AI Data Trainer

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

• 

  Conversational user interface

  A conversational user interface (CUI) is a user interface for computers that emulates a conversation with a human. Historically, computers have relied on text-based user interfaces and graphical user interfaces (GUIs) (such as the user pressing a "back" button) to translate the user's desired action into commands the computer understands. While an effective mechanism of completing computing actions, there is a learning curve for the user associated with GUI. Instead, CUIs provide opportunity for the user to communicate with the computer in their natural language rather than in a syntax specific commands.

  Read more →
• 

  ESign (India)

  Aadhaar eSign is an online electronic signature service in India to facilitate an Aadhaar holder to digitally sign a document. The signature service is facilitated by authenticating the Aadhaar holder via the Aadhaar-based e-KYC (electronic Know Your Customer) service. To eSign a document, one has to have an Aadhaar card and a mobile number registered with Aadhaar. With these two things, an Indian citizen can sign a document remotely without being physically present. == Procedure == The notification issued by Government of India in this regard stipulates the following procedure for the e-authentication using Aadhaar e-KYC services. Authentication of an electronic record by e-authentication technique, which shall be done by the applicable use of e-authentication, hash function, and asymmetric cryptosystem techniques, leading to issuance of digital signature certificate by Certifying Authority, a trusted third party service by subscriber's key pair generation, storing of the key pairs on hardware security module and creation of digital signature provided that the trusted third party shall be offered by the certifying authority (the trusted third party shall send application form and certificate signing request to the Certifying Authority for issuing a digital signature certificate to the subscriber), issuance of digital signature certificate by Certifying Authority shall be based on e-authentication, particulars given in the prescribed format, digitally signed verified information from Aadhaar e-KYC services and electronic consent of digital signature certificate applicant, the manner and requirements for e-authentication shall be as issued by the Controller from time to time, the security procedure for creating the subscriber's key pair shall be in accordance with the e-authentication guidelines issued by the Controller, the standards referred to in rule 6 of the Information Technology (Certifying Authorities) Rules, 2000 shall be complied with, in so far as they relate to the certification function of public key of Digital Signature Certificate applicant, and the manner in which information is authenticated by means of digital signature shall comply with the standards specified in rule 6 of the Information Technology (Certifying Authorities) Rules, 2000 in so far as they relate to the creation, storage and transmission of Digital Signature. == eSign Service Providers == Organisations and individuals seeking to obtain the eSigning Service can utilize the services of various service providers. There are empanelled service providers with whom organisations can register as an Application Service Prover after submitting the requisite documents, getting UAT access, building the application around the service and going through an IT Audit by an CERT-IN empanelled auditor. However, the process of registering as an Application Service Provider is cumbersome, and requires huge investments of time, money and resources in complying with the regulations and building a suitable application. Most organisations prefer using services of plug-n-play gateway providers who take the responsibility of complying with the regulations, hence simplifying the process for the market.

  Read more →
• 

  Kerckhoffs's principle

  Kerckhoffs's principle (also called Kerckhoffs's desideratum, assumption, axiom, doctrine or law) of cryptography was stated by the Dutch cryptographer Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century. The principle holds that a cryptosystem should be secure, even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge. This concept is widely embraced by cryptographers, in contrast to security through obscurity, which is not. Kerckhoffs's principle was phrased by the American mathematician Claude Shannon as "the enemy knows the system", i.e., "one ought to design systems under the assumption that the enemy will immediately gain full familiarity with them". In that form, it is called Shannon's maxim. Another formulation by American researcher and professor Steven M. Bellovin is: In other words—design your system assuming that your opponents know it in detail. (A former official at NSA's National Computer Security Center told me that the standard assumption there was that serial number 1 of any new device was delivered to the Kremlin.) == Origins == The invention of telegraphy radically changed military communications and increased the number of messages that needed to be protected from the enemy dramatically, leading to the development of field ciphers which had to be easy to use without large confidential codebooks prone to capture on the battlefield. It was this environment which led to the development of Kerckhoffs's requirements. Auguste Kerckhoffs was a professor of German language at Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC) in Paris. In early 1883, Kerckhoffs's article, La Cryptographie Militaire, was published in two parts in the Journal of Military Science, in which he stated six design rules for military ciphers. Translated from French, they are: The system must be practically, if not mathematically, indecipherable; It should not require secrecy, and it should not be a problem if it falls into enemy hands; It must be possible to communicate and remember the key without using written notes, and correspondents must be able to change or modify it at will; It must be applicable to telegraph communications; It must be portable, and should not require several persons to handle or operate; Lastly, given the circumstances in which it is to be used, the system must be easy to use and should not be stressful to use or require its users to know and comply with a long list of rules. Some are no longer relevant given the ability of computers to perform complex encryption. The second rule, now known as Kerckhoffs's principle, is still critically important. == Explanation of the principle == Kerckhoffs viewed cryptography as a rival to, and a better alternative than, steganographic encoding, which was common in the nineteenth century for hiding the meaning of military messages. One problem with encoding schemes is that they rely on humanly-held secrets such as "dictionaries" which disclose for example, the secret meaning of words. Steganographic-like dictionaries, once revealed, permanently compromise a corresponding encoding system. Another problem is that the risk of exposure increases as the number of users holding the secrets increases. Nineteenth century cryptography, in contrast, used simple tables which provided for the transposition of alphanumeric characters, generally given row-column intersections which could be modified by keys which were generally short, numeric, and could be committed to human memory. The system was considered "indecipherable" because tables and keys do not convey meaning by themselves. Secret messages can be compromised only if a matching set of table, key, and message falls into enemy hands in a relevant time frame. Kerckhoffs viewed tactical messages as only having a few hours of relevance. Systems are not necessarily compromised, because their components (i.e. alphanumeric character tables and keys) can be easily changed. === Advantage of secret keys === Using secure cryptography is supposed to replace the difficult problem of keeping messages secure with a much more manageable one, keeping relatively small keys secure. A system that requires long-term secrecy for something as large and complex as the whole design of a cryptographic system obviously cannot achieve that goal. It only replaces one hard problem with another. However, if a system is secure even when the enemy knows everything except the key, then all that is needed is to manage keeping the keys secret. There are a large number of ways the internal details of a widely used system could be discovered. The most obvious is that someone could bribe, blackmail, or otherwise threaten staff or customers into explaining the system. In war, for example, one side will probably capture some equipment and people from the other side. Each side will also use spies to gather information. If a method involves software, someone could do memory dumps or run the software under the control of a debugger in order to understand the method. If hardware is being used, someone could buy or steal some of the hardware and build whatever programs or gadgets needed to test it. Hardware can also be dismantled so that the chip details can be examined under the microscope. === Maintaining security === A generalization some make from Kerckhoffs's principle is: "The fewer and simpler the secrets that one must keep to ensure system security, the easier it is to maintain system security." Bruce Schneier ties it in with a belief that all security systems must be designed to fail as gracefully as possible: Kerckhoffs's principle applies beyond codes and ciphers to security systems in general: every secret creates a potential failure point. Secrecy, in other words, is a prime cause of brittleness—and therefore something likely to make a system prone to catastrophic collapse. Conversely, openness provides ductility. Any security system depends crucially on keeping some things secret. However, Kerckhoffs's principle points out that the things kept secret ought to be those least costly to change if inadvertently disclosed. For example, a cryptographic algorithm may be implemented by hardware and software that is widely distributed among users. If security depends on keeping that secret, then disclosure leads to major logistic difficulties in developing, testing, and distributing implementations of a new algorithm – it is "brittle". On the other hand, if keeping the algorithm secret is not important, but only the keys used with the algorithm must be secret, then disclosure of the keys simply requires the simpler, less costly process of generating and distributing new keys. == Applications == In accordance with Kerckhoffs's principle, the majority of civilian cryptography makes use of publicly known algorithms. By contrast, ciphers used to protect classified government or military information are often kept secret (see Type 1 encryption). However, it should not be assumed that government/military ciphers must be kept secret to maintain security. It is possible that they are intended to be as cryptographically sound as public algorithms, and the decision to keep them secret is in keeping with a layered security posture. == Security through obscurity == It is moderately common for companies to keep the inner workings of a system secret. Some argue this "security by obscurity" makes the product safer and less vulnerable to attack. A counter-argument is that keeping the innards secret may improve security in the short term, but in the long run, only systems that have been published and analyzed should be trusted. Steven Bellovin and Randy Bush commented: Security Through Obscurity Considered Dangerous Hiding security vulnerabilities in algorithms, software, and/or hardware decreases the likelihood they will be repaired and increases the likelihood that they can and will be exploited. Discouraging or outlawing discussion of weaknesses and vulnerabilities is extremely dangerous and deleterious to the security of computer systems, the network, and its citizens. Open Discussion Encourages Better Security The long history of cryptography and cryptoanalysis has shown time and time again that open discussion and analysis of algorithms exposes weaknesses not thought of by the original authors, and thereby leads to better and more secure algorithms. As Kerckhoffs noted about cipher systems in 1883 [Kerc83], "Il faut qu'il n'exige pas le secret, et qu'il puisse sans inconvénient tomber entre les mains de l'ennemi." (Roughly, "the system must not require secrecy and must be able to be stolen by the enemy without causing trouble.")

  Read more →
• 

  White-box cryptography

  In cryptography, the white-box model refers to an extreme attack scenario, in which an adversary has full unrestricted access to a cryptographic implementation, most commonly of a block cipher such as the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). A variety of security goals may be posed (see the section below), the most fundamental being "unbreakability", requiring that any (bounded) attacker should not be able to extract the secret key hardcoded in the implementation, while at the same time the implementation must be fully functional. In contrast, the black-box model only provides an oracle access to the analyzed cryptographic primitive (in the form of encryption and/or decryption queries). There is also a model in-between, the so-called gray-box model, which corresponds to additional information leakage from the implementation, more commonly referred to as side-channel leakage. White-box cryptography is a practice and study of techniques for designing and attacking white-box implementations. It has many applications, including digital rights management (DRM), pay television, protection of cryptographic keys in the presence of malware, mobile payments and cryptocurrency wallets. Examples of DRM systems employing white-box implementations include CSS and Widevine. White-box cryptography is closely related to the more general notions of obfuscation, in particular, to Black-box obfuscation, proven to be impossible, and to Indistinguishability obfuscation, constructed recently under well-founded assumptions but so far being infeasible to implement in practice. As of January 2023, there are no publicly known unbroken white-box designs of standard symmetric encryption schemes. On the other hand, there exist many unbroken white-box implementations of dedicated block ciphers designed specifically to achieve incompressibility (see § Security goals). == Security goals == Depending on the application, different security goals may be required from a white-box implementation. Specifically, for symmetric-key algorithms the following are distinguished: Unbreakability is the most fundamental goal requiring that a bounded attacker should not be able to recover the secret key embedded in the white-box implementation. Without this requirement, all other security goals are unreachable since a successful attacker can simply use a reference implementation of the encryption scheme together with the extracted key. One-wayness requires that a white-box implementation of an encryption scheme can not be used by a bounded attacker to decrypt ciphertexts. This requirement essentially turns a symmetric encryption scheme into a public-key encryption scheme, where the white-box implementation plays the role of the public key associated to the embedded secret key. This idea was proposed already in the famous work of Diffie and Hellman in 1976 as a potential public-key encryption candidate. Code lifting security is an informal requirement on the context, in which the white-box program is being executed. It demands that an attacker can not extract a functional copy of the program. This goal is particularly relevant in the DRM setting. Code obfuscation techniques are often used to achieve this goal. A commonly used technique is to compose the white-box implementation with so-called external encodings. These are lightweight secret encodings that modify the function computed by the white-box part of an application. It is required that their effect is canceled in other parts of the application in an obscure way, using code obfuscation techniques. Alternatively, the canceling counterparts can be applied on a remote server. Incompressibility requires that an attacker can not significantly compress a given white-box implementation. This can be seen as a way to achieve code lifting security (see above), since exfiltrating a large program from a constrained device (for example, an embedded or a mobile device) can be time-consuming and may be easy to detect by a firewall. Examples of incompressible designs include SPACE cipher, SPNbox, WhiteKey and WhiteBlock. These ciphers use large lookup tables that can be pseudorandomly generated from a secret master key. Although this makes the recovery of the master key hard, the lookup tables themselves play the role of an equivalent secret key. Thus, unbreakability is achieved only partially. Traceability (Traitor tracing) requires that each distributed white-box implementation contains a digital watermark allowing identification of the guilty user in case the white-box program is being leaked and distributed publicly. == History == The white-box model with initial attempts of white-box DES and AES implementations were first proposed by Chow, Eisen, Johnson and van Oorshot in 2003. The designs were based on representing the cipher as a network of lookup tables and obfuscating the tables by composing them with small (4- or 8-bit) random encodings. Such protection satisfied a property that each single obfuscated table individually does not contain any information about the secret key. Therefore, a potential attacker has to combine several tables in their analysis. The first two schemes were broken in 2004 by Billet, Gilbert, and Ech-Chatbi using structural cryptanalysis. The attack was subsequently called "the BGE attack". The numerous consequent design attempts (2005-2022) were quickly broken by practical dedicated attacks. In 2016, Bos, Hubain, Michiels and Teuwen showed that an adaptation of standard side-channel power analysis attacks can be used to efficiently and fully automatically break most existing white-box designs. This result created a new research direction about generic attacks (correlation-based, algebraic, fault injection) and protections against them. == Competitions == Four editions of the WhibOx contest were held in 2017, 2019, 2021 and 2024 respectively. These competitions invited white-box designers both from academia and industry to submit their implementation in the form of (possibly obfuscated) C code. At the same time, everyone could attempt to attack these programs and recover the embedded secret key. Each of these competitions lasted for about 4-5 months. WhibOx 2017 / CHES 2017 Capture the Flag Challenge targeted the standard AES block cipher. Among 94 submitted implementations, all were broken during the competition, with the strongest one staying unbroken for 28 days. WhibOx 2019 / CHES 2019 Capture the Flag Challenge again targeted the AES block cipher. Among 27 submitted implementations, 3 programs stayed unbroken throughout the competition, but were broken after 51 days since the publication. WhibOx 2021 / CHES 2021 Capture the Flag Challenge changed the target to ECDSA, a digital signature scheme based on elliptic curves. Among 97 submitted implementations, all were broken within at most 2 days. WhibOx 2024 / CHES 2024 Capture the Flag Challenge again targeted ECDSA. Among 47 submitted implementations, all were broken during the competition, with the strongest one staying unbroken for almost 5 days.

  Read more →
• 

  Directional cubic convolution interpolation

  Directional cubic convolution interpolation (DCCI) is an edge-directed image scaling algorithm created by Dengwen Zhou and Xiaoliu Shen. By taking into account the edges in an image, this scaling algorithm reduces artifacts common to other image scaling algorithms. For example, staircase artifacts on diagonal lines and curves are eliminated. The algorithm resizes an image to 2x its original dimensions, minus 1.

  Read more →
• 

  BitFunnel

  BitFunnel is the search engine indexing algorithm and a set of components used in the Bing search engine, which were made open source in 2016. BitFunnel uses bit-sliced signatures instead of an inverted index in an attempt to reduce operations cost. == History == Progress on the implementation of BitFunnel was made public in early 2016, with the expectation that there would be a usable implementation later that year. In September 2016, the source code was made available via GitHub. A paper discussing the BitFunnel algorithm and implementation was released as through the Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval of the Association for Computing Machinery in 2017 and won the Best Paper Award. == Components == BitFunnel consists of three major components: BitFunnel – the text search/retrieval system itself WorkBench – a tool for preparing text for use in BitFunnel NativeJIT – a software component that takes expressions that use C data structures and transforms them into highly optimized assembly code == Algorithm == === Initial problem and solution overview === The BitFunnel paper describes the "matching problem", which occurs when an algorithm must identify documents through the usage of keywords. The goal of the problem is to identify a set of matches given a corpus to search and a query of keyword terms to match against. This problem is commonly solved through inverted indexes, where each searchable item is maintained with a map of keywords. In contrast, BitFunnel represents each searchable item through a signature. A signature is a sequence of bits which describe a Bloom filter of the searchable terms in a given searchable item. The bloom filter is constructed through hashing through several bit positions. === Theoretical implementation of bit-string signatures === The signature of a document (D) can be described as the logical-or of its term signatures: S D → = ⋃ t ∈ D S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}=\bigcup _{t\in D}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Similarly, a query for a document (Q) can be defined as a union: S Q → = ⋃ t ∈ Q S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}=\bigcup _{t\in Q}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Additionally, a document D is a member of the set M' when the following condition is satisfied: S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}} This knowledge is then combined to produce a formula where M' is identified by documents which match the query signature: M ′ = { D ∈ C ∣ S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → } {\displaystyle M'=\left\{D\in C\mid {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\right\}} These steps and their proofs are discussed in the 2017 paper. === Pseudocode for bit-string signatures === This algorithm is described in the 2017 paper. M ′ = ∅ foreach D ∈ C do if S D → ∩ S Q → = S Q → then M ′ = M ′ ∪ { D } endif endfor {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{l}M'=\emptyset \\{\texttt {foreach}}\ D\in C\ {\texttt {do}}\\\qquad {\texttt {if}}\ {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\ {\texttt {then}}\\\qquad \qquad M'=M'\cup \{D\}\\\qquad {\texttt {endif}}\\{\texttt {endfor}}\end{array}}}

  Read more →
• 

  SFINKS

  Sfinks (Polish for "Sphynx") was also the initial name of the Janusz A. Zajdel Award In cryptography, SFINKS is a stream cypher algorithm developed by An Braeken, Joseph Lano, Nele Mentens, Bart Preneel, and Ingrid Verbauwhede. It includes a message authentication code. It has been submitted to the eSTREAM Project of the eCRYPT network. In 2005, Nicolas T. Courtois noted that, while the cipher is elegant and secure against some simple algebraic attacks, it is vulnerable to more elaborate known attacks.

  Read more →
• 

  Factorization of polynomials over finite fields

  In mathematics and computer algebra the factorization of a polynomial consists of decomposing it into a product of irreducible factors. This decomposition is theoretically possible and is unique for polynomials with coefficients in any field, but rather strong restrictions on the field of the coefficients are needed to allow the computation of the factorization by means of an algorithm. In practice, algorithms have been designed only for polynomials with coefficients in a finite field, in the field of rationals or in a finitely generated field extension of one of them. All factorization algorithms, including the case of multivariate polynomials over the rational numbers, reduce the problem to this case; see polynomial factorization. It is also used for various applications of finite fields, such as coding theory (cyclic redundancy codes and BCH codes), cryptography (public key cryptography by the means of elliptic curves), and computational number theory. As the reduction of the factorization of multivariate polynomials to that of univariate polynomials does not have any specificity in the case of coefficients in a finite field, only polynomials with one variable are considered in this article. == Background == === Finite field === The theory of finite fields, whose origins can be traced back to the works of Gauss and Galois, has played a part in various branches of mathematics. Due to the applicability of the concept in other topics of mathematics and sciences like computer science there has been a resurgence of interest in finite fields and this is partly due to important applications in coding theory and cryptography. Applications of finite fields introduce some of these developments in cryptography, computer algebra and coding theory. A finite field or Galois field is a field with a finite order (number of elements). The order of a finite field is always a prime or a power of prime. For each prime power q = pr, there exists exactly one finite field with q elements, up to isomorphism. This field is denoted GF(q) or Fq. If p is prime, GF(p) is the prime field of order p; it is the field of residue classes modulo p, and its p elements are denoted 0, 1, ..., p−1. Thus a = b in GF(p) means the same as a ≡ b (mod p). === Irreducible polynomials === Let F be a finite field. As for general fields, a non-constant polynomial f in F[x] is said to be irreducible over F if it is not the product of two polynomials of positive degree. A polynomial of positive degree that is not irreducible over F is called reducible over F. Irreducible polynomials allow us to construct the finite fields of non-prime order. In fact, for a prime power q, let Fq be the finite field with q elements, unique up to isomorphism. A polynomial f of degree n greater than one, which is irreducible over Fq, defines a field extension of degree n which is isomorphic to the field with qn elements: the elements of this extension are the polynomials of degree lower than n; addition, subtraction and multiplication by an element of Fq are those of the polynomials; the product of two elements is the remainder of the division by f of their product as polynomials; the inverse of an element may be computed by the extended GCD algorithm (see Arithmetic of algebraic extensions). It follows that, to compute in a finite field of non prime order, one needs to generate an irreducible polynomial. For this, the common method is to take a polynomial at random and test it for irreducibility. For sake of efficiency of the multiplication in the field, it is usual to search for polynomials of the shape xn + ax + b. Irreducible polynomials over finite fields are also useful for pseudorandom number generators using feedback shift registers and discrete logarithm over F2n. The number of irreducible monic polynomials of degree n over Fq is the number of aperiodic necklaces, given by Moreau's necklace-counting function Mq(n). The closely related necklace function Nq(n) counts monic polynomials of degree n which are primary (a power of an irreducible); or alternatively irreducible polynomials of all degrees d which divide n. === Example === The polynomial P = x4 + 1 is irreducible over Q but not over any finite field. On any field extension of F2, P = (x + 1)4. On every other finite field, at least one of −1, 2 and −2 is a square, because the product of two non-squares is a square and so we have If − 1 = a 2 , {\displaystyle -1=a^{2},} then P = ( x 2 + a ) ( x 2 − a ) . {\displaystyle P=(x^{2}+a)(x^{2}-a).} If 2 = b 2 , {\displaystyle 2=b^{2},} then P = ( x 2 + b x + 1 ) ( x 2 − b x + 1 ) . {\displaystyle P=(x^{2}+bx+1)(x^{2}-bx+1).} If − 2 = c 2 , {\displaystyle -2=c^{2},} then P = ( x 2 + c x − 1 ) ( x 2 − c x − 1 ) . {\displaystyle P=(x^{2}+cx-1)(x^{2}-cx-1).} === Complexity === Polynomial factoring algorithms use basic polynomial operations such as products, divisions, gcd, powers of one polynomial modulo another, etc. A multiplication of two polynomials of degree at most n can be done in O(n2) operations in Fq using "classical" arithmetic, or in O(nlog(n) log(log(n)) ) operations in Fq using "fast" arithmetic. A Euclidean division (division with remainder) can be performed within the same time bounds. The cost of a polynomial greatest common divisor between two polynomials of degree at most n can be taken as O(n2) operations in Fq using classical methods, or as O(nlog2(n) log(log(n)) ) operations in Fq using fast methods. For polynomials h, g of degree at most n, the exponentiation hq mod g can be done with O(log(q)) polynomial products, using exponentiation by squaring method, that is O(n2log(q)) operations in Fq using classical methods, or O(nlog(q)log(n) log(log(n))) operations in Fq using fast methods. In the algorithms that follow, the complexities are expressed in terms of number of arithmetic operations in Fq, using classical algorithms for the arithmetic of polynomials. == Factoring algorithms == Many algorithms for factoring polynomials over finite fields include the following three stages: Square-free factorization Distinct-degree factorization Equal-degree factorization An important exception is Berlekamp's algorithm, which combines stages 2 and 3. === Berlekamp's algorithm === Berlekamp's algorithm is historically important as being the first factorization algorithm which works well in practice. However, it contains a loop on the elements of the ground field, which implies that it is practicable only over small finite fields. For a fixed ground field, its time complexity is polynomial, but, for general ground fields, the complexity is exponential in the size of the ground field. === Square-free factorization === The algorithm determines a square-free factorization for polynomials whose coefficients come from the finite field Fq of order q = pm with p a prime. This algorithm firstly determines the derivative and then computes the gcd of the polynomial and its derivative. If it is not one then the gcd is again divided into the original polynomial, provided that the derivative is not zero (a case that exists for non-constant polynomials defined over finite fields). This algorithm uses the fact that, if the derivative of a polynomial is zero, then it is a polynomial in xp, which is, if the coefficients belong to Fp, the pth power of the polynomial obtained by substituting x by x1/p. If the coefficients do not belong to Fp, the pth root of a polynomial with zero derivative is obtained by the same substitution on x, completed by applying the inverse of the Frobenius automorphism to the coefficients. This algorithm works also over a field of characteristic zero, with the only difference that it never enters in the blocks of instructions where pth roots are computed. However, in this case, Yun's algorithm is much more efficient because it computes the greatest common divisors of polynomials of lower degrees. A consequence is that, when factoring a polynomial over the integers, the algorithm which follows is not used: one first computes the square-free factorization over the integers, and to factor the resulting polynomials, one chooses a p such that they remain square-free modulo p. Algorithm: SFF (Square-Free Factorization) Input: A monic polynomial f in Fq[x] where q = pm Output: Square-free factorization of f R ← 1 # Make w be the product (without multiplicity) of all factors of f that have # multiplicity not divisible by p c ← gcd(f, f′) w ← f/c # Step 1: Identify all factors in w i ← 1 while w ≠ 1 do y ← gcd(w, c) fac ← w / y R ← R · faci w ← y; c ← c / y; i ← i + 1 end while # c is now the product (with multiplicity) of the remaining factors of f # Step 2: Identify all remaining factors using recursion # Note that these are the factors of f that have multiplicity divisible by p if c ≠ 1 then c ← c1/p R ← R·SFF(c)p end if Output(R) The idea is to identify the product of all irreducible factors of f with the same multiplicity. This is done in two steps. The first step uses the formal d

  Read more →
• 

  Standard test image

  A standard test image is a digital image file used across different institutions to test image processing and image compression algorithms. By using the same standard test images, different labs are able to compare results, both visually and quantitatively. The images are in many cases chosen to represent natural or typical images that a class of processing techniques would need to deal with. Other test images are chosen because they present a range of challenges to image reconstruction algorithms, such as the reproduction of fine detail and textures, sharp transitions and edges, and uniform regions. == Historical origins == Test images as transmission system calibration material probably date back to the original Paris to Lyon pantelegraph link. Analogue fax equipment (and photographic equipment for the printing trade) were the largest user groups of the standardized image for calibration technology until the coming of television and digital image transmission systems. == Common test image resolutions == The standard resolution of the images is usually 512×512 or 720×576. Most of these images are available as TIFF files from the University of Southern California's Signal and Image Processing Institute. Kodak has released 768×512 images, available as PNGs, that was originally on Photo CD with higher resolution, that are widely used for comparing image compression techniques.

  Read more →
• 

  BitFunnel

  BitFunnel is the search engine indexing algorithm and a set of components used in the Bing search engine, which were made open source in 2016. BitFunnel uses bit-sliced signatures instead of an inverted index in an attempt to reduce operations cost. == History == Progress on the implementation of BitFunnel was made public in early 2016, with the expectation that there would be a usable implementation later that year. In September 2016, the source code was made available via GitHub. A paper discussing the BitFunnel algorithm and implementation was released as through the Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval of the Association for Computing Machinery in 2017 and won the Best Paper Award. == Components == BitFunnel consists of three major components: BitFunnel – the text search/retrieval system itself WorkBench – a tool for preparing text for use in BitFunnel NativeJIT – a software component that takes expressions that use C data structures and transforms them into highly optimized assembly code == Algorithm == === Initial problem and solution overview === The BitFunnel paper describes the "matching problem", which occurs when an algorithm must identify documents through the usage of keywords. The goal of the problem is to identify a set of matches given a corpus to search and a query of keyword terms to match against. This problem is commonly solved through inverted indexes, where each searchable item is maintained with a map of keywords. In contrast, BitFunnel represents each searchable item through a signature. A signature is a sequence of bits which describe a Bloom filter of the searchable terms in a given searchable item. The bloom filter is constructed through hashing through several bit positions. === Theoretical implementation of bit-string signatures === The signature of a document (D) can be described as the logical-or of its term signatures: S D → = ⋃ t ∈ D S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}=\bigcup _{t\in D}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Similarly, a query for a document (Q) can be defined as a union: S Q → = ⋃ t ∈ Q S t → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}=\bigcup _{t\in Q}{\overrightarrow {S_{t}}}} Additionally, a document D is a member of the set M' when the following condition is satisfied: S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → {\displaystyle {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}} This knowledge is then combined to produce a formula where M' is identified by documents which match the query signature: M ′ = { D ∈ C ∣ S Q → ∩ S D → = S Q → } {\displaystyle M'=\left\{D\in C\mid {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\right\}} These steps and their proofs are discussed in the 2017 paper. === Pseudocode for bit-string signatures === This algorithm is described in the 2017 paper. M ′ = ∅ foreach D ∈ C do if S D → ∩ S Q → = S Q → then M ′ = M ′ ∪ { D } endif endfor {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{l}M'=\emptyset \\{\texttt {foreach}}\ D\in C\ {\texttt {do}}\\\qquad {\texttt {if}}\ {\overrightarrow {S_{D}}}\cap {\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}={\overrightarrow {S_{Q}}}\ {\texttt {then}}\\\qquad \qquad M'=M'\cup \{D\}\\\qquad {\texttt {endif}}\\{\texttt {endfor}}\end{array}}}

  Read more →
• 

  Content format

  A content format is an encoded format for converting a specific type of data to displayable information. Content formats are used in recording and transmission to prepare data for observation or interpretation. This includes both analog and digitized content. Content formats may be recorded and read by either natural or manufactured tools and mechanisms. In addition to converting data to information, a content format may include the encryption and/or scrambling of that information. Multiple content formats may be contained within a single section of a storage medium (e.g. track, disk sector, computer file, document, page, column) or transmitted via a single channel (e.g. wire, carrier wave) of a transmission medium. With multimedia, multiple tracks containing multiple content formats are presented simultaneously. 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 (e.g. spectrogram, pictogram). Observable data is often known as raw data, or raw content. 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. The following are examples of some common content formats and content format categories (covering: sensory experience, model, and language used for encoding information):

  Read more →
• 

  Influencer

  An influencer is an individual who has the capacity to shape the attitudes, behavior, or decisions of others through authority, knowledge, position, or the nature of the relationship with the audience. The term is used in various fields such as media, business, politics, religion, and communication, referring to influencers such as social media influencers, podcasters, public speakers, religious influencers, writers, and newsletter writers etc who have dedicated followings in various areas. One writer defines influencers as "a range of third parties who exercise influence over the organization and its potential customers." Another writer defines an influencer as a "third party who significantly shapes the customer's purchasing decision but may never be accountable for it." According to another writer, influencers are "well-connected, create an impact, have active minds, and are trendsetters". Just because a person has many followers does not necessarily mean they have much influence over those people. In contemporary usage, the term frequently refers to a social media influencer, (also known as an online influencer or simply influencer) a person who builds a grassroots online presence through engaging content such as photos, videos, and updates. This is done by using direct audience interaction to establish authenticity, expertise, and appeal, and by standing apart from traditional celebrities by growing their platform through social media rather than pre-existing fame. The modern referent of the term is commonly a paid role in which a business entity pays for the social media influence-for-hire activity to promote its products and services, known as influencer marketing. A 1% increase in spending on influencer marketing can lead to a 0.5% increase in audience engagement. As such, an influencer effectively acts as a modern salesperson or a marketer. Types of influencers include fashion influencer, travel influencer, and virtual influencer, and they involve content creators and streamers. Some influencers are associated primarily with specific social media apps such as TikTok, Instagram, or Pinterest; many influencers are also considered internet celebrities. As of 2023, Instagram is the social media platform businesses spend the most advertising money towards marketing with influencers. However, influencers can have an impact on any social media network. == History == === Origins === The word influencer in its general sense of a person or thing that exerts influence, is attested in historical sources at least since the 17th century. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) gives 1664 as the earliest example of usage and cites a sentence from Henry More's A Modest Enquiry into the Mystery of Iniquity: "The head and influencer of the whole Church". The origins of online influencing can be traced back to the emergence of digital blogs and platforms in the early 2000s. Nevertheless, recent studies demonstrate that Instagram, an application with more than one billion users, harbors the majority of the influencer demographic. These individuals are sometimes referred to as "Instagrammers" or "Instafamous". A crucial aspect of influencing is their association with sponsors. The 2015 debut of Vamp, a company that links influencers with sponsorships, transformed the landscape of influencing. There is much debate about whether social media influencers can be considered celebrities, as their path to fame is often less traditional and arguably easier. Melody Nouri addressed the differences between the two types in her article "The Power of Influence: Traditional Celebrities vs Social Media Influencer". Nouri asserts that social media platforms have a greater negative impact on young, impressionable audiences in comparison with traditional media such as magazines, billboards, advertisements, and tabloids featuring celebrities. Online, it is thought to be simpler to manipulate an image and lifestyle in such a way that viewers are more susceptible to believing it. One theory considers the former American First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) to be the "original media influencer." While she achieved celebrity in her role as First Lady, she built a global personal brand as a wise, informative, trustworthy American woman. Her voice was her own, unrestricted by political advisors and powerful men, and with it, Roosevelt exerted unprecedented social and cultural influence in radio, print, public speaking, film, and television until she died. In one notable example, it may have been Roosevelt's television support of John F. Kennedy which nudged his "hairline victory" during the 1960 Presidential campaign. In another example, David Ogilvy paid Roosevelt more than a quarter of a million dollars in today's currency to make a TV commercial for Good Luck margarine (1959), in which Roosevelt also managed to mention world hunger. As a content creator, she wrote My Day, a popular daily newspaper column that ran nationwide for twenty-six years. Like a social media post, My Day covered all aspects of her life, and in it Roosevelt often recommended movies, books, and products that she admired. Roosevelt also had a hand in designing all three of her public affairs television shows. Unlike contemporary influencers, she was less motivated by a pay-to-play situation than by a desire to educate and inspire; but she did use her influence to benefit the entertainment industry careers of her children, and she welcomed the revenue that her influence bought, most of which was donated to charity. === 2000s === The early 2000s showed corporate endeavors to leverage the internet for influence, with some companies participating in forums for promotions or providing bloggers with complimentary products in return for favorable reviews. A few of these practices were viewed as unethical for taking advantage of the labor of young individuals without providing remuneration. In 2004, The Blogstar Network was established by Ted Murphy of MindComet. Bloggers were encouraged to join an email list and receive remunerated offers from corporations in exchange for creating specific posts. For instance, bloggers were compensated for writing reviews of fast-food meals on their blogs. Blogstar is widely regarded as the first influencer marketing network. Murphy succeeded Blogstar with PayPerPost, which was introduced in 2006. This platform compensated significant posters on prominent forums and social media platforms for every post made about a corporate product. Payment rates were determined by the influencer's status. Though very popular, PayPerPost, received a great deal of criticism as these influencers were not required to disclose their involvement with PayPerPost as traditional journalism would have. With the success of PayPerPost, the public became aware that there was a drive for corporate interests to influence what some people were posting to these sites. The platform also incentivized other firms to establish comparable programs. Despite concerns, marketing networks with influencers continued to grow throughout the 2000s and into the 2010s. The influencer marketing industry was worth as much as $8 billion in 2019, according to estimates from Business Insider Intelligence, which are based on Mediakix data. Evan Asano, the Former CEO and founder of the agency Mediakix, previously spoke with Business Insider and said he believed influencer marketing on Instagram would continue to grow despite likes being hidden. === 2010s === By the 2010s, the term "influencer" described digital content creators with a large following, distinctive brand persona, and a patterned relationship with commercial sponsors. By this period, influencer marketing had become a widely researched field globally, with systematic reviews drawing on hundreds of studies that documented the growing role of authenticity, audience engagement, and parasocial relationships in shaping how consumers responded to influencer content across different markets. During this period, influencer culture also developed through distinct channels outside Western markets. In South Korea, the global spread of Korean pop culture, also called K-Pop, through platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter gave rise to what scholars have called 'Hallyu 2.0' or the 'New Korean Wave', where fans throughout Southeast Asia, North America, Latin America, and Europe shared, subtitled, and redistributed Korean music and film content on a large scale. This helped Korean entertainers to build substantial followings internationally. Consumers often mistakenly view celebrities as reliable, leading to trust and confidence in the products being promoted. A 2001 study from Rutgers University discovered that individuals were using "internet forums as influential sources of consumer information." The study proposes that consumers preferred internet forums and social media when making purchasing decisions over conventional advertising and print sources. An in

  Read more →
• 

  Artifact (app)

  Artifact was a personalized social news aggregator app that uses recommender systems to suggest articles. Launched in January 2023 by Nokto, Inc., a company founded by co-founders of Instagram Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger, the app is available for iOS and Android. The app's name is a portmanteau of the words "articles", "artificial intelligence", and "fact". The app shut down in January 2024 as a result of low interest. == History == Nokto, Inc. was established on March 3, 2022, as a foreign stock company in California, with its headquarters in San Francisco. The company's main product, Artifact, is the first new product launched by Krieger and Systrom since their 2018 resignation from Instagram after conflicts with parent company Meta, which acquired Instagram in 2012. Artifact launched on January 31, 2023, after the team had been working on it for over a year, offering the option to sign up for a waiting list for its private beta, which grew to about 160,000 people, and then launching in open beta on February 22, 2023. With a team of seven employees in San Francisco, the app was free throughout its lifetime, with the founders explaining at the time that different business models - such as advertising or subscription fees - could be explored in the future. In January 2024, cofounder Kevin Systrom announced that the app would be shutting down after concluding that "the market opportunity isn’t big enough to warrant continued investment in this way." In April 2024, it was announced Artifact had been acquired by Yahoo, who intended to use the service's technology in an upgraded Yahoo! News app. == Features == Frequently described as "TikTok for text" and a competitor to Twitter, Artifact was a news aggregator that used machine learning to make personalized recommendations based on topics, news sources, and authors that the reader is interested in. In addition to reading articles, the app offered the ability to like articles, leave comments, or listen to an audio version of an article read by AI-generated voices, including a simulation of the voices of Snoop Dogg or Gwyneth Paltrow. AI also would rewrite clickbait headlines that users flagged. Artifact later expanded to a social network where users could post links, images and text to their profile, which could be liked or commented on by other users. Similar to other social news websites like Reddit, reader accounts had profiles with reputation scores.

  Read more →
• 

  Out-of-band control

  Out-of-band control is a method used by network protocols for sending control information (commands, logins, or session signals) separately from the main data, improving reliability and preventing interference. File Transfer Protocol (FTP) employs an out-of-band approach, using one connection for control commands, like logging in or requesting files, and a separate connection for transferring the files themselves.

  Read more →
• 

  Localhost

  In computer networking, localhost is a hostname that refers to the current computer used to access it. The name localhost is reserved for loopback purposes. It is used to access the network services that are running on the host via the loopback network interface. Using the loopback interface bypasses any local network interface hardware. == Loopback == The local loopback mechanism may be used to run a network service on a host without requiring a physical network interface, or without making the service accessible from the networks the computer may be connected to. For example, a locally installed website may be accessed from a Web browser by the URL http://localhost to display its home page. IPv4 network standards reserve the entire address block 127.0.0.0/8 (more than 16 million addresses) for loopback purposes. That means any packet sent to any of those addresses is looped back. The address 127.0.0.1 is the standard address for IPv4 loopback traffic; the rest are not supported by all operating systems. However, they can be used to set up multiple server applications on the host, all listening on the same port number. In the IPv6 addressing architecture there is only a single address assigned for loopback: ::1. The standard precludes the assignment of that address to any physical interface, as well as its use as the source or destination address in any packet sent to remote hosts. == Name resolution == The name localhost normally resolves to the IPv4 loopback address 127.0.0.1, and to the IPv6 loopback address ::1. This resolution is normally configured by the following lines in the operating system's hosts file: 127.0.0.1 localhost ::1 localhost The name may also be resolved by Domain Name System (DNS) servers, but there are special considerations governing the use of this name: An IPv4 or IPv6 address query for the name localhost must always resolve to the respective loopback address. Applications may resolve the name to a loopback address themselves, or pass it to the local name resolver mechanisms. When a name resolver receives an address (A or AAAA) query for localhost, it should return the appropriate loopback addresses, and negative responses for any other requested record types. Queries for localhost should not be sent to caching name servers. To avoid burdening the Domain Name System root servers with traffic, caching name servers should never request name server records for localhost, or forward resolution to authoritative name servers. When authoritative name servers receive queries for 'localhost' in spite of the provisions mentioned above, they should resolve them appropriately. In addition to the mapping of localhost to the loopback addresses (127.0.0.1 and ::1), localhost may also be mapped to other IPv4 (loopback) addresses and it is also possible to assign other, or additional, names to any loopback address. The mapping of localhost to addresses other than the designated loopback address range in the hosts file or in DNS is not guaranteed to have the desired effect, as applications may map the name internally. In the Domain Name System, the name .localhost is reserved as a top-level domain name, originally set aside to avoid confusion with the hostname localhost. Domain name registrars are precluded from delegating domain names in the top-level .localhost domain. == Historical notes == In 1981, the block 127.0.0.0/8 got a 'reserved' status, as not to assign it as a general purpose class A IP network. This block was officially assigned for loopback purposes in 1986. Its purpose as a Special Use IPv4 Address block was confirmed in 1994,, 2002, 2010,, and last in 2013. From the outset, in 1995, the single IPv6 loopback address ::1 was defined. Its purpose and definition was unchanged in 1998,, 2003,, and up to the current definition, in 2006. == Packet processing == The processing of any packet sent to a loopback address, is implemented in the link layer of the TCP/IP stack. Such packets are never passed to any network interface controller (NIC) or hardware device driver and must not appear outside of a computing system, or be routed by any router. This permits software testing and local services, even in the absence of any hardware network interfaces. Looped-back packets are distinguished from any other packets traversing the TCP/IP stack only by the special IP address they were addressed to. Thus, the services that ultimately receive them respond according to the specified destination. For example, an HTTP service could route packets addressed to 127.0.0.99:80 and 127.0.0.100:80 to different Web servers, or to a single server that returns different web pages. To simplify such testing, the hosts file may be configured to provide appropriate names for each address. Packets received on a non-loopback interface with a loopback source or destination address must be dropped. Such packets are sometimes referred to as Martian packets. As with any other bogus packets, they may be malicious and any problems they might cause can be avoided by applying bogon filtering. == Special cases == The releases of the MySQL database differentiate between the use of the hostname localhost and the use of the addresses 127.0.0.1 and ::1. When using localhost as the destination in a client connector interface of an application, the MySQL application programming interface connects to the database using a Unix domain socket, while a TCP connection via the loopback interface requires the direct use of the explicit address. One notable exception to the use of the 127.0.0.0/8 addresses is their use in Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) traceroute error detection, in which their property of not being routable provides a convenient means to avoid delivery of faulty packets to end users.

  Read more →