AI Detector Huggingface

AI Detector Huggingface — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Inferential theory of learning

Inferential Theory of Learning (ITL) is an area of machine learning which describes inferential processes performed by learning agents. ITL has been continuously developed by Ryszard S. Michalski, starting in the 1980s. The first known publication of ITL was in 1983. In the ITL learning process is viewed as a search (inference) through hypotheses space guided by a specific goal. The results of learning need to be stored. Stored information will later be used by the learner for future inferences. Inferences are split into multiple categories including conclusive, deduction, and induction. In order for an inference to be considered complete it was required that all categories must be taken into account. This is how the ITL varies from other machine learning theories like Computational Learning Theory and Statistical Learning Theory; which both use singular forms of inference. == Usage == The most relevant published usage of ITL was in scientific journal published in 2012 and used ITL as a way to describe how agent-based learning works. According to the journal "The Inferential Theory of Learning (ITL) provides an elegant way of describing learning processes by agents".
Read more →
Isolation forest

Isolation forest is an unsupervised learning algorithm for anomaly detection that works on the principle of isolating anomalies, instead of the most common techniques of profiling normal points. In statistics, an anomaly (a.k.a. outlier) is an observation or event that deviates so much from other events to arouse suspicion it was generated by a different mean. For example, the graph in Fig.1 represents ingress traffic to a web server, expressed as the number of requests in 3-hours intervals, for a period of one month. It is quite evident by simply looking at the picture that some points (marked with a red circle) are unusually high, to the point of inducing suspect that the web server might have been under attack at that time. On the other hand, the flat segment indicated by the red arrow also seems unusual and might possibly be a sign that the server was down during that time period. Anomalies in a big dataset may follow very complicated patterns, which are difficult to detect "by eye" in the great majority of cases. This is the reason why the field of anomaly detection is well suited for the application of machine learning techniques. The most common techniques employed for anomaly detection are based on the construction of a profile of what is "normal": anomalies are reported as those instances in the dataset that do not conform to the normal profile. Isolation Forest uses a different approach: instead of trying to build a model of normal instances, it explicitly isolates anomalous points in the dataset. The main advantage of this approach is the possibility of exploiting sampling techniques to an extent that is not allowed to the profile-based methods, creating a very fast algorithm with a low memory demand. == History == The Isolation Forest (iForest) algorithm was initially proposed by Fei Tony Liu, Kai Ming Ting and Zhi-Hua Zhou in 2008. The authors took advantage of two quantitative properties of anomalous data points in a sample, that is: they are the minority consisting of fewer instances and they have attribute-values that are very different from those of normal instances Since anomalies are typically few and very different from the other points in the sample, they must be easier to "isolate" compared to normal points. On the basis of this principle, Isolation Forest builds an ensemble of "Isolation Trees" (iTrees) for the data set and marks as anomalies the points that have short average path lengths on the iTrees. In a later paper, published in 2012 the same authors described a set of experiments to prove that iForest: has a low linear time complexity and a small memory requirement is able to deal with high dimensional data with irrelevant attributes can be trained with or without anomalies in the training set can provide detection results with different levels of granularity without re-training In 2013 Zhiguo Ding and Minrui Fei proposed a framework based on iForest to resolve the problem of detecting anomalies in streaming data. More application of iForest to streaming data are described in papers by Swee Chuan Tan et al., G. A. Susto et al. and Yu Weng et al. One of the main problems of the application of iForest to anomaly detection was not with the model itself, but rather in the way the "anomaly score" was computed. This problem was highlighted by Sahand Hariri, Matias Carrasco Kind and Robert J. Brunner in a 2018 paper, wherein they proposed an improved iForest model named Extended Isolation Forest (EIF). In the same paper the authors describe the improvements made to the original model and how they are able to enhance the consistency and reliability of the anomaly score produced for a given data point. == Algorithm == At the basis of the Isolation Forest algorithm there is the tendency of anomalous instances in a dataset to be easier to separate from the rest of the sample (isolate), compared to normal points. In order to isolate a data point the algorithm recursively generates partitions on the sample by randomly selecting an attribute and then randomly selecting a split value for the attribute, between the minimum and maximum values allowed for that attribute. An example of random partitioning in a 2D dataset of normally distributed points is given in Fig. 2 for a non-anomalous point and Fig. 3 for a point that's more likely to be an anomaly. It is apparent from the pictures how anomalies require fewer random partitions to be isolated, compared to normal points. From a mathematical point of view, recursive partitioning can be represented by a tree structure named Isolation Tree, while the number of partitions required to isolate a point can be interpreted as the length of the path, within the tree, to reach a terminating node starting from the root. For example, the path length of point xi in Fig. 2 is greater than the path length of xj in Fig. 3. More formally, let X = { x1, ..., xn } be a set of d-dimensional points and X' ⊂ X a subset of X. An Isolation Tree (iTree) is defined as a data structure with the following properties: for each node T in the Tree, T is either an external-node with no child, or an internal-node with one "test" and exactly two daughter nodes (Tl, Tr) a test at node T consists of an attribute q and a split value p such that the test q < p determines the traversal of a data point to either Tl or Tr. In order to build an iTree, the algorithm recursively divides X' by randomly selecting an attribute q and a split value p, until either (i) the node has only one instance or (ii) all data at the node have the same values. When the iTree is fully grown, each point in X is isolated at one of the external nodes. Intuitively, the anomalous points are those (easier to isolate, hence) with the smaller path length in the tree, where the path length h(xi) of point x i ∈ X {\displaystyle x_{i}\in X} is defined as the number of edges xi traverses from the root node to get to an external node. A probabilistic explanation of iTree is provided in the iForest original paper. == Properties of Isolation Forest == Sub-sampling: since iForest does not need to isolate all of normal instances, it can frequently ignore the big majority of the training sample. As a consequence, iForest works very well when the sampling size is kept small, a property that is in contrast with the great majority of existing methods, where large sampling size is usually desirable. Swamping: when normal instances are too close to anomalies, the number of partitions required to separate anomalies increases, a phenomena known as swamping, which makes it more difficult for iForest to discriminate between anomalies and normal points. One of the main reasons for swamping is the presence of too many data for the purpose of anomaly detection, which implies one possible solution to the problem is sub-sampling. Since iForest respond very well to sub-sampling in terms of performance, the reduction of the number of points in the sample is also a good way to reduce the effect of swamping. Masking: when the number of anomalies is high it is possible that some of those aggregate in a dense and large cluster, making it more difficult to separate the single anomalies and, in turn, to detect such points as anomalous. Similarly to swamping, this phenomena (known as "masking") is also more likely when the number of points in the sample is big, and can be alleviated through sub-sampling. High Dimensional Data: one of the main limitation to standard, distance-based methods is their inefficiency in dealing with high dimensional datasets:. The main reason for that is, in a high dimensional space every point is equally sparse, so using a distance-based measure of separation is pretty ineffective. Unfortunately, high-dimensional data also affects the detection performance of iForest, but the performance can be vastly improved by adding a features selection test like Kurtosis to reduce the dimensionality of the sample space. Normal Instances Only: iForest performs well even if the training set does not contain any anomalous point, the reason being that iForest describes data distributions in such a way that high values of the path length h(xi) correspond to the presence of data points. As a consequence, the presence of anomalies is pretty irrelevant to iForest's detection performance. == Anomaly Detection with Isolation Forest == Anomaly detection with Isolation Forest is a process composed of two main stages: in the first stage, a training dataset is used to build iTrees as described in previous sections. in the second stage, each instance in test set is passed through the iTrees build in the previous stage, and a proper "anomaly score" is assigned to the instance using the algorithm described below Once all the instances in the test set have been assigned an anomaly score, it is possible to mark as "anomaly" any point whose score is greater than a predefined threshold, which depends on the domain the analysis is being applied to. === Anomaly Score === Th
Read more →
How to Choose an AI Text-to-image Tool

Curious about the best AI text-to-image tool? An AI text-to-image tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-image tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Read more →
Muller automaton

In automata theory, a Muller automaton is a type of an ω-automaton. The acceptance condition separates a Muller automaton from other ω-automata. The Muller automaton is defined using a Muller acceptance condition, i.e. the set of all states visited infinitely often must be an element of the acceptance set. Both deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata recognize the ω-regular languages. They are named after David E. Muller, an American mathematician and computer scientist, who invented them in 1963. == Formal definition == Formally, a deterministic Muller-automaton is a tuple A = (Q,Σ,δ,q0,F) that consists of the following information: Q is a finite set. The elements of Q are called the states of A. Σ is a finite set called the alphabet of A. δ: Q × Σ → Q is a function, called the transition function of A. q0 is an element of Q, called the initial state. F is a set of sets of states. Formally, F ⊆ P(Q) where P(Q) is powerset of Q. F defines the acceptance condition. A accepts exactly those runs in which the set of infinitely often occurring states is an element of F In a non-deterministic Muller automaton, the transition function δ is replaced with a transition relation Δ that returns a set of states and the initial state q0 is replaced by a set of initial states Q0. Generally, 'Muller automaton' refers to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. For more comprehensive formalisation look at ω-automaton. == Equivalence with other ω-automata == The Muller automata are equally expressive as parity automata, Rabin automata, Streett automata, and non-deterministic Büchi automata, to mention some, and strictly more expressive than the deterministic Büchi automata. The equivalence of the above automata and non-deterministic Muller automata can be shown very easily as the accepting conditions of these automata can be emulated using the acceptance condition of Muller automata and vice versa. McNaughton's theorem demonstrates the equivalence of non-deterministic Büchi automaton and deterministic Muller automaton. Thus, deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata are equivalent in terms of the languages they can accept. == Transformation to non-deterministic Muller automata == Following is a list of automata constructions that each transforms a type of ω-automata to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. From Büchi automata If B is the set of final states in a Büchi automaton with the set of states Q, we can construct a Muller automaton with same set of states, transition function and initial state with the Muller accepting condition as F = { X | X ∈ P(Q) ∧ X ∩ B ≠ ∅}. From Rabin automata/parity automata Similarly, the Rabin conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } and F ∩ F j ≠ ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}\neq \emptyset } , for some j. Note that this covers the case of parity automata too, as the parity acceptance condition can be expressed as a Rabin acceptance condition easily. From Streett automata The Streett conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ F j = ∅ ⟹ F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}=\emptyset \implies F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } , for all j. == Transformation to deterministic Muller automata == From Büchi automaton McNaughton's theorem provides a procedure to transform any non-deterministic Büchi automaton into a deterministic Muller automaton.
Read more →
Albert One

Albert One is an artificial intelligence chatbot created by Robby Garner and designed to mimic the way humans make conversations using a multi-faceted approach in natural language programming. == History == In both 1998 and 1999, Albert One won the Loebner Prize Contest, a competition between chatterbots. Some parts of Albert were deployed on the internet beginning in 1995, to gather information about what kinds of things people would say to a chatterbot. Another element of Albert One involved the building of a large database of human statements, and associated replies. This portion of the project was tested at the 1994-1997 Loebner Prize contests. Albert was the first of Robby Garner's multifaceted bots. The Albert One system was composed of several subsystems. Among those were a version of Eliza, the therapist, Elivs, another Eliza-like bot, and several other helper applications working together in a hierarchical arrangement. As a continuation of the stimulus-response library, various other database queries and assertions were tested to arrive at each of Albert's responses. Robby went on to develop networked examples of this kind of hierarchical "glue" at The Turing Hub.
Read more →
Marilyn Walker

Marilyn A. Walker is an American computer scientist. She is professor of computer science and head of the Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). Her research includes work on computational models of dialogue interaction and conversational agents, analysis of affect, sarcasm and other social phenomena in social media dialogue, acquiring causal knowledge from text, conversational summarization, interactive story and narrative generation, and statistical methods for training the dialogue manager and the language generation engine for dialogue systems. == Biography == Walker received an M.S. in Computer Science from Stanford University in 1987, and a Ph.D. in Computer and Information Science and an M.A in linguistics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1993. Walker was awarded a Royal Society Wolfson Research Fellowship at the University of Sheffield from 2003 to 2009. She was inducted as a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) in December 2016 for "fundamental contributions to statistical methods for dialog optimization, to centering theory, and to expressive generation for dialog". She served as the general chair of the 2018 North American Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL-2018) conference. Walker pioneered the use of statistical methods for dialog optimization at AT&T Bell Labs Research where she conducted some of the first experiments on reinforcement learning for optimizing dialogue systems. Her research on Centering Theory is taught in standard textbooks on NLP. She also pioneered the use of statistical NLP methods for Natural Language Generation with the development of the first statistical sentence planner for dialogue systems in 2001. She is well known for her work with François Mairesse on recognizing Big Five personality from text as well as using statistical methods for stylistic Natural Language Generation to express a particular Big Five personality type. An extension of this work learns how to manifest the linguistic style of a particular character in a film. She has published over 300 papers and is the holder of 10 U.S. patents. Her work on the evaluation of dialogue systems conducted at AT&T Bell Labs Research (PARADISE: A framework for evaluating spoken dialogue agents) is a classic, has been cited more than 1100 times. At UCSC, her lab focuses on computational modeling of dialogue and user-generated content in social media such as weblogs, including spoken dialogue systems and interactive stories. She led the Athena team, which was selected as a contender in the Alexa Prize SocialBot Challenge for 5 challenges between 2018 and 2023.
Read more →
Two-way finite automaton

In computer science, in particular in automata theory, a two-way finite automaton is a finite automaton that is allowed to re-read its input. == Two-way deterministic finite automaton == A two-way deterministic finite automaton (2DFA) is an abstract machine, a generalized version of the deterministic finite automaton (DFA) which can revisit characters already processed. As in a DFA, there are a finite number of states with transitions between them based on the current character, but each transition is also labelled with a value indicating whether the machine will move its position in the input to the left, right, or stay at the same position. Equivalently, 2DFAs can be seen as read-only Turing machines with no work tape, only a read-only input tape. 2DFAs were introduced in a seminal 1959 paper by Rabin and Scott, who proved them to have equivalent power to one-way DFAs. That is, any formal language which can be recognized by a 2DFA can be recognized by a DFA which only examines and consumes each character in order. Since DFAs are obviously a special case of 2DFAs, this implies that both kinds of machines recognize precisely the class of regular languages. However, the equivalent DFA for a 2DFA may require exponentially many states, making 2DFAs a much more practical representation for algorithms for some common problems. 2DFAs are also equivalent to read-only Turing machines that use only a constant amount of space on their work tape, since any constant amount of information can be incorporated into the finite control state via a product construction (a state for each combination of work tape state and control state). == Formal description == Formally, a two-way deterministic finite automaton can be described by the following 8-tuple: M = ( Q , Σ , L , R , δ , s , t , r ) {\displaystyle M=(Q,\Sigma ,L,R,\delta ,s,t,r)} where Q {\displaystyle Q} is the finite, non-empty set of states Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is the finite, non-empty set of input symbols L {\displaystyle L} is the left endmarker R {\displaystyle R} is the right endmarker δ : Q × ( Σ ∪ { L , R } ) → Q × { l e f t , r i g h t } {\displaystyle \delta :Q\times (\Sigma \cup \{L,R\})\rightarrow Q\times \{\mathrm {left,right} \}} s {\displaystyle s} is the start state t {\displaystyle t} is the end state r {\displaystyle r} is the reject state In addition, the following two conditions must also be satisfied: For all q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} δ ( q , L ) = ( q ′ , r i g h t ) {\displaystyle \delta (q,L)=(q^{\prime },\mathrm {right} )} for some q ′ ∈ Q {\displaystyle q^{\prime }\in Q} δ ( q , R ) = ( q ′ , l e f t ) {\displaystyle \delta (q,R)=(q^{\prime },\mathrm {left} )} for some q ′ ∈ Q {\displaystyle q^{\prime }\in Q} It says that there must be some transition possible when the pointer reaches either end of the input word. For all symbols σ ∈ Σ ∪ { L } {\displaystyle \sigma \in \Sigma \cup \{L\}} δ ( t , σ ) = ( t , R ) {\displaystyle \delta (t,\sigma )=(t,R)} δ ( r , σ ) = ( r , R ) {\displaystyle \delta (r,\sigma )=(r,R)} δ ( t , R ) = ( t , L ) {\displaystyle \delta (t,R)=(t,L)} δ ( r , R ) = ( r , L ) {\displaystyle \delta (r,R)=(r,L)} It says that once the automaton reaches the accept or reject state, it stays in there forever and the pointer goes to the right most symbol and cycles there infinitely. == Two-way nondeterministic finite automaton == A two-way nondeterministic finite automaton (2NFA) may have multiple transitions defined in the same configuration. Its transition function is δ : Q × ( Σ ∪ { L , R } ) → 2 Q × { l e f t , r i g h t } {\displaystyle \delta :Q\times (\Sigma \cup \{L,R\})\rightarrow 2^{Q\times \{\mathrm {left,right} \}}} . Like a standard one-way NFA, a 2NFA accepts a string if at least one of the possible computations is accepting. Like the 2DFAs, the 2NFAs also accept only regular languages. == Two-way alternating finite automaton == A two-way alternating finite automaton (2AFA) is a two-way extension of an alternating finite automaton (AFA). Its state set is Q = Q ∃ ∪ Q ∀ {\displaystyle Q=Q_{\exists }\cup Q_{\forall }} where Q ∃ ∩ Q ∀ = ∅ {\displaystyle Q_{\exists }\cap Q_{\forall }=\emptyset } . States in Q ∃ {\displaystyle Q_{\exists }} and Q ∀ {\displaystyle Q_{\forall }} are called existential resp. universal. In an existential state a 2AFA nondeterministically chooses the next state like an NFA, and accepts if at least one of the resulting computations accepts. In a universal state 2AFA moves to all next states, and accepts if all the resulting computations accept. == State complexity tradeoffs == Two-way and one-way finite automata, deterministic and nondeterministic and alternating, accept the same class of regular languages. However, transforming an automaton of one type to an equivalent automaton of another type incurs a blow-up in the number of states. Christos Kapoutsis determined that transforming an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2DFA to an equivalent DFA requires n ( n n − ( n − 1 ) n ) {\displaystyle n(n^{n}-(n-1)^{n})} states in the worst case. If an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2DFA or a 2NFA is transformed to an NFA, the worst-case number of states required is ( 2 n n + 1 ) = O ( 4 n n ) {\displaystyle {\binom {2n}{n+1}}=O\left({\frac {4^{n}}{\sqrt {n}}}\right)} . Ladner, Lipton and Stockmeyer. proved that an n {\displaystyle n} -state 2AFA can be converted to a DFA with 2 n 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n2^{n}}} states. The 2AFA to NFA conversion requires 2 Θ ( n log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle 2^{\Theta (n\log n)}} states in the worst case, see Geffert and Okhotin. It is an open problem whether every 2NFA can be converted to a 2DFA with only a polynomial increase in the number of states. The problem was raised by Sakoda and Sipser, who compared it to the P vs. NP problem in the computational complexity theory. Berman and Lingas discovered a formal relation between this problem and the L vs. NL open problem, see Kapoutsis for a precise relation. == Sweeping automata == Sweeping automata are 2DFAs of a special kind that process the input string by making alternating left-to-right and right-to-left sweeps, turning only at the endmarkers. Sipser constructed a sequence of languages, each accepted by an n-state NFA, yet which is not accepted by any sweeping automata with fewer than 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} states. == Two-way quantum finite automaton == The concept of 2DFAs was in 1997 generalized to quantum computing by John Watrous's "On the Power of 2-Way Quantum Finite State Automata", in which he demonstrates that these machines can recognize nonregular languages and so are more powerful than DFAs. == Two-way pushdown automaton == A pushdown automaton that is allowed to move either way on its input tape is called two-way pushdown automaton (2PDA); it has been studied by Hartmanis, Lewis, and Stearns (1965). Aho, Hopcroft, Ullman (1968) and Cook (1971) characterized the class of languages recognizable by deterministic (2DPDA) and non-deterministic (2NPDA) two-way pushdown automata; Gray, Harrison, and Ibarra (1967) investigated the closure properties of these languages.
Read more →
Pushpak Bhattacharyya

Pushpak Bhattacharyya (3 July 1962 – 5 October 2025) was an Indian computer scientist and professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the IIT Bombay. He served as the Director of the IIT Patna from 2015 to 2021. He was a past President of the Association for Computational Linguistics (2016–17), and held the Vijay and Sita Vashee Chair Professorship at IIT Bombay. Bhattacharyya led the Natural Language Processing (NLP) research group at the Centre for Indian Language Technology (CFILT) at IIT Bombay until his death. At the inauguration of the Nilekani Centre at AI4Bharat, IIT Madras, Nandan Nilekani, Co-founder and Non-Executive Chairman of Infosys, referred to Bhattacharyya as the "Godfather of Indian NLP". == Early life and education == Bhattacharyya was born in Shillong in 1962. He completed his schooling at Jail Road Boys' High School, Shillong. He obtained a B.Tech. in Computer Science from the IIT Kharagpur, followed by an M.Tech. from the IIT Kanpur, and a Ph.D. in Computer Science from IIT Bombay in 1994. == Research == Bhattacharyya’s research areas includes Natural language processing, Artificial intelligence, Machine learning, Psycholinguistics, Eye tracking, and Information retrieval. He made contributions to the development of multilingual lexical databases such as IndoWordNet and other projects related to machine translation and computational linguistics. He authored and co-authored multiple academic works, including Investigations in Computational Sarcasm (with Aditya Joshi), Cognitively Inspired Natural Language Processing: An Investigation Based on Eye Tracking (with Abhijit Mishra), and Machine Translation and Transliteration of Low Resource Related Languages (with Anoop Kunchukuttan). Over his career, Bhattacharyya published more than 350 research papers in journals and conference proceedings and supervised over 300 undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral students. His projects often addressed computational challenges for Indian languages, such as developing wordnets, building translation systems for low-resource languages, and studying cognitive aspects of language processing. He also led government- and industry-funded research initiatives supported by organizations including IBM, Microsoft, Yahoo, and the United Nations. == Death == Bhattacharyya died on 5 October 2025, at the age of 63. == Awards == Patwardhan Award, IIT Bombay, for Technology Development VNMM Award, IIT Roorkee, for Technology Development Fellow, Indian National Academy of Engineering Eminent Engineer Award, Institution of Engineers (India)
Read more →
Cinema 4D

Cinema 4D is a 3D software suite developed by the German company Maxon. == Overview == As of R21, only a single version of Cinema 4D is available. It replaces all previous variants, including BodyPaint 3D, and includes all features of the past 'Studio' variant. With R21, all binaries were unified. There is no technical difference between commercial, educational, or demo versions. The difference is now only in licensing. 2014 saw the release of Cinema 4D Lite, which came packaged with Adobe After Effects Creative Cloud 2014. "Lite" acts as an introductory version, with many features withheld. This is part of a partnership between the two companies, where a Maxon-produced plug-in, called Cineware, allows any variant to create a seamless workflow with After Effects. The "Lite" variant is dependent on After Effects CC, needing the latter application running to launch, and is only sold as a package component included with After Effects CC through Adobe. Initially, Cinema 4D was developed for Amiga computers in the early 1990s, and the first three versions of the program were available exclusively for that platform. With v4, however, Maxon began to develop the application for Windows and Macintosh computers as well, citing the wish to reach a wider audience and the growing instability of the Amiga market following Commodore's bankruptcy. It was also released for BeOS. On Linux, Cinema 4D is available as a commandline rendering version. == Modules and older variants == From R12 to R20, Cinema 4D was available in four variants. A core Cinema 4D 'Prime' application, a 'Broadcast' version with additional motion-graphics features, 'Visualize,' which adds functions for architectural design and 'Studio,' which includes all modules. From Release 8 until Release 11.5, Cinema 4D had a modular approach to the application, with the ability to expand upon the core application with various modules. This ended with Release 12, though the functionality of these modules remains in the different flavors of Cinema 4D (Prime, Broadcast, Visualize, Studio) The old modules were: Advanced Render (global illumination/HDRI, caustics, ambient occlusion and sky simulation) BodyPaint 3D (direct painting on UVW meshes; now included in the core. In essence Cinema 4D Core/Prime and the BodyPaint 3D products are identical. The only difference between the two is the splash screen that is shown at startup and the default user interface.) Dynamics (for simulating soft body and rigid body dynamics) Hair (simulates hair, fur, grass, etc.) MOCCA (character animation and cloth simulation) MoGraph (Motion Graphics procedural modelling and animation toolset) NET Render (to render animations over a TCP/IP network in render farms) PyroCluster (simulation of smoke and fire effects) Prime (the core application) Broadcast (adds MoGraph2) Visualize (adds Virtual Walkthrough, Advanced Render, Sky, Sketch and Toon, data exchange, camera matching) Studio (the complete package) == Version history == == Use in industry == A number of films and related works have been modeled and rendered in Cinema 4D, including: == Cinebench == Cinebench is a cross-platform test suite which tests a computer's hardware capabilities. It can be used as a test for Cinema 4D's 3D modeling, animation, motion graphic and rendering performance on multiple CPU cores. The program "target[s] a certain niche and [is] better suited for high-end desktop and workstation platforms". Cinebench is commonly used to demonstrate hardware capabilities at tech shows to show a CPU performance, especially by tech YouTubers and review sites.
Read more →
Michael Collins (computational linguist)

Michael J. Collins (born 4 March 1970) is a researcher in the field of computational linguistics. He is the Vikram S. Pandit Professor of Computer Science at Columbia University. His research interests are in natural language processing as well as machine learning and he has made important contributions in statistical parsing and in statistical machine learning. In his studies Collins covers a wide range of topics such as parse re-ranking, tree kernels, semi-supervised learning, machine translation and exponentiated gradient algorithms with a general focus on discriminative models and structured prediction. One notable contribution is a state-of-the-art parser for the Penn Wall Street Journal corpus. As of 11 November 2015, his works have been cited 16,020 times, and he has an h-index of 47. Collins worked as a researcher at AT&T Labs between January 1999 and November 2002, and later held the positions of assistant and associate professor at M.I.T. Since January 2011, he has been a professor at Columbia University. In 2011, he was named a fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
Read more →
Weighted automaton

In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a weighted automaton or weighted finite-state machine is a generalization of a finite-state machine in which the edges have weights, for example real numbers or integers. Finite-state machines are only capable of answering decision problems; they take as input a string and produce a Boolean output, i.e. either "accept" or "reject". In contrast, weighted automata produce a quantitative output, for example a count of how many answers are possible on a given input string, or a probability of how likely the input string is according to a probability distribution. They are one of the simplest studied models of quantitative automata. The definition of a weighted automaton is generally given over an arbitrary semiring R {\displaystyle R} , an abstract set with an addition operation + {\displaystyle +} and a multiplication operation × {\displaystyle \times } . The automaton consists of a finite set of states, a finite input alphabet of characters Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and edges which are labeled with both a character in Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and a weight in R {\displaystyle R} . The weight of any path in the automaton is defined to be the product of weights along the path, and the weight of a string is the sum of the weights of all paths which are labeled with that string. The weighted automaton thus defines a function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} . Weighted automata generalize deterministic finite automata (DFAs) and nondeterministic finite automata (NFAs), which correspond to weighted automata over the Boolean semiring, where addition is logical disjunction and multiplication is logical conjunction. In the DFA case, there is only one accepting path for any input string, so disjunction is not applied. When the weights are real numbers and the outgoing weights for each state add to one, weighted automata can be considered a probabilistic model and are also known as probabilistic automata. These machines define a probability distribution over all strings, and are related to other probabilistic models such as Markov decision processes and Markov chains. Weighted automata have applications in natural language processing where they are used to assign weights to words and sentences, as well as in image compression. They were first introduced by Marcel-Paul Schützenberger in his 1961 paper On the definition of a family of automata. Since their introduction, many extensions have been proposed, for example nested weighted automata, cost register automata, and weighted finite-state transducers. Researchers have studied weighted automata from the perspective of learning a machine from its input-output behavior (see computational learning theory) and studying decidability questions. == Definition == A commutative semiring (or rig) is a set R equipped with two distinguished elements 0 ≠ 1 {\displaystyle 0\neq 1} and addition and multiplication operations ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } and ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } such that ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is commutative and associative with identity 0 {\displaystyle 0} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } is commutative and associative with identity 1 {\displaystyle 1} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } distributes over ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } , and 0 is an absorbing element for ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } . A weighted automaton over R {\displaystyle R} is a tuple A = ( Q , Σ , Δ , I , F ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}=(Q,\Sigma ,\Delta ,I,F)} where: Q {\displaystyle Q} is a finite set of states. Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is a finite alphabet. Δ ⊆ Q × Σ × R × Q {\displaystyle \Delta \subseteq Q\times \Sigma \times R\times Q} is a finite set of transitions ( q , σ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,w,q')} , where σ {\displaystyle \sigma } is called a character and w {\displaystyle w} is called a weight. I : Q → R {\displaystyle I:Q\to R} is an initial weight function. F : Q → R {\displaystyle F:Q\to R} is a final weight function. A path on input w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{}} is a finite path in the graph, where the concatenation of the character labels equals w {\displaystyle w} . The weight of the path q 0 , q 1 , … , q n {\displaystyle q_{0},q_{1},\ldots ,q_{n}} is the product ( ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } ) of the weights along the path, additionally multiplied by the initial and final weights I ( q 0 ) ⊗ F ( q n ) {\displaystyle I(q_{0})\otimes F(q_{n})} . The weight of the word w {\displaystyle w} is the sum ( ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } ) of the weights of all paths on input w {\displaystyle w} (or 0 if there are no accepting paths). In this way the machine defines a function [ [ A ] ] : Σ ∗ → R {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!]:\Sigma ^{}\to R} . == Ambiguity and determinism == Since Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } is a set of transitions, weighted automata allow multiple transitions (or paths) on a single input string. Therefore a weighted automaton can be considered analogous to a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). As is the case with NFAs, restrictions of weighted automata are considered that correspond to the concepts of deterministic finite automaton and unambiguous finite automaton (deterministic weighted automata and unambiguous weighted automata, respectively). First, a preliminary definition: the underlying NFA of A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} is an NFA formed by removing all transitions with weight 0 {\displaystyle 0} and then erasing all of the weights on the transitions Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } , so that the new transition set lies in Q × Σ × Q {\displaystyle Q\times \Sigma \times Q} . The initial states and final states are the set of states q {\displaystyle q} such that I ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle I(q)\neq 0} and F ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle F(q)\neq 0} , respectively. A weighted automaton is deterministic if the underlying NFA is deterministic and unambiguous if the underlying NFA is unambiguous. Every deterministic weighted automaton is unambiguous. In both the deterministic and unambiguous cases, there is always at most one accepting path, so the ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } operation is never applied and can be omitted from the definition. == Variations == The requirement that there is a zero element for ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is sometimes omitted; in this case the machine defines a partial function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} rather than a total function. It is possible to extend the definition to allow epsilon transitions ( q , ϵ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\epsilon ,w,q')} , where ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the empty string. In this case, one must then require that there are no cycles of epsilon transitions. This does not increase the expressiveness of weighted automata. If epsilon transitions are allowed, the initial weights and final weights can be replaced by initial and final sets of states without loss of expressiveness. Some authors omit the initial and final weight functions I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} . Instead, I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} are replaced by a set of initial and final states. If epsilon transitions are not present, this technically decreases expressiveness as it forces [ [ A ] ] ( ε ) {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!](\varepsilon )} to depend only on the number of states that are both initial and final. The transition function can be given as a matrix Δ σ ∈ R Q × Q {\displaystyle \Delta _{\sigma }\in R^{Q\times Q}} with entries in R {\displaystyle R} for each σ {\displaystyle \sigma } , rather than a set of transitions. The entry of the matrix at ( q , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,q')} is the sum of all transitions labeled ( q , σ , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,q')} . Some authors restrict to specific semirings, such as N {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} } or Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} } , particularly when studying decidability results.
Read more →
Mark Steedman

Mark Jerome Steedman (born 18 September 1946) is a British computational linguist and cognitive scientist. == Biography == Steedman graduated from the University of Sussex in 1968, with a B.Sc. in Experimental Psychology, and from the University of Edinburgh in 1973, with a Ph.D. in Artificial Intelligence (Dissertation: The Formal Description of Musical Perception gained in 1972. Advisor: Prof. H.C. Longuet-Higgins FRS). He has held posts as Lecturer in Psychology, University of Warwick (1977–83); Lecturer and Reader in Computational Linguistics, University of Edinburgh (1983–8); Associate and full Professor in Computer and Information Sciences, University of Pennsylvania (1988–98). He has held visiting positions at the University of Texas at Austin, the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Radboud University Nijmegen, and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Steedman currently holds the Chair of Cognitive Science in the School of Informatics at the University of Edinburgh (1998– ). He works in computational linguistics, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science, on Generation of Meaningful Intonation for Speech by Artificial Agents, Animated Conversation, The Communicative Use of Gesture, Tense and Aspect, and combinatory categorial grammar (CCG). He is also interested in Computational Musical Analysis and combinatory logic. == Distinctions == Member of the Academia Europæa (2006) Fellow of the British Academy (2002). Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (2002) AAAI Fellow (1993) President elect for 2008 of the Association for Computational Linguistics Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics (2012) == Principal publications == Steedman, Mark (1996). Surface structure and interpretation. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph. Vol. 30. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. p. 123. ISBN 978-0-262-19379-5. Steedman, Mark (2000). The Syntactic Process. Language, Speech, and Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. p. 344. ISBN 978-0-262-69268-7. Steedman, Mark (Fall 2000). "Information Structure and the Syntax-Phonology Interface". Linguistic Inquiry. 31 (4): 649–689. doi:10.1162/002438900554505. ISSN 0024-3892. S2CID 9084597.
Read more →
Fabric Connect

Fabric Connect, in computer networking usage, is the name used by Extreme Networks to market an extended implementation of the IEEE 802.1aq and IEEE 802.1ah-2008 standards. The Fabric Connect technology was originally developed by the Enterprise Solutions R&D department within Nortel Networks. In 2009, Avaya, Inc acquired Nortel Networks Enterprise Business Solutions; this transaction included the Fabric Connect intellectual property together with all of the Ethernet Switching platforms that supported it. Subsequently, the Fabric Connect technology became part of the Extreme Networks portfolio by virtue of their 2017 purchase of the Avaya Networking business and assets. It was during the Avaya era that this technology was promoted as the lead element of the Virtual Enterprise Network Architecture (VENA). == Technologies == === Fabric Connect === Fabric Connect's provides network-wide, end-to-end, multi-layer virtualization. A network virtualization capability, based on an enhanced implementation of the IEEE 802.1aq Shortest Path Bridging (SPB) standard, Fabric Connect offers the ability to create a simplified network that can dynamically virtualize elements to efficiently provision and utilize resources, thus reducing the strain on the network and personnel. Extreme Networks base the Fabric Connect technology on the SPB standard, including support for RFC 6329, and have integrated IP Routing and IP Multicast support; this unified technology allows for the replacement of multiple conventional protocols such as Spanning Tree, RIP and/or OSPF, ECMP, and PIM. === Fabric Attach === An adjunct to the Fabric Connect technology, Fabric Attach allows network operators to extend network virtualization directly into conventional wiring closets (using existing non-Fabric Ethernet switches) and automate the provisioning of devices to their appropriate virtual network. This is particularly relevant for the mass of unattended network end-point that are now appearing, such as IP Phones, Wireless Access Points, and IP Cameras. Fabric Attach standardized protocols such as 802.1AB LLDP to exchange credentials and obtain provisioning information that allows "Client" Switches to be automatically re-configured on the fly with parameters that let Traffic Flows Map through to Fabric Connect Edge Switches (aka "Backbone Edge Bridge" in SPB definition) functioning as a Fabric Attach "Server" Switch. This method is described by an IETF "Internet Draft", pending further standardization activity. Fabric Attach is typically used to automate Wiring Closet connectivity, but has the potential to be extensible for use in the Data Center, with Virtual Machines being able to dynamically request VLAN/VSN (Virtual Service Network) assignment based upon application requirements. == Hardware products == === Virtual Services Platform 9000 Series === A range of modular chassis-based products, featuring a carrier-grade Linux operation system, and designed for high-performance deployment scenarios that need to scale to multiple terabits of switching capacity and support 10 and 40 gigabit Ethernet connections, and is designed eventually to support 100 gigabit Ethernet. === Virtual Services Platform 8000 Series === A compact form-factor platform delivering high-density 10/40 gigabit Ethernet connectivity, and targeted at mid-market through to mid-size enterprise core switch applications. === Virtual Services Platform 7000 Series === A range of high-end 10 gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that extend fabric-based networking to the data center top-of-rack. They support 40 gigabit Ethernet via the MDA Slot. === Virtual Services Platform 4000 Series === A range of high-end gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that extend Fabric-based networking to branch and metro locations. === Ethernet Routing Switch 5000 Series === A range of high-end gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that provides enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE, and offers 10 Gbit/s uplink connections. Each Switch supports up to 144 Gbit/s of virtual backplane capacity, delivering up to 1.152 Tbit/s for a system of eight, creating a virtual backplane through a stacking configuration. === Ethernet Routing Switch 4000 Series === A range of gigabit Ethernet stackable switches that provide enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE/PoE+, and offer 1/10 Gbit/s uplink connections. Each switch supports up to 48 Gbit/s of virtual backplane capacity, delivering up to 384 Gbit/s for a system of 8, creating a virtual backplane through a stacking configuration. === Ethernet Routing Switch 3500 Series === These entry-level gigabit Ethernet stackable switches provide enterprise-class desktop features, including PoE/PoE+, and 1 Gbit/s uplink connections.
Read more →
Tom M. Mitchell

Tom Michael Mitchell (born August 9, 1951) is an American computer scientist and the Founders University Professor at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). He is a founder and former chair of the Machine Learning Department at CMU. Mitchell is known for his contributions to the advancement of machine learning, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience and is the author of the textbook Machine Learning. He is a member of the United States National Academy of Engineering since 2010. He is also a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a Fellow and past president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. In October 2018, Mitchell was appointed as the Interim Dean of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon. == Early life and education == Mitchell was born in Blossburg, Pennsylvania and grew up in Upstate New York, in the town of Vestal. He received his bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1973 and a Ph.D. from Stanford University under the direction of Bruce G. Buchanan in 1979. == Career == Mitchell began his teaching career at Rutgers University in 1978. During his tenure at Rutgers, he held the positions of assistant and associate professor in the Department of Computer Science. In 1986, he left Rutgers and joined Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh as a professor. In 1999, he became the E. Fredkin Professor in the School of Computer Science. In 2006 Mitchell was appointed as the first chair of the Machine Learning Department within the School of Computer Science. He became university professor in 2009, and served as Interim Dean of the Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science during 2018–2019. Mitchell currently serves on the Scientific Advisory Board of the Allen Institute for AI and on the Science Board of the Santa Fe Institute. == Honors and awards == He was elected into the United States National Academy of Engineering in 2010 "for pioneering contributions and leadership in the methods and applications of machine learning." He is also a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) since 2008 and a Fellow the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) since 1990. In 2016 he became a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Mitchell was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Laws degree from Dalhousie University in 2015 for his contributions to machine learning and to cognitive neuroscience, and the President's Medal from Stevens Institute of Technology in 2018. He is a recipient of the NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award in 1984. == Publications == Mitchell is a prolific author of scientific works on various topics in computer science, including machine learning, artificial intelligence, robotics, and cognitive neuroscience. He has authored hundreds of scientific articles. Mitchell published one of the first textbooks in machine learning, entitled Machine Learning, in 1997 (publisher: McGraw Hill Education). He is also a coauthor of the following books: J. Franklin, T. Mitchell, and S. Thrun (eds.), Recent Advances in Robot Learning, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996. T. Mitchell, J. Carbonell, and R. Michalski (eds.), Machine Learning: A Guide to Current Research, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1986. R. Michalski, J. Carbonell, and T. Mitchell (eds.), Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Volume 2, Morgan Kaufmann, 1986. R. Michalski, J. Carbonell, and T. Mitchell (eds.), Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Tioga Press, 1983.
Read more →
Synchronizing word

In computer science, more precisely, in the theory of deterministic finite automata (DFA), a synchronizing word or reset sequence is a word in the input alphabet of the DFA that sends any state of the DFA to one and the same state. That is, if an ensemble of copies of the DFA are each started in different states, and all of the copies process the synchronizing word, they will all end up in the same state. Not every DFA has a synchronizing word; for instance, a DFA with two states, one for words of even length and one for words of odd length, can never be synchronized. == Existence == Given a DFA, the problem of determining if it has a synchronizing word can be solved in polynomial time using a theorem due to Ján Černý. A simple approach considers the power set of states of the DFA, and builds a directed graph where nodes belong to the power set, and a directed edge describes the action of the transition function. A path from the node of all states to a singleton state shows the existence of a synchronizing word. This algorithm is exponential in the number of states. A polynomial algorithm results however, due to a theorem of Černý that exploits the substructure of the problem, and shows that a synchronizing word exists if and only if every pair of states has a synchronizing word. == Length == The problem of estimating the length of synchronizing words has a long history and was posed independently by several authors, but it is commonly known as the Černý conjecture. In 1969, Ján Černý conjectured that (n − 1)2 is the upper bound for the length of the shortest synchronizing word for any n-state complete DFA (a DFA with complete state transition graph). If this is true, it would be tight: in his 1964 paper, Černý exhibited a class of automata (indexed by the number n of states) for which the shortest reset words have this length. The best upper bound known is 0.1654n3, far from the lower bound. For n-state DFAs over a k-letter input alphabet, an algorithm by David Eppstein finds a synchronizing word of length at most 11n3/48 + O(n2), and runs in time complexity O(n3+kn2). This algorithm does not always find the shortest possible synchronizing word for a given automaton; as Eppstein also shows, the problem of finding the shortest synchronizing word is NP-complete. However, for a special class of automata in which all state transitions preserve the cyclic order of the states, he describes a different algorithm with time O(kn2) that always finds the shortest synchronizing word, proves that these automata always have a synchronizing word of length at most (n − 1)2 (the bound given in Černý's conjecture), and exhibits examples of automata with this special form whose shortest synchronizing word has length exactly (n − 1)2. == Road coloring == The road coloring problem is the problem of labeling the edges of a regular directed graph with the symbols of a k-letter input alphabet (where k is the outdegree of each vertex) in order to form a synchronizable DFA. It was conjectured in 1970 by Benjamin Weiss and Roy Adler that any strongly connected and aperiodic regular digraph can be labeled in this way; their conjecture was proven in 2007 by Avraham Trahtman. == Related: transformation semigroups == A transformation semigroup is synchronizing if it contains an element of rank 1, that is, an element whose image is of cardinality 1. A DFA corresponds to a transformation semigroup with a distinguished generator set.
Read more →