}q+a_{1}^{3}-a_{1}^{2}+a_{1}-1}}{\bmod {\ell }}} For g = 2, n = 3: s = − q 2 − a 2 + a 1 a 1 q − a 2 + 1 mod ℓ {\displaystyle s=-{\dfrac {q^{2}-a_{2}+a_{1}}{a_{1}q-a_{2}+1}}{\bmod {\ell }}} Knowing this, it is possible to replace any scalar multiplication mD (|m| ≤ l/2) with: m 0 D + m 1 σ ( D ) + ⋯ + m n − 1 σ n − 1 ( D ) , where m i = O ( ℓ 1 / ( n − 1 ) ) = O ( q g ) {\displaystyle m_{0}D+m_{1}\sigma (D)+\cdots +m_{n-1}\sigma ^{n-1}(D),~~~~{\text{where }}m_{i}=O(\ell ^{1/(n-1)})=O(q^{g})} With this trick the multiple scalar product can be reduced to about 1/(n − 1)th of doublings necessary for calculating mD, if the implied constants are small enough. == Security == The security of cryptographic systems based on trace zero subvarieties according to the results of the papers comparable to the security of hyper-elliptic curves of low genus g' over F p ′ {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{p'}} , where p' ~ (n − 1)(g/g' ) for |G| ~128 bits. For the cases where n = 3, g = 2 and n = 5, g = 1 it is possible to reduce the security for at most 6 bits, where |G| ~ 2256, because one can not be sure that G is contained in a Jacobian of a curve of genus 6. The security of curves of genus 4 for similar fields are far less secure. == Cover attack on a trace zero crypto-system == The attack published in shows, that the DLP in trace zero groups of genus 2 over finite fields of characteristic diverse than 2 or 3 and a field extension of degree 3 can be transformed into a DLP in a class group of degree 0 with genus of at most 6 over the base field. In this new class group the DLP can be attacked with the index calculus methods. This leads to a reduction of the bit length 1/6th.
Read more →
Data validation and reconciliation

Industrial process data validation and reconciliation, or more briefly, process data reconciliation (PDR), is a technology that uses process information and mathematical methods in order to automatically ensure data validation and reconciliation by correcting measurements in industrial processes. The use of PDR allows for extracting accurate and reliable information about the state of industry processes from raw measurement data and produces a single consistent set of data representing the most likely process operation. == Models, data and measurement errors == Industrial processes, for example chemical or thermodynamic processes in chemical plants, refineries, oil or gas production sites, or power plants, are often represented by two fundamental means: Models that express the general structure of the processes, Data that reflects the state of the processes at a given point in time. Models can have different levels of detail, for example one can incorporate simple mass or compound conservation balances, or more advanced thermodynamic models including energy conservation laws. Mathematically the model can be expressed by a nonlinear system of equations F ( y ) = 0 {\displaystyle F(y)=0\,} in the variables y = ( y 1 , … , y n ) {\displaystyle y=(y_{1},\ldots ,y_{n})} , which incorporates all the above-mentioned system constraints (for example the mass or heat balances around a unit). A variable could be the temperature or the pressure at a certain place in the plant. === Error types === Data originates typically from measurements taken at different places throughout the industrial site, for example temperature, pressure, volumetric flow rate measurements etc. To understand the basic principles of PDR, it is important to first recognize that plant measurements are never 100% correct, i.e. raw measurement y {\displaystyle y\,} is not a solution of the nonlinear system F ( y ) = 0 {\displaystyle F(y)=0\,\!} . When using measurements without correction to generate plant balances, it is common to have incoherencies. Measurement errors can be categorized into two basic types: random errors due to intrinsic sensor accuracy and systematic errors (or gross errors) due to sensor calibration or faulty data transmission. Random errors means that the measurement y {\displaystyle y\,\!} is a random variable with mean y ∗ {\displaystyle y^{}\,\!} , where y ∗ {\displaystyle y^{}\,\!} is the true value that is typically not known. A systematic error on the other hand is characterized by a measurement y {\displaystyle y\,\!} which is a random variable with mean y ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {y}}\,\!} , which is not equal to the true value y ∗ {\displaystyle y^{}\,} . For ease in deriving and implementing an optimal estimation solution, and based on arguments that errors are the sum of many factors (so that the Central limit theorem has some effect), data reconciliation assumes these errors are normally distributed. Other sources of errors when calculating plant balances include process faults such as leaks, unmodeled heat losses, incorrect physical properties or other physical parameters used in equations, and incorrect structure such as unmodeled bypass lines. Other errors include unmodeled plant dynamics such as holdup changes, and other instabilities in plant operations that violate steady state (algebraic) models. Additional dynamic errors arise when measurements and samples are not taken at the same time, especially lab analyses. The normal practice of using time averages for the data input partly reduces the dynamic problems. However, that does not completely resolve timing inconsistencies for infrequently-sampled data like lab analyses. This use of average values, like a moving average, acts as a low-pass filter, so high frequency noise is mostly eliminated. The result is that, in practice, data reconciliation is mainly making adjustments to correct systematic errors like biases. === Necessity of removing measurement errors === ISA-95 is the international standard for the integration of enterprise and control systems It asserts that: Data reconciliation is a serious issue for enterprise-control integration. The data have to be valid to be useful for the enterprise system. The data must often be determined from physical measurements that have associated error factors. This must usually be converted into exact values for the enterprise system. This conversion may require manual, or intelligent reconciliation of the converted values [...]. Systems must be set up to ensure that accurate data are sent to production and from production. Inadvertent operator or clerical errors may result in too much production, too little production, the wrong production, incorrect inventory, or missing inventory. == History == PDR has become more and more important due to industrial processes that are becoming more and more complex. PDR started in the early 1960s with applications aiming at closing material balances in production processes where raw measurements were available for all variables. At the same time the problem of gross error identification and elimination has been presented. In the late 1960s and 1970s unmeasured variables were taken into account in the data reconciliation process., PDR also became more mature by considering general nonlinear equation systems coming from thermodynamic models., , Quasi steady state dynamics for filtering and simultaneous parameter estimation over time were introduced in 1977 by Stanley and Mah. Dynamic PDR was formulated as a nonlinear optimization problem by Liebman et al. in 1992. == Data reconciliation == Data reconciliation is a technique that targets at correcting measurement errors that are due to measurement noise, i.e. random errors. From a statistical point of view the main assumption is that no systematic errors exist in the set of measurements, since they may bias the reconciliation results and reduce the robustness of the reconciliation. Given n {\displaystyle n} measurements y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} , data reconciliation can mathematically be expressed as an optimization problem of the following form: min x , y ∗ ∑ i = 1 n ( y i ∗ − y i σ i ) 2 subject to F ( x , y ∗ ) = 0 y min ≤ y ∗ ≤ y max x min ≤ x ≤ x max , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\min _{x,y^{}}&\sum _{i=1}^{n}\left({\frac {y_{i}^{}-y_{i}}{\sigma _{i}}}\right)^{2}\\{\text{subject to }}&F(x,y^{})=0\\&y_{\min }\leq y^{}\leq y_{\max }\\&x_{\min }\leq x\leq x_{\max },\end{aligned}}\,\!} where y i ∗ {\displaystyle y_{i}^{}\,\!} is the reconciled value of the i {\displaystyle i} -th measurement ( i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\ldots ,n\,\!} ), y i {\displaystyle y_{i}\,\!} is the measured value of the i {\displaystyle i} -th measurement ( i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\ldots ,n\,\!} ), x j {\displaystyle x_{j}\,\!} is the j {\displaystyle j} -th unmeasured variable ( j = 1 , … , m {\displaystyle j=1,\ldots ,m\,\!} ), and σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}\,\!} is the standard deviation of the i {\displaystyle i} -th measurement ( i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\ldots ,n\,\!} ), F ( x , y ∗ ) = 0 {\displaystyle F(x,y^{})=0\,\!} are the p {\displaystyle p\,\!} process equality constraints and x min , x max , y min , y max {\displaystyle x_{\min },x_{\max },y_{\min },y_{\max }\,\!} are the bounds on the measured and unmeasured variables. The term ( y i ∗ − y i σ i ) 2 {\displaystyle \left({\frac {y_{i}^{}-y_{i}}{\sigma _{i}}}\right)^{2}\,\!} is called the penalty of measurement i. The objective function is the sum of the penalties, which will be denoted in the following by f ( y ∗ ) = ∑ i = 1 n ( y i ∗ − y i σ i ) 2 {\displaystyle f(y^{})=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\left({\frac {y_{i}^{}-y_{i}}{\sigma _{i}}}\right)^{2}} . In other words, one wants to minimize the overall correction (measured in the least squares term) that is needed in order to satisfy the system constraints. Additionally, each least squares term is weighted by the standard deviation of the corresponding measurement. The standard deviation is related to the accuracy of the measurement. For example, at a 95% confidence level, the standard deviation is about half the accuracy. === Redundancy === Data reconciliation relies strongly on the concept of redundancy to correct the measurements as little as possible in order to satisfy the process constraints. Here, redundancy is defined differently from redundancy in information theory. Instead, redundancy arises from combining sensor data with the model (algebraic constraints), sometimes more specifically called "spatial redundancy", "analytical redundancy", or "topological redundancy". Redundancy can be due to sensor redundancy, where sensors are duplicated in order to have more than one measurement of the same quantity. Redundancy also arises when a single variable can be estimated in several independent ways from separate sets of measurements at a given time or time averaging period, using the algebraic constraints. Redundancy is linked to the concept
Read more →
Link encryption

Link encryption is an approach to communications security that encrypts and decrypts all network traffic at each network routing point (e.g. network switch, or node through which it passes) until arrival at its final destination. This repeated decryption and encryption is necessary to allow the routing information contained in each transmission to be read and employed further to direct the transmission toward its destination, before which it is re-encrypted. This contrasts with end-to-end encryption where internal information, but not the header/routing information, is encrypted by the sender at the point of origin and only decrypted by the intended recipient. Link encryption offers two main advantages: encryption is automatic so there is less opportunity for human error. if the communications link operates continuously and carries an unvarying level of traffic, link encryption defeats traffic analysis. On the other hand, end-to-end encryption ensures only the intended recipient has access to the plaintext. Link encryption can be used with end-to-end systems by superencrypting the messages. Bulk encryption refers to encrypting a large number of circuits at once, after they have been multiplexed.
Read more →
Cryptographic module

A cryptographic module is a component of a computer system that securely implements cryptographic algorithms, typically with some element of tamper resistance. NIST defines a cryptographic module as "The set of hardware, software, and/or firmware that implements security functions (including cryptographic algorithms), holds plaintext keys and uses them for performing cryptographic operations, and is contained within a cryptographic module boundary." Hardware security modules, including secure cryptoprocessors, are one way of implementing cryptographic modules. Standards for cryptographic modules include FIPS 140-3 and ISO/IEC 19790.
Read more →
Social bot

A social bot, refers to fully or partially automated social media accounts designed to perform most regular users’ actions, such as liking, posting content, and chatting with other users. Although their levels of autonomy vary, and often include a human-in-the-loop, social bots can use artificial intelligence to perform social media actions and can use large language models to mimic human dialogue. Social bots can operate alone or in groups that coordinate messaging as part of a network of coordinated inauthentic behavior. Social bots are often used to perform ad fraud by artificially boosting viewership and engagement metrics and to spread disinformation on social media. == Uses == Social bots are used for a large number of purposes on a variety of social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. One common use of social bots is to inflate a social media user's apparent popularity, usually by artificially manipulating their engagement metrics with large volumes of fake likes, reposts, or replies. Social bots can similarly be used to artificially inflate a user's follower count with fake followers, creating a false perception of a larger and more influential online following than is the case. The use of social bots to create the impression of a large social media influence allows individuals, brands, and organizations to attract a higher number of human followers and boost their online presence. Fake engagement can be bought and sold in the black market of social media engagement. Corporations typically use automated customer service agents on social media to affordably manage high levels of support requests. Social bots are used to send automated responses to users’ questions, sometimes prompting the user to private message the support account with additional information. The increased use of automated support bots and virtual assistants has led to some companies laying off customer-service staff. Social bots are also often used to influence public opinion. Autonomous bot accounts can flood social media with large numbers of posts expressing support for certain products, companies, or political campaigns, creating the impression of organic grassroots support. This can create a false perception of the number of people who support a certain position, which may also have effects on the direction of stock prices or on elections. Messages with similar content can also influence fads or trends. Many social bots are also used to amplify phishing attacks. These malicious bots are used to trick a social media user into giving up their passwords or other personal data. This is usually accomplished by posting links claiming to direct users to news articles that would in actuality direct to malicious websites containing malware. Scammers often use URL shortening services such as TinyURL and bit.ly to disguise a link's domain address, increasing the likelihood of a user clicking the malicious link. The presence of fake social media followers and high levels of engagement help convince the victim that the scammer is in fact a trusted user. Social bots can be a tool for computational propaganda. Bots can also be used for algorithmic curation, algorithmic radicalization, and/or influence-for-hire, a term that refers to the selling of an account on social media platforms. == History == Bots have coexisted with computer technology since the earliest days of computing. Social bots have their roots in the 1950s with Alan Turing, whose work focused on machine intelligence with the development of the Turing Test. The following decades saw further progress made towards the goal of creating programs capable of mimicking human behavior, notably with Joseph Weizenbaum’s creation of ELIZA. Considered to be one of the first Chatbots, ELIZA could simulate natural conversations with human users through pattern matching. Its most famous script was DOCTOR, a simulation of a Rogerian psychotherapist that was programmed to chat with patients and respond to questions. With the growth of social media platforms in the early 2000s, these bots could be used to interact with much larger user groups in an inconspicuous manner. Early instances of autonomous agents on social media could be found on sites like MySpace, with social bots being used by marketing firms to inflate activity on a user’s page in an effort to make them appear more popular. Social bots have been observed on a large variety of social media websites, with Twitter being one of the most widely observed examples. The creation of Twitter bots is generally against the site’s terms of service when used to post spam or to automatically like and follow other users, but some degree of automation using Twitter’s API may be permitted if used for “entertainment, informational, or novelty purposes.” Other platforms such as Reddit and Discord also allow for the use of social bots as long as they are not used to violate policies regarding harmful content and abusive behavior. Social media platforms have developed their own automated tools to filter out messages that come from bots, although they cannot detect all bot messages. == Legal regulation == Due to the difficulty of recognizing social bots and separating them from "eligible" automation via social media APIs, it is unclear how legal regulation can be enforced. Social bots are expected to play a role in shaping public opinion by autonomously acting as influencers. Some social bots have been used to rapidly spread misinformation, manipulate stock markets, influence opinion on companies and brands, promote political campaigns, and engage in malicious phishing campaigns. In the United States, some states have started to implement legislation in an attempt to regulate the use of social bots. In 2019, California passed the Bolstering Online Transparency Act (the B.O.T. Act) to make it unlawful to use automated software to appear indistinguishable from humans for the purpose of influencing a social media user's purchasing and voting decisions. Other states such as Utah and Colorado have passed similar bills to restrict the use of social bots. The Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) in the European Union is the first comprehensive law governing the use of Artificial Intelligence. The law requires transparency in AI to prevent users from being tricked into believing they are communicating with another human. AI-generated content on social media must be clearly marked as such, preventing social bots from using AI in a manner that mimics human behavior. == Detection == The first generation of bots could sometimes be distinguished from real users by their often superhuman capacities to post messages. Later developments have succeeded in imprinting more "human" activity and behavioral patterns in the agent. With enough bots, it might be even possible to achieve artificial social proof. To unambiguously detect social bots as what they are, a variety of criteria must be applied together using pattern detection techniques, some of which are: cartoon figures as user pictures sometimes also random real user pictures are captured (identity fraud) reposting rate temporal patterns sentiment expression followers-to-friends ratio length of user names variability in (re)posted messages engagement rate (like/followers rate) analysis of the time series of social media posts Social bots are always becoming increasingly difficult to detect and understand. The bots' human-like behavior, ever-changing behavior of the bots, and the sheer volume of bots covering every platform may have been a factor in the challenges of removing them. Social media sites, like Twitter, are among the most affected, with CNBC reporting up to 48 million of the 319 million users (roughly 15%) were bots in 2017. Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) is a public Web service that checks the activity of a Twitter account and gives it a score based on how likely the account is to be a bot. The system leverages over a thousand features. An active method for detecting early spam bots was to set up honeypot accounts that post nonsensical content, which may get reposted (retweeted) by the bots. However, bots evolve quickly, and detection methods have to be updated constantly, because otherwise they may get useless after a few years. One method is the use of Benford's Law for predicting the frequency distribution of significant leading digits to detect malicious bots online. This study was first introduced at the University of Pretoria in 2020. Another method is artificial-intelligence-driven detection. Some of the sub-categories of this type of detection would be active learning loop flow, feature engineering, unsupervised learning, supervised learning, and correlation discovery. Some operations of bots work together in a synchronized way. For example, ISIS used Twitter to amplify its Islamic content by numerous orchestrated accounts which further pushed an item to the Hot List news, thus further a
Read more →
Control break

In computer programming, a control break is a change in the value of one of the keys on which a file is sorted, which requires some extra processing. For example, with an input file sorted by post code, the number of items found in each postal district might need to be printed on a report, and a heading shown for the next district. Quite often there is a hierarchy of nested control breaks in a program, such as streets within districts within areas, with the need for a grand total at the end. Structured programming techniques have been developed to ensure correct processing of control breaks in languages such as COBOL and to ensure that conditions such as empty input files and sequence errors are handled properly. With fourth-generation languages such as SQL, the programming language should handle most of the details of control breaks automatically.
Read more →
Cryptographic bill of materials

Cryptographic bill of materials (CBOM—also cryptography bill of materials) is a structured inventory of all cryptographic assets present in a software, firmware, device, or system. It enumerates algorithms (and parameters such as key sizes and modes), cryptographic libraries or modules, digital certificates, keys and related material, and protocols in use, and maps their relationships to the components that implement or invoke them. CBOMs are used to improve security analysis, compliance, and cryptographic agility, and are increasingly referenced in guidance for post‑quantum cryptography (PQC) migration. == Definition and scope == A CBOM inventories cryptographic primitives and materials—such as encryption and signature algorithms (with specific variants and modes), key sizes, cryptographic libraries/modules, digital certificates (e.g., X.509), keys and other related cryptographic material, and security protocols (e.g., TLS, IPsec). It also documents dependencies (for example, an application uses an algorithm provided by a library; a protocol uses several algorithms) and can capture certificate lifecycles, cryptographic module certifications (e.g., FIPS 140‑3), and policy conformance metadata. In common practice, a CBOM may be embedded within an SBOM format (such as CycloneDX) or exported as a separate, linked artifact. === Typical CBOM fields === The exact schema varies by implementation, but common fields are summarized below (see CycloneDX CBOM guide and NIST SP 1800‑38B). == Relation to SBOM == A CBOM is complementary to, but distinct from, a software bill of materials (SBOM). Whereas an SBOM lists software components and their versions, a CBOM focuses specifically on the cryptography present and how it is configured and used. For example, an SBOM might enumerate inclusion of a library such as OpenSSL, while the CBOM would identify which algorithms and parameters that library enables (e.g., RSA‑2048, ECDH P‑256, AES‑GCM) and list relevant keys and certificates. The pairing enables both supply‑chain transparency and cryptographic transparency. == History == The term and practice emerged in the early–mid 2020s alongside software‑supply‑chain transparency and PQC planning. The OWASP CycloneDX standard introduced native CBOM support (v1.6 and later), modeling algorithms, keys, certificates, and protocols as first‑class “cryptographic assets” and providing dependency semantics (uses/implements) between software and cryptography. Open tooling from industry and researchers (e.g., IBM's CBOMkit and related generators/viewers) appeared to automate discovery and representation of cryptographic use in the CycloneDX CBOM schema. == Regulatory and policy context == In the United States, policy has emphasized cryptographic inventories as a prerequisite to PQC migration. The White House's National Security Memorandum 10 (2022) directed a government‑wide transition to quantum‑resistant cryptography; the Office of Management and Budget's M‑23‑02 (November 2022) operationalized this by requiring agencies to submit a prioritized inventory of cryptographic systems (with algorithm and key details) by 4 May 2023 and annually thereafter, and tasked CISA/NSA/NIST to develop automated discovery and inventory strategies. A 2024 Office of the National Cyber Director report reiterated that a “comprehensive cryptographic inventory” is the baseline for PQC planning and must be maintained iteratively with both automated and manual discovery. NIST's NCCoE practice guide (SP 1800‑38B, preliminary draft) provides concrete methods for cryptographic discovery and documentation across enterprises, aligning with CBOM‑style representations. CISA later published a strategy to migrate federal agencies to automated cryptography discovery and inventory tools to support continuous reporting. Separately, NSA, CISA, and NIST issued joint guidance encouraging all organisations to prepare cryptographic inventories and roadmaps for PQC, beyond government environments. == Role in quantum readiness and cryptographic agility == Because large‑scale quantum computing threatens widely used public‑key algorithms (e.g., RSA, ECC), organisations are planning multi‑year transitions to post-quantum cryptography. CBOMs enable that planning by identifying where quantum‑vulnerable algorithms appear, prioritising high‑impact systems, and tracking replacements over time. A machine‑readable CBOM also supports cryptographic agility and incident response: if an algorithm, library, or certificate lifecycle becomes non‑compliant or vulnerable, the CBOM indicates which products and systems are affected and where mitigations must be applied first. == Standards and tooling == CycloneDX (OWASP): Native CBOM modelling (v1.6+) for algorithms, certificates, keys/related material, and protocols, with dependency semantics and examples. The project publishes a CBOM guide and use‑case profiles (e.g., certificate and algorithm inventories). NIST NCCoE SP 1800‑38 series: Practice guides for PQC migration include enterprise cryptographic discovery methods that produce CBOM‑like inventories and integrate multiple discovery tools. Government automation initiatives: Following M‑23‑02, CISA issued a strategy to migrate to automated cryptography discovery and inventory tools to support agency reporting and continuous inventory management. Open‑source and vendor tools: IBM's CBOMkit and related components generate, analyse, and visualise CBOMs; the IBM CBOM specification work was upstreamed into CycloneDX 1.6. === Data model and interchange (example) === CycloneDX provides machine‑readable encodings (JSON/XML) for CBOM content. The example below (subset) shows an application depending on a crypto library that provides the AES‑256‑GCM algorithm, and the application also depends on a leaf X.509 certificate. See the CycloneDX CBOM guide, JSON reference, and the “Implementation details” use‑case for the semantics of `dependsOn` and `provides`. == Relationship to cybersecurity supply chain initiatives == CBOMs complement SBOM‑focused supply‑chain transparency introduced by U.S. Executive Order 14028 and NTIA/NIST SBOM work. SBOMs document software components; CBOMs add detail on embedded cryptography to support risk management, policy compliance (e.g., disallowing deprecated algorithms), and PQC transition planning.
Read more →
Semantic space

Semantic spaces in the natural language domain aim to create representations of natural language that are capable of capturing meaning. The original motivation for semantic spaces stems from two core challenges of natural language: Vocabulary mismatch (the fact that the same meaning can be expressed in many ways) and ambiguity of natural language (the fact that the same term can have several meanings). The application of semantic spaces in natural language processing (NLP) aims at overcoming limitations of rule-based or model-based approaches operating on the keyword level. The main drawback with these approaches is their brittleness, and the large manual effort required to create either rule-based NLP systems or training corpora for model learning. Rule-based and machine learning based models are fixed on the keyword level and break down if the vocabulary differs from that defined in the rules or from the training material used for the statistical models. Research in semantic spaces dates back more than 20 years. In 1996, two papers were published that raised a lot of attention around the general idea of creating semantic spaces: latent semantic analysis and Hyperspace Analogue to Language. However, their adoption was limited by the large computational effort required to construct and use those semantic spaces. A breakthrough with regard to the accuracy of modelling associative relations between words (e.g. "spider-web", "lighter-cigarette", as opposed to synonymous relations such as "whale-dolphin", "astronaut-driver") was achieved by explicit semantic analysis (ESA) in 2007. ESA was a novel (non-machine learning) based approach that represented words in the form of vectors with 100,000 dimensions (where each dimension represents an Article in Wikipedia). However practical applications of the approach are limited due to the large number of required dimensions in the vectors. More recently, advances in neural network techniques in combination with other new approaches (tensors) led to a host of new recent developments: Word2vec from Google, GloVe from Stanford University, and fastText from Facebook AI Research (FAIR) labs.
Read more →
Unknown key-share attack

As defined by Blake-Wilson & Menezes (1999), an unknown key-share (UKS) attack on an authenticated key agreement (AK) or authenticated key agreement with key confirmation (AKC) protocol is an attack whereby an entity A {\displaystyle A} ends up believing she shares a key with B {\displaystyle B} , and although this is in fact the case, B {\displaystyle B} mistakenly believes the key is instead shared with an entity E ≠ A {\displaystyle E\neq A} . In other words, in a UKS, an opponent, say Eve, coerces honest parties Alice and Bob into establishing a secret key where at least one of Alice and Bob does not know that the secret key is shared with the other. For example, Eve may coerce Bob into believing he shares the key with Eve, while he actually shares the key with Alice. The “key share” with Alice is thus unknown to Bob.
Read more →
Media evaluation

Media evaluation is a discipline of the external and logical social sciences and centres on the analysis of media content, rating the exposure using a number of pre-designated criteria commonly including tonal value and presence of key messages. It is said to be one of the fastest-growing areas of mass communications research. The International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (AMEC) is the industry-appointed trade body for companies and individuals involved in research, measurement, and evaluation in editorial media coverage and related communications issues. To be a full member of AMEC, companies must be able to: a) offer comprehensive media evaluation, research, and interpretation services, b) have been in business for at least two years, and c) have a media evaluation turnover of more than £150,000 when applying. In addition, all companies abide by a strict code of ethics and must implement tight quality control procedures. These requirements guarantee that all media evaluation services provided are of the highest caliber. The Commission on Public Relations Measurement & Evaluation is a different organization that was established in 1998 under the direction of the Institute for Public Relations. The Commission's main functions are to set standards and procedures for research and measurement in public relations and to publish authoritative white papers on best practices.
Read more →