AI Detector Make It Human

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

• 

  Teleradiology

  Teleradiology is the transmission of radiological patient images from procedures such as x-rays, Computed tomography (CT), and MRI imaging, from one location to another for the purposes of sharing studies with other radiologists and physicians. Teleradiology allows radiologists to provide services without actually having to be at the location of the patient. This is particularly important when a sub-specialist such as an MRI radiologist, neuroradiologist, pediatric radiologist, or musculoskeletal radiologist is needed, since these professionals are generally only located in large metropolitan areas working during daytime hours. Teleradiology allows for specialists to be available at all times. Teleradiology utilizes standard network technologies such as the Internet, telephone lines, wide area networks, local area networks (LAN) and the latest advanced technologies such as medical cloud computing. Specialized software is used to transmit the images and enable the radiologist to effectively analyze potentially hundreds of images of a given study. Technologies such as advanced graphics processing, voice recognition, artificial intelligence, and image compression are often used in teleradiology. Through teleradiology and mobile DICOM viewers, images can be sent to another part of the hospital or to other locations around the world with equal effort. Teleradiology is a growth technology given that imaging procedures are growing approximately 15% annually against an increase of only 2% in the radiologist population. == Reports == Teleradiology services commonly provide either preliminary or final interpretations of medical imaging studies. Preliminary reads are frequently used in emergency settings to support immediate clinical decisions and may include direct communication of critical findings to the referring physician. Some providers report turnaround times of approximately 30 minutes for emergency cases, with faster processing for time-sensitive conditions such as stroke. Final reads are definitive and used in official patient records and billing. These reports typically include all relevant findings and may require access to prior imaging and clinical data. Teleradiology is also employed to provide off-hour or overflow coverage for healthcare institutions lacking continuous on-site radiology staffing. == Subspecialties == Some teleradiologists are fellowship trained and have a wide variety of subspecialty expertise including such difficult-to-find areas as neuroradiology, pediatric neuroradiology, thoracic imaging, musculoskeletal radiology, mammography, and nuclear cardiology. There are also various medical practitioners who are not radiologists that take on studies in radiology to become sub specialists in their respected fields, an example of this is dentistry where oral and maxillofacial radiology allows those in dentistry to specialize in the acquisition and interpretation of radiographic imaging studies performed for diagnosis of treatment guidance for conditions affecting the maxillofacial region. == Teleultrasound == Teleradiology infrastructure has also been adapted to support point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in remote and austere environments. In teleultrasound—also known as telementored ultrasound—a remote expert guides a non-specialist in real time during image acquisition. This technique has been successfully demonstrated in extreme settings, including aboard the International Space Station, on Mount Everest, and during helicopter flight. == Regulations == In the United States, Medicare and Medicaid laws require the teleradiologist to be on U.S. soil in order to qualify for reimbursement of the Final Read. In addition, advanced teleradiology systems must also be HIPAA compliant, which helps to ensure patients' privacy. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) is a uniform, federal floor of privacy protections for consumers. It limits the ways that entities can use patients' personal information and protects the privacy of all medical information no matter what form it is in. Quality teleradiology must abide by important HIPAA rules to ensure patients' privacy is protected. Also State laws governing the licensing requirements and medical malpractice insurance coverage required for physicians vary from state to state. Ensuring compliance with these laws is a significant overhead expense for larger multi-state teleradiology groups. Medicare (Australia) has identical requirements to that of the United States, where the guidelines are provided by the Department of Health and Ageing, and government based payments fall under the Health Insurance Act. The regulations in Australia are also conducted at both federal and state levels, ensuring that strict guidelines are adhered to at all times, with regular yearly updates and amendments are introduced (usually around March and November of every year), ensuring that the legislation is kept up to date with changes in the industry. One of the most recent changes to Medicare and radiology / teleradiology in Australia was the introduction of the Diagnostic Imaging Accreditation Scheme (DIAS) on 1 July 2008. DIAS was introduced to further improve the quality of Diagnostic Imaging and to amend the Health Insurance Act. == Industry growth == Until the late 1990s teleradiology was primarily used by individual radiologists to interpret occasional emergency studies from offsite locations, often in the radiologists home. The connections were made through standard analog phone lines. Teleradiology expanded rapidly as the growth of the internet and broad band combined with new CT scanner technology to become an essential tool in trauma cases in emergency rooms throughout the country. The occasional 2–3 x-ray studies a week soon became 3–10 CT scans, or more, a night. Because ER physicians are not trained to read CT scans or MRIs, radiologists went from working 8–10 hours a day, five and half days a week to a schedule of 24 hours a day, 7 days a week coverage. This became a particularly acute challenge in smaller rural facilities that only had one solo radiologist with no other to share call. These circumstances spawned a post-dot.com boom of firms and groups that provided medical outsourcing, off-site teleradiology on-call services to hospitals and Radiology Groups around the country. As an example, a teleradiology firm might cover trauma at a hospital in Indiana with doctors based in Texas. Some firms even used overseas doctors in locations like Australia and India. Nighthawk, founded by Paul Berger, was the first to station U.S. licensed radiologists overseas (initially Australia and later Switzerland) to maximize the time zone difference to provide nightcall in U.S. hospitals. Currently, teleradiology firms are facing pricing pressures. Industry consolidation is likely as there are more than 500 of these firms, large and small, throughout the United States.

  Read more →
• 

  SQL/PSM

  SQL/PSM (SQL/Persistent Stored Modules) is an ISO standard mainly defining an extension of SQL with a procedural language for use in stored procedures. Initially published in 1996 as an extension of SQL-92 (ISO/IEC 9075-4:1996, a version sometimes called PSM-96 or even SQL-92/PSM), SQL/PSM was later incorporated into the multi-part SQL:1999 standard, and has been part 4 of that standard since then, most recently in SQL:2023. The SQL:1999 part 4 covered less than the original PSM-96 because the SQL statements for defining, managing, and invoking routines were actually incorporated into part 2 SQL/Foundation, leaving only the procedural language itself as SQL/PSM. The SQL/PSM facilities are still optional as far as the SQL standard is concerned; most of them are grouped in Features P001-P008. SQL/PSM standardizes syntax and semantics for control flow, exception handling (called "condition handling" in SQL/PSM), local variables, assignment of expressions to variables and parameters, and (procedural) use of cursors. It also defines an information schema (metadata) for stored procedures. SQL/PSM is one language in which methods for the SQL:1999 structured types can be defined. The other is Java, via SQL/JRT. SQL/PSM is derived, seemingly directly, from Oracle's PL/SQL. Oracle developed PL/SQL and released it in 1991, basing the language on the US Department of Defense's Ada programming language. However, Oracle has maintained a distance from the standard in its documentation. IBM's SQL PL (used in DB2) and Mimer SQL's PSM were the first two products officially implementing SQL/PSM. It is commonly thought that these two languages, and perhaps also MySQL/MariaDB's procedural language, are closest to the SQL/PSM standard. However, a PostgreSQL addon implements SQL/PSM (alongside its other procedural languages like the PL/SQL-derived plpgsql), although it is not part of the core product. RDF functionality in OpenLink Virtuoso was developed entirely through SQL/PSM, combined with custom datatypes (e.g., ANY for handling URI and Literal relation objects), sophisticated indexing, and flexible physical storage choices (column-wise or row-wise).

  Read more →
• 

  Operational data store

  An operational data store (ODS) is used for operational reporting and as a source of data for the enterprise data warehouse (EDW). It is a complementary element to an EDW in a decision support environment, and is used for operational reporting, controls, and decision making, as opposed to the EDW, which is used for tactical and strategic decision support. An ODS is a database designed to integrate data from multiple sources for additional operations on the data, for reporting, controls and operational decision support. Unlike a production master data store, the data is not passed back to operational systems. It may be passed for further operations and to the data warehouse for reporting. An ODS should not be confused with an enterprise data hub (EDH). An operational data store will take transactional data from one or more production systems and loosely integrate it, in some respects it is still subject oriented, integrated and time variant, but without the volatility constraints. This integration is mainly achieved through the use of EDW structures and content. An ODS is not an intrinsic part of an EDH solution, although an EDH may be used to subsume some of the processing performed by an ODS and the EDW. An EDH is a broker of data. An ODS is certainly not. Because the data originates from multiple sources, the integration often involves cleaning, resolving redundancy and checking against business rules for integrity. An ODS is usually designed to contain low-level or atomic (indivisible) data (such as transactions and prices) with limited history that is captured "real time" or "near real time" as opposed to the much greater volumes of data stored in the data warehouse generally on a less-frequent basis. == General use == The general purpose of an ODS is to integrate data from disparate source systems in a single structure, using data integration technologies like data virtualization, data federation, or extract, transform, and load (ETL). This will allow operational access to the data for operational reporting, master data or reference data management. An ODS is not a replacement or substitute for a data warehouse or for a data hub but in turn could become a source.

  Read more →
• 

  Holographic algorithm

  In computer science, a holographic algorithm is an algorithm that uses a holographic reduction. A holographic reduction is a constant-time reduction that maps solution fragments many-to-many such that the sum of the solution fragments remains unchanged. These concepts were introduced by Leslie Valiant, who called them holographic because "their effect can be viewed as that of producing interference patterns among the solution fragments". The algorithms are unrelated to laser holography, except metaphorically. Their power comes from the mutual cancellation of many contributions to a sum, analogous to the interference patterns in a hologram. Holographic algorithms have been used to find polynomial-time solutions to problems without such previously known solutions for special cases of satisfiability, vertex cover, and other graph problems. They have received notable coverage due to speculation that they are relevant to the P versus NP problem and their impact on computational complexity theory. Although some of the general problems are #P-hard problems, the special cases solved are not themselves #P-hard, and thus do not prove FP = #P. Holographic algorithms have some similarities with quantum computation, but are completely classical. == Holant problems == Holographic algorithms exist in the context of Holant problems, which generalize counting constraint satisfaction problems (#CSP). A #CSP instance is a hypergraph G=(V,E) called the constraint graph. Each hyperedge represents a variable and each vertex v {\displaystyle v} is assigned a constraint f v . {\displaystyle f_{v}.} A vertex is connected to an hyperedge if the constraint on the vertex involves the variable on the hyperedge. The counting problem is to compute ∑ σ : E → { 0 , 1 } ∏ v ∈ V f v ( σ | E ( v ) ) , ( 1 ) {\displaystyle \sum _{\sigma :E\to \{0,1\}}\prod _{v\in V}f_{v}(\sigma |_{E(v)}),~~~~~~~~~~(1)} which is a sum over all variable assignments, the product of every constraint, where the inputs to the constraint f v {\displaystyle f_{v}} are the variables on the incident hyperedges of v {\displaystyle v} . A Holant problem is like a #CSP except the input must be a graph, not a hypergraph. Restricting the class of input graphs in this way is indeed a generalization. Given a #CSP instance, replace each hyperedge e of size s with a vertex v of degree s with edges incident to the vertices contained in e. The constraint on v is the equality function of arity s. This identifies all of the variables on the edges incident to v, which is the same effect as the single variable on the hyperedge e. In the context of Holant problems, the expression in (1) is called the Holant after a related exponential sum introduced by Valiant. == Holographic reduction == A standard technique in complexity theory is a many-one reduction, where an instance of one problem is reduced to an instance of another (hopefully simpler) problem. However, holographic reductions between two computational problems preserve the sum of solutions without necessarily preserving correspondences between solutions. For instance, the total number of solutions in both sets can be preserved, even though individual problems do not have matching solutions. The sum can also be weighted, rather than simply counting the number of solutions, using linear basis vectors. === General example === It is convenient to consider holographic reductions on bipartite graphs. A general graph can always be transformed it into a bipartite graph while preserving the Holant value. This is done by replacing each edge in the graph by a path of length 2, which is also known as the 2-stretch of the graph. To keep the same Holant value, each new vertex is assigned the binary equality constraint. Consider a bipartite graph G=(U,V,E) where the constraint assigned to every vertex u ∈ U {\displaystyle u\in U} is f u {\displaystyle f_{u}} and the constraint assigned to every vertex v ∈ V {\displaystyle v\in V} is f v {\displaystyle f_{v}} . Denote this counting problem by Holant ( G , f u , f v ) . {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(G,f_{u},f_{v}).} If the vertices in U are viewed as one large vertex of degree |E|, then the constraint of this vertex is the tensor product of f u {\displaystyle f_{u}} with itself |U| times, which is denoted by f u ⊗ | U | . {\displaystyle f_{u}^{\otimes |U|}.} Likewise, if the vertices in V are viewed as one large vertex of degree |E|, then the constraint of this vertex is f v ⊗ | V | . {\displaystyle f_{v}^{\otimes |V|}.} Let the constraint f u {\displaystyle f_{u}} be represented by its weighted truth table as a row vector and the constraint f v {\displaystyle f_{v}} be represented by its weighted truth table as a column vector. Then the Holant of this constraint graph is simply f u ⊗ | U | f v ⊗ | V | . {\displaystyle f_{u}^{\otimes |U|}f_{v}^{\otimes |V|}.} Now for any complex 2-by-2 invertible matrix T (the columns of which are the linear basis vectors mentioned above), there is a holographic reduction between Holant ( G , f u , f v ) {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(G,f_{u},f_{v})} and Holant ( G , f u T ⊗ ( deg ⁡ u ) , ( T − 1 ) ⊗ ( deg ⁡ v ) f v ) . {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(G,f_{u}T^{\otimes (\deg u)},(T^{-1})^{\otimes (\deg v)}f_{v}).} To see this, insert the identity matrix T ⊗ | E | ( T − 1 ) ⊗ | E | {\displaystyle T^{\otimes |E|}(T^{-1})^{\otimes |E|}} in between f u ⊗ | U | f v ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle f_{u}^{\otimes |U|}f_{v}^{\otimes |V|}} to get f u ⊗ | U | f v ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle f_{u}^{\otimes |U|}f_{v}^{\otimes |V|}} = f u ⊗ | U | T ⊗ | E | ( T − 1 ) ⊗ | E | f v ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle =f_{u}^{\otimes |U|}T^{\otimes |E|}(T^{-1})^{\otimes |E|}f_{v}^{\otimes |V|}} = ( f u T ⊗ ( deg ⁡ u ) ) ⊗ | U | ( f v ( T − 1 ) ⊗ ( deg ⁡ v ) ) ⊗ | V | . {\displaystyle =\left(f_{u}T^{\otimes (\deg u)}\right)^{\otimes |U|}\left(f_{v}(T^{-1})^{\otimes (\deg v)}\right)^{\otimes |V|}.} Thus, Holant ( G , f u , f v ) {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(G,f_{u},f_{v})} and Holant ( G , f u T ⊗ ( deg ⁡ u ) , ( T − 1 ) ⊗ ( deg ⁡ v ) f v ) {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(G,f_{u}T^{\otimes (\deg u)},(T^{-1})^{\otimes (\deg v)}f_{v})} have exactly the same Holant value for every constraint graph. They essentially define the same counting problem. === Specific examples === ==== Vertex covers and independent sets ==== Let G be a graph. There is a 1-to-1 correspondence between the vertex covers of G and the independent sets of G. For any set S of vertices of G, S is a vertex cover in G if and only if the complement of S is an independent set in G. Thus, the number of vertex covers in G is exactly the same as the number of independent sets in G. The equivalence of these two counting problems can also be proved using a holographic reduction. For simplicity, let G be a 3-regular graph. The 2-stretch of G gives a bipartite graph H=(U,V,E), where U corresponds to the edges in G and V corresponds to the vertices in G. The Holant problem that naturally corresponds to counting the number of vertex covers in G is Holant ( H , OR 2 , EQUAL 3 ) . {\displaystyle {\text{Holant}}(H,{\text{OR}}_{2},{\text{EQUAL}}_{3}).} The truth table of OR2 as a row vector is (0,1,1,1). The truth table of EQUAL3 as a column vector is ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 ) T = [ 1 0 ] ⊗ 3 + [ 0 1 ] ⊗ 3 {\displaystyle (1,0,0,0,0,0,0,1)^{T}={\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}+{\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}} . Then under a holographic transformation by [ 0 1 1 0 ] , {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}},} OR 2 ⊗ | U | EQUAL 3 ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle {\text{OR}}_{2}^{\otimes |U|}{\text{EQUAL}}_{3}^{\otimes |V|}} = ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ⊗ | U | ( [ 1 0 ] ⊗ 3 + [ 0 1 ] ⊗ 3 ) ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle =(0,1,1,1)^{\otimes |U|}\left({\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}+{\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}\right)^{\otimes |V|}} = ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ⊗ | U | [ 0 1 1 0 ] ⊗ | E | [ 0 1 1 0 ] ⊗ | E | ( [ 1 0 ] ⊗ 3 + [ 0 1 ] ⊗ 3 ) ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle =(0,1,1,1)^{\otimes |U|}{\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes |E|}{\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes |E|}\left({\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}+{\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}\right)^{\otimes |V|}} = ( ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) [ 0 1 1 0 ] ⊗ 2 ) ⊗ | U | ( ( [ 0 1 1 0 ] [ 1 0 ] ) ⊗ 3 + ( [ 0 1 1 0 ] [ 0 1 ] ) ⊗ 3 ) ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle =\left((0,1,1,1){\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 2}\right)^{\otimes |U|}\left(\left({\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}}\right)^{\otimes 3}+\left({\begin{bmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\end{bmatrix}}\right)^{\otimes 3}\right)^{\otimes |V|}} = ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 0 ) ⊗ | U | ( [ 0 1 ] ⊗ 3 + [ 1 0 ] ⊗ 3 ) ⊗ | V | {\displaystyle =(1,1,1,0)^{\otimes |U|}\left({\begin{bmatrix}0\\1\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}+{\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\end{bmatrix}}^{\otimes 3}\right)^{\otimes |V|}} = NAND 2 ⊗ | U | EQUAL 3 ⊗ | V | , {\displaystyle ={\text{NAND}}_{2}^{\otim

  Read more →
• 

  Construction robots

  Construction robots are a subset of industrial robots used for building and infrastructure construction on site, or in the production of materials and components offsite. A 2021 survey said 55% of construction companies in the United States, Europe, and China used robots in some form. This figure, however, reflects reported use across the construction value chain rather than widespread deployment of robots on active construction sites. Real-world adoption remains limited, with many robotic systems confined to pilot projects, controlled environments, or specific task applications rather than continuous on-site construction use. One of the main challenges in deploying robots on construction sites is the unstructured and variable nature of the environment, which differs fundamentally from controlled factory settings where industrial robots have traditionally operated. Some robots currently deployed on job sites assist with physically demanding or repetitive tasks: excavating, lifting heavy materials, surveying, laying out markers, tying rebar, and installing drywall. More advanced systems are being developed for exterior finishing, steel placement, masonry, and reinforced concrete work. In practice, rather than autonomous systems performing core building tasks, the most widely adopted robot applications on construction sites involve technologies such as aerial drones (or, less frequently, robot 'dogs' - for example, Boston Dynamics' Spot - or humanoid robots) used for surveying, inspection, and progress monitoring (the robots typically carry video and/or 360-degree cameras, LiDar scanners or other data capture devices, with data analysed using artificial intelligence and machine learning). Some emerging systems are designed as multifunctional construction robots, integrating multiple tools and capabilities within a single robotic platform to perform different stages of the construction process. These systems aim to improve operational flexibility and increase automation in complex construction environments. Experimental projects using robotic construction technologies and additive manufacturing have been demonstrated in several countries as part of broader efforts to industrialize the construction sector and improve productivity through automation and digitalization. == Features == Construction robots are generally required to meet the following criteria: Mobility: the ability to navigate around a construction site, including uneven terrain and confined spaces. Adaptability: the ability to handle components of variable size, weight, and shape. Environmental awareness: the ability to sense and respond to changing on-site conditions. Interactivity: the ability to operate alongside human workers and other equipment. Multitasking: the ability to perform several different operations within a single deployment. == Capabilities == Construction robots have been developed and tested for a range of on-site tasks, including: Progress monitoring — robots equipped with cameras and sensors can track construction progress and identify deviations from plans. Inspection — robots are used to investigate infrastructure at dangerous or inaccessible locations, reducing risk to human workers and eliminating human error. Wall construction — robotic systems can lay bricks and blocks with greater speed and consistency than manual labour. Earthmoving and material handling — autonomous excavators and haul trucks use GPS, lidar, and motion sensors to perform digging, trenching, and loading tasks with minimal human input. Grading and dozing — autonomous bulldozers use GPS, gyroscopes, and laser sensors to control blade angle and depth, improving surface finish accuracy and reducing material overuse. 3D printing — additive manufacturing systems can construct walls and structural elements directly from digital models. == Notable construction-related activities undertaken by robots == The distribution of robotic applications in construction varies across the project lifecycle. Most applications are concentrated in structural construction tasks such as masonry, concrete work, and assembly, while other phases, including planning, maintenance, and demolition, remain less represented. === Automated building systems === The Nisseki Yokohama Building (also known as Rail City Yokohama), a 30-storey office building in Yokohama, Japan, was constructed between 1994 and 1997 using the SMART system (Shimizu Manufacturing system by Advanced Robotics Technology), developed by Shimizu Corporation and a consortium of seven other Japanese companies. The system used automated horizontal hoists and vertical lifts to position steel beams, columns, precast concrete floor slabs, and prefabricated facade panels, with welding robots connecting structural elements under laser-guided precision. Each component was tracked by barcode to monitor progress and coordinate just-in-time delivery of materials. Obayashi Corporation developed the Advanced Building Construction System (ABCS), a similar automated platform used in several high-rise projects in Japan in the 1990s, including the NEC Head Office in Kanagawa (1997–2000). === Progress monitoring, inspection === Boston Dynamics' Spot was used in February 2024 to inspect sections of the M5 motorway in England for National Highways. A £15,000 humanoid robot (a G1 model from Chinese manufacturer Unitree) was deployed to capture 360-degree imagery and progress reports to support health and safety monitoring and reporting for UK contractor Tilbury Douglas in April 2026. In the US, Virginia Tech's ARCADE research lab is developing MARIO (Multi-Agent Robotic system for Inspection On-site), a heterogenous robotic system deploying multiple robots capable of different locomotion to perform remote real-time construction progress monitoring in complex construction sites. === Earthmoving === === Concrete works === Obayashi Corporation developed and deployed a robotic system for placing concrete layers in dam construction in Japan. A concrete floor finishing robot was deployed by Kajima and Tokimec in Japan. The MARK series were designed in 1984 to automate the levelling and trowelling of concrete slabs on construction sites, providing consistent finishing accuracy, improved efficiency, and reduced dependence on skilled labour === Masonry === SAM100 (Semi-Automated Mason), developed by Construction Robotics, is one of the first commercially available bricklaying robots for on-site masonry construction. In 2018, it was used in the construction of the University Arts Building at the University of Nevada, Reno — a $35.5 million facility — where it laid over 60,000 of the 100,000 bricks required, reducing the brick veneer installation time by approximately 50%. Hadrian X, developed by the Australian company Fastbrick Robotics, is a fully autonomous mobile bricklaying robot. In November 2022, it completed its first commercial project — five four-bedroom houses in Wellard, Western Australia. In February 2025, PulteGroup, one of the largest homebuilders in the United States, piloted Hadrian X on a site in Florida, constructing an entire house in a single day. === 3D printing === In May 2025, a residential building in Arinaga, Gran Canaria, Spain, was completed using 3D printing construction technology, as part of broader efforts to demonstrate robotic and additive manufacturing methods in the housing sector. In 2026, a three-storey apartment block in France was constructed using concrete 3D printing technology, three months faster than conventional building methods. Finland's Hyperion Robotics has opened a UK factory and used 3D printing with concrete to produce foundations for pipelines and for electricity substation bases, reducing time-consuming and weather-dependent onsite construction processes. == Social impact == The adoption of construction robots varies significantly by region and is shaped by labour market conditions, cultural attitudes, and regulatory frameworks. In Japan, construction robots have been embraced as a response to an ageing workforce and chronic labour shortages, and are generally viewed positively by the industry. In the United States, adoption has historically been slower, partly due to resistance from labour unions concerned about job displacement. Research suggests that the impact of automation on workers is uneven: while robots can create a productivity effect that benefits some workers, displacement effects are most pronounced among younger, less-educated workers in manufacturing-heavy regions. More than 60% of construction firms now report difficulty finding skilled operators, which has increased openness to automation as a practical solution to workforce shortages rather than a replacement for workers. In the UK, during onsite deployment of a humanoid robot for monitoring purposes, there were concerns that staff might think they were being watched ("It's not there to spy on people.... So, we insist that everyone is blurred out. N

  Read more →
• 

  Knowledge organization

  Knowledge organization (KO), organization of knowledge, organization of information, or information organization is an intellectual discipline concerned with activities such as document description, indexing, and classification that serve to provide systems of representation and order for knowledge and information objects. According to The Organization of Information by Joudrey and Taylor, information organization: examines the activities carried out and tools used by people who work in places that accumulate information resources (e.g., books, maps, documents, datasets, images) for the use of humankind, both immediately and for posterity. It discusses the processes that are in place to make resources findable, whether someone is searching for a single known item or is browsing through hundreds of resources just hoping to discover something useful. Information organization supports a myriad of information-seeking scenarios. Issues related to knowledge sharing can be said to have been an important part of knowledge management for a long time. Knowledge sharing has received a lot of attention in research and business practice both within and outside organizations and its different levels. Sharing knowledge is not only about giving it to others, but it also includes searching, locating, and absorbing knowledge. Unawareness of the employees' work and duties tends to provoke the repetition of mistakes, the waste of resources, and duplication of the same projects. Motivating co-workers to share their knowledge is called knowledge enabling. It leads to trust among individuals and encourages a more open and proactive relationship that grants the exchange of information easily. Knowledge sharing is part of the three-phase knowledge management process which is a continuous process model. The three parts are knowledge creation, knowledge implementation, and knowledge sharing. The process is continuous, which is why the parts cannot be fully separated. Knowledge creation is the consequence of individuals' minds, interactions, and activities. Developing new ideas and arrangements alludes to the process of knowledge creation. Using the knowledge which is present at the company in the most effective manner stands for the implementation of knowledge. Knowledge sharing, the most essential part of the process for our topic, takes place when two or more people benefit by learning from each other. Traditional human-based approaches performed by librarians, archivists, and subject specialists are increasingly challenged by computational (big data) algorithmic techniques. KO as a field of study is concerned with the nature and quality of such knowledge-organizing processes (KOP) (such as taxonomy and ontology) as well as the resulting knowledge organizing systems (KOS). == Theoretical approaches == === Traditional approaches === Among the major figures in the history of KO are Melvil Dewey (1851–1931) and Henry Bliss (1870–1955). Dewey's goal was an efficient way to manage library collections; not an optimal system to support users of libraries. His system was meant to be used in many libraries as a standardized way to manage collections. The first version of this system was created in 1876. An important characteristic in Henry Bliss' (and many contemporary thinkers of KO) was that the sciences tend to reflect the order of Nature and that library classification should reflect the order of knowledge as uncovered by science: The implication is that librarians, in order to classify books, should know about scientific developments. This should also be reflected in their education: Again from the standpoint of the higher education of librarians, the teaching of systems of classification ... would be perhaps better conducted by including courses in the systematic encyclopedia and methodology of all the sciences, that is to say, outlines which try to summarize the most recent results in the relation to one another in which they are now studied together. ... (Ernest Cushing Richardson, quoted from Bliss, 1935, p. 2) Among the other principles, which may be attributed to the traditional approach to KO are: Principle of controlled vocabulary Cutter's rule about specificity Hulme's principle of literary warrant (1911) Principle of organizing from the general to the specific Today, after more than 100 years of research and development in LIS, the "traditional" approach still has a strong position in KO and in many ways its principles still dominate. === Facet analytic approaches === The date of the foundation of this approach may be chosen as the publication of S. R. Ranganathan's colon classification in 1933. The approach has been further developed by, in particular, the British Classification Research Group. The best way to explain this approach is probably to explain its analytico-synthetic methodology. The meaning of the term "analysis" is: breaking down each subject into its basic concepts. The meaning of the term synthesis is: combining the relevant units and concepts to describe the subject matter of the information package in hand. Given subjects (as they appear in, for example, book titles) are first analyzed into a few common categories, which are termed "facets". Ranganathan proposed his PMEST formula: Personality, Matter, Energy, Space and Time: Personality is the distinguishing characteristic of a subject. Matter is the physical material of which a subject may be composed. Energy is any action that occurs with respect to the subject. Space is the geographic component of the location of a subject. Time is the period associated with a subject. === The information retrieval tradition (IR) === Important in the IR-tradition have been, among others, the Cranfield experiments, which were founded in the 1950s, and the TREC experiments (Text Retrieval Conferences) starting in 1992. It was the Cranfield experiments, which introduced the measures "recall" and "precision" as evaluation criteria for systems efficiency. The Cranfield experiments found that classification systems like UDC and facet-analytic systems were less efficient compared to free-text searches or low level indexing systems ("UNITERM"). The Cranfield I test found, according to Ellis (1996, 3–6) the following results: Although these results have been criticized and questioned, the IR-tradition became much more influential while library classification research lost influence. The dominant trend has been to regard only statistical averages. What has largely been neglected is to ask: Are there certain kinds of questions in relation to which other kinds of representation, for example, controlled vocabularies, may improve recall and precision? === User-oriented and cognitive views === The best way to define this approach is probably by method: Systems based upon user-oriented approaches must specify how the design of a system is made on the basis of empirical studies of users. User studies demonstrated very early that users prefer verbal search systems as opposed to systems based on classification notations. This is one example of a principle derived from empirical studies of users. Adherents of classification notations may, of course, still have an argument: That notations are well-defined and that users may miss important information by not considering them. Folksonomies is a recent kind of KO based on users' rather than on librarians' or subject specialists' indexing. === Bibliometric approaches === These approaches are primarily based on using bibliographical references to organize networks of papers, mainly by bibliographic coupling (introduced by Kessler 1963) or co-citation analysis ( independently suggested by Marshakova 1973 and Small 1973). In recent years it has become a popular activity to construe bibliometric maps as structures of research fields. Two considerations are important in considering bibliometric approaches to KO: The level of indexing depth is partly determined by the number of terms assigned to each document. In citation indexing this corresponds to the number of references in a given paper. On the average, scientific papers contain 10–15 references, which provide quite a high level of depth. The references, which function as access points, are provided by the highest subject-expertise: The experts writing in the leading journals. This expertise is much higher than that which library catalogs or bibliographical databases typically are able to draw on. === The domain analytic approach === Domain analysis is a sociological-epistemological standpoint that advocates that the indexing of a given document should reflect the needs of a given group of users or a given ideal purpose. In other words, any description or representation of a given document is more or less suited to the fulfillment of certain tasks. A description is never objective or neutral, and the goal is not to standardize descriptions or make one description once and for all for different target groups. The develo

  Read more →
• 

  Weak stability boundary

  Weak stability boundary (WSB), including low-energy transfer, is a concept introduced by Edward Belbruno in 1987. The concept explained how a spacecraft could change orbits using very little fuel. Weak stability boundary is defined for the three-body problem. This problem considers the motion of a particle P of negligible mass moving with respect to two larger bodies, P1, P2, modeled as point masses, where these bodies move in circular or elliptical orbits with respect to each other, and P2 is smaller than P1. The force between the three bodies is the classical Newtonian gravitational force. For example, P1 is the Earth, P2 is the Moon and P is a spacecraft; or P1 is the Sun, P2 is Jupiter and P is a comet, etc. This model is called the restricted three-body problem. The weak stability boundary defines a region about P2 where P is temporarily captured. This region is in position-velocity space. Capture means that the Kepler energy between P and P2 is negative. This is also called weak capture. == Background == This boundary was defined for the first time by Edward Belbruno of Princeton University in 1987. He described a Low-energy transfer which would allow a spacecraft to change orbits using very little fuel. It was for motion about Moon (P2) with P1 = Earth. It is defined algorithmically by monitoring cycling motion of P about the Moon and finding the region where cycling motion transitions between stable and unstable after one cycle. Stable motion means P can completely cycle about the Moon for one cycle relative to a reference section, starting in weak capture. P needs to return to the reference section with negative Kepler energy. Otherwise, the motion is called unstable, where P does not return to the reference section within one cycle or if it returns, it has non-negative Kepler energy. The set of all transition points about the Moon comprises the weak stability boundary, W. The motion of P is sensitive or chaotic as it moves about the Moon within W. A mathematical proof that the motion within W is chaotic was given in 2004. This is accomplished by showing that the set W about an arbitrary body P2 in the restricted three-body problem contains a hyperbolic invariant set of fractional dimension consisting of the infinitely many intersections Hyperbolic manifolds. The weak stability boundary was originally referred to as the fuzzy boundary. This term was used since the transition between capture and escape defined in the algorithm is not well defined and limited by the numerical accuracy. This defines a "fuzzy" location for the transition points. It is also due the inherent chaos in the motion of P near the transition points. It can be thought of as a fuzzy chaos region. As is described in an article in Discover magazine, the WSB can be roughly viewed as the fuzzy edge of a region, referred to as a gravity well, about a body (the Moon), where its force of gravity becomes small enough to be dominated by force of gravity of another body (the Earth) and the motion there is chaotic. A much more general algorithm defining W was given in 2007. It defines W relative to n-cycles, where n = 1,2,3,..., yielding boundaries of order n. This gives a much more complex region consisting of the union of all the weak stability boundaries of order n. This definition was explored further in 2010. The results suggested that W consists, in part, of the hyperbolic network of invariant manifolds associated to the Lyapunov orbits about the L1, L2 Lagrange points near P2. The explicit determination of the set W about P2 = Jupiter, where P1 is the Sun, is described in "Computation of Weak Stability Boundaries: Sun-Jupiter Case". It turns out that a weak stability region can also be defined relative to the larger mass point, P1. A proof of the existence of the weak stability boundary about P1 was given in 2012, but a different definition is used. The chaos of the motion is analytically proven in "Geometry of Weak Stability Boundaries". The boundary is studied in "Applicability and Dynamical Characterization of the Associated Sets of the Algorithmic Weak Stability Boundary in the Lunar Sphere of Influence". == Applications == There are a number of important applications for the weak stability boundary (WSB). Since the WSB defines a region of temporary capture, it can be used, for example, to find transfer trajectories from the Earth to the Moon that arrive at the Moon within the WSB region in weak capture, which is called ballistic capture for a spacecraft. No fuel is required for capture in this case. This was numerically demonstrated in 1987. This is the first reference for ballistic capture for spacecraft and definition of the weak stability boundary. The boundary was operationally demonstrated to exist in 1991 when it was used to find a ballistic capture transfer to the Moon for Japan's Hiten spacecraft. Other missions have used the same transfer type as Hiten, including Grail, Capstone, Danuri, Hakuto-R Mission 1 and SLIM. The WSB for Mars is studied in "Earth-Mars Transfers with Ballistic Capture" and ballistic capture transfers to Mars are computed. The BepiColombo mission of ESA should achieve ballistic capture at the WSB of Mercury in November 2026. The WSB region can be used in the field of Astrophysics. It can be defined for stars within open star clusters. This is done in "Chaotic Exchange of Solid Material Between Planetary Systems: Implications for the Lithopanspermia Hypothesis" to analyze the capture of solid material that may have arrived on the Earth early in the age of the Solar System to study the validity of the lithopanspermia hypothesis. Numerical explorations of trajectories for P starting in the WSB region about P2 show that after the particle P escapes P2 at the end of weak capture, it moves about the primary body, P1, in a near resonant orbit, in resonance with P2 about P1. This property was used to study comets that move in orbits about the Sun in orbital resonance with Jupiter, which change resonance orbits by becoming weakly captured by Jupiter. An example of such a comet is 39P/Oterma. This property of change of resonance of orbits about P1 when P is weakly captured by the WSB of P2 has an interesting application to the field of quantum mechanics to the motion of an electron about the proton in a hydrogen atom. The transition motion of an electron about the proton between different energy states described by the Schrödinger equation is shown to be equivalent to the change of resonance of P about P1 via weak capture by P2 for a family of transitioning resonance orbits. This gives a classical model using chaotic dynamics with Newtonian gravity for the motion of an electron.

  Read more →
• 

  Energy informatics

  Energy informatics is a research field covering the use of information and communication technology to address energy utilization and management challenges. Methods used for "smart" implementations often combine IoT sensors with artificial intelligence and machine learning. Energy Informatics is founded on flow networks that are the major suppliers and consumers of energy. Their efficiency can be improved by collecting and analyzing information. == Application areas == The field among other consider application areas within: Smart Buildings by developing ICT-centred solutions for improving the energy-efficiency of buildings. Smart Cities by investigating the synergies between demand patterns and supply availability of energy flows in cities and communities to improve energy efficiency, increase integration of renewable sources, and provide resilience towards system faults caused by extreme situations, like hurricanes and flooding. Smart Industries including the development of ICT-centred solutions for improving the energy efficiency and predictability of energy intensive industrial processes, without compromising process and product quality. Smart Energy Networks by developing ICT-centred solutions for coordinating the supply and demand in environmentally sustainable energy networks.

  Read more →
• 

  AsoSoft text corpus

  The AsoSoft text corpus is the first large-scale Kurdish text corpus, collected and processed by the AsoSoft research and development group. It contains 458,000 documents (188 million tokens) that are collected from sources such as websites, news agencies, books, and magazines. The corpus is partially tagged by topic, so it can be used for topic identification tasks. Also, it is applicable for extracting language model and computational lexicon information. Part of the corpus (75 million tokens) is available online for non-commercial use. The corpus uses the TEI format.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic Puzzles

  Algorithmic Puzzles is a book of puzzles based on computational thinking. It was written by computer scientists Anany and Maria Levitin, and published in 2011 by Oxford University Press. == Topics == The book begins with a "tutorial" introducing classical algorithm design techniques including backtracking, divide-and-conquer algorithms, and dynamic programming, methods for the analysis of algorithms, and their application in example puzzles. The puzzles themselves are grouped into three sets of 50 puzzles, in increasing order of difficulty. A final two chapters provide brief hints and more detailed solutions to the puzzles, with the solutions forming the majority of pages of the book. Some of the puzzles are well known classics, some are variations of known puzzles making them more algorithmic, and some are new. They include: Puzzles involving chessboards, including the eight queens puzzle, knight's tours, and the mutilated chessboard problem Balance puzzles River crossing puzzles The Tower of Hanoi Finding the missing element in a data stream The geometric median problem for Manhattan distance == Audience and reception == The puzzles in the book cover a wide range of difficulty, and in general do not require more than a high school level of mathematical background. William Gasarch notes that grouping the puzzles only by their difficulty and not by their themes is actually an advantage, as it provides readers with fewer clues about their solutions. Reviewer Narayanan Narayanan recommends the book to any puzzle aficionado, or to anyone who wants to develop their powers of algorithmic thinking. Reviewer Martin Griffiths suggests another group of readers, schoolteachers and university instructors in search of examples to illustrate the power of algorithmic thinking. Gasarch recommends the book to any computer scientist, evaluating it as "a delight".

  Read more →
• 

  Rendezvous hashing

  Rendezvous or highest random weight (HRW) hashing is an algorithm that allows clients to achieve distributed agreement on a set of k {\displaystyle k} options out of a possible set of n {\displaystyle n} options. A typical application is when clients need to agree on which sites (or proxies) objects are assigned to. Consistent hashing addresses the special case k = 1 {\displaystyle k=1} using a different method. Rendezvous hashing is both much simpler and more general than consistent hashing (see below). == History == Rendezvous hashing was invented by David Thaler and Chinya Ravishankar at the University of Michigan in 1996. Consistent hashing appeared a year later in the literature. Given its simplicity and generality, rendezvous hashing is now being preferred to consistent hashing in real-world applications. Rendezvous hashing was used very early on in many applications including mobile caching, router design, secure key establishment, and sharding and distributed databases. Other examples of real-world systems that use Rendezvous Hashing include the GitHub load balancer, the Apache Ignite distributed database, the Tahoe-LAFS file store, the CoBlitz large-file distribution service, Apache Druid, IBM's Cloud Object Store, the Arvados Data Management System, Apache Kafka, and the Twitter EventBus pub/sub platform. One of the first applications of rendezvous hashing was to enable multicast clients on the Internet (in contexts such as the MBONE) to identify multicast rendezvous points in a distributed fashion. It was used in 1998 by Microsoft's Cache Array Routing Protocol (CARP) for distributed cache coordination and routing. Some Protocol Independent Multicast routing protocols use rendezvous hashing to pick a rendezvous point. == Problem definition and approach == === Algorithm === Rendezvous hashing solves a general version of the distributed hash table problem: We are given a set of n {\displaystyle n} sites (servers or proxies, say). How can any set of clients, given an object O {\displaystyle O} , agree on a k-subset of sites to assign to O {\displaystyle O} ? The standard version of the problem uses k = 1. Each client is to make its selection independently, but all clients must end up picking the same subset of sites. This is non-trivial if we add a minimal disruption constraint, and require that when a site fails or is removed, only objects mapping to that site need be reassigned to other sites. The basic idea is to give each site S j {\displaystyle S_{j}} a score (a weight) for each object O i {\displaystyle O_{i}} , and assign the object to the highest scoring site. All clients first agree on a hash function h ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle h(\cdot )} . For object O i {\displaystyle O_{i}} , the site S j {\displaystyle S_{j}} is defined to have weight w i , j = h ( O i , S j ) {\displaystyle w_{i,j}=h(O_{i},S_{j})} . Each client independently computes these weights w i , 1 , w i , 2 … w i , n {\displaystyle w_{i,1},w_{i,2}\dots w_{i,n}} and picks the k sites that yield the k largest hash values. The clients have thereby achieved distributed k {\displaystyle k} -agreement. If a site S {\displaystyle S} is added or removed, only the objects mapping to S {\displaystyle S} are remapped to different sites, satisfying the minimal disruption constraint above. The HRW assignment can be computed independently by any client, since it depends only on the identifiers for the set of sites S 1 , S 2 … S n {\displaystyle S_{1},S_{2}\dots S_{n}} and the object being assigned. HRW easily accommodates different capacities among sites. If site S k {\displaystyle S_{k}} has twice the capacity of the other sites, we simply represent S k {\displaystyle S_{k}} twice in the list, say, as S k , 1 , S k , 2 {\displaystyle S_{k,1},S_{k,2}} . Clearly, twice as many objects will now map to S k {\displaystyle S_{k}} as to the other sites. === Properties === Consider the simple version of the problem, with k = 1, where all clients are to agree on a single site for an object O. Approaching the problem naively, it might appear sufficient to treat the n sites as buckets in a hash table and hash the object name O into this table. Unfortunately, if any of the sites fails or is unreachable, the hash table size changes, forcing all objects to be remapped. This massive disruption makes such direct hashing unworkable. Under rendezvous hashing, however, clients handle site failures by picking the site that yields the next largest weight. Remapping is required only for objects currently mapped to the failed site, and disruption is minimal. Rendezvous hashing has the following properties: Low overhead: The hash function used is efficient, so overhead at the clients is very low. Load balancing: Since the hash function is randomizing, each of the n sites is equally likely to receive the object O. Loads are uniform across the sites. Site capacity: Sites with different capacities can be represented in the site list with multiplicity in proportion to capacity. A site with twice the capacity of the other sites will be represented twice in the list, while every other site is represented once. High hit rate: Since all clients agree on placing an object O into the same site SO, each fetch or placement of O into SO yields the maximum utility in terms of hit rate. The object O will always be found unless it is evicted by some replacement algorithm at SO. Minimal disruption: When a site fails, only the objects mapped to that site need to be remapped. Disruption is at the minimal possible level. Distributed k-agreement: Clients can reach distributed agreement on k sites simply by selecting the top k sites in the ordering. == O(log n) running time via skeleton-based hierarchical rendezvous hashing == The standard version of Rendezvous Hashing described above works quite well for moderate n, but when n {\displaystyle n} is extremely large, the hierarchical use of Rendezvous Hashing achieves O ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(\log n)} running time. This approach creates a virtual hierarchical structure (called a "skeleton"), and achieves O ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(\log n)} running time by applying HRW at each level while descending the hierarchy. The idea is to first choose some constant m {\displaystyle m} and organize the n {\displaystyle n} sites into c = ⌈ n / m ⌉ {\displaystyle c=\lceil n/m\rceil } clusters C 1 = { S 1 , S 2 … S m } , C 2 = { S m + 1 , S m + 2 … S 2 m } … {\displaystyle C_{1}=\left\{S_{1},S_{2}\dots S_{m}\right\},C_{2}=\left\{S_{m+1},S_{m+2}\dots S_{2m}\right\}\dots } Next, build a virtual hierarchy by choosing a constant f {\displaystyle f} and imagining these c {\displaystyle c} clusters placed at the leaves of a tree T {\displaystyle T} of virtual nodes, each with fanout f {\displaystyle f} . In the accompanying diagram, the cluster size is m = 4 {\displaystyle m=4} , and the skeleton fanout is f = 3 {\displaystyle f=3} . Assuming 108 sites (real nodes) for convenience, we get a three-tier virtual hierarchy. Since f = 3 {\displaystyle f=3} , each virtual node has a natural numbering in octal. Thus, the 27 virtual nodes at the lowest tier would be numbered 000 , 001 , 002 , . . . , 221 , 222 {\displaystyle 000,001,002,...,221,222} in octal (we can, of course, vary the fanout at each level - in that case, each node will be identified with the corresponding mixed-radix number). The easiest way to understand the virtual hierarchy is by starting at the top, and descending the virtual hierarchy. We successively apply Rendezvous Hashing to the set of virtual nodes at each level of the hierarchy, and descend the branch defined by the winning virtual node. We can in fact start at any level in the virtual hierarchy. Starting lower in the hierarchy requires more hashes, but may improve load distribution in the case of failures. For example, instead of applying HRW to all 108 real nodes in the diagram, we can first apply HRW to the 27 lowest-tier virtual nodes, selecting one. We then apply HRW to the four real nodes in its cluster, and choose the winning site. We only need 27 + 4 = 31 {\displaystyle 27+4=31} hashes, rather than 108. If we apply this method starting one level higher in the hierarchy, we would need 9 + 3 + 4 = 16 {\displaystyle 9+3+4=16} hashes to get to the winning site. The figure shows how, if we proceed starting from the root of the skeleton, we may successively choose the virtual nodes ( 2 ) 3 {\displaystyle (2)_{3}} , ( 20 ) 3 {\displaystyle (20)_{3}} , and ( 200 ) 3 {\displaystyle (200)_{3}} , and finally end up with site 74. The virtual hierarchy need not be stored, but can be created on demand, since the virtual nodes names are simply prefixes of base- f {\displaystyle f} (or mixed-radix) representations. We can easily create appropriately sorted strings from the digits, as required. In the example, we would be working with the strings 0 , 1 , 2 {\displaystyle 0,1,2} (at tier 1), 20 , 21 , 22 {\displaystyle 20,21,22} (at tier 2), and 200 , 201 , 202

  Read more →
• 

  Ontology-based data integration

  Ontology-based data integration involves the use of one or more ontologies to effectively combine data or information from multiple heterogeneous sources. It is one of the multiple data integration approaches and may be classified as Global-As-View (GAV). The effectiveness of ontology‑based data integration is closely tied to the consistency and expressivity of the ontology used in the integration process. == Background == Data from multiple sources are characterized by multiple types of heterogeneity. The following hierarchy is often used: Syntactic heterogeneity: is a result of differences in representation format of data Schematic or structural heterogeneity: the native model or structure to store data differ in data sources leading to structural heterogeneity. Schematic heterogeneity that particularly appears in structured databases is also an aspect of structural heterogeneity. Semantic heterogeneity: differences in interpretation of the 'meaning' of data are source of semantic heterogeneity System heterogeneity: use of different operating system, hardware platforms lead to system heterogeneity Ontologies, as formal models of representation with explicitly defined concepts and named relationships linking them, are used to address the issue of semantic heterogeneity in data sources. In domains like bioinformatics and biomedicine, the rapid development, adoption and public availability of ontologies [1] Archived 2007-06-16 at the Wayback Machine has made it possible for the data integration community to leverage them for semantic integration of data and information. == The role of ontologies == Ontologies enable the unambiguous identification of entities in heterogeneous information systems and assertion of applicable named relationships that connect these entities together. Specifically, ontologies play the following roles: Content Explication The ontology enables accurate interpretation of data from multiple sources through the explicit definition of terms and relationships in the ontology. Query Model In some systems like SIMS, the query is formulated using the ontology as a global query schema. Verification The ontology verifies the mappings used to integrate data from multiple sources. These mappings may either be user specified or generated by a system. == Approaches using ontologies for data integration == There are three main architectures that are implemented in ontology‑based data integration applications, namely, Single ontology approach A single ontology is used as a global reference model in the system. This is the simplest approach as it can be simulated by other approaches. SIMS is a prominent example of this approach. The Structured Knowledge Source Integration component of Research Cyc is another prominent example of this approach. (Title = Harnessing Cyc to Answer Clinical Researchers' Ad Hoc Queries). The Gellish Taxonomic Dictionary-Ontology follows this approach as well. Multiple ontologies Multiple ontologies, each modeling an individual data source, are used in combination for integration. Though, this approach is more flexible than the single ontology approach, it requires creation of mappings between the multiple ontologies. Ontology mapping is a challenging issue and is focus of large number of research efforts in computer science [2]. The OBSERVER system is an example of this approach. Hybrid approaches The hybrid approach involves the use of multiple ontologies that subscribe to a common, top-level vocabulary. The top-level vocabulary defines the basic terms of the domain. Thus, the hybrid approach makes it easier to use multiple ontologies for integration in presence of the common vocabulary.

  Read more →
• 

  Pooling layer

  In neural networks, a pooling layer is a kind of network layer that downsamples and aggregates information that is dispersed among many vectors into fewer vectors. It has several uses. It removes redundant information, thus reducing the amount of computation and memory required, which makes the model more robust to small variations in the input; and it increases the receptive field of neurons in later layers in the network. == Convolutional neural network pooling == Pooling is most commonly used in convolutional neural networks (CNN). Below is a description of pooling in 2-dimensional CNNs. The generalization to n-dimensions is immediate. As notation, we consider a tensor x ∈ R H × W × C {\displaystyle x\in \mathbb {R} ^{H\times W\times C}} , where H {\displaystyle H} is height, W {\displaystyle W} is width, and C {\displaystyle C} is the number of channels. A pooling layer outputs a tensor y ∈ R H ′ × W ′ × C ′ {\displaystyle y\in \mathbb {R} ^{H'\times W'\times C'}} . We define two variables f , s {\displaystyle f,s} called "filter size" (aka "kernel size") and "stride". Sometimes, it is necessary to use a different filter size and stride for horizontal and vertical directions. In such cases, we define 4 variables: f H , f W , s H , s W {\displaystyle f_{H},f_{W},s_{H},s_{W}} . The receptive field of an entry in the output tensor, y {\displaystyle y} , are all the entries in x {\displaystyle x} that can affect that entry. === Max pooling === Max Pooling (MaxPool) is commonly used in CNNs to reduce the spatial dimensions of feature maps. Define M a x P o o l ( x | f , s ) 0 , 0 , 0 = max ( x 0 : f − 1 , 0 : f − 1 , 0 ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MaxPool} (x|f,s)_{0,0,0}=\max(x_{0:f-1,0:f-1,0})} where 0 : f − 1 {\displaystyle 0:f-1} means the range 0 , 1 , … , f − 1 {\displaystyle 0,1,\dots ,f-1} . Note that we need to avoid the off-by-one error. The next input is M a x P o o l ( x | f , s ) 1 , 0 , 0 = max ( x s : s + f − 1 , 0 : f − 1 , 0 ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MaxPool} (x|f,s)_{1,0,0}=\max(x_{s:s+f-1,0:f-1,0})} and so on. The receptive field of y i , j , c {\displaystyle y_{i,j,c}} is x i s + f − 1 , j s + f − 1 , c {\displaystyle x_{is+f-1,js+f-1,c}} , so in general, M a x P o o l ( x | f , s ) i , j , c = m a x ( x i s : i s + f − 1 , j s : j s + f − 1 , c ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MaxPool} (x|f,s)_{i,j,c}=\mathrm {max} (x_{is:is+f-1,js:js+f-1,c})} If the horizontal and vertical filter size and strides differ, then in general, M a x P o o l ( x | f , s ) i , j , c = m a x ( x i s H : i s H + f H − 1 , j s W : j s W + f W − 1 , c ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MaxPool} (x|f,s)_{i,j,c}=\mathrm {max} (x_{is_{H}:is_{H}+f_{H}-1,js_{W}:js_{W}+f_{W}-1,c})} More succinctly, we can write y k = max ( { x k ′ | k ′ in the receptive field of k } ) {\displaystyle y_{k}=\max(\{x_{k'}|k'{\text{ in the receptive field of }}k\})} . If H {\displaystyle H} is not expressible as k s + f {\displaystyle ks+f} where k {\displaystyle k} is an integer, then for computing the entries of the output tensor on the boundaries, max pooling would attempt to take as inputs variables off the tensor. In this case, how those non-existent variables are handled depends on the padding conditions, illustrated on the right. Global Max Pooling (GMP) is a specific kind of max pooling where the output tensor has shape R C {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{C}} and the receptive field of y c {\displaystyle y_{c}} is all of x 0 : H , 0 : W , c {\displaystyle x_{0:H,0:W,c}} . That is, it takes the maximum over each entire channel. It is often used just before the final fully connected layers in a CNN classification head. === Average pooling === Average pooling (AvgPool) is similarly defined A v g P o o l ( x | f , s ) i , j , c = a v e r a g e ( x i s : i s + f − 1 , j s : j s + f − 1 , c ) = 1 f 2 ∑ k ∈ i s : i s + f − 1 ∑ l ∈ j s : j s + f − 1 x k , l , c {\displaystyle \mathrm {AvgPool} (x|f,s)_{i,j,c}=\mathrm {average} (x_{is:is+f-1,js:js+f-1,c})={\frac {1}{f^{2}}}\sum _{k\in is:is+f-1}\sum _{l\in js:js+f-1}x_{k,l,c}} Global Average Pooling (GAP) is defined similarly to GMP. It was first proposed in Network-in-Network. Similarly to GMP, it is often used just before the final fully connected layers in a CNN classification head. === Interpolations === There are some interpolations of max pooling and average pooling. Mixed Pooling is a linear sum of max pooling and average pooling. That is, M i x e d P o o l ( x | f , s , w ) = w M a x P o o l ( x | f , s ) + ( 1 − w ) A v g P o o l ( x | f , s ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MixedPool} (x|f,s,w)=w\mathrm {MaxPool} (x|f,s)+(1-w)\mathrm {AvgPool} (x|f,s)} where w ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle w\in [0,1]} is either a hyperparameter, a learnable parameter, or randomly sampled anew every time. Lp Pooling is similar to average pooling, but uses Lp norm average instead of average: y k = ( 1 N ∑ k ′ in the receptive field of k | x k ′ | p ) 1 / p {\displaystyle y_{k}=\left({\frac {1}{N}}\sum _{k'{\text{ in the receptive field of }}k}|x_{k'}|^{p}\right)^{1/p}} where N {\displaystyle N} is the size of receptive field, and p ≥ 1 {\displaystyle p\geq 1} is a hyperparameter. If all activations are non-negative, then average pooling is the case of p = 1 {\displaystyle p=1} , and max pooling is the case of p → ∞ {\displaystyle p\to \infty } . Square-root pooling is the case of p = 2 {\displaystyle p=2} . Stochastic pooling samples a random activation x k ′ {\displaystyle x_{k'}} from the receptive field with probability x k ′ ∑ k ″ x k ″ {\displaystyle {\frac {x_{k'}}{\sum _{k''}x_{k''}}}} . It is the same as average pooling in expectation. Softmax pooling is like max pooling, but uses softmax, i.e. ∑ k ′ e β x k ′ x k ′ ∑ k ″ e β x k ″ {\displaystyle {\frac {\sum _{k'}e^{\beta x_{k'}}x_{k'}}{\sum _{k''}e^{\beta x_{k''}}}}} where β > 0 {\displaystyle \beta >0} . Average pooling is the case of β ↓ 0 {\displaystyle \beta \downarrow 0} , and max pooling is the case of β ↑ ∞ {\displaystyle \beta \uparrow \infty } Local Importance-based Pooling generalizes softmax pooling by ∑ k ′ e g ( x k ′ ) x k ′ ∑ k ″ e g ( x k ″ ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\sum _{k'}e^{g(x_{k'})}x_{k'}}{\sum _{k''}e^{g(x_{k''})}}}} where g {\displaystyle g} is a learnable function. === Other poolings === Spatial pyramidal pooling applies max pooling (or any other form of pooling) in a pyramid structure. That is, it applies global max pooling, then applies max pooling to the image divided into 4 equal parts, then 16, etc. The results are then concatenated. It is a hierarchical form of global pooling, and similar to global pooling, it is often used just before a classification head. Region of Interest Pooling (also known as RoI pooling) is a variant of max pooling used in R-CNNs for object detection. It is designed to take an arbitrarily-sized input matrix, and output a fixed-sized output matrix. Covariance pooling computes the covariance matrix of the vectors { x k , l , 0 : C − 1 } k ∈ i s : i s + f − 1 , l ∈ j s : j s + f − 1 {\displaystyle \{x_{k,l,0:C-1}\}_{k\in is:is+f-1,l\in js:js+f-1}} which is then flattened to a C 2 {\displaystyle C^{2}} -dimensional vector y i , j , 0 : C 2 − 1 {\displaystyle y_{i,j,0:C^{2}-1}} . Global covariance pooling is used similarly to global max pooling. As average pooling computes the average, which is a first-degree statistic, and covariance is a second-degree statistic, covariance pooling is also called "second-order pooling". It can be generalized to higher-order poolings. Blur Pooling means applying a blurring method before downsampling. For example, the Rect-2 blur pooling means taking an average pooling at f = 2 , s = 1 {\displaystyle f=2,s=1} , then taking every second pixel (identity with s = 2 {\displaystyle s=2} ). == Vision Transformer pooling == In Vision Transformers (ViT), there are the following common kinds of poolings. BERT-like pooling uses a dummy [CLS] token, "classification". For classification, the output at [CLS] is the classification token, which is then processed by a LayerNorm-feedforward-softmax module into a probability distribution, which is the network's prediction of class probability distribution. This is the one used by the original ViT and Masked Autoencoder. Global average pooling (GAP) does not use the dummy token, but simply takes the average of all output tokens as the classification token. It was mentioned in the original ViT as being equally good. Multihead attention pooling (MAP) applies a multi headed attention block to pooling. Specifically, it takes as input a list of vectors x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n}} , which might be thought of as the output vectors of a layer of a ViT. It then applies a feedforward layer F F N {\displaystyle \mathrm {FFN} } on each vector, resulting in a matrix V = [ F F N ( v 1 ) , … , F F N ( v n ) ] {\displaystyle V=[\mathrm {FFN} (v_{1}),\dots ,\mathrm {FFN} (v_{n})]} . This is then sent to a multi-headed attention, resulting in M u l t i h e a d e d A

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithm engineering

  Algorithm engineering focuses on the design, analysis, implementation, optimization, profiling and experimental evaluation of computer algorithms, bridging the gap between algorithmics theory and practical applications of algorithms in software engineering. It is a general methodology for algorithmic research. == Origins == In 1995, a report from an NSF-sponsored workshop "with the purpose of assessing the current goals and directions of the Theory of Computing (TOC) community" identified the slow speed of adoption of theoretical insights by practitioners as an important issue and suggested measures to reduce the uncertainty by practitioners whether a certain theoretical breakthrough will translate into practical gains in their field of work, and tackle the lack of ready-to-use algorithm libraries, which provide stable, bug-free and well-tested implementations for algorithmic problems and expose an easy-to-use interface for library consumers. But also, promising algorithmic approaches have been neglected due to difficulties in mathematical analysis. The term "algorithm engineering" was first used with specificity in 1997, with the first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE97), organized by Giuseppe F. Italiano. == Difference from algorithm theory == Algorithm engineering does not intend to replace or compete with algorithm theory, but tries to enrich, refine and reinforce its formal approaches with experimental algorithmics (also called empirical algorithmics). This way it can provide new insights into the efficiency and performance of algorithms in cases where the algorithm at hand is less amenable to algorithm theoretic analysis, formal analysis pessimistically suggests bounds which are unlikely to appear on inputs of practical interest, the algorithm relies on the intricacies of modern hardware architectures like data locality, branch prediction, instruction stalls, instruction latencies which the machine model used in Algorithm Theory is unable to capture in the required detail, the crossover between competing algorithms with different constant costs and asymptotic behaviors needs to be determined. == Methodology == Some researchers describe algorithm engineering's methodology as a cycle consisting of algorithm design, analysis, implementation and experimental evaluation, joined by further aspects like machine models or realistic inputs. They argue that equating algorithm engineering with experimental algorithmics is too limited, because viewing design and analysis, implementation and experimentation as separate activities ignores the crucial feedback loop between those elements of algorithm engineering. === Realistic models and real inputs === While specific applications are outside the methodology of algorithm engineering, they play an important role in shaping realistic models of the problem and the underlying machine, and supply real inputs and other design parameters for experiments. === Design === Compared to algorithm theory, which usually focuses on the asymptotic behavior of algorithms, algorithm engineers need to keep further requirements in mind: Simplicity of the algorithm, implementability in programming languages on real hardware, and allowing code reuse. Additionally, constant factors of algorithms have such a considerable impact on real-world inputs that sometimes an algorithm with worse asymptotic behavior performs better in practice due to lower constant factors. === Analysis === Some problems can be solved with heuristics and randomized algorithms in a simpler and more efficient fashion than with deterministic algorithms. Unfortunately, this makes even simple randomized algorithms difficult to analyze because there are subtle dependencies to be taken into account. === Implementation === Huge semantic gaps between theoretical insights, formulated algorithms, programming languages and hardware pose a challenge to efficient implementations of even simple algorithms, because small implementation details can have rippling effects on execution behavior. The only reliable way to compare several implementations of an algorithm is to spend an considerable amount of time on tuning and profiling, running those algorithms on multiple architectures, and looking at the generated machine code. === Experiments === See: Experimental algorithmics === Application engineering === Implementations of algorithms used for experiments differ in significant ways from code usable in applications. While the former prioritizes fast prototyping, performance and instrumentation for measurements during experiments, the latter requires thorough testing, maintainability, simplicity, and tuning for particular classes of inputs. === Algorithm libraries === Stable, well-tested algorithm libraries like LEDA play an important role in technology transfer by speeding up the adoption of new algorithms in applications. Such libraries reduce the required investment and risk for practitioners, because it removes the burden of understanding and implementing the results of academic research. == Conferences == Two main conferences on Algorithm Engineering are organized annually, namely: Symposium on Experimental Algorithms (SEA), established in 1997 (formerly known as WEA). SIAM Meeting on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX), established in 1999. The 1997 Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'97) was held in Venice (Italy) on September 11–13, 1997. The Third International Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'99) was held in London, UK in July 1999. The first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experimentation (ALENEX99) was held in Baltimore, Maryland on January 15–16, 1999. It was sponsored by DIMACS, the Center for Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science (at Rutgers University), with additional support from SIGACT, the ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory, and SIAM, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic game theory

  Algorithmic game theory (AGT) is an interdisciplinary field at the intersection of game theory and computer science, focused on understanding and designing algorithms for environments where multiple strategic agents interact. This research area combines computational thinking with economic principles to address challenges that emerge when algorithmic inputs come from self-interested participants. In traditional algorithm design, inputs are assumed to be fixed and reliable. However, in many real-world applications—such as online auctions, internet routing, digital advertising, and resource allocation systems—inputs are provided by multiple independent agents who may strategically misreport information to manipulate outcomes in their favor. AGT provides frameworks to analyze and design systems that remain effective despite such strategic behavior. The field can be approached from two complementary perspectives: Analysis: Evaluating existing algorithms and systems through game-theoretic tools to understand their strategic properties. This includes calculating and proving properties of Nash equilibria (stable states where no participant can benefit by changing only their own strategy), measuring price of anarchy (efficiency loss due to selfish behavior), and analyzing best-response dynamics (how systems evolve when players sequentially optimize their strategies). Design: Creating mechanisms and algorithms with both desirable computational properties and game-theoretic robustness. This sub-field, known as algorithmic mechanism design, develops systems that incentivize truthful behavior while maintaining computational efficiency. Algorithm designers in this domain must satisfy traditional algorithmic requirements (such as polynomial-time running time and good approximation ratio) while simultaneously addressing incentive constraints that ensure participants act according to the system's intended design. == History == === Nisan-Ronen: a new framework for studying algorithms === In 1999, the seminal paper of Noam Nisan and Amir Ronen drew the attention of the Theoretical Computer Science community to designing algorithms for selfish (strategic) users. As they claim in the abstract: We consider algorithmic problems in a distributed setting where the participants cannot be assumed to follow the algorithm but rather their own self-interest. As such participants, termed agents, are capable of manipulating the algorithm, the algorithm designer should ensure in advance that the agents’ interests are best served by behaving correctly. Following notions from the field of mechanism design, we suggest a framework for studying such algorithms. In this model the algorithmic solution is adorned with payments to the participants and is termed a mechanism. The payments should be carefully chosen as to motivate all participants to act as the algorithm designer wishes. We apply the standard tools of mechanism design to algorithmic problems and in particular to the shortest path problem. This paper coined the term algorithmic mechanism design and was recognized by the 2012 Gödel Prize committee as one of "three papers laying foundation of growth in Algorithmic Game Theory". === Price of Anarchy === The other two papers cited in the 2012 Gödel Prize for fundamental contributions to Algorithmic Game Theory introduced and developed the concept of "Price of Anarchy". In their 1999 paper "Worst-case Equilibria", Koutsoupias and Papadimitriou proposed a new measure of the degradation of system efficiency due to the selfish behavior of its agents: the ratio of between system efficiency at an optimal configuration, and its efficiency at the worst Nash equilibrium. (The term "Price of Anarchy" only appeared a couple of years later.) === The Internet as a catalyst === The Internet created a new economy—both as a foundation for exchange and commerce, and in its own right. The computational nature of the Internet allowed for the use of computational tools in this new emerging economy. On the other hand, the Internet itself is the outcome of actions of many. This was new to the classic, ‘top-down’ approach to computation that held till then. Thus, game theory is a natural way to view the Internet and interactions within it, both human and mechanical. Game theory studies equilibria (such as the Nash equilibrium). An equilibrium is generally defined as a state in which no player has an incentive to change their strategy. Equilibria are found in several fields related to the Internet, for instance financial interactions and communication load-balancing. Game theory provides tools to analyze equilibria, and a common approach is then to ‘find the game’—that is, to formalize specific Internet interactions as a game, and to derive the associated equilibria. Rephrasing problems in terms of games allows the analysis of Internet-based interactions and the construction of mechanisms to meet specified demands. If equilibria can be shown to exist, a further question must be answered: can an equilibrium be found, and in reasonable time? This leads to the analysis of algorithms for finding equilibria. Of special importance is the complexity class PPAD, which includes many problems in algorithmic game theory. == Areas of research == === Algorithmic mechanism design === Mechanism design is the subarea of economics that deals with optimization under incentive constraints. Algorithmic mechanism design considers the optimization of economic systems under computational efficiency requirements. Typical objectives studied include revenue maximization and social welfare maximization. === Inefficiency of equilibria === The concepts of price of anarchy and price of stability were introduced to capture the loss in performance of a system due to the selfish behavior of its participants. The price of anarchy captures the worst-case performance of the system at equilibrium relative to the optimal performance possible. The price of stability, on the other hand, captures the relative performance of the best equilibrium of the system. These concepts are counterparts to the notion of approximation ratio in algorithm design. === Complexity of finding equilibria === The existence of an equilibrium in a game is typically established using non-constructive fixed point theorems. There are no efficient algorithms known for computing Nash equilibria. The problem is complete for the complexity class PPAD even in 2-player games. In contrast, correlated equilibria can be computed efficiently using linear programming, as well as learned via no-regret strategies. === Computational social choice === Computational social choice studies computational aspects of social choice, the aggregation of individual agents' preferences. Examples include algorithms and computational complexity of voting rules and coalition formation. Other topics include: Algorithms for computing Market equilibria Fair division Multi-agent systems And the area counts with diverse practical applications: Sponsored search auctions Spectrum auctions Cryptocurrencies Prediction markets Reputation systems Sharing economy Matching markets such as kidney exchange and school choice Crowdsourcing and peer grading Economics of the cloud == Journals and newsletters == ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC) SIGEcom Exchanges Algorithmic Game Theory papers are often also published in Game Theory journals such as GEB, Economics journals such as Econometrica, and Computer Science journals such as SICOMP.

  Read more →