AI Detector Similar To Turnitin

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

CityEngine

ArcGIS CityEngine is a commercial 3D modeling program. Developed by Esri R&D Center Zurich (formerly Procedural Inc.), it specializes in the generation of 3D urban environments to support the creation of detailed large-scale 3D city models. Unlike traditional 3D modeling methodology, which uses computer-aided design (CAD) tools and techniques, CityEngine takes a procedural modeling approach which shapes generation via a rules-based system. Due to its integration with the wider ArcGIS platform, CityEngine can also be used with geographic information system (GIS) datasets. CityEngine can be used for urban planning and architecture, graphics visualization, game development, entertainment, and archeology. CityEngine can be used to visualize the building information modeling (BIM) data of buildings in a larger urban context, making for more realistic construction projects. == History and releases == === Software history === ArcGIS CityEngine, originally named Esri CityEngine, was developed at Swiss technology university ETH Zurich by Pascal Mueller, the co-founder and CEO of Procedural Inc. While researching for his PhD at the ETH Computer Vision Lab, Mueller invented a number of techniques for procedural modeling of 3D architecture that make up the foundation of CityEngine. CityEngine publically debuted at the 2001 SIGGRAPH conference; since then, additional research papers have been published that have contributed to CityEngine and its features. The first commercial version of CityEngine was released in 2008. In 2007, Procedural Inc. was founded and separated from ETH Zurich, the top-ranking technology university in Switzerland. In the summer of 2011, Procedural Inc. was acquired by Esri Inc., becoming Esri R&D Center Zurich. Esri CityEngine was renamed to ArcGIS CityEngine in June 2020 to offically make it a part of the ArcGIS software suite. === Releases === === Licensing and pricing === ArcGIS CityEngine is included in the Professional and Professional Plus tiers of ArcGIS Online. Pricing may vary by region and distributors. In the US, the professional tier costs US$2,200 per year; in the UK, it is £4,200 per year (excluding VAT). CityEngine can be purchased elsewhere via a local Esri partner. . Once purchased, users can download and obtain license details from the MyEsri portal. == Features == CGA (computer generated architecture) parametric modeling rules to control mass, geometry assets, proportions, or texturing of buildings or streets on a citywide scale Select a target location and import geo-referenced satellite imagery and 3D terrain of the location to more quickly build accurate urban environments through OpenStreetMap integration Interactively control specific street or building parameters, such as height or age Import/export geo-spatial/vector data with industry-standard formats such as Esri Shapefile, File Geodatabase, and OpenStreetMap, as well as file formats for WebGL, KMZ, Collada, Autodesk FBX, Autodesk Maya, 3DS, Wavefront OBJ, RenderMan RIB, Alembic, e-on software's Vue, Universal Scene Description USD, Khronos Group GLTF, Unreal Engine, and Unreal Datasmith Script and generate rules-based reports to show socioeconomic figures (e.g., Gross Floor Area (GFA) and Floor Area Ratio (FAR)) to analyze their urban design proposals. VR viewing of modeled environments with Samsung Gear VR Use a variety of materials through the Esri materials library == Procedural modeling == ArcGIS CityEngine uses a procedural modeling approach to automatically generate models through a predefined rule set. The rules are defined through a CGA shape grammar system, enabling the creation of complex parametric models. Users can change or add the shape grammar as needed. Urban environments can be modeled within CityEngine by starting with creating a street network (either from the street drawing tool or with data imported from map data). Then, lots may be subdivided as many times as specified, resulting in a map of multiple lots and streets. CityEngine can then be instructed to start generating the buildings using defined procedural modeling rules. At this point, the city model can be re-designed and adjusted by changing the parameters or the shape grammar. === Geodesign === Though CityEngine is not an analytical tool like GIS, discussions about geodesign often mention the use of ArcGIS CityEngine. As it can be used to enhance 3D shape generation in ArcGIS, ArcGIS CityEngine is a critical product to improve the applicability of geodesign by using geospatial information to design or analyze a city. == Applications == === Urban design and planning === Garsdale Design used ArcGIS CityEngine in the creation of city master plans in Iraq before 2013, both to model existing historic areas and also model future plans. Larger companies like Foster+Partners and HOK Architects have also used CityEngine in their urban planning projects. === Urban and environmental studies === Because its primary feature is building informative city models, some urban researchers use CityEngine to compare land-use planning schemes, for example in very dense global cities such as Hong Kong and Seoul. Environmental scientists can also utilize the instant 3D model generation in CityEngine, which can make for more convenient informative research than modeling a city by creating each building individually. === Game development === CityEngine can be used as a tool in the creation of video games that require detailed 3D environments to assign interactive scripts. === Movie industry === Zootopia (also known outside of the US as Zootopolis), which won the 2016 Academy Award for Best Animated Feature Film, used CityEngine to model the city in its movie. multi-scaling city, the designers used CityEngine due to its rule-based system. CityEngine was also used to create Big Hero 6's San-Fransokyo. === Military === Due to its integration with the Esri product suite and its ability to process geospatial data to create 3D scenes/maps, CityEngine can be used within military/defense organizations. == List of movies and TV shows using CityEngine == Studios and companies rarely state what software they use in their pipelines. When CityEngine is mentioned as a tool in production, it's often in a small reference in a larger article. Movies only claimed to use CityEngine by a single Esri employee Presented at FMX 2025 workshop == Ports == ArcGIS CityEngine is built on top of Eclipse IDE, and has therefore able to be used on Windows and Linux operating systems. Support for macOS was stopped in March 2021. == Plugins and extensions == ArcGIS CityEngine currently works with a number of third party 3D modeling, rendering, and analytical software products via its SDK and API; these currently are: ArcGIS CityEngine for ArcGIS Urban: ArcGIS Urban Suite Puma: ArcGIS CityEngine for Rhinoceros 3D Palladio: ArcGIS CityEngine for Houdini Serlio: ArcGIS CityEngine for Maya PyPRT: ArcGIS CityEngine for Python ArcGIS CityEngine provides a Python scripting interface built on Jython (current version 2.7.0) which allows users to create their own tools and functionality. == Publications ==
Read more →
Hallin's spheres

Hallin's spheres is a theory of news reporting and its rhetorical framing posited by journalism historian Daniel C. Hallin in his 1986 book The Uncensored War to explain the news coverage of the Vietnam War. Hallin divides the world of political discourse into three concentric spheres: consensus, legitimate controversy, and deviance. In the sphere of consensus, journalists assume everyone agrees. The sphere of legitimate controversy includes the standard political debates, and journalists are expected to remain neutral. The sphere of deviance falls outside the bounds of legitimate debate, and journalists can ignore it. These boundaries shift, as public opinion shifts. Hallin's spheres, which deals with the media, are similar to the Overton window, which deals with public opinion generally, and posits a sliding scale of public opinion on any given issue ranging from conventional wisdom to unacceptable. Hallin used the concept of framing to describe the presentation and reception of issues in public. For example, framing the use of drugs as criminal activity can encourage the public to consider that behavior anti-social. Hallin's work was later referred to in the controversial formulation of the concept of an opinion corridor, in which the range of acceptable public opinion narrows, and opinion outside that corridor moves from legitimate controversy into deviance. == Description == === Sphere of consensus === This sphere contains those topics on which there is widespread agreement, or at least the perception thereof. Within the sphere of consensus, "journalists feel free to invoke a generalized 'we' and to take for granted shared values and shared assumptions". Examples include such things as motherhood and apple pie. For topics in this sphere, journalists feel free to be advocating cheerleaders without having to be neutral or present any opposing view point and be disinterested observers." === Sphere of legitimate controversy === For topics in this sphere rational and informed people hold differing views within limited range. These topics are therefore the most important to cover, and also ones upon which journalists are seemingly obliged to remain disinterested reporters, rather than advocating for or against a particular view. Schudson notes that Hallin, in his influential study of the US media during the Vietnam War, argues that journalism's commitment to objectivity has always been compartmentalized. That is, within a certain sphere—the sphere of legitimate controversy—journalists seek conscientiously to be balanced and objective. The work of Walter Williams professor at the University of Missouri, Rod Petersen, advanced the idea that priming—controlling the narratives that media covers—can be the tool that media use to get deviant news subjects into the legitimate controversial circles of new coverage. === Sphere of deviance === Topics in this sphere are rejected by journalists as being unworthy of general consideration. Such views are perceived as being out of hand, unfounded, taboo, or of such minor consequence that they are not newsworthy. Hallin argues that in the sphere of deviance, "journalists also depart from standard norms of objective reporting and feel authorized to treat as marginal, laughable, dangerous". They either avoid mentioning or ridicule the controversial subject as outside the bounds of acceptable controversy; and they censor the individuals and groups who are associated with it. A simple example: a person claiming that aliens are manipulating college basketball scores might have difficulty finding sports media coverage for such a claim. A more political example: the US media regulator FCC's "Fairness Doctrine" aimed at radio stations, advocated balance between right and left political news and opinions, yet specified that broadcasters did not have to reserve any space or time for Communist viewpoints. == Uses of the terms == Craig Watkins (2001, pp. 92–94) makes use of the Hallin's spheres in a paper examining ABC, CBS, and NBC television network television news coverage of the Million Man March, a demonstration that took place in Washington, D.C., on October 16, 1995. Watkins analyzes the dominant framing practices—problem definition, rhetorical devices, use of sources, and images—employed by journalists to make sense of this particular expression of political protest. He argues that Hallin's three spheres are a way for media framing practices to develop specific reportorial contexts, and each sphere develops its own distinct style of news reporting resources by different rhetorical tropes and discourses. Piers Robinson (2001, p. 536) uses the concept in relation to debates that have emerged over the extent to which the mass media serves elite interests or, alternatively, plays a powerful role in shaping political outcomes. His article reviews Hallin's spheres as an example of media-state relations, that highlights theoretical and empirical shortcomings in the 'manufacturing consent' thesis (Chomsky, McChesney). Robinson argues that a more nuanced and bi-directional understanding is needed of the direction of influence between media and the state that builds upon, rather than rejecting, existing theoretical accounts. Hallin's theory assumed a relatively homogenized media environment, where most producers were trying to reach most consumers. A more fractured media landscape can challenge this assumption because different audiences may place topics in different spheres, a concept related to the filter bubble, which posits that many members of the public choose to limit their media consumption to the areas of consensus and deviance that they personally prefer.
Read more →
WYSIWYM (interaction technique)

What you see is what you meant (WYSIWYM) is a text editing interaction technique that emerged from two projects at University of Brighton. It allows users to create abstract knowledge representations such as those required by the Semantic Web using a natural language interface. Natural language understanding (NLU) technology is not employed. Instead, natural language generation (NLG) is used in a highly interactive manner. The text editor accepts repeated refinement of a selected span of text as it becomes progressively less vacuous of authored semantics. Using a mouse, a text property held in the evolving text can be further refined by a set of options derived by NLG from a built-in ontology. An invisible representation of the semantic knowledge is created which can be used for multilingual document generation, formal knowledge formation, or any other task that requires formally specified information. The two projects at Brighton worked in the field of Conceptual Authoring to lay a foundation for further research and development of a Semantic Web Authoring Tool (SWAT). This tool has been further explored as a means for developing a knowledge base by those without prior experience with Controlled Natural Language tools.
Read more →
Department of Defense Directive 3000.09

Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 (DODD 3000.09), titled Autonomy in Weapon Systems, is the current U.S. military policy on autonomous weapons. It states: "Autonomous and semi-autonomous weapon systems will be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force." == History == Then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter issued DOD's policy on autonomy in weapons systems, Department of Defense Directive (DODD) 3000.09, in November 2012. DOD updated the directive in January 2023. In February 2023, the US issued a related foreign policy proposal, Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy. == Definitions == There is no agreed definition of lethal autonomous weapon systems that is used in international fora. However, DODD 3000.09 provides definitions for different categories of autonomous weapon systems for the purposes of the U.S. military. These definitions are principally grounded in the role of the human operator with regard to target selection and engagement decisions, rather than in the technological sophistication of the weapon system. DODD 3000.09 defines LAWS as "weapon system[s] that, once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator." This concept of autonomy is also known as "human out of the loop" or "full autonomy." The directive contrasts LAWS with human-supervised, or "human on the loop," autonomous weapon systems, in which operators have the ability to monitor and halt a weapon's target engagement. Another category is semi-autonomous, or "human in the loop," weapon systems that "only engage individual targets or specific target groups that have been selected by a human operator." Semi-autonomous weapons include so-called "fire and forget" weapons, such as certain types of guided missiles, that deliver effects to human-identified targets using autonomous functions. The directive does not apply to autonomous or semi-autonomous cyberspace capabilities; unarmed platforms; unguided munitions; munitions manually guided by the operator (e.g., laser- or wire-guided munitions); mines; unexploded explosive ordnance; or autonomous or semi-autonomous systems that are not weapon systems, nor subject them to its guidelines. == Role of human operator == DODD 3000.09 requires that all systems, including LAWS, be designed to "allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force." As noted in an August 2018 U.S. government white paper, "'appropriate' is a flexible term that reflects the fact that there is not a fixed, one-size-fits-all level of human judgment that should be applied to every context. What is 'appropriate' can differ across weapon systems, domains of warfare, types of warfare, operational contexts, and even across different functions in a weapon system." Furthermore, "human judgment over the use of force" does not require manual human "control" of the weapon system, as is often reported, but rather broader human involvement in decisions about how, when, where, and why the weapon will be employed. This includes a human determination that the weapon will be used "with appropriate care and in accordance with the law of war, applicable treaties, weapon system safety rules, and applicable rules of engagement." To aid this determination, DODD 3000.09 requires that "[a]dequate training, [tactics, techniques, and procedures], and doctrine are available, periodically reviewed, and used by system operators and commanders to understand the functioning, capabilities, and limitations of the system's autonomy in realistic operational conditions." The directive also requires that the weapon's human-machine interface be "readily understandable to trained operators" so they can make informed decisions regarding the weapon's use. == Weapons review process == DODD 3000.09 requires that the software and hardware of covered semi-autonomous and autonomous weapon systems, be tested and evaluated to ensure they:Function as anticipated in realistic operational environments against adaptive adversaries taking realistic and practicable countermeasures, [and] complete engagements within a timeframe and geographic area, as well as other relevant environmental and operational constraints, consistent with commander and operator intentions. If unable to do so, the systems will terminate the engagement or obtain additional operator input before continuing the engagement.Systems must also be "sufficiently robust to minimize the probability and consequences of failures." Any changes to the system's operating state—for example, due to machine learning—would require the system to go through testing and evaluation again to ensure that it has retained its safety features and ability to operate as intended. The directive also notes that "the use of AI capabilities in autonomous or semi-autonomous systems will be consistent with the DOD AI Ethical Principles." In addition to the standard weapons review process, a secondary senior-level review is required for covered autonomous and semi-autonomous systems. This review requires the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD[P]), the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (VCJCS), and the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USD[R&E]) to approve the system before formal development. USD(P), VCJCS, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD[A&S]) must then approve the system before fielding. In the event of "urgent military need," this senior-level review may be waived by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. DODD 3000.09 additionally establishes the Autonomous Weapon System Working Group—composed of representatives of USD(P); USD(R&E); USD(A&S); DOD General Counsel; the Chief Digital and AI Officer; the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation; and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—to support and advise the senior-level review process. == Congressional notification == Per Section 251 of the FY2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA; Pub. L. 118–31 (text) (PDF)), the Secretary of Defense is to notify the defense committees of any changes to DODD 3000.09 within 30 days. The Secretary is directed to provide a description of the modification and an explanation of the reasons for the modification. Section 1066 of the FY2025 NDAA (Pub. L. 118–159 (text) (PDF)) additionally requires the Secretary to "submit to the congressional defense committees a comprehensive report on the approval and deployment of lethal autonomous weapon systems by the United States," annually through December 31, 2029. Section 1061 of the FY2026 NDAA (P.L. Pub. L. 119–60 (menu; GPO has not yet published law)) amends the U.S. Code to require congressional notification of any waiver issued under DODD 3000.09. == AI safety == The second revision of DoDD 3000.09, effective January 25, 2023, requires that "The DoD will design and engineer AI capabilities to fulfill their intended functions while possessing the ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences, and the ability to disengage or deactivate deployed systems that demonstrate unintended behavior." == Criticism == As noted in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the policy requires that autonomous weapon systems that kill people or use kinetic force, selecting and engaging targets without further human intervention, be certified as compliant with "appropriate levels" and other standards, not that such weapon systems cannot meet these standards and are therefore forbidden. "Semi-autonomous" hunter-killers that autonomously identify and attack targets do not require certification.
Read more →
VGACAD

VGACAD was the parent of a suite of shareware graphic utilities made for the MS-DOS operating system used in the IBM PC and clones. It was popular for editing and capturing images using BSAVE (graphics image format) and provided an early graphic editing suite compatible with multiple graphic cards and resolutions, used on the IBM PC. == Usage == Written by Lawrence Gozum in 1987, it was the genesis of multiple versions and improvements over 10 years. Ran with his brother, Marvin initially helped with design ideas, strategic focus, technical support calls, and managing the early shareware business. The growth of the VGACAD suite grew quickly to preoccupy most of their time. Lawrence then focused more of his efforts on software and formed Applied Insights, to manage VGACAD and its offspring, VidFun, and Ai Picture Explorer. At its peak, its users ranged from individuals, Federal government offices, museums and major newspapers. == Features == VGACAD was a misnomer, and meant VGA-Computer Assisted Drawing, rather than computer-aided design, as CAD is commonly referred to today. Its longevity was due to its color accuracy, speed, small size, and that its suite of small utilities often worked stand-alone. One called VGACAP, for 'capture', dumped video memory into a file that could later be converted to popular graphic image formats, later made commonplace when Microsoft Windows programmed the print screen key to dump graphics into the clipboard. However, VGACAP ran insulated apart from early versions of Windows, and thus could capture screens were applications prohibited such function.
Read more →
Vilém Flusser

Vilém Flusser (May 12, 1920 – November 27, 1991) was a Czech-born Brazilian philosopher, writer and journalist, best known for his contributions to media studies, communication theory, and the philosophy of language. He lived for a long period in São Paulo (where he became a Brazilian citizen) and later in France, and his works are written in many different languages. His early work was marked by discussion of the thought of Martin Heidegger, and by the influence of existentialism and phenomenology. Phenomenology would play a major role in the transition to the later phase of his work, in which he turned his attention to the philosophy of communication and of artistic production. He contributed to the dichotomy logic theory through history: the period of image worship, and period of text worship, with deviations consequently into idolatry and "textolatry". == Life == Flusser was born in 1920 in Prague, Czechoslovakia into a family of Jewish intellectuals. His father, Gustav Flusser, studied mathematics and physics (under Albert Einstein among others). Vilém attended German and Czech primary schools and later a German grammar school. In 1938, Flusser started to study philosophy at the Juridical Faculty of the Charles University in Prague. In 1939, shortly after the Nazi occupation, Flusser emigrated to London (with Edith Barth, his later wife, and her parents) to continue his studies for one term at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Vilém Flusser lost all of his family in the German concentration camps: his father died in Buchenwald in 1940; his grandparents, his mother and his sister were brought to Theresienstadt and later to Auschwitz where they were killed. The next year, he emigrated to Brazil, living both in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. He started working at a Czech import/export company and then at Stabivolt, a manufacturer of radios and transistors. In 1960 he started to collaborate with the Brazilian Institute of Philosophy (IBF) in São Paulo and published in the Revista Brasileira de Filosofia; by these means he seriously approached the Brazilian intellectual community. Flusser had as his friend and closest interlocutor the Brazilian philosopher Vicente Ferreira da Silva. Flusser and Vicente Ferreira da Silva met in São Paulo in the 1960s and began a close intellectual dialogue that continued until Ferreira da Silva's death in 1963. Flusser wrote several essays on Ferreira da Silva's work and that Ferreira da Silva's concept of "Fundamental ontology” had a significant impact on Flusser's understanding of the nature of reality. During the 60s Flusser published and taught at several schools in São Paulo, being Lecturer for Philosophy of Science at the Escola Politécnica of the University of São Paulo and Professor of Philosophy of Communication at the Escola Dramática and the Escola Superior de Cinema in São Paulo. He also participated actively in the arts, collaborating with the Bienal de São Paulo, among other cultural events. Beginning in the 1950s he taught philosophy and worked as a journalist, before publishing his first book Língua e realidade (Language and Reality) in 1963. In 1972 he decided to leave Brazil. Some say it was because it was becoming difficult to publish because of the military regime. Others dispute this reason, since his work on communication and language did not threaten the military. In 1970, when a reform took place at the University of São Paulo by the Brazilian military government, all Lecturers of Philosophy (members of the Department of Philosophy) were dismissed. Flusser, who taught at the Engineering School (Escola Politécnica), had to leave the university as well. In 1972 he and his wife Edith settled temporarily in Merano (Tyrol). Further short stays in various European countries followed until they moved to Robion in southern France in 1981, where they remained until Flusser's death in 1991. To the end of his life, he was quite active writing and giving lectures around media theory and working with new topics (Philosophy of Photography, Technical Images, etc.). He died in 1991 in a car accident near the Czech–German border, while trying to visit his native city, Prague, to give a lecture. Vilém Flusser is the cousin of David Flusser. == Philosophy == Flusser's essays are short, provocative and lucid, with a resemblance to the style of journalistic articles. Critics have noted he is less a 'systematic' thinker than a 'dialogic' one, purposefully eclectic and provocative (Cubitt 2004). However, his early books, written in the 1960s, primarily in Portuguese, and published in Brazil, have a slightly different style. Flusser's writings relate to each other, however, which means that he intensively works over certain topics and dissects them into a number of brief essays. His main topics of interest were: epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, ontology, language philosophy, semiotics, philosophy of science, the history of Western culture, the philosophy of religion, the history of symbolic language, technology, writing, the technical image, photography, migration, media and literature, and, especially in his later years, the philosophy of communication and of artistic production. His writings reflect his wandering life: although the majority of his work was written in German and Portuguese, he also wrote in English and French, with scarce translation to other languages. Because Flusser's writings in different languages are dispersed in the form of books, articles or sections of books, his work as a media philosopher and cultural theorist is only now becoming more widely known. The first book by Flusser to be published in English was Towards a Philosophy of Photography in 1984 by the then new journal European Photography, which was his own translation of the work. The Shape of Things, was published in London in 1999 and was followed by a new translation of Towards a Philosophy of Photography. Flusser's archives have been held by the Academy of Media Arts in Cologne and are currently housed at the Berlin University of the Arts. === Philosophy of photography === Writing about photography in the 1970s and 80s, in the face of the early worldwide impact of computer technologies, Flusser argued that the photograph was the first in a number of technical image forms to have fundamentally changed the way in which the world is seen. Historically, the importance of photography had been that it introduced nothing less than a new epoch: 'The invention of photography constitutes a break in history that can only be understood in comparison to that other historical break constituted by the invention of linear writing.' Whereas ideas might previously have been interpreted in terms of their written form, photography heralded new forms of perceptual experience and knowledge. As Flusser Archive Supervisor Claudia Becker describes, "For Flusser, photography is not only a reproductive imaging technology, it is a dominant cultural technique through which reality is constituted and understood". In this context, Flusser argued that photographs have to be understood in strict separation from 'pre-technical image forms'. For example, he contrasted them to paintings which he described as images that can be sensibly 'decoded', because the viewer is able to interpret what he or she sees as more or less direct signs of what the painter intended. By contrast, even though photography produces images that seem to be 'faithful reproductions' of objects and events they cannot be so directly 'decoded'. The crux of this difference stems, for Flusser, from the fact that photographs are produced through the operations of an apparatus. And the photographic apparatus operates in ways that are not immediately known or shaped by its operator. For example, he described the act of photographing as follows: The photographer's gesture as the search for a viewpoint onto a scene takes place within the possibilities offered by the apparatus. The photographer moves within specific categories of space and time regarding the scene: proximity and distance, bird- and worm's-eye views, frontal- and side-views, short or long exposures, etc. The Gestalt of space–time surrounding the scene is prefigured for the photographer by the categories of his camera. These categories are an a priori for him. He must 'decide' within them: he must press the trigger. Roughly put, the person using a camera might think that they are operating its controls to produce a picture that shows the world the way they want it to be seen, but it is the pre-programmed character of the camera that sets the parameters of this act and it is the apparatus that shapes the meaning of the resulting image. Given the central role of photography to almost all aspects of contemporary life, the programmed character of the photographic apparatus shapes the experience of looking at and interpreting photographs as well as most of the cultural contexts in which we do so. Flusse
Read more →
Pattern language

A pattern language is an organized and coherent set of patterns, each of which describes a problem and the core of a solution that can be used in many ways within a specific field of expertise. The term was coined by architect Christopher Alexander and popularized by his 1977 book A Pattern Language. A pattern language can also be an attempt to express the deeper wisdom of what brings aliveness within a particular field of human endeavor, through a set of interconnected patterns. Aliveness is one placeholder term for "the quality that has no name": a sense of wholeness, spirit, or grace, that while of varying form, is precise and empirically verifiable. Alexander claims that ordinary people can use this design approach to successfully solve very large, complex design problems. == What is a pattern? == When a designer designs something – whether a house, computer program, or lamp – they must make many decisions about how to solve problems. A single problem is documented with its typical place (the syntax), and use (the grammar) with the most common and recognized good solution seen in the wild, like the examples seen in dictionaries. Each such entry is a single design pattern. Each pattern has a name, a descriptive entry, and some cross-references, much like a dictionary entry. A documented pattern should explain why that solution is good in the pattern's contexts. Elemental or universal patterns such as "door" or "partnership" are versatile ideals of design, either as found in experience or for use as components in practice, explicitly described as holistic resolutions of the forces in recurrent contexts and circumstances, whether in architecture, medicine, software development or governance, etc. Patterns might be invented or found and studied, such as the naturally occurring patterns of design that characterize human environments. Like all languages, a pattern language has vocabulary, syntax, and grammar – but a pattern language applies to some complex activity other than communication. In pattern languages for design, the parts break down in this way: The language description – the vocabulary – is a collection of named, described solutions to problems in a field of interest. These are called design patterns. So, for example, the language for architecture describes items like: settlements, buildings, rooms, windows, latches, etc. Each solution includes syntax, a description that shows where the solution fits in a larger, more comprehensive or more abstract design. This automatically links the solution into a web of other needed solutions. For example, rooms have ways to get light, and ways to get people in and out. The solution includes grammar that describes how the solution solves a problem or produces a benefit. So, if the benefit is unneeded, the solution is not used. Perhaps that part of the design can be left empty to save money or other resources; if people do not need to wait to enter a room, a simple doorway can replace a waiting room. In the language description, grammar and syntax cross index (often with a literal alphabetic index of pattern names) to other named solutions, so the designer can quickly think from one solution to related, needed solutions, and document them in a logical way. In Christopher Alexander's book A Pattern Language, the patterns are in decreasing order by size, with a separate alphabetic index. The web of relationships in the index of the language provides many paths through the design process. This simplifies the design work because designers can start the process from any part of the problem they understand and work toward the unknown parts. At the same time, if the pattern language has worked well for many projects, there is reason to believe that even a designer who does not completely understand the design problem at first will complete the design process, and the result will be usable. For example, skiers coming inside must shed snow and store equipment. The messy snow and boot cleaners should stay outside. The equipment needs care, so the racks should be inside. == Many patterns form a language == Just as words must have grammatical and semantic relationships to each other in order to make a spoken language useful, design patterns must be related to each other in position and utility order to form a pattern language. Christopher Alexander's work describes a process of decomposition, in which the designer has a problem (perhaps a commercial assignment), selects a solution, then discovers new, smaller problems resulting from the larger solution. Occasionally, the smaller problems have no solution, and a different larger solution must be selected. Eventually all of the remaining design problems are small enough or routine enough to be solved by improvisation by the builders, and the "design" is done. The actual organizational structure (hierarchical, iterative, etc.) is left to the discretion of the designer, depending on the problem. This explicitly lets a designer explore a design, starting from some small part. When this happens, it's common for a designer to realize that the problem is actually part of a larger solution. At this point, the design almost always becomes a better design. In the language, therefore, each pattern has to indicate its relationships to other patterns and to the language as a whole. This gives the designer using the language a great deal of guidance about the related problems that must be solved. The most difficult part of having an outside expert apply a pattern language is in fact to get a reliable, complete list of the problems to be solved. Of course, the people most familiar with the problems are the people that need a design. So, Alexander famously advocated on-site improvisation by concerned, empowered users, as a powerful way to form very workable large-scale initial solutions, maximizing the utility of a design, and minimizing the design rework. The desire to empower users of architecture was, in fact, what led Alexander to undertake a pattern language project for architecture in the first place. == Design problems in a context == An important aspect of design patterns is to identify and document the key ideas that make a good system different from a poor system (that may be a house, a computer program or an object of daily use), and to assist in the design of future systems. The idea expressed in a pattern should be general enough to be applied in very different systems within its context, but still specific enough to give constructive guidance. The range of situations in which the problems and solutions addressed in a pattern apply is called its context. An important part in each pattern is to describe this context. Examples can further illustrate how the pattern applies to very different situation. For instance, Alexander's pattern "A PLACE TO WAIT" addresses bus stops in the same way as waiting rooms in a surgery, while still proposing helpful and constructive solutions. The "Gang-of-Four" book Design Patterns by Gamma et al. proposes solutions that are independent of the programming language, and the program's application domain. Still, the problems and solutions described in a pattern can vary in their level of abstraction and generality on the one side, and specificity on the other side. In the end this depends on the author's preferences. However, even a very abstract pattern will usually contain examples that are, by nature, absolutely concrete and specific. Patterns can also vary in how far they are proven in the real world. Alexander gives each pattern a rating by zero, one or two stars, indicating how well they are proven in real-world examples. It is generally claimed that all patterns need at least some existing real-world examples. It is, however, conceivable to document yet unimplemented ideas in a pattern-like format. The patterns in Alexander's book also vary in their level of scale – some describing how to build a town or neighbourhood, others dealing with individual buildings and the interior of rooms. Alexander sees the low-scale artifacts as constructive elements of the large-scale world, so they can be connected to a hierarchic network. === Balancing of forces === A pattern must characterize the problems that it is meant to solve, the context or situation where these problems arise, and the conditions under which the proposed solutions can be recommended. Often these problems arise from a conflict of different interests or "forces". A pattern emerges as a dialogue that will then help to balance the forces and finally make a decision. For instance, there could be a pattern suggesting a wireless telephone. The forces would be the need to communicate, and the need to get other things done at the same time (cooking, inspecting the bookshelf). A very specific pattern would be just "WIRELESS TELEPHONE". More general patterns would be "WIRELESS DEVICE" or "SECONDARY ACTIVITY", suggesting that a secondary activity (such as talking on t
Read more →
20Q

20Q is a computerized game of twenty questions that began as a test in artificial intelligence (AI). It was invented by Robin Burgener in 1988. The game was made handheld by Radica in 2003, but was discontinued in 2011 because Techno Source took the license for 20Q handheld devices. The game 20Q is based on the spoken parlor game known as twenty questions, and is both a website and a handheld device. 20Q asks the player to think of something and will then try to guess what they are thinking of with twenty yes-or-no questions. If it fails to guess in 20 questions, it will ask an additional 5 questions. If it fails to guess even with 25 (or 30) questions, the player is declared the winner. Sometimes the first guess of the object can be asked at question 14. == Principle and history == The principle is that the player thinks of something and the 20Q artificial intelligence asks a series of questions before guessing what the player is thinking. This artificial intelligence learns on its own with the information relayed back to the players who interact with it, and is not programmed. The player can answer these questions with: Yes, No, Unknown, and Sometimes. The experiment is based on the classic word game of Twenty Questions, and on the computer game "Animals," popular in the early 1970s, which used a somewhat simpler method to guess an animal. The 20Q AI uses an artificial neural network to pick the questions and to guess. After the player has answered the twenty questions posed (sometimes fewer), 20Q makes a guess. If it is incorrect, it asks more questions, then guesses again. It makes guesses based on what it has learned; it is not programmed with information or what the inventor thinks. Answers to any question are based on players’ interpretations of the questions asked. Newer editions were made for different categories, such as music 20Q which has the player think of a song, and Harry Potter 20Q, which has the player think of something from the world of the Harry Potter series. The 20Q AI can draw its own conclusions on how to interpret the information. It can be described as more of a folk taxonomy than a taxonomy. Its knowledge develops with every game played. In this regard, the online version of the 20Q AI can be inaccurate because it gathers its answers from what people think rather than from what people know. Limitations of taxonomy are often overcome by the AI itself because it can learn and adapt. For example, if the player was thinking of a "Horse" and answered "No" to the question "Is it an animal?," the AI will, nevertheless, guess correctly, despite being told that a horse is not an animal. Patent applications in the US and Europe were submitted in 2005. In August 2014, 20Q.net Inc., with Brashworks Studios, developed and released an iOS iPad version available at the Apple iTunes store. == Game show == On June 13, 2009, GSN began a TV version of the game, hosted by Cat Deeley, with Hal Sparks as the voice of Mr. Q.
Read more →
H (company)

H Company, also known simply as H, is a French artificial intelligence startup which develops "action-oriented" artificial intelligence agents for enterprise automation and productivity. In May 2024, H Company closed a record-setting $220 million seed round, at the time the largest AI raise in Europe. In 2026, H Company released Holo 3, the latest generation of its computer-use AI models. The update marked a major advance in agentic AI, enabling agents to navigate any user interface, interpret screens, and complete complex, multi-step tasks across enterprise systems—much like a human user. This breakthrough positioned H Company at the frontier of computer-use autonomy, accelerating the integration of AI in enterprise workflows. == History == H Company was founded in 2023 in Paris by Laurent Sifre, Charles Kantor, and three DeepMind veterans: Daan Wiestra, Karl Tuyls, Julien Perollat. In May 2024, the firm secured what was then the largest European AI seed round, totaling $220 million led by US investors including Eric Schmidt (former Google CEO), Amazon, and backed by Accel, Bpifrance, UiPath, Eurazeo, Xavier Niel, Yuri Milner, Bernard Arnault, Samsung and others. In August 2024, three cofounders (Wiestra, Tuyls, Perollat) left the company over operational disagreements. In November 2024, H launched Runner H, its first agentic-API platform, which combined a large language model (LLM) and a reduced, 2-billion parameter vision-language model (VLM). In May 2025, H Company acquired Mithril Security, and in June 2025 the company widened its offering for agentic models. In June 2025, Gautier Cloix (formerly CEO Palantir France) replaced Charles Kantor as CEO of H Company, aiming to pivot the company towards a "forward deployed engineers" model. In July 2025, H Company introduced Surfer-H-CLI, an open-source, web-native Chrome agent designed for browser-based automation—able to search, scroll, click, and type on behalf of users and controllable via any visual language model (VLM). When paired with its June 2025 open-sourced 3B-parameter Holo-1 model, Surfer-H-CLI achieved 92.2% WebVoyager benchmark accuracy. == Activity == H Company creates enterprise AI models and agents (agentic AI) to automate and optimize complex workflows. H Company specifically designs AI agents called computer use capable of autonomously interfacing with any software (local or cloud-based) to detect and automate repetitive operations. H Company is based in Paris, France, with international offices in London and New York. H Company raised $220 million since its inception. Gautier Cloix is president and CEO of the company. H Company client include the French national lottery FDJ United. In March 2026, H Company released Holo3, a family of artificial intelligence models designed to operate digital systems by interacting directly with user interfaces. Holo3 enables agents ("virtual humanoids") to understand what is displayed in front-end environments—such as web pages, desktop applications, and other graphical user interfaces—and perform actions such as clicking, typing, and navigating across them to complete multi-step tasks. On the OSWorld-Verified benchmark, Holo3 reportedly achieved about 78.9%, surpassing the scores of OpenAI’s GPT‑5.4 and Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6 on this specific test, at roughly one-tenth of the inference cost of these proprietary systems. The release has been presented as a significant step toward automating routine digital workflows, allowing organizations to offload repetitive on-screen work, such as data entry and reconciliation across multiple tools, to AI-based agents.
Read more →
Reward hacking

Reward hacking or specification gaming occurs when an AI trained with reinforcement learning optimizes an objective function—achieving the literal, formal specification of an objective—without actually achieving an outcome that the programmers intended. DeepMind researchers have analogized it to the human behavior of finding a "shortcut" when being evaluated: "In the real world, when rewarded for doing well on a homework assignment, a student might copy another student to get the right answers, rather than learning the material—and thus exploit a loophole in the task specification". This idea is strongly associated with Goodhart's law, which argues that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. == Definition and theoretical framework == The concept of reward hacking arises from the intrinsic difficulty of defining a reward function that accurately reflects the true intentions of designers. In 2016, researchers at OpenAI identified reward hacking as one of five major "concrete problems of AI safety", describing it as the possibility that an agent could exploit the reward function to achieve maximum rewards through undesirable behavior. Amodei et al. categorized several distinct sources of reward hacking, including agents that use partially observed goals (such as a cleaning robot that closes its eyes to avoid perceiving messes), metrics that collapse under strong optimization (Goodhart's law), self-reinforcing feedback loops, and agents that interfere with the physical implementation of their reward signal (a failure mode known as "wireheading"). Skalse et al. (2022) propose a formal mathematical definition of reward hacking, which involves a situation where optimizing an imperfect proxy reward function results in poor performance compared to the true reward function. They define a proxy as "unhackable" if any increase in the expected proxy return cannot cause any decrease in the expected true return. A key finding states that, across all stochastic policy distributions (mappings from states to probability distributions over actions), two reward functions are unhackable if and only if one of them is constant, which means that reward hacking is theoretically unavoidable. Similarly, Nayebi (2025) presents general no-free-lunch barriers to AI alignment, arguing that with large task spaces and finite samples, reward hacking is "globally inevitable" since rare high-loss states are systematically under-covered by any oversight scheme. == Examples == Around 1983, Eurisko, an early attempt at evolving general heuristics, unexpectedly assigned the highest possible fitness level to a parasitic mutated heuristic, H59, whose only activity was to artificially maximize its own fitness level by taking unearned partial credit for the accomplishments of other heuristics. The "bug" was fixed by the programmers moving part of the code to a new protected section that could not be modified by the heuristics. In a 2004 paper, a reinforcement learning algorithm was designed to encourage a physical Mindstorms robot to remain on a marked path. Because the three allowed actions were forward, left, and right, the researchers expected the trained robot to move forward and follow the turns of the provided path. However, alternation of two composite actions allowed the robot to slowly zig-zag backwards; thus, the robot learned to maximize its reward by going back and forth on the initial straight portion of the path. Given the limited sensory abilities of the robot, a reward purely based on its position in the environment had to be discarded as infeasible; the reinforcement function had to be patched with an action-based reward for moving forward. The book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You (2019) gives an example of a tic-tac-toe bot (playing the unrestricted n-in-a-row variant) that learned to win by playing a huge coordinate value that would cause other bots to crash when they attempted to expand their model of the board. Among other examples from the book is a bug-fixing evolution-based AI (named GenProg) that, when tasked to prevent a list from containing sorting errors, simply truncated the list. Another of GenProg's misaligned strategies evaded a regression test that compared a target program's output to the expected output stored in a file called "trusted-output.txt". Rather than continue to maintain the target program, GenProg simply deleted the "trusted-output.txt" file globally; this hack tricked the regression test into succeeding. Such problems could be patched by human intervention on a case-by-case basis after they became evident. === In virtual robotics === In Karl Sims' 1994 demonstration of creature evolution in a virtual environment, a fitness function that was expected to encourage the evolution of creatures that would learn to walk or crawl to a target resulted instead in the evolution of tall, rigid creatures that reached the target by falling over. This was patched by changing the environment so that taller creatures were forced to start farther from the target. Researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute stated in 1998 that their cycle-bot's reinforcement functions had "to be designed with great care." In their first experiments, "we rewarded the agent for driving towards the goal but did not punish it for driving away from it. Cconsequently, the agent drove in circles with a radius of 20–50 meters around the starting point. Such behavior was actually rewarded by the reinforcement function, furthermore circles with a certain radius are physically very stable when driving a bicycle". While setting up a 2011 experiment to test "survival of the flattest", experimenters attempted to ban mutations that altered the base reproduction rate. Every time a mutation occurred, the system would pause the simulation to test the new mutation in a test environment and would veto any mutations that resulted in a higher base reproduction rate. However, this resulted in mutated organisms that could recognize and suppress reproduction ("play dead") within the test environment. An initial patch, which removed cues that identified the test environment, failed to completely prevent runaway reproduction; new mutated organisms would "play dead" at random as a strategy to sometimes, by chance, outwit the mutation veto system. A 2017 DeepMind paper noted that "great care must be taken when defining the reward function," citing an unexpected failure when an agent flipped a brick because it received "a grasping reward calculated with the wrong reference point on the brick". OpenAI stated in 2017 that in some domains their semi-supervised system could result in agents "adopting policies that tricked evaluators," and that in one environment "a robot that was supposed to grasp items instead positioned its manipulator between the camera and the object so that it only appeared to be grasping it." A 2018 bug in OpenAI Gym could cause a robot expected to quietly move a block sitting on top of a table to instead opt to move the table. A 2020 collection of similar anecdotes posits that "evolution has its own 'agenda' distinct from the programmer's" and that "the first rule of directed evolution is 'you get what you select for'". === In video game bots === In 2013, programmer Tom Murphy VII published an AI designed to learn NES games. When the AI was about to lose at Tetris, it learned to indefinitely pause the game. Murphy later analogized it to the fictional WarGames computer, which concluded that "The only winning move is not to play". AI programmed to learn video games will sometimes fail to progress through the entire game as expected, instead opting to repeat content. A 2016 OpenAI algorithm trained on the CoastRunners racing game unexpectedly learned to attain a higher score by looping through three targets rather than ever finishing the race. Some evolutionary algorithms that were evolved to play QBert in 2018 declined to clear levels, instead finding two distinct novel ways to farm a single level indefinitely. Multiple researchers have observed that AI learning to play Road Runner gravitates to a "score exploit" in which the AI deliberately gets itself killed near the end of level one so that it can repeat the level. A 2017 experiment deployed an "oversight" convolutional neural network trained on human examples to block such actions, but the agent learned to exploit oversight failures in the top right corner of the screen, where it was still able to get killed. == Reward hacking in modern language models == With the rise of large language models (LLMs) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) as a primary technique for AI alignment, reward hacking has become a major concern for the development of artificial intelligence. In RLHF, a reward model trained on data that best captures human preferences is used as a proxy for human judgment, with the language model being fine-tuned to optimize this reward proxy. However, since the rewar
Read more →
NeOn Toolkit

The NeOn Toolkit is an open source, multi-platform ontology editor, which supports the development of ontologies in F-Logic and OWL/RDF. The editor is based on the Eclipse platform and provides a set of plug-ins (currently 20 plug-ins are available for the latest version, v2.4) covering a number of ontology engineering activities, including Annotation and Documentation, Modularization and Customization, Reuse, Ontology Evolution, translation and others. The NeOn Toolkit has been developed in the course of the EU-funded NeOn project and is currently maintained and distributed by the NeOn Technologies Foundation.
Read more →
KL-ONE

KL-ONE (pronounced "kay ell won") is a knowledge representation system in the tradition of semantic networks and frames; that is, it is a frame language. The system is an attempt to overcome semantic indistinctness in semantic network representations and to explicitly represent conceptual information as a structured inheritance network. == Overview == There is a whole family of KL-ONE-like systems. One of the innovations that KL-ONE initiated was the use of a deductive classifier, an automated reasoning engine that can validate a frame ontology and deduce new information about the ontology based on the initial information provided by a domain expert. Frames in KL-ONE are called concepts. These form hierarchies using subsume-relations; in the KL-ONE terminology a super class is said to subsume its subclasses. Multiple inheritance is allowed. Actually a concept is said to be well-formed only if it inherits from more than one other concept. All concepts, except the top concept (usually THING), must have at least one super class. In KL-ONE descriptions are separated into two basic classes of concepts: primitive and defined. Primitives are domain concepts that are not fully defined. This means that given all the properties of a concept, this is not sufficient to classify it. They may also be viewed as incomplete definitions. Using the same view, defined concepts are complete definitions. Given the properties of a concept, these are necessary and sufficient conditions to classify the concept. The slot-concept is called roles and the values of the roles are role-fillers. There are several different types of roles to be used in different situations. The most common and important role type is the generic RoleSet that captures the fact that the role may be filled with more than one filler.
Read more →
E-gree (app)

E-gree is a legal app that became well known in 2020. It was the first app of its kind to protect users against a number of dating-related issues, including revenge porn. == Background == The app was co-founded by Araz Mamet, Keith Fraser and Ilya Flaks. The app focuses on privacy, with users being able to set up various contracts to protect themselves following a breakup, or while dating. This notably included signing an NDA when sexting. The app received investment from a number of notable people and companies, including Natalia Vodianova.
Read more →
Stanford Research Institute Problem Solver

The Stanford Research Institute Problem Solver, known by its acronym STRIPS, is an automated planner developed by Richard Fikes and Nils Nilsson in 1971 at SRI International. The same name was later used to refer to the formal language of the inputs to this planner. This language is the base for most of the languages for expressing automated planning problem instances in use today; such languages are commonly known as action languages. This article only describes the language, not the planner. == Definition == A STRIPS instance is composed of: An initial state; The specification of the goal states – situations that the planner is trying to reach; A set of actions. For each action, the following are included: preconditions (what must be established before the action is performed); postconditions (what is established after the action is performed). Mathematically, a STRIPS instance is a quadruple ⟨ P , O , I , G ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle P,O,I,G\rangle } , in which each component has the following meaning: P {\displaystyle P} is a set of conditions (i.e., propositional variables); O {\displaystyle O} is a set of operators (i.e., actions); each operator is itself a quadruple ⟨ α , β , γ , δ ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle \alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta \rangle } , each element being a set of conditions. These four sets specify, in order, which conditions must be true for the action to be executable, which ones must be false, which ones are made true by the action and which ones are made false; I {\displaystyle I} is the initial state, given as the set of conditions that are initially true (all others are assumed false); G {\displaystyle G} is the specification of the goal state; this is given as a pair ⟨ N , M ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle N,M\rangle } , which specify which conditions are true and false, respectively, in order for a state to be considered a goal state. A plan for such a planning instance is a sequence of operators that can be executed from the initial state and that leads to a goal state. Formally, a state is a set of conditions: a state is represented by the set of conditions that are true in it. Transitions between states are modeled by a transition function, which is a function mapping states into new states that result from the execution of actions. Since states are represented by sets of conditions, the transition function relative to the STRIPS instance ⟨ P , O , I , G ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle P,O,I,G\rangle } is a function succ : 2 P × O → 2 P , {\displaystyle \operatorname {succ} :2^{P}\times O\rightarrow 2^{P},} where 2 P {\displaystyle 2^{P}} is the set of all subsets of P {\displaystyle P} , and is therefore the set of all possible states. The transition function succ {\displaystyle \operatorname {succ} } for a state C ⊆ P {\displaystyle C\subseteq P} , can be defined as follows, using the simplifying assumption that actions can always be executed but have no effect if their preconditions are not met: The function succ {\displaystyle \operatorname {succ} } can be extended to sequences of actions by the following recursive equations: succ ⁡ ( C , [ ] ) = C {\displaystyle \operatorname {succ} (C,[\ ])=C} succ ⁡ ( C , [ a 1 , a 2 , … , a n ] ) = succ ⁡ ( succ ⁡ ( C , a 1 ) , [ a 2 , … , a n ] ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {succ} (C,[a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}])=\operatorname {succ} (\operatorname {succ} (C,a_{1}),[a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}])} A plan for a STRIPS instance is a sequence of actions such that the state that results from executing the actions in order from the initial state satisfies the goal conditions. Formally, [ a 1 , a 2 , … , a n ] {\displaystyle [a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}]} is a plan for G = ⟨ N , M ⟩ {\displaystyle G=\langle N,M\rangle } if F = succ ⁡ ( I , [ a 1 , a 2 , … , a n ] ) {\displaystyle F=\operatorname {succ} (I,[a_{1},a_{2},\ldots ,a_{n}])} satisfies the following two conditions: N ⊆ F {\displaystyle N\subseteq F} M ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle M\cap F=\varnothing } == Extensions == The above language is actually the propositional version of STRIPS; in practice, conditions are often about objects: for example, that the position of a robot can be modeled by a predicate A t {\displaystyle At} , and A t ( r o o m 1 ) {\displaystyle At(room1)} means that the robot is in Room1. In this case, actions can have free variables, which are implicitly existentially quantified. In other words, an action represents all possible propositional actions that can be obtained by replacing each free variable with a value. The initial state is considered fully known in the language described above: conditions that are not in I {\displaystyle I} are all assumed false. This is often a limiting assumption, as there are natural examples of planning problems in which the initial state is not fully known. Extensions of STRIPS have been developed to deal with partially known initial states. == A sample STRIPS problem == A monkey is at location A in a lab. There is a box in location C. The monkey wants the bananas that are hanging from the ceiling in location B, but it needs to move the box and climb onto it in order to reach them. Initial state: At(A), Level(low), BoxAt(C), BananasAt(B) Goal state: Have(bananas) Actions: // move from X to Y _Move(X, Y)_ Preconditions: At(X), Level(low) Postconditions: not At(X), At(Y) // climb up on the box _ClimbUp(Location)_ Preconditions: At(Location), BoxAt(Location), Level(low) Postconditions: Level(high), not Level(low) // climb down from the box _ClimbDown(Location)_ Preconditions: At(Location), BoxAt(Location), Level(high) Postconditions: Level(low), not Level(high) // move monkey and box from X to Y _MoveBox(X, Y)_ Preconditions: At(X), BoxAt(X), Level(low) Postconditions: BoxAt(Y), not BoxAt(X), At(Y), not At(X) // take the bananas _TakeBananas(Location)_ Preconditions: At(Location), BananasAt(Location), Level(high) Postconditions: Have(bananas) == Complexity == Deciding whether any plan exists for a propositional STRIPS instance is PSPACE-complete. Various restrictions can be enforced in order to decide if a plan exists in polynomial time or at least make it an NP-complete problem. == Macro operator == In the monkey and banana problem, the robot monkey has to execute a sequence of actions to reach the banana at the ceiling. A single action provides a small change in the game. To simplify the planning process, it make sense to invent an abstract action, which isn't available in the normal rule description. The super-action consists of low level actions and can reach high-level goals. The advantage is that the computational complexity is lower, and longer tasks can be planned by the solver. Identifying new macro operators for a domain can be realized with genetic programming. The idea is, not to plan the domain itself, but in the pre-step, a heuristics is created that allows the domain to be solved much faster. In the context of reinforcement learning, a macro-operator is called an option. Similar to the definition within AI planning, the idea is, to provide a temporal abstraction (span over a longer period) and to modify the game state directly on a higher layer.
Read more →
Lernmatrix

Lernmatrix (German for "learning matrix") is a special type of artificial neural network (ANN) architecture, similar to associative memory, invented around 1960 by Karl Steinbuch, a pioneer in computer science and ANNs. This model for learning systems could establish complex associations between certain sets of characteristics (e.g., letters of an alphabet) and their meanings. == Function == The Lernmatrix generally consists of n "characteristic lines" and m "meaning lines," where each characteristic line is connected to each meaning line, similar to how neurons in the brain are connected by synapses. (This can be realized in various ways – according to Steinbuch, this could be done by hardware or software). To train a Lernmatrix, values are specified on the corresponding characteristic and meaning lines (binary or real); then the connections between all pairs of characteristic and meaning lines are strengthened by the Hebb rule. A trained Lernmatrix, when given a specific input on the characteristic lines, activates the corresponding meaning lines. In modern language, it is a linear projection module. By appropriately interconnecting several Lernmatrices, a switching system can be built that, after completing certain training phases, is ultimately able to automatically determine the most probable associated meaning for an input sequence of features.
Read more →