AI Data Warehouse

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

• 

  Elastic cloud storage

  An elastic cloud is a cloud computing offering that provides variable service levels based on changing needs. Elasticity is an attribute that can be applied to most cloud services. It states that the capacity and performance of any given cloud service can expand or contract according to a customer's requirements and that this can potentially be changed automatically as a consequence of some software-driven event or, at worst, can be reconfigured quickly by the customer's infrastructure management team. Elasticity has been described as one of the five main principles of cloud computing by Rosenburg and Mateos in The Cloud at Your Service - Manning 2011. == History == Cloud computing was first described by Gillet and Kapor in 1996; however, the first practical implementation was a consequence of a strategy to leverage Amazon's excess data center capacity. Amazon and other pioneers of the commercial use of this technology were primarily interested in providing a “public” cloud service, whereby they could offer customers the benefits of using the cloud, particularly the utility-based pricing model benefit. Other suppliers followed suit with a range of cloud-based models all offering elasticity as a core component, but these suppliers were only offering this service as an element of their public cloud service. Due to perceived weaknesses in security, or at least a lack of proven compliance, many organizations, particularly in the financial and public sectors, have been slow adopters of cloud technologies. These wary organizations can achieve some of the benefits of cloud computing by adopting private cloud technologies. An alternative form of the elastic cloud has been offered by vendors such as EMC and IBM, whereby the service is based around an enterprise's own infrastructure but still retains elements of elasticity and the potential to bill by consumption. == Description == Elasticity in cloud computing is the ability for the organization to adjust its storage requirements in terms of capacity and processing with respect to operational requirements. This has the following benefits: Operational Benefits - Services can be acquired quickly, meaning that the evolving requirements of the business can be addressed almost immediately, giving an organization a potential agility advantage. A properly implemented elastic system will provision/de-provision according to application demands, so if a particular business has activity spikes then the provision can be enabled to match the demand and the capacity can be re-allocated. Research and Development (R&D) Projects - R&D activities are no longer hindered by a requirement to secure a capex budget prior to a project starting. Capability can simply be provisioned from the cloud and released at the end of the exercise. Testing and Deployment - With most large-scale projects a size test needs to be performed prior to final rollout. By taking advantage of the elasticity of the cloud and creating a full-scale avatar of the proposed production system, realistic data and traffic volumes can be provisioned and released as needed. Expensive Resources Allocated - This will normally apply only in the context where a customer is applying at least some of their own servers as part of a cloud infrastructure, specifically where a business (for performance reasons) has decided to invest in solid-state storage as opposed to spinning platters. There are instances when, due to activity spikes, a less critical process may need to be moved from the high-performance resources to more traditional storage. Server Specification - When a customer has elected to own/lease hardware, they can select and specify servers that are specifically tuned to meet the likely needs of their operation (i.e., directly controlling the cost/benefit equation). Utility Based Payments - There is, of course, a key cost driver in this process, and the notion that you should pay for what you consume is acceptable for many organizations. When hardware capacity is sourced internally, organizations need to over-provision. This applies just as much to traditional outsourcing as it does to capex-related expenditure on in-house servers. Cloud Platform – At the heart of any cloud storage system is the ability to manage hyperscale object storage and a Hadoop Distributed Files System (HDFS). Elastic storage capability is particularly well suited to hyperscale and Hadoop environments, where its capability to rapidly respond to changing circumstances and priorities is essential

  Read more →
• 

  Cancer Likelihood in Plasma

  Cancer Likelihood in Plasma (CLiP) refers to a set of ensemble learning methods for integrating various genomic features useful for the noninvasive detection of early cancers from blood plasma. An application of this technique for early detection of lung cancer (Lung-CLiP) was originally described by Chabon et al. (2020) from the labs of Ash Alizadeh and Max Diehn at Stanford. This method relies on several improvements to cancer personalized profiling by deep sequencing (CAPP-Seq) for analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). The CLiP technique integrates multiple distinctive genomic features of a cancer of interest findings within a machine-learning framework for cancer detection. For example, studies have shown that the majority of somatic mutations found in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are not tumor derived, but instead reflect clonal hematopoeisis (also known as CHIP). Even though CHIP tends to target specific genes, it also involves many generally non-recurrent mutations that can be shed from leukocytes and detected in cfDNA, regardless of whether profiling patients with cancer and healthy adults. However, genuine tumor derived ctDNA mutations can be distinguished from CHIP-derived mutations. This is because unlike tumor-derived mutations, CHIP-derived mutations that are shed from leukocytes into plasma tend to occur on longer cfDNA fragments, and to lack specific mutational signatures such as those associated with tobacco smoking in lung cancer that are also found in tumor derived ctDNA molecules. CLiP integrates these features within hierarchical ensemble machine learning models that consider somatic mutations and copy number alternations, among other features. While the CLiP method is unique in relying exclusively on mutations and copy number alterations, it is related to a variety of other liquid biopsy methods being commercially developed for early cancer detection using ctDNA and proteins (e.g., CancerSEEK / DETECT-A ), cfDNA fragmentation patterns (e.g., DELFI), and DNA methylation (e.g., cfMeDIP-Seq, Grail). While the CLiP method has not yet been broadly applied for population-based cancer screening, it has been shown to distinguish discriminate early-stage lung cancers from risk-matched controls across multiple cohorts of patients enrolled across the US.

  Read more →
• 

  Anyword

  Anyword is a technology company that offers an artificial intelligence platform, using natural language processing to generate and optimize marketing text for websites, social media, email, and ads. The company also offers a complete managed service to publishers and brands to help them increase their revenue through social ads. It is used by National Geographic, Red Bull, The New York Times, BBC, Ted Baker, etc. The company has an office in New York, and Tel Aviv. == History == It was founded in 2013 — its original name was Keywee Inc. In March 2015, Anyword received $9.1 million in the Series A funding round led by a notable group of investors. In July 2016, the company was selected as an official Facebook Marketing Partner. In August 2019, Anyword was named Best Content Marketing Platform in the Digiday Technology Award winners. In November 2021, it raised $21 million in its Series B funding round.

  Read more →
• 

  Enterprise information integration

  Enterprise information integration (EII) is the ability to support a unified view of data and information for an entire organization. The goal of EII is to get a large set of heterogeneous data sources to appear to a user or system as a single, homogeneous data source. In a data virtualization application of EII, there is a process of information integration, using data abstraction to provide a unified interface (known as uniform data access) for viewing all the data within an organization, and a single set of structures and naming conventions (known as uniform information representation) to represent this data. == Overview == Data within an enterprise can be stored in heterogeneous formats, including relational databases (which themselves come in a large number of varieties), text files, XML files, spreadsheets and a variety of proprietary storage methods, each with their own indexing and data access methods. Standardized data access APIs have emerged that offer a specific set of commands to retrieve and modify data from a generic data source. Many applications exist that implement these APIs' commands across various data sources, most notably relational databases. Such APIs include ODBC, JDBC, XQJ, OLE DB, and more recently ADO.NET. There are also standard formats for representing data within a file that are very important to information integration. The best-known of these is XML, which has emerged as a standard universal representation format. There are also more specific XML "grammars" defined for specific types of data such as Geography Markup Language for expressing geographical features and Directory Service Markup Language for holding directory-style information. In addition, non-XML standard formats exist such as iCalendar for representing calendar information and vCard for business card information. Enterprise Information Integration (EII) applies data integration commercially. Despite the theoretical problems described above, the private sector shows more concern with the problems of data integration as a viable product. EII emphasizes neither correctness nor tractability, but speed and simplicity. === Uniform data access === Uniform data access means connectivity and controllability across numerous target data sources. Necessary to fields such as EII and Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), it is most often used regarding analysis of disparate data types and data sources, which must be rendered into a uniform information representation, and generally must appear homogenous to the analysis tools—when the data being analyzed is typically heterogeneous and widely varying in size, type, and original representation. === Uniform information representation === Uniform information representation allows information from several realms or disciplines to be displayed and worked with as if it came from the same realm or discipline. It takes information from a number of sources, which may have used different methodologies and metrics in their data collection, and builds a single large collection of information, where some records may be more complete than others across all fields of data Uniform information representation is particularly important in EII and Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), where different departments of a large organization may have collected information for different purposes, with different labels and units, until one department realized that data already collected by those other departments could be re-purposed for their own needs—saving the enterprise the effort and cost of re-collecting the same information. === Combining disparate data sets === Each data source is disparate and as such is not designed to support EII. Therefore, data virtualization as well as data federation depends upon accidental data commonality to support combining data and information from disparate data sets. Because of this lack of data value commonality across data sources, the return set may be inaccurate, incomplete, and impossible to validate. One solution is to recast disparate databases to integrate these databases without the need for ETL. The recast databases support commonality constraints where referential integrity may be enforced between databases. The recast databases provide designed data access paths with data value commonality across databases. === Simplicity of deployment === Even if recognized as a solution to a problem, EII as of 2009 currently takes time to apply and offers complexities in deployment. Proposed schema-less solutions include "Lean Middleware". === Handling higher-order information === Analysts experience difficulty—even with a functioning information integration system—in determining whether the sources in the database will satisfy a given application. Answering these kinds of questions about a set of repositories requires semantic information like metadata and/or ontologies. == Applications == EII products enable loose coupling between homogeneous-data consuming client applications and services and heterogeneous-data stores. Such client applications and services include Desktop Productivity Tools (spreadsheets, word processors, presentation software, etc.), development environments and frameworks (Java EE, .NET, Mono, SOAP or RESTful Web services, etc.), business intelligence (BI), business activity monitoring (BAM) software, enterprise resource planning (ERP), Customer relationship management (CRM), business process management (BPM and/or BPEL) Software, and web content management (CMS). == Data access technologies == Service Data Objects (SDO) for Java, C++ and .Net clients and any type of data source XQuery and XQuery API for Java

  Read more →
• 

  Genigraphics

  Genigraphics is a large-format printing service bureau specializing in providing poster session services to medical and scientific conferences throughout the US and Canada. The company began in 1973 as a division of General Electric. == History == Genigraphics began as a computer graphics system, developed by General Electric in the late 1960s, for NASA to use in space flight simulation. The technologies thus developed provided a foundation for the company's expansion into the commercial market. The Computed Images System & Services division (CISS, to become Genigraphics Corporation) of GE delivered the first presentation graphics system to Amoco Oil's corporate headquarters in 1973. It was named the 100 Series, and was based on DEC's PDP 11 series of mini computer systems. The first Genigraphics systems (100 Series and 100A Series) used an array of buttons, dials, knobs and joysticks, along with a built in keyboard, as the means of user interface. The PDP-11/40 computer was housed in a tall cabinet and used random access magnetic tape drives (DECtape) for storing completed presentations. The graphics generator (Forox recorder) was capable of outputting 2,000 line resolution, suitable for 35mm and 72mm film and large sheet film positive using larger cassettes for recording. 4000 and 8000 line resolution was later achieved with duplex scanning and 4x scanning by modifying to the Forox recorder's settings menu. Subsequent models (100B,C,D,D+ and D+/GVP) replaced the knobs and dials with an on screen, text based menu system, a graphics tablet and a pen. The pen/tablet combination gave way to a mouse like device in later models, and served to provide the interface with the graphics tools. User interaction with the computer for functions such as media initialization or modem to modem data transfer required a DECwriter serial terminal. In 1982, GE divested the Genigraphics division along with a host of other "non essential" business units (Genitext, Geniponics) and Genigraphics Corporation was born. Shortly after the divestiture, the headquarters of Genigraphics was moved from Liverpool, New York to Saddle Brook, New Jersey. Major success followed as the company grew exponentially over the next few years selling both systems and slide creation services. Genigraphics film recorders produced high-resolution digital images on 35mm film. The computer-generated scenes for The Last Starfighter were calculated on a Cray X-MP supercomputer and mastered with a Genigraphics film recorder. At its peak, Genigraphics Corporation employed roughly 300 people in 24 offices worldwide, with revenues upwards of $70 million annually. By the late 1980s Genigraphics saw demand for its proprietary systems dwindle and began selling the MASTERPIECE 8770 film recorder and GRAFTIME software as a peripheral for DEC Vaxes, IBM PC AT’s, and Mac NuBus machines. But the MASTERPIECE film recorder proved too expensive to sell in volume. In 1988, the company began a partnership with Microsoft to help develop the PowerPoint software. In exchange, every copy of PowerPoint included a “Send to Genigraphics” link to have files sent to a Genigraphics service bureau to be produced as 35mm slides. This partnership continued until 2001. In 1989, after three years of flat revenue, Genigraphics sold its hardware business in order to focus on its service bureau business and partnership with Microsoft via PowerPoint. In 1994, all assets of Genigraphics, including equipment, software development, in-house artwork, trademarks, and rights to the Microsoft partnership, were sold to InFocus Corporation of Wilsonville, Oregon who continued to operate under the Genigraphics brand name. The twenty-four service bureaus were consolidated to a 20,000 square foot facility next to the FedEx hub in Memphis, Tennessee. This allowed PowerPoint slide orders to be received until 10pm and delivered across the United States by the following morning. In 1995, InFocus registered www.genigraphics.com and was among the first to offer a form of ecommerce allowing 35mm slides, color prints and transparencies, printed booklets, and digital projectors to be purchased online. In 1998, then current management bought Genigraphics from InFocus and have operated it continuously ever since as Genigraphics LLC. That same year, InFocus projector rentals were added to the “Send to Genigraphics” link in PowerPoint and Genigraphics became the rental and repair center for all InFocus national accounts. It also marked Genigraphics entry into the new industry of large format printing; leveraging their knowledge of, and access to, PowerPoint programming code to develop a proprietary printer driver to output directly to an Epson 9500 wide format printer. At the time, Genigraphics was the exclusive 35mm slide vendor for all Kinko’s stores in the United States and poster printing was added to the arrangement. In 2003, Genigraphics closed their 35mm slide E6 photo lab – one of the last high-volume commercial E6 labs in the US – and expanded their large format printing capabilities. Since 2003, Genigraphics has become a major player in the poster session market, providing printing and on-site services to medical and scientific conferences throughout the US and Canada. As of February 2019, over 150,000 medical or scientific ‘ePosters’ are made available through their ResearchPosters.com archive service. === Partnership with Microsoft and development of PowerPoint === As presentations began to be created on personal computers in the late 80’s, Genigraphics sought presentation software partners in Silicon Valley who would be interested in sending files to Genigraphics via dial-up modem to be produced on 35mm slides. In 1987, Michael Beetner, Director of Marketing Planning for Genigraphics, met with Robert Gaskins, head of Microsoft's Graphics Business Unit, who was leading the development of the newly released PowerPoint software. A joint development agreement between Microsoft and Genigraphics was agreed upon and announced at Mac World 1988. According to Erica Robles-Anderson and Patrik Svensson, "It would be hard to overestimate Genigraphics’ influence on PowerPoint. PowerPoint 2.0 was designed for Genigraphics film recorders. It shipped with Genigraphics color palettes, schemes, and the distinctively Genigraphics color-gradient backgrounds. The application contained a ‘Send to Genigraphics’ menu item that wrote the presentation to floppy disk or transmitted the order directly via modem. Within three and a half months PowerPoint orders accounted for ten percent of revenue at Genigraphics service centers. PowerPoint 3.0 was even more intimately dependent upon Genigraphics. The software incorporated a collection of clip art images and symbols that had been produced by hundreds of artists at dozens of service centers across tens of thousands of presentations. Genigraphics artists designed PowerPoint 3.0 colors, templates, and sample presentations. The software even used Genigraphics (rather than Excel) chart style. Bar charts were rendered two-dimensionally with apparent thickness added to make them seemingly recede from the axes. The technique made it easier for viewers to compare bar heights and estimate values from axis ticks and labels. Pie charts were handled analogously. Microsoft paid Genigraphics to produce more than 500 clip art drawings and symbols used in Microsoft programs.” In exchange for Genigraphics development efforts, Microsoft included a “Send to Genigraphics” link in every copy of PowerPoint through the 10.0 version (2000/2001). The arrangement came to an end when Microsoft restructured as a result of anti-trust lawsuits.

  Read more →
• 

  Archival bond

  The archival bond is a concept in archival theory referring to the relationship that each archival record has with the other records produced as part of the same transaction or activity and located within the same grouping. These bonds are a core component of each individual record and are necessary for transforming a document into a record, as a document will only acquire meaning (and become a record) through its interrelationships with other records. == Description == The concept of the archival bond is primarily associated with the work of Luciana Duranti along with Heather MacNeil, as part of research into the integrity of electronic records. Duranti resumed and extended the concept of vincolo archivistico (archival bond), first expressed in 1937 by archivist Giorgio Cencetti of the Italian archival school. This bond emerges from the fact that electronic records are not physically arranged like traditional records. For traditional, analog records, their bond is implicit in their arrangement. But for electronic records, this bond must be made explicit due to the lack of a single sequential order of records in a digital environment. The archival bond was one of the core concepts of the subsequent International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems (InterPARES) project and can be found in the InterPARES glossary. As Duranti notes, the archival bond is not to be confused with the broader term "context" as context exists independently of a record, while "the archival bond is an essential part of the record, which would not exist without it."

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic transparency

  Algorithmic transparency is the principle that the factors that influence the decisions made by algorithms should be visible, or transparent, to the people who use, regulate, and are affected by systems that employ those algorithms. Although the phrase was coined in 2016 by Nicholas Diakopoulos and Michael Koliska about the role of algorithms in deciding the content of digital journalism services, the underlying principle dates back to the 1970s and the rise of automated systems for scoring consumer credit. The phrases "algorithmic transparency" and "algorithmic accountability" are sometimes used interchangeably – especially since they were coined by the same people – but they have subtly different meanings. Specifically, "algorithmic transparency" states that the inputs to the algorithm and the algorithm's use itself must be known, but they need not be fair. "Algorithmic accountability" implies that the organizations that use algorithms must be accountable for the decisions made by those algorithms, even though the decisions are being made by a machine, and not by a human being. Current research around algorithmic transparency interested in both societal effects of accessing remote services running algorithms, as well as mathematical and computer science approaches that can be used to achieve algorithmic transparency. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection studies how algorithms are used by consumers by conducting its own research on algorithmic transparency and by funding external research. In the European Union, the data protection laws that came into effect in May 2018 include a "right to explanation" of decisions made by algorithms, though it is unclear what this means. Furthermore, the European Union founded The European Center for Algorithmic Transparency (ECAT).

  Read more →
• 

  Whitehead's algorithm

  Whitehead's algorithm is a mathematical algorithm in group theory for solving the automorphic equivalence problem in the finite rank free group Fn. The algorithm is based on a classic 1936 paper of J. H. C. Whitehead. It is still unknown (except for the case n = 2) if Whitehead's algorithm has polynomial time complexity. == Statement of the problem == Let F n = F ( x 1 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle F_{n}=F(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n})} be a free group of rank n ≥ 2 {\displaystyle n\geq 2} with a free basis X = { x 1 , … , x n } {\displaystyle X=\{x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}\}} . The automorphism problem, or the automorphic equivalence problem for F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} asks, given two freely reduced words w , w ′ ∈ F n {\displaystyle w,w'\in F_{n}} whether there exists an automorphism φ ∈ Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \varphi \in \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} such that φ ( w ) = w ′ {\displaystyle \varphi (w)=w'} . Thus the automorphism problem asks, for w , w ′ ∈ F n {\displaystyle w,w'\in F_{n}} whether Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w = Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w ′ {\displaystyle \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w=\operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w'} . For w , w ′ ∈ F n {\displaystyle w,w'\in F_{n}} one has Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w = Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w ′ {\displaystyle \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w=\operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w'} if and only if Out ⁡ ( F n ) [ w ] = Out ⁡ ( F n ) [ w ′ ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Out} (F_{n})[w]=\operatorname {Out} (F_{n})[w']} , where [ w ] , [ w ′ ] {\displaystyle [w],[w']} are conjugacy classes in F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} of w , w ′ {\displaystyle w,w'} accordingly. Therefore, the automorphism problem for F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} is often formulated in terms of Out ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Out} (F_{n})} -equivalence of conjugacy classes of elements of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} . For an element w ∈ F n {\displaystyle w\in F_{n}} , | w | X {\displaystyle |w|_{X}} denotes the freely reduced length of w {\displaystyle w} with respect to X {\displaystyle X} , and ‖ w ‖ X {\displaystyle \|w\|_{X}} denotes the cyclically reduced length of w {\displaystyle w} with respect to X {\displaystyle X} . For the automorphism problem, the length of an input w {\displaystyle w} is measured as | w | X {\displaystyle |w|_{X}} or as ‖ w ‖ X {\displaystyle \|w\|_{X}} , depending on whether one views w {\displaystyle w} as an element of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} or as defining the corresponding conjugacy class [ w ] {\displaystyle [w]} in F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} . == History == The automorphism problem for F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} was algorithmically solved by J. H. C. Whitehead in a classic 1936 paper, and his solution came to be known as Whitehead's algorithm. Whitehead used a topological approach in his paper. Namely, consider the 3-manifold M n = # i = 1 n S 2 × S 1 {\displaystyle M_{n}=\#_{i=1}^{n}\mathbb {S} ^{2}\times \mathbb {S} ^{1}} , the connected sum of n {\displaystyle n} copies of S 2 × S 1 {\displaystyle \mathbb {S} ^{2}\times \mathbb {S} ^{1}} . Then π 1 ( M n ) ≅ F n {\displaystyle \pi _{1}(M_{n})\cong F_{n}} , and, moreover, up to a quotient by a finite normal subgroup isomorphic to Z 2 n {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} _{2}^{n}} , the mapping class group of M n {\displaystyle M_{n}} is equal to Out ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Out} (F_{n})} ; see. Different free bases of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} can be represented by isotopy classes of "sphere systems" in M n {\displaystyle M_{n}} , and the cyclically reduced form of an element w ∈ F n {\displaystyle w\in F_{n}} , as well as the Whitehead graph of [ w ] {\displaystyle [w]} , can be "read-off" from how a loop in general position representing [ w ] {\displaystyle [w]} intersects the spheres in the system. Whitehead moves can be represented by certain kinds of topological "swapping" moves modifying the sphere system. Subsequently, Rapaport, and later, based on her work, Higgins and Lyndon, gave a purely combinatorial and algebraic re-interpretation of Whitehead's work and of Whitehead's algorithm. The exposition of Whitehead's algorithm in the book of Lyndon and Schupp is based on this combinatorial approach. Culler and Vogtmann, in their 1986 paper that introduced the Outer space, gave a hybrid approach to Whitehead's algorithm, presented in combinatorial terms but closely following Whitehead's original ideas. == Whitehead's algorithm == Our exposition regarding Whitehead's algorithm mostly follows Ch.I.4 in the book of Lyndon and Schupp, as well as. === Overview === The automorphism group Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} has a particularly useful finite generating set W {\displaystyle {\mathcal {W}}} of Whitehead automorphisms or Whitehead moves. Given w , w ′ ∈ F n {\displaystyle w,w'\in F_{n}} the first part of Whitehead's algorithm consists of iteratively applying Whitehead moves to w , w ′ {\displaystyle w,w'} to take each of them to an "automorphically minimal" form, where the cyclically reduced length strictly decreases at each step. Once we find automorphically these minimal forms u , u ′ {\displaystyle u,u'} of w , w ′ {\displaystyle w,w'} , we check if ‖ u ‖ X = ‖ u ′ ‖ X {\displaystyle \|u\|_{X}=\|u'\|_{X}} . If ‖ u ‖ X ≠ ‖ u ′ ‖ X {\displaystyle \|u\|_{X}\neq \|u'\|_{X}} then w , w ′ {\displaystyle w,w'} are not automorphically equivalent in F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} . If ‖ u ‖ X = ‖ u ′ ‖ X {\displaystyle \|u\|_{X}=\|u'\|_{X}} , we check if there exists a finite chain of Whitehead moves taking u {\displaystyle u} to u ′ {\displaystyle u'} so that the cyclically reduced length remains constant throughout this chain. The elements w , w ′ {\displaystyle w,w'} are not automorphically equivalent in F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} if and only if such a chain exists. Whitehead's algorithm also solves the search automorphism problem for F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} . Namely, given w , w ′ ∈ F n {\displaystyle w,w'\in F_{n}} , if Whitehead's algorithm concludes that Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w = Aut ⁡ ( F n ) w ′ {\displaystyle \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w=\operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})w'} , the algorithm also outputs an automorphism φ ∈ Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \varphi \in \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} such that φ ( w ) = w ′ {\displaystyle \varphi (w)=w'} . Such an element φ ∈ Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \varphi \in \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} is produced as the composition of a chain of Whitehead moves arising from the above procedure and taking w {\displaystyle w} to w ′ {\displaystyle w'} . === Whitehead automorphisms === A Whitehead automorphism, or Whitehead move, of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} is an automorphism τ ∈ Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \tau \in \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} of one of the following two types: There is a permutation σ ∈ S n {\displaystyle \sigma \in S_{n}} of { 1 , 2 , … , n } {\displaystyle \{1,2,\dots ,n\}} such that for i = 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=1,\dots ,n} τ ( x i ) = x σ ( i ) ± 1 {\displaystyle \tau (x_{i})=x_{\sigma (i)}^{\pm 1}} Such τ {\displaystyle \tau } is called a Whitehead automorphism of the first kind. There is an element a ∈ X ± 1 {\displaystyle a\in X^{\pm 1}} , called the multiplier, such that for every x ∈ X ± 1 {\displaystyle x\in X^{\pm 1}} τ ( x ) ∈ { x , x a , a − 1 x , a − 1 x a } . {\displaystyle \tau (x)\in \{x,xa,a^{-1}x,a^{-1}xa\}.} Such τ {\displaystyle \tau } is called a Whitehead automorphism of the second kind. Since τ {\displaystyle \tau } is an automorphism of F n {\displaystyle F_{n}} , it follows that τ ( a ) = a {\displaystyle \tau (a)=a} in this case. Often, for a Whitehead automorphism τ ∈ Aut ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \tau \in \operatorname {Aut} (F_{n})} , the corresponding outer automorphism in Out ⁡ ( F n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Out} (F_{n})} is also called a Whitehead automorphism or a Whitehead move. ==== Examples ==== Let F 4 = F ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 ) {\displaystyle F_{4}=F(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},x_{4})} . Let τ : F 4 → F 4 {\displaystyle \tau :F_{4}\to F_{4}} be a homomorphism such that τ ( x 1 ) = x 2 x 1 , τ ( x 2 ) = x 2 , τ ( x 3 ) = x 2 x 3 x 2 − 1 , τ ( x 4 ) = x 4 {\displaystyle \tau (x_{1})=x_{2}x_{1},\quad \tau (x_{2})=x_{2},\quad \tau (x_{3})=x_{2}x_{3}x_{2}^{-1},\quad \tau (x_{4})=x_{4}} Then τ {\displaystyle \tau } is actually an automorphism of F 4 {\displaystyle F_{4}} , and, moreover, τ {\displaystyle \tau } is a Whitehead automorphism of the second kind, with the multiplier a = x 2 − 1 {\displaystyle a=x_{2}^{-1}} . Let τ ′ : F 4 → F 4 {\displaystyle \tau ':F_{4}\to F_{4}} be a homomorphism such that τ ′ ( x 1 ) = x 1 , τ ′ ( x 2 ) = x 1 − 1 x 2 x 1 , τ ′ ( x 3 ) = x 1 − 1 x 3 x 1 , τ ′ ( x 4 ) = x 1 − 1 x 4 x 1 {\displaystyle \tau '(x_{1})=x_{1},\quad \tau '(x_{2})=x_{1}^{-1}x_{2}x_{1},\quad \tau '(x_{3})=x_{1}^{-1}x_{3}x_{1},\quad \tau '(x_{4})=x_{1}^{-1}x_{4}x_{1}} Then τ ′ {\displaystyle \tau '} is actually an inner automorphism of F 4 {\displaystyle F_{4}} given by conjugation by x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} , and, moreover, τ ′ {\displaystyle \

  Read more →
• 

  Managed private cloud

  Managed private cloud (also known as "hosted private cloud" or "single-tenant SaaS") refers to a principle in software architecture where a single instance of the software runs on a server, serves a single client organization (tenant), and is managed by a third party. The third-party provider is responsible for providing the hardware for the server and also for preliminary maintenance. This is in contrast to multitenancy, where multiple client organizations share a single server, or an on-premises deployment, where the client organization hosts its software instance. Managed private clouds also fall under the larger umbrella of cloud computing. == Adoption == The need for private clouds arose due to enterprises requiring a dedicated service and infrastructure for their cloud computing needs, such as for business-critical operations, improved security, and better control over their resources. Managed private cloud adoption is a popular choice among organizations. It has been on the rise due to enterprises requiring a dedicated cloud environment and preferring to avoid having to deal with management, maintenance, or future upgrade costs for the associated infrastructure and services. Such operational costs are unavoidable in on-premises private cloud data centers. == Advantages and challenges of managed private cloud == A managed private cloud cuts down on upkeep costs by outsourcing infrastructure management and maintenance to the managed cloud provider. It is easier to integrate an organization's existing software, services, and applications into a dedicated cloud hosting infrastructure which can be customized to the client's needs instead of a public cloud platform, whose hardware or infrastructure/software platform cannot be individualized to each client. Customers who choose a managed private cloud deployment usually choose them because of their desire for efficient cloud deployment, but also have the need for service customization or integration only available in a single-tenant environment. This chart shows the key benefits of the different types of deployments, and shows the overlap between these cloud solutions. This chart shows key drawbacks. Since deployments are done in a single-tenant environment, it is usually cost-prohibitive for small and medium-sized businesses. While server upkeep and maintenance are handled by the service provider, including network management and security, the client is charged for all such services. It is up to the potential client to determine if a managed private cloud solution aligns with their business objectives and budget. While the service provider maintains the upkeep of servers, network, and platform infrastructure, sensitive data is typically not stored on managed private clouds as it may leave business-critical information prone to breaches via third-party attacks on the cloud service provider. Common customizations and integrations include: Active Directory Single Sign-on Learning Management Systems Video Teleconferencing == Deployment strategies and service providers == Software companies have taken a variety of strategies in the Managed Private Cloud realm. Some software organizations have provided managed private cloud options internally, such as Microsoft. Companies that offer an on-premises deployment option, by definition, enable third-party companies to market Managed Private Cloud solutions. A few managed private cloud service providers are: Adobe Connect: Adobe Connect may be purchased for on-premises deployment, multi-tenant hosted deployment, managed private cloud as ACMS, or managed by third-party managed private cloud provider ConnectSolutions. Rackspace CenturyLink Microsoft licenses for Lync, SharePoint and Exchange may be purchased for on-premises deployment, a multi-tenant hosted deployment via Office 365, or managed by third-party cloud hosting from Azaleos, ConnectSolutions and others.

  Read more →
• 

  Block swap algorithms

  In computer algorithms, block swap algorithms swap two regions of elements of an array. It is simple to swap two non-overlapping regions of an array of equal size. However, it is not as simple to swap two contiguous regions of an array of unequal sizes (algorithms that perform such swapping are called rotation algorithms). A few well-known algorithms can accomplish this: Bentley's juggling (also known as the dolphin algorithm), Gries-Mills rotation, triple reversal algorithm, conjoined triple reversal algorithm (also known as the trinity rotation) and Successive rotation. == Triple reversal algorithm == The triple reversal algorithm is the simplest to explain, using rotations. A rotation is an in-place reversal of array elements. This method swaps two elements of an array from outside in within a range. The rotation works for an even or odd number of array elements. The reversal algorithm uses three in-place rotations to accomplish an in-place block swap: Rotate region A Rotate region B Rotate region AB Where A and B are adjacent regions of an array that together form the region AB. Gries-Mills and reversal algorithms perform better than Bentley's juggling, because of their cache-friendly memory access pattern behavior. The triple reversal algorithm parallelizes well, because rotations can be split into sub-regions, which can be rotated independently of others.

  Read more →
• 

  ARMA International

  ARMA International (formerly the Association of Records Managers and Administrators) is an American not-for-profit professional association for information professionals – primarily information management (including records management) and information governance, and related industry practitioners and vendors. The association provides educational opportunities and publications covering aspects of information management broadly. == History == The Association was founded in 1955. In 1975, the Association of Records Executives and Administrators (AREA) and the American Records Management Association merged to form ARMA International. The headquarters for ARMA International is located in Overland Park, Kansas. == Operations == ARMA International services professionals in the United States, Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Its members include records managers, attorneys, information technology professionals, consultants, and archivists involved in various aspects of managing records and information assets. ARMA hosts an annual conference with the goal of bringing together record and information management professionals from around the world – In 2023, ARMA hosted conferences in both the United States and Canada. Topics addressed in the 120+ educational sessions include advanced technology, creating information structure, ediscovery and information law, information management fundamentals, information project management, and reducing organizational information risk. The expo features exhibitors displaying records and information technologies, products, and services.

  Read more →
• 

  Golden record (informatics)

  In informatics, a golden record is the valid version of a data element (record) in a single source of truth system. It may refer to a database, specific table or data field, or any unit of information used. A golden copy is a consolidated data set, and is supposed to provide a single source of truth and a "well-defined version of all the data entities in an organizational ecosystem". Other names sometimes used include master source or master version. The term has been used in conjunction with data quality, master data management, and similar topics. (Different technical solutions exist, see master data management). == Master data == In master data management (MDM), the golden copy refers to the master data (master version) of the reference data which works as an authoritative source for the "truth" for all applications in a given IT landscape.

  Read more →
• 

  Frameserver

  A frameserver is any program that acts as a media source in the process called frameserving, which transfers digital video data from one computer program to another without intermediate files. The program that receives the data – the frameclient – could be any type of video application. The process is controlled by the frameclient: the frameclient requests audio/video frames and the frameserver serves them. The client can request frames in any order, allowing it to pause or jump to an arbitrary frame, just as a media player does with a file on disk. The client is most commonly a media encoder, a non-linear editing system, or a media player. == Frameservers == AviSynth VirtualDub VapourSynth Debugmode FrameServer

  Read more →
• 

  Enterprise architecture

  Enterprise architecture (EA) is a business function concerned with the structures and behaviours of a business, especially business roles and processes that create and use business data. The international definition according to the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations is "a well-defined practice for conducting enterprise analysis, design, planning, and implementation, using a comprehensive approach at all times, for the successful development and execution of strategy. Enterprise architecture applies architecture principles and practices to guide organizations through the business, information, process, and technology changes necessary to execute their strategies. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate, and achieve these changes." The United States Federal Government is an example of an organization that practices EA, in this case with its Capital Planning and Investment Control processes. Companies such as Independence Blue Cross, Intel, Volkswagen AG, and InterContinental Hotels Group also use EA to improve their business architectures as well as to improve business performance and productivity. Additionally, the Federal Enterprise Architecture's reference guide aids federal agencies in the development of their architectures. == Introduction == As a discipline, EA "proactively and holistically lead[s] enterprise responses to disruptive forces by identifying and analyzing the execution of change" towards organizational goals. EA gives business and IT leaders recommendations for policy adjustments and provides best strategies to support and enable business development and change within the information systems the business depends on. EA provides a guide for decision making towards these objectives. The National Computing Centre's EA best practice guidance states that an EA typically "takes the form of a comprehensive set of cohesive models that describe the structure and functions of an enterprise. The individual models in an EA are arranged in a logical manner that provides an ever-increasing level of detail about the enterprise." Important players within EA include enterprise architects and solutions architects. Enterprise architects are at the top level of the architect hierarchy, meaning they have more responsibilities than solutions architects. While solutions architects focus on their own relevant solutions, enterprise architects focus on solutions for and the impact on the whole organization. Enterprise architects oversee many solution architects and business functions. As practitioners of EA, enterprise architects support an organization's strategic vision by acting to align people, process, and technology decisions with actionable goals and objectives that result in quantifiable improvements toward achieving that vision. The practice of EA "analyzes areas of common activity within or between organizations, where information and other resources are exchanged to guide future states from an integrated viewpoint of strategy, business, and technology." === Definitions === The term enterprise can be defined as an organizational unit, organization, or collection of organizations that share a set of common goals and collaborate to provide specific products or services to customers. In that sense, the term enterprise covers various types of organizations, regardless of their size, ownership model, operational model, or geographical distribution. It includes those organizations' complete sociotechnical system, including people, information, processes, and technologies. Enterprise as a sociotechnical system defines the scope of EA. The term architecture refers to fundamental concepts or properties of a system in its environment; and embodied in its elements, relationships, and in the principles of its design and evolution. A methodology for developing and using architecture to guide the transformation of a business from a baseline state to a target state, sometimes through several transition states, is usually known as an enterprise architecture framework. A framework provides a structured collection of processes, techniques, artifact descriptions, reference models, and guidance for the production and use of an enterprise-specific architecture description. Open-source tools supporting EA practice, such as the Essential Project, have also been evaluated for suitability in academic and commercial training contexts. Paramount to changing the EA is the identification of a sponsor. Their mission, vision, strategy, and the governance framework define all roles, responsibilities, and relationships involved in the anticipated transformation. Changes considered by enterprise architects typically include innovations in the structure or processes of an organization; innovations in the use of information systems or technologies; the integration and/or standardization of business processes; and improvement of the quality and timeliness of business information. According to the standard ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010, the product used to describe the architecture of a system is called an architectural description. In practice, an architectural description contains a variety of lists, tables, and diagrams. These are models known as views. In the case of EA, these models describe the logical business functions or capabilities, business processes, human roles and actors, the physical organization structure, data flows and data stores, business applications and platform applications, hardware, and communications infrastructure. The first use of the term "enterprise architecture" is often incorrectly attributed to John Zachman's 1987 A framework for information systems architecture. The first publication to use it was instead a National Institute of Standards (NIST) Special Publication on the challenges of information system integration. The NIST article describes EA as consisting of several levels. Business unit architecture is the top level and might be a total corporate entity or a sub-unit. It establishes for the whole organization necessary frameworks for "satisfying both internal information needs" as well as the needs of external entities, which include cooperating organizations, customers, and federal agencies. The lower levels of the EA that provide information to higher levels are more attentive to detail on behalf of their superiors. In addition to this structure, business unit architecture establishes standards, policies, and procedures that either enhance or stymie the organization's mission. The main difference between these two definitions is that Zachman's concept was the creation of individual information systems optimized for business, while NIST's described the management of all information systems within a business unit. The definitions in both publications, however, agreed that due to the "increasing size and complexity of the [i]mplementations of [i]nformation systems... logical construct[s] (or architecture) for defining and controlling the interfaces and... [i]ntegration of all the components of a system" is necessary. Zachman in particular urged for a "strategic planning methodology." == Overview == === Schools of thought === Within the field of enterprise architecture, there are three overarching schools: Enterprise IT Design, Enterprise Integrating, and Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption. Which school one subscribes to will impact how they see the EA's purpose and scope, as well as the means of achieving it, the skills needed to conduct it, and the locus of responsibility for conducting it. Under Enterprise IT Design, the main purpose of EA is to guide the process of planning and designing an enterprise's IT/IS capabilities to meet the desired organizational objectives, often by greater alignment between IT/IS and business concerns. Architecture proposals and decisions are limited to the IT/IS aspects of the enterprise and other aspects service only as inputs. The Enterprise Integrating school believes that the purpose of EA is to create a greater coherency between the various concerns of an enterprise (HR, IT, Operations, etc.), including the link between strategy formulation and execution. Architecture proposals and decisions here encompass all aspects of the enterprise. The Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption school states that the purpose of EA is to foster and maintain the learning capabilities of enterprises so they may be sustainable. Consequently, a great deal of emphasis is put on improving the capabilities of the enterprise to improve itself, to innovate, and to coevolve with its environment. Typically, proposals and decisions encompass both the enterprise and its environment. === Benefits, challenges, and criticisms === The benefits of EA are achieved through its direct and indirect contributions to organizational goals. Notable benefits include support in the areas related to design and re-design of the organizational structures during mergers, acquisitions, or

  Read more →
• 

  Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier

  An Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier (ALEI) is the identifier assigned by a government jurisdiction authorized by statute or decree to create a legal entity and to maintain the authoritative registries of legal entities. ALEIs are used within supply chain data, ERP applications and master data management systems to support accurate and consistent identification of entities in digital records, supply chains, and government databases. ALEIs are described in the international standard ISO 8000-116, which outlines a structured format that makes the locally unique identifier into a globally unique one and ensures global interoperability and data quality. == Structure == An ALEI is composed of three main components: a prefix that identifies the jurisdiction and register, a subdomain element (optional), and the local registration number of the entity. For example, the identifier "US-DE.BER:3031657" refers to an entity registered in the Delaware Business Entity Register in the United States. The standardization of this structure is governed by ISO 8000-116, which is designed to ensure each ALEI is globally unique and resolvable. == Comparison with other identifiers == ALEIs differ from proxy identifiers such as the DUNS number, NCAGE code, or the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) managed by GLEIF. While proxy identifiers can be issued by institutions that do not create legal entities, ALEIs are created and maintained by public bodies with the authority to form and register legal entities. This authoritative origin makes ALEIs particularly suitable for applications involving legal traceability, government regulation, and international transparency efforts. == Usage == ALEIs are increasingly utilized to identify legal entities in public and private datasets. The identifiers support supply chain accuracy, regulatory compliance, and the unification of master data. The first practical implementation of an ALEI was the International Business Registration Number (IBRN), developed to provide globally unique identifiers for registered business entities. IBRNs are issued by authorized government jurisdictions and are used to verify entities across borders, particularly in the context of trade facilitation and data exchange systems. For instance, business directories and registration systems in U.S. states like Connecticut provide structured registration documents that can be used to verify the ALEIs they issue. The use of ALEIs has been recommended by international organizations such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and Open ownership to improve beneficial ownership registries. == Policy and regulation == ALEIs have been referenced in policy consultations such as those related to the U.S. Financial Data Transparency Act. Federal institutions including the Federal Reserve and FDIC have examined the potential for ALEIs to unify entity identification across regulatory databases.

  Read more →