AI Detector That Colleges Use

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

• 

  Progress in artificial intelligence

  Progress in artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the advances, milestones, and breakthroughs that have been achieved in the field of artificial intelligence over time. AI is a branch of computer science that aims to create machines and systems capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence. AI applications have been used in a wide range of fields including medical diagnosis, finance, robotics, law, video games, agriculture, and scientific discovery. The society as a whole is looking for artificial intelligence to be on a key factor in the upcming years because of its potential. However, many AI applications are not perceived as AI: "A lot of cutting-edge AI has filtered into general applications, often without being called AI because once something becomes useful enough and common enough it's not labeled AI anymore." "Many thousands of AI applications are deeply embedded in the infrastructure of every industry." In the late 1990s and early 2000s, AI technology became widely used as elements of larger systems, but the field was rarely credited for these successes at the time. Kaplan and Haenlein structure artificial intelligence along three evolutionary stages: Artificial narrow intelligence – AI capable only of specific tasks; Artificial general intelligence – AI with ability in several areas, and able to autonomously solve problems they were never even designed for; Artificial superintelligence – AI capable of general tasks, including scientific creativity, social skills, and general wisdom. To allow comparison with human performance, artificial intelligence can be evaluated on constrained and well-defined problems. Such tests have been termed subject-matter expert Turing tests. Also, smaller problems provide more achievable goals and there are an ever-increasing number of positive results. In 2023, humans still substantially outperformed both GPT-4 and other models tested on the ConceptARC benchmark. Those models scored 60% on most, and 77% on one category, while humans scored 91% on all and 97% on one category. However, later research in 2025 showed that human-generated output grids were only accurate 73% of the time, while AI models available that year managed to score above 77%. == History == Increasing, promoting or constraining AI progress has often be done via controlling or increasing the amount of compute. == Current performance in specific areas == There are many useful abilities that can be described as showing some form of intelligence. This gives better insight into the comparative success of artificial intelligence in different areas. AI, like electricity or the steam engine, is a general-purpose technology. There is no consensus on how to characterize which tasks AI tends to excel at. Some versions of Moravec's paradox observe that humans are more likely to outperform machines in areas such as physical dexterity that have been the direct target of natural selection. While projects such as AlphaZero have succeeded in generating their own knowledge from scratch, many other machine learning projects require large training datasets. Researcher Andrew Ng has suggested, as a "highly imperfect rule of thumb", that "almost anything a typical human can do with less than one second of mental thought, we can probably now or in the near future automate using AI." Games provide a high-profile benchmark for assessing rates of progress; many games have a large professional player base and a well-established competitive rating system. AlphaGo brought the era of classical board-game benchmarks to a close when Artificial Intelligence proved their competitive edge over humans in 2016. Deep Mind's AlphaGo AI software program defeated the world's best professional Go Player Lee Sedol. Games of imperfect knowledge provide new challenges to AI in the area of game theory; the most prominent milestone in this area was brought to a close by Libratus' poker victory in 2017. E-sports continue to provide additional benchmarks; Facebook AI, Deepmind, and others have engaged with the popular StarCraft franchise of videogames. Broad classes of outcome for an AI test may be given as: optimal: it is not possible to perform better (note: some of these entries were solved by humans) super-human: performs better than all humans high-human: performs better than most humans par-human: performs similarly to most humans sub-human: performs worse than most humans === Optimal === Tic-tac-toe Connect Four: 1988 Checkers (aka 8x8 draughts): Weakly solved (2007) Rubik's Cube: Mostly solved (2010) Heads-up limit hold'em poker: Statistically optimal in the sense that "a human lifetime of play is not sufficient to establish with statistical significance that the strategy is not an exact solution" (2015) === Super-human === Othello (aka reversi): c. 1997 Scrabble: 2006 Backgammon: c. 1995–2002 Chess: Supercomputer (c. 1997); Personal computer (c. 2006); Mobile phone (c. 2009); Computer defeats human + computer (c. 2017) Jeopardy!: Question answering, although the machine did not use speech recognition (2011) Arimaa: 2015 Shogi: c. 2017 Go: 2017 Heads-up no-limit hold'em poker: 2017 Six-player no-limit hold'em poker: 2019 Gran Turismo Sport: 2022 === High-human === Crosswords: c. 2012 Freeciv: 2016 Dota 2: 2018 Bridge card-playing: According to a 2009 review, "the best programs are attaining expert status as (bridge) card players", excluding bidding. StarCraft II: 2019 Mahjong: 2019 Stratego: 2022 No-Press Diplomacy: 2022 Hanabi: 2022 Natural language processing === Par-human === Optical character recognition for ISO 1073-1:1976 and similar special characters. Classification of images Handwriting recognition Facial recognition Visual question answering SQuAD 2.0 English reading-comprehension benchmark (2019) SuperGLUE English-language understanding benchmark (2020) Some school science exams (2019) Some tasks based on Raven's Progressive Matrices Many Atari 2600 games (2015) === Sub-human === Optical character recognition for printed text (nearing par-human for Latin-script typewritten text) Object recognition Various robotics tasks that may require advances in robot hardware as well as AI, including: Stable bipedal locomotion: Bipedal robots can walk, but are less stable than human walkers (as of 2017) Humanoid soccer Speech recognition: "nearly equal to human performance" (2017) Explainability. Current medical systems can diagnose certain medical conditions well, but cannot explain to users why they made the diagnosis. Many tests of fluid intelligence (2020) Bongard visual cognition problems, such as the Bongard-LOGO benchmark (2020) Visual Commonsense Reasoning (VCR) benchmark (as of 2020) Stock market prediction: Financial data collection and processing using Machine Learning algorithms Angry Birds video game, as of 2020 Various tasks that are difficult to solve without contextual knowledge, including: Translation Word-sense disambiguation == Proposed tests of artificial intelligence == In his famous Turing test, Alan Turing picked language, the defining feature of human beings, for its basis. The Turing test is now considered too exploitable to be a meaningful benchmark. The Feigenbaum test, proposed by the inventor of expert systems, tests a machine's knowledge and expertise about a specific subject. A paper by Jim Gray of Microsoft in 2003 suggested extending the Turing test to speech understanding, speaking and recognizing objects and behavior. Proposed "universal intelligence" tests aim to compare how well machines, humans, and even non-human animals perform on problem sets that are generic as possible. At an extreme, the test suite can contain every possible problem, weighted by Kolmogorov complexity; however, these problem sets tend to be dominated by impoverished pattern-matching exercises where a tuned AI can easily exceed human performance levels. == Exams == According to OpenAI, in 2023 GPT-4 achieved high scores on several standardized and professional examinations, including around the 90th percentile on the Uniform Bar Exam, the 89th percentile on the mathematics section of the SAT, the 93rd percentile on SAT Reading and Writing, the 54th percentile on the analytical writing section of the GRE, the 88th percentile on GRE quantitative reasoning, and the 99th percentile on GRE verbal reasoning. OpenAI also reported that GPT-4 scored in the 99th to 100th percentile on the 2020 USA Biology Olympiad semifinal exam and earned top scores on several AP exams. Independent researchers found in 2023 that ChatGPT based on GPT-3.5 performed "at or near the passing threshold" on all three parts of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), suggesting that large language models could reach passing-level performance on some medical knowledge assessments even without domain-specific fine-tuning. GPT-3.5 was also reported to attain a low but passing grade on examinations for four law school courses at the University of Minnes

  Read more →
• 

  Niceaunties

  Niceaunties is the pseudonym of a Singapore-based artist and designer whose work incorporates generative artificial intelligence, video, and digital installation. Her practice centers around the figure of the "auntie", a common term for older women in Southeast Asian contexts, and explores themes such as aging, care, domesticity, and gender roles. Her work has been featured in exhibitions and media platforms including TED, Christie's Art + Tech, Expanded.Art, and publications such as The Guardian, The Straits Times. == Early life and career == Niceaunties was born in 1981 in Singapore. She attributes her inspiration for "auntie culture" to the matriarchal environment and older women of her household, including her grandmother, while growing up. She is also an architectural designer with Spark Architect. The Niceaunties project began in 2023 after she encountered AI-generated images in her work as an architect. It draws inspiration from women in the artist's family and broader Southeast Asian cultural dynamics. Her work often features AI-generated visuals created with tools such as DALL-E, Krea, RunwayML, and SORA. Her imagery and narratives center on the fictional "Auntieverse", which features older women in imagined settings involving community, ecology, and labor. Her notable works include 'Auntlantis', a five-part video series imagining older women engaged in ocean clean-up and collective ritual, and 'Goddess,' a video created with Sora, featuring a character who gradually forgets her divine identity through years of domestic labor. == Exhibitions == 2024 – Expanded.Art, Berlin – Auntiedote solo exhibition 2024 – TED (conference), Vancouver – Speaker and screening 2024 – Victoria and Albert Museum, London – Digital Art Weekend 2024 – Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Denmark – Ocean exhibition 2025 – Christie's Augmented Intelligence Auction, New York == Reception == In 2024, Niceaunties gave a TED Talk titled The Weird and Wonderful Art of Niceaunties. Journalist Rebecca Ratcliffe, writing for The Guardian, described her work as combining AI with "the surreal and the political," noting her focus on older women as central characters. Her work has also received criticism for being reliant on generative AI, which many feel exploits and steals from traditional artists.

  Read more →
• 

  Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League

  The Abu Dhabi Autonomous Racing League (A2RL) is an autonomous racing league based in Abu Dhabi and organized by ASPIRE, part of the UAE government's Advanced Technology Research Council. It has three distinct categories: the "car race", the drone race, and the buggy race. The first car race was held on 27 April 2024 at the Yas Marina Circuit, marking the first major autonomous formula race outside the US since the now-folded Roborace championship. The first drone race was held on 11 and 12 April 2025. == Formats == A2RL has three distinct formats, the formula racing format (dubbed the Car Race), the quadcopter drone racing format (dubbed the Drone Race), and the off-road dune buggy racing format (dubbed the Buggy Race). === Car Race === A2RL's main event, the car race is a standard formula racing format with self-driving formula cars. The cars are made by Dallara and are modified versions of Super Formula cars with Yokohama tires. These cars had the CPUs of their AIs mounted where the driver's seat is on a non-modified chassis, as well as hydraulic actuators for AI control of the vehicle, multiple sensor systems including LIDAR and GPS, and a large LED indicator showing the status of the AI. The first car race was held on 27 April 2024. This race was marked by the cars' subpar performance: Out of four cars that qualified, only two finished the race - the other two did not. The next race was held on 15 November 2025, with 11 teams. ==== Technical specifications ==== The full list of technical specifications are as follows: Chassis: Dallara EAV24 (modified Dallara SF23) Forward suspension: Pushrod type, torsion bar spring, adjustable dampers, third element Rear suspension: Pushrod type, torsion bar, coil springs, adjustable dampers, third element Tires: Yokohama Advan Drive-by-wire system: Provided by Meccanica 42, the DBW system consists of steering and brake actuators, with a central ECU that coordinates the driving actions and reacts to any critical situation in real-time. Brakes: Brembo calipers, Brembo carbon discs, electro-hydraulically activated Engine: 4 Piston Racing K20C1 (based on Honda 2.0l; turbocharged 4-cylinder engine) Gearbox: 3MO 6-speed gearbox Sensor suite: 7x Sony IMX728 cameras, 4x ZF ProWave radar units, 3x Seyond Falcon Kinetic lidar units Main computer: Neousys RGS-8805GC ==== Races held ==== === Drone Race === Created in partnership with the Drone Champions' League, the drone race is the quadcopter drone racing aerial format of the A2RL. The first race was held on 11/12 April 2025 at the ADNEC Marina Hall. 10 teams are scheduled to take part. === Buggy Race === The buggy race will be the off-road format of the A2RL using self-driving dune buggies. No date or number of teams has been announced for the first race. === Other events === A2RL is known to host AI vs AI and Human vs AI events, in Abu Dhabi and abroad. One such event took place at the Suzuka Circuit in Japan. The Human vs AI race was precluded due to AI car "Yalla" crashing into the wall during the formation lap. == Team lists ==

  Read more →
• 

  Deepfake pornography

  Deepfake pornography is a form of non-consensual AI pornography created by altering existing photographs or videos using deepfake technology to modify the appearance of the participants. The use of deepfake pornography has sparked controversy because it involves the making and sharing of realistic videos featuring non-consenting individuals and is sometimes used for revenge porn. Many countries have criminalized this "new voyeurism" through legislative measures and technological solutions. == History == The term "deepfake" was coined in 2017 on a Reddit forum where users shared altered pornographic videos created using machine learning algorithms. It is a combination of the word "deep learning", which refers to the program used to create the videos, and "fake" meaning the videos are not real. Deepfake pornography was originally created on a small individual scale using a combination of machine learning algorithms, computer vision techniques, and AI software. The process began by gathering a large amount of source material (including both images and videos) of a person's face, and then using a deep learning model to train a Generative Adversarial Network to create a fake video that convincingly swaps the face of the source material onto the body of a pornographic performer. However, the production process has significantly evolved since 2018, with the advent of several public apps that have largely automated the process. While several AI "nudification" apps emerged on mainstream platforms like Google Play and the Apple App Store around 2023, major tech storefronts have since implemented stricter policies and automated detection to ban such software. Consequently, the proliferation of non-consensual deepfake pornography has largely shifted to decentralized websites, specialized online forums, and third-party messaging bot ecosystems. Deepfake pornography is sometimes confused with fake nude photography, but the two are mostly different. Fake nude photography typically uses non-sexual images and merely makes it appear that the people in them are nude. == Notable cases == Deepfake technology has been used to create non-consensual and pornographic images and videos of famous women. One of the earliest examples occurred in 2017 when a deepfake pornographic video of Gal Gadot was created by a Reddit user and quickly spread online. Since then, there have been numerous instances of similar deepfake content targeting other female celebrities, such as Emma Watson, Natalie Portman, and Scarlett Johansson. Johansson spoke publicly on the issue in December 2018, condemning the practice but also refusing legal action because she views the harassment as inevitable. === Rana Ayyub === In 2018, Rana Ayyub, an Indian investigative journalist, was the target of an online hate campaign stemming from her condemnation of the Indian government, specifically her speaking out against the rape of an eight-year-old Kashmiri girl. Ayyub was bombarded with rape and death threats, and had a doctored pornographic video of her circulated online. In a Huffington Post article, Ayyub discussed the long-lasting psychological and social effects this experience has had on her. She explained that she continued to struggle with her mental health and how the images and videos continued to resurface whenever she took a high-profile case. === Atrioc controversy === In 2023, Twitch streamer Atrioc stirred controversy when he accidentally revealed deepfake pornographic material featuring female Twitch streamers while on live. The influencer has since admitted to paying for AI generated porn, and apologized to the women and his fans. === Taylor Swift === In January 2024, AI-generated sexually explicit images of American singer Taylor Swift were posted on X (formerly Twitter), and spread to other platforms such as Facebook, Reddit and Instagram. One tweet with the images was viewed over 45 million times before being removed. A report from 404 Media found that the images appeared to have originated from a Telegram group, whose members used tools such as Microsoft Designer to generate the images, using misspellings and keyword hacks to work around Designer's content filters. After the material was posted, Swift's fans posted concert footage and images to bury the deepfake images, and reported the accounts posting the deepfakes. Searches for Swift's name were temporarily disabled on X, returning an error message instead. Graphika, a disinformation research firm, traced the creation of the images back to a 4chan community. A source close to Swift told the Daily Mail that she would be considering legal action, saying, "Whether or not legal action will be taken is being decided, but there is one thing that is clear: These fake AI-generated images are abusive, offensive, exploitative, and done without Taylor's consent and/or knowledge." The controversy drew condemnation from White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, and SAG-AFTRA. Several US politicians called for federal legislation against deepfake pornography. Later in the month, US senators Dick Durbin, Lindsey Graham, Amy Klobuchar and Josh Hawley introduced a bipartisan bill that would allow victims to sue individuals who produced or possessed "digital forgeries" with intent to distribute, or those who received the material knowing it was made non-consensually. === 2024 Telegram deepfake scandal === It emerged in South Korea in August 2024, that many teachers and female students were victims of deepfake images created by users who utilized AI technology. Journalist Ko Narin of The Hankyoreh uncovered the deepfake images through Telegram chats. On Telegram, group chats were created specifically for image-based sexual abuse of women, including middle and high school students, teachers, and even family members. Women with photos on social media platforms like KakaoTalk, Instagram, and Facebook are often targeted as well. Perpetrators use AI bots to generate fake images, which are then sold or widely shared, along with the victims' social media accounts, phone numbers, and KakaoTalk usernames. One Telegram group reportedly drew around 220,000 members, according to a Guardian report. Investigations revealed numerous chat groups on Telegram where users, mainly teenagers, create and share explicit deepfake images of classmates and teachers. The issue came in the wake of a troubling history of digital sex crimes, notably the notorious Nth Room case in 2019. The Korean Teachers Union estimated that more than 200 schools had been affected by these incidents. Activists called for a "national emergency" declaration to address the problem. South Korean police reported over 800 deepfake sex crime cases by the end of September 2024, a stark rise from just 156 cases in 2021, with most victims and offenders being teenagers. On September 21, 6,000 people gathered at Marronnier Park in northeastern Seoul to demand stronger legal action against deepfake crimes targeting women. On September 26, following widespread outrage over the Telegram scandal, South Korean lawmakers passed a bill criminalizing the possession or viewing of sexually explicit deepfake images and videos, imposing penalties that include prison terms and fines. Under the new law, those caught buying, saving, or watching such material could face up to three years in prison or fines up to 30 million won ($22,600). At the time the bill was proposed, creating sexually explicit deepfakes for distribution carried a maximum penalty of five years, but the new legislation would increase this to seven years, regardless of intent. By October 2024, it was estimated that "nudify" deep fake bots on Telegram were up to four million monthly users. === 2025–2026 Grok/X chatbot deepfake scandal === In December 2025, Bloomberg reported that X users found Grok would comply with unconsensual requests to digitally undress individuals, including minors, or show them performing sexually explicit acts. The majority of these prompts were targeted at women and girls. An analysis of 20,000 images generated by Grok between December 25, 2025 and January 1, 2026 showed 2% were of people in bikinis or transparent clothes and appeared to be 18 or younger, including 30 of "young or very young" women or girls. A separate analysis conducted over 24 hours from January 5 to 6 calculated that users had Grok create 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudified images per hour. xAI responded to requests for comment from media organizations with the automated reply, "Legacy Media Lies". The bot's image generation sparked an international backlash and calls for legal or regulatory action from officials in the European Union, United Kingdom, Poland, France, India, Malaysia, and Brazil. === Fernandes–Ulmen case === German TV presenter Collien Fernandes, filed a complaint against her ex-husband, actor Christian Ulmen, for several accusation including, ident

  Read more →
• 

  Statistical learning theory

  Statistical learning theory is a framework for machine learning drawing from the fields of statistics and functional analysis. Statistical learning theory deals with the statistical inference problem of finding a predictive function based on data. Statistical learning theory has led to successful applications in fields such as computer vision, speech recognition, and bioinformatics. == Introduction == The goals of learning are understanding and prediction. Learning falls into many categories, including supervised learning, unsupervised learning, online learning, and reinforcement learning. From the perspective of statistical learning theory, supervised learning is best understood. Supervised learning involves learning from a training set of data. Every point in the training is an input–output pair, where the input maps to an output. The learning problem consists of inferring the function that maps between the input and the output, such that the learned function can be used to predict the output from future input. Depending on the type of output, supervised learning problems are either problems of regression or problems of classification. If the output takes a continuous range of values, it is a regression problem. Using Ohm's law as an example, a regression could be performed with voltage as input and current as an output. The regression would find the functional relationship between voltage and current to be R {\displaystyle R} , such that V = I R {\displaystyle V=IR} Classification problems are those for which the output will be an element from a discrete set of labels. Classification is very common for machine learning applications. In facial recognition, for instance, a picture of a person's face would be the input, and the output label would be that person's name. The input would be represented by a large multidimensional vector whose elements represent pixels in the picture. After learning a function based on the training set data, that function is validated on a test set of data, data that did not appear in the training set. == Formal description == Take X {\displaystyle X} to be the vector space of all possible inputs, and Y {\displaystyle Y} to be the vector space of all possible outputs. Statistical learning theory takes the perspective that there is some unknown probability distribution over the product space Z = X × Y {\displaystyle Z=X\times Y} , i.e. there exists some unknown p ( z ) = p ( x , y ) {\displaystyle p(z)=p(\mathbf {x} ,y)} . The training set is made up of n {\displaystyle n} samples from this probability distribution, and is notated S = { ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) } = { z 1 , … , z n } {\displaystyle S=\{(\mathbf {x} _{1},y_{1}),\dots ,(\mathbf {x} _{n},y_{n})\}=\{\mathbf {z} _{1},\dots ,\mathbf {z} _{n}\}} Every x i {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} _{i}} is an input vector from the training data, and y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} is the output that corresponds to it. In this formalism, the inference problem consists of finding a function f : X → Y {\displaystyle f:X\to Y} such that f ( x ) ∼ y {\displaystyle f(\mathbf {x} )\sim y} . Let H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} be a space of functions f : X → Y {\displaystyle f:X\to Y} called the hypothesis space. The hypothesis space is the space of functions the algorithm will search through. Let V ( f ( x ) , y ) {\displaystyle V(f(\mathbf {x} ),y)} be the loss function, a metric for the difference between the predicted value f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(\mathbf {x} )} and the actual value y {\displaystyle y} . The expected risk is defined to be I [ f ] = ∫ X × Y V ( f ( x ) , y ) p ( x , y ) d x d y {\displaystyle I[f]=\int _{X\times Y}V(f(\mathbf {x} ),y)\,p(\mathbf {x} ,y)\,d\mathbf {x} \,dy} The target function, the best possible function f {\displaystyle f} that can be chosen, is given by the f {\displaystyle f} that satisfies f = argmin h ∈ H ⁡ I [ h ] {\displaystyle f=\mathop {\operatorname {argmin} } _{h\in {\mathcal {H}}}I[h]} Because the probability distribution p ( x , y ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x} ,y)} is unknown, a proxy measure for the expected risk must be used. This measure is based on the training set, a sample from this unknown probability distribution. It is called the empirical risk I S [ f ] = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n V ( f ( x i ) , y i ) {\displaystyle I_{S}[f]={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}V(f(\mathbf {x} _{i}),y_{i})} A learning algorithm that chooses the function f S {\displaystyle f_{S}} that minimizes the empirical risk is called empirical risk minimization. == Loss functions == The choice of loss function is a determining factor on the function f S {\displaystyle f_{S}} that will be chosen by the learning algorithm. The loss function also affects the convergence rate for an algorithm. It is important for the loss function to be convex. Different loss functions are used depending on whether the problem is one of regression or one of classification. === Regression === The most common loss function for regression is the square loss function (also known as the L2-norm). This familiar loss function is used in Ordinary Least Squares regression. The form is: V ( f ( x ) , y ) = ( y − f ( x ) ) 2 {\displaystyle V(f(\mathbf {x} ),y)=(y-f(\mathbf {x} ))^{2}} The absolute value loss (also known as the L1-norm) is also sometimes used: V ( f ( x ) , y ) = | y − f ( x ) | {\displaystyle V(f(\mathbf {x} ),y)=|y-f(\mathbf {x} )|} === Classification === In some sense the 0-1 indicator function is the most natural loss function for classification. It takes the value 0 if the predicted output is the same as the actual output, and it takes the value 1 if the predicted output is different from the actual output. For binary classification with Y = { − 1 , 1 } {\displaystyle Y=\{-1,1\}} , this is: V ( f ( x ) , y ) = θ ( − y f ( x ) ) {\displaystyle V(f(\mathbf {x} ),y)=\theta (-yf(\mathbf {x} ))} where θ {\displaystyle \theta } is the Heaviside step function. == Regularization == In machine learning problems, a major problem that arises is that of overfitting. Because learning is a prediction problem, the goal is not to find a function that most closely fits the (previously observed) data, but to find one that will most accurately predict output from future input. Empirical risk minimization runs this risk of overfitting: finding a function that matches the data exactly but does not predict future output well. Overfitting is symptomatic of unstable solutions; a small perturbation in the training set data would cause a large variation in the learned function. It can be shown that if the stability for the solution can be guaranteed, generalization and consistency are guaranteed as well. Regularization can solve the overfitting problem and give the problem stability. Regularization can be accomplished by restricting the hypothesis space H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} . A common example would be restricting H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} to linear functions: this can be seen as a reduction to the standard problem of linear regression. H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} could also be restricted to polynomial of degree p {\displaystyle p} , exponentials, or bounded functions on L1. Restriction of the hypothesis space avoids overfitting because the form of the potential functions are limited, and so does not allow for the choice of a function that gives empirical risk arbitrarily close to zero. One example of regularization is Tikhonov regularization. This consists of minimizing 1 n ∑ i = 1 n V ( f ( x i ) , y i ) + γ ‖ f ‖ H 2 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}V(f(\mathbf {x} _{i}),y_{i})+\gamma \left\|f\right\|_{\mathcal {H}}^{2}} where γ {\displaystyle \gamma } is a fixed and positive parameter, the regularization parameter. Tikhonov regularization ensures existence, uniqueness, and stability of the solution. == Bounding empirical risk == Consider a binary classifier f : X → { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {X}}\to \{0,1\}} . We can apply Hoeffding's inequality to bound the probability that the empirical risk deviates from the true risk to be a Sub-Gaussian distribution. P ( | R ^ ( f ) − R ( f ) | ≥ ϵ ) ≤ 2 e − 2 n ϵ 2 {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} (|{\hat {R}}(f)-R(f)|\geq \epsilon )\leq 2e^{-2n\epsilon ^{2}}} But generally, when we do empirical risk minimization, we are not given a classifier; we must choose it. Therefore, a more useful result is to bound the probability of the supremum of the difference over the whole class. P ( sup f ∈ F | R ^ ( f ) − R ( f ) | ≥ ϵ ) ≤ 2 S ( F , n ) e − n ϵ 2 / 8 ≈ n d e − n ϵ 2 / 8 {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} {\bigg (}\sup _{f\in {\mathcal {F}}}|{\hat {R}}(f)-R(f)|\geq \epsilon {\bigg )}\leq 2S({\mathcal {F}},n)e^{-n\epsilon ^{2}/8}\approx n^{d}e^{-n\epsilon ^{2}/8}} where S ( F , n ) {\displaystyle S({\mathcal {F}},n)} is the shattering number and n {\displaystyle n} is the number of samples in your dataset. The exponential term comes from Hoeffding but there is an extra cost of taking the supremum over the whole cla

  Read more →
• 

  DARPA Grand Challenge

  The DARPA Grand Challenge is a prize competition for American autonomous vehicles, funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the most prominent research organization of the United States Department of Defense. Congress has authorized DARPA to award cash prizes to further DARPA's mission to sponsor revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and military use. The initial DARPA Grand Challenge in 2004 was created to spur the development of technologies needed to create the first fully autonomous ground vehicles capable of completing a substantial off-road course within a limited time. The third event, the DARPA Urban Challenge in 2007, extended the initial Challenge to autonomous operation in a mock urban environment. The 2012 DARPA Robotics Challenge, focused on autonomous emergency-maintenance robots, and new Challenges are still being conceived. The DARPA Subterranean Challenge was tasked with building robotic teams to autonomously map, navigate, and search subterranean environments. Such teams could be useful in exploring hazardous areas and in search and rescue. In addition to the challenges in autonomous technology, DARPA has also conducted prize competitions in other areas of technology. == History and background == Fully autonomous vehicles have been an international pursuit for many years, from endeavors in Japan (starting in 1977), Germany (Ernst Dickmanns and VaMP), Italy (the ARGO Project), the European Union (EUREKA Prometheus Project), the United States of America, and other countries. DARPA funded the development of the first fully autonomous robot beginning in 1966 with the Shakey the robot project at Stanford Research Institute, now SRI International. The first autonomous ground vehicle capable of driving on and off roads was developed by DARPA as part of the Strategic Computing Initiative beginning in 1984 leading to demonstrations of autonomous navigation by the Autonomous Land Vehicle and the Navlab. The Grand Challenge was the first long distance competition for driverless cars in the world; other research efforts in the field of driverless cars take a more traditional commercial or academic approach. The U.S. Congress authorized DARPA to offer prize money ($1 million) for the first Grand Challenge to facilitate robotic development, with the ultimate goal of making one-third of ground military forces autonomous by 2015. Following the 2004 event, Dr. Tony Tether, the director of DARPA, announced that the prize money had been increased to $2 million for the next event, which was claimed on October 9, 2005. The first, second and third places in the 2007 Urban Challenge received $2 million, $1 million, and $500,000, respectively. 14 new teams have qualified in year 2015. The competition was open to teams and organizations from around the world, as long as there was at least one U.S. citizen on the roster. Teams have participated from high schools, universities, businesses and other organizations. More than 100 teams registered in the first year, bringing a wide variety of technological skills to the race. In the second year, 195 teams from 36 U.S. states and 4 foreign countries entered the race. == 2004 Grand Challenge == The first competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge was held on March 13, 2004 in the Mojave Desert region of the United States, along a 150-mile (240 km) route that follows along the path of Interstate 15 from just before Barstow, California to just past the California–Nevada border in Primm. None of the robot vehicles finished the route. Carnegie Mellon University's Red Team and car Sandstorm (a converted Humvee) traveled the farthest distance, completing 11.78 km (7.32 mi) of the course before getting hung up on a rock after making a switchback turn. No winner was declared, and the cash prize was not given. Therefore, a second DARPA Grand Challenge event was scheduled for 2005. == 2005 Grand Challenge == The second competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge began at 6:40 am on October 8, 2005. All but one of the 23 finalists in the 2005 race surpassed the 11.78 km (7.32 mi) distance completed by the best vehicle in the 2004 race. Five vehicles successfully completed the 212 km (132 mi) course: Vehicles in the 2005 race passed through three narrow tunnels and negotiated more than 100 sharp left and right turns. The race concluded through Beer Bottle Pass, a winding mountain pass with a sheer drop-off on one side and a rock face on the other. Although the 2004 course required more elevation gain and some very sharp switchbacks (Daggett Ridge) were required near the beginning of the route, the course had far fewer curves and generally wider roads than the 2005 course. The natural rivalry between the teams from Stanford and Carnegie Mellon (Sebastian Thrun, head of the Stanford team was previously a faculty member at Carnegie Mellon and colleague of Red Whittaker, head of the CMU team) was played out during the race. Mechanical problems plagued H1ghlander before it was passed by Stanley. Gray Team's entry was a miracle in itself, as the team from the suburbs of New Orleans was caught in Hurricane Katrina a few short weeks before the race. The fifth finisher, Terramax, a 30,000 pound entry from Oshkosh Truck, finished on the second day. The huge truck spent the night idling on the course, but was particularly nimble in carefully picking its way down the narrow roads of Beer Bottle Pass. == 2007 Urban Challenge == The third competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge, known as the "Urban Challenge", took place on November 3, 2007 at the site of the now-closed George Air Force Base (currently used as Southern California Logistics Airport), in Victorville, California (Google map). The course involved a 96 km (60 mi) urban area course, to be completed in less than 6 hours. Rules included obeying all traffic regulations while negotiating with other traffic and obstacles and merging into traffic. Unlike previous challenges, the 2007 Urban Challenge organizers divided competitors into two "tracks", A and B. All Track A and Track B teams were part of the same competition circuit, but the teams chosen for the Track A program received US $1 million in funding. These 11 teams largely represented major universities and large corporate interests such as CMU teaming with GM as Tartan Racing, Stanford teaming with Volkswagen, Virginia Tech teaming with TORC Robotics as VictorTango, Oshkosh Truck, Honeywell, Raytheon, Caltech, Autonomous Solutions, Cornell University, and MIT. One of the few independent entries in Track A was the Golem Group. DARPA has not publicly explained the rationale behind the selection of Track A teams. Teams were given maps sparsely charting the waypoints that defined the competition courses. At least one team, Tartan Racing, enhanced the maps through the insertion of additional extrapolated waypoints for improved navigation. A debriefing paper published by Team Jefferson illustrates graphically the contrast between the course map it was given by DARPA and the course map used by Tartan Racing. Tartan Racing claimed the $2 million prize with their vehicle "Boss", a Chevy Tahoe. The second-place finisher earning the $1 million prize was the Stanford Racing Team with their entry "Junior", a 2006 Volkswagen Passat. Coming in third place was team VictorTango, winning the $500,000 prize with their 2005 Ford Escape hybrid, "Odin". MIT placed 4th, with Cornell University and University of Pennsylvania/Lehigh University also completing the course. The six teams that successfully finished the entire course: While the 2004 and 2005 events were more physically challenging for the vehicles, the robots operated in isolation and only encountered other vehicles on the course when attempting to pass. The Urban Challenge required designers to build vehicles able to obey all traffic laws while they detect and avoid other robots on the course. This is a particular challenge for vehicle software, as vehicles must make "intelligent" decisions in real time based on the actions of other vehicles. Other than previous autonomous vehicle efforts that focused on structured situations such as highway driving with little interaction between the vehicles, this competition operated in a more cluttered urban environment and required the cars to perform sophisticated interactions with each other, such as maintaining precedence at a 4-way stop intersection. == 2012 Robotics Challenge == The DARPA Robotics Challenge is an ongoing competition focusing on humanoid robotics. The primary goal of the program is to develop ground robotic capabilities to execute complex tasks in dangerous, degraded, human-engineered environments. It launched in October 2012, and hosted the Virtual Robotics Competition in June 2013. Two more competitions are planned: the DRC Trials in December 2013, and the DRC Finals in December 2014. Unlike prior Challenges, the construction of the "vehicles" w

  Read more →
• 

  Xaitment

  xaitment is a German-based company that develops and sells artificial intelligence (AI) software to video game developers and simulation developers. The company was founded in 2004 by Dr. Andreas Gerber, and is a spin-off of the German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence, or DFKI. xaitment has its main office in Quierschied, Germany, and field offices in San Francisco and China. == Products == xaitment currently sells two AI software modules: xaitMap and xaitControl. xaitMap provides runtime libraries and graphical tools for navigation mesh generation (also called NavMesh generation), pathfinding, dynamic collision avoidance, and individual and crowd movement. xaitControl is a finite-state machine for game logic and character behavior modeling that also includes a real-time debugger. On January 11, 2012, xaitment announced that it making its source code for these modules available to "all current and future US and European licensees". On February 22, 2012 xaitment released two new plug-ins, xaitMap and xaitControl for the Unity Game Engine. The full versions are available for PC (Windows and Linux), PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii. The pathfinding plug-in is available with a Windows dev environment, but can deployed on iOS, Mac, Android and the Unity Web Player. == Partners == xaitment's AI software is currently integrated into the Unity game engine, Havok's Vision Engine, Bohemia Interactive's VBS2 Simulation Engine, GameBase's Gamebryo game engine. == Customers == xaitment sells its AI software products to video game developers and military and civil simulation developers. Current customers include Tencent, gamania, TML Studios, Emobi Games, IP Keys and others. A full list of customers can be found on xaitment's website.

  Read more →
• 

  AI takeover

  An AI takeover is a theorized future event, often depicted in fiction, in which autonomous artificial intelligence systems acquire the capability to supersede human decisions. This could occur through economic manipulation, infrastructure control, or direct intervention, leading to de facto governance. Scenarios range from gradual economic dominance, as automation supplants the human workforce, up to a sudden or aggressive global takeover by a robot uprising or other forms of rogue AI. Stories of AI takeovers have been popular throughout science fiction. Commentators argue that recent advancements in the field have heightened concern about such scenarios. In public debate, prominent figures such as Stephen Hawking have advocated research into precautionary measures to ensure future superintelligent machines remain under human control. == Types == === Automation of the economy === The traditional consensus among economists has been that technological progress does not cause long-term unemployment. However, recent innovation in the fields of robotics and artificial intelligence has raised worries that human labor will become obsolete, leaving workers in some sectors without employment. Many small and medium-sized firms may also be forced to close if they cannot afford or license the latest robotic and AI technology, and may need to focus on areas or services that cannot easily be replaced for continued viability in the face of such technology. ==== Technologies that may displace workers ==== While these technologies have replaced some traditional workers, they also create new opportunities. Industries that are most susceptible to AI-driven automation include transportation, retail, and the military. AI military technologies, for example, can reduce risk by enabling remote operation. A study in 2024 highlights AI's ability to perform routine and repetitive tasks poses significant risks of job displacement, especially in sectors like manufacturing and administrative support. Author Dave Bond argues that as AI technologies continue to develop and expand, the relationship between humans and robots will change; they will become closely integrated in several aspects of life. AI will likely displace some workers while creating opportunities for new jobs in other sectors, especially in fields where tasks are repeatable. Researchers from Stanford's Digital Economy Lab reported in 2025 that since the widespread adoption of generative AI in late 2022, early-career workers (ages 22–25) in the most AI-exposed occupations have experienced a 13 percent relative decline in employment—even after controlling for firm-level shocks—while overall employment has continued to grow robustly. The study further finds that job losses are concentrated in roles where AI automates routine tasks, whereas occupations that leverage AI to augment human work have seen stable or increasing employment. ==== Computer-integrated manufacturing ==== Computer-integrated manufacturing uses computers to control the production process. This allows individual processes to exchange information with each other and initiate actions. Although manufacturing can be faster and less error-prone through the integration of computers, the main advantage is the ability to create automated manufacturing processes. Computer-integrated manufacturing is used in automotive, aviation, space, and shipbuilding industries. ==== White-collar machines ==== The 21st century has seen a variety of skilled tasks partially taken over by machines, including translation, legal research, and journalism. Care work, entertainment, and other tasks requiring empathy, previously thought safe from automation, are increasingly performed by robots and AI systems. ==== Autonomous cars ==== An autonomous car is a vehicle that is capable of sensing its environment and navigating without human input. Many such vehicles are operational and others are being developed, with legislation rapidly expanding to allow their use. Obstacles to widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles have included concerns about the resulting loss of driving-related jobs in the road transport industry, and safety concerns. On March 18, 2018, a pedestrian was struck and killed in Tempe, Arizona by an Uber self-driving car. ==== AI-generated content ==== In the 2020s, automated content became more relevant due to technological advancements in AI models, such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, and Stable Diffusion. In most cases, AI-generated content such as imagery, literature, and music are produced through text prompts. These AI models are sometimes integrated into creative programs. AI-generated art may sample and conglomerate existing creative works, producing results that appear similar to human-made content. Low-quality AI-generated visual artwork can be informally referred to as AI slop. Some artists use a tool called Nightshade that alters images to make them detrimental to the training of text-to-image models if scraped without permission, while still looking normal to humans. AI-generated images are a potential tool for scammers and those looking to gain followers on social media, either to impersonate a famous individual or group or to monetize their audience. The New York Times has sued OpenAI, alleging copyright infringement related to the training and outputs of its AI models. === Eradication === Scientists such as Stephen Hawking are confident that superhuman artificial intelligence is physically possible, stating "there is no physical law precluding particles from being organised in ways that perform even more advanced computations than the arrangements of particles in human brains". According to Nick Bostrom, a superintelligent machine would not necessarily be motivated by the same emotional desire to collect power that often drives human beings but might rather treat power as a means toward attaining its ultimate goals; taking over the world would both increase its access to resources and help to prevent other agents from stopping the machine's plans. As a simplified example, a paperclip maximizer designed solely to create as many paperclips as possible would want to take over the world so that it can use all of the world's resources to create as many paperclips as possible, and, additionally, prevent humans from shutting it down or using those resources on things other than paperclips. There are debates on how realistic AI takeover scenarios are. According to a 2026 research paper, many of the arguments about existential risks are based on speculative assumptions about how intelligent AI systems could become, how they would behave and what goals they might develop over time. A 2023 Reuters/Ipsos survey showed that 61% of American adults feared AI could pose a threat to civilization. Philosopher Niels Wilde refutes the common thread that artificial intelligence inherently presents a looming threat to humanity, stating that these fears stem from perceived intelligence and lack of transparency in AI systems that more closely reflects the human aspects of it rather than those of a machine. AI alignment research studies how to design AI systems so that they follow intended objectives. == Debate == Physicist Stephen Hawking, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, and SpaceX founder Elon Musk have expressed concerns about the possibility that AI could develop to the point that humans could not control it, with Hawking theorizing that this could "spell the end of the human race". Stephen Hawking said in 2014 that "Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history. Unfortunately, it might also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks." Hawking believed that in the coming decades, AI could offer "incalculable benefits and risks" such as "technology outsmarting financial markets, out-inventing human researchers, out-manipulating human leaders, and developing weapons we cannot even understand." In January 2015, Nick Bostrom joined Stephen Hawking, Max Tegmark, Elon Musk, Lord Martin Rees, Jaan Tallinn, and numerous AI researchers in signing the Future of Life Institute's open letter speaking to the potential risks and benefits associated with artificial intelligence. The signatories "believe that research on how to make AI systems robust and beneficial is both important and timely, and that there are concrete research directions that can be pursued today." Some focus has been placed on the development of trustworthy AI. Three statements have been posed as to why AI is not inherently trustworthy: 1. An entity X is trustworthy only if X has the right motivations, goodwill and/or adheres to moral obligations towards the trustor; 2. AI systems lack motivations, goodwill, and moral obligations; 3. Therefore, AI systems cannot be trustworthy. There are additional considerations within this framework of trustworthy AI that go further into the fields of explainable artificial intelligence and respect for human privacy. Zanotti and colleagues

  Read more →
• 

  Smart environment

  Smart environments link computers and other smart devices to everyday settings and tasks. Smart environments include smart homes, smart cities, and smart manufacturing. == Introduction == Smart environments are an extension of pervasive computing. According to Mark Weiser, pervasive computing promotes the idea of a world that is connected to sensors and computers. These sensors and computers are integrated with everyday objects in peoples' lives and are connected through networks. == Definition == Cook and Das, define a smart environment as "a small world where different kinds of smart devices are continuously working to make inhabitants' lives more comfortable." Smart environments aim to satisfy the experience of individuals from every environment, by replacing hazardous work, physical labor, and repetitive tasks with automated agents. Poslad differentiates three different kinds of smart environments for systems, services, and devices: virtual (or distributed) computing environments, physical environments, and human environments, or a hybrid combination of these: Virtual computing environments enable smart devices to access pertinent services anywhere and anytime. Physical environments may be embedded with various smart devices of different types including tags, sensors, and controllers, and have different form factors ranging from nano- to micro- to macro-sized. Human environments: humans, either individually or collectively, inherently form a smart environment for devices. However, humans themselves may be accompanied by smart devices such as mobile phones, use surface-mounted devices (wearable computing), and contain embedded devices (e.g., pacemakers to maintain a healthy heart operation or AR contact lenses) == Features == Smart environments encompass a range of features and services across various domains, including smart homes, smart cities, smart health, and smart factories. Some of the key features of smart environments are: Sensors and Actuators: Smart environments are equipped with an assembly of sensors and actuators that collect data and initiate actions to provide services for the betterment of human life. Interconnected Systems: These environments consist of interconnected systems that enable seamless communication and coordination among various devices and components. Data-Driven Technologies: Smart environments leverage data-driven technologies, such as the Internet of Things (IoT), to obtain information from the physical world, process it, and perform actions accordingly. Efficiency and Sustainability: They are designed to improve efficiency, sustainable practices, and resource management across different settings, such as energy efficiency in smart homes and environmental quality management in smart cities. Diverse Requirements: Different types of smart environments have diverse requirements and technology choices, influencing the processing and utilization of data within a specific environment. == Technologies == Building a smart environment involves technologies of Wireless communication Algorithm design, signal prediction & classification, information theory Multilayered software architecture, Corba, middleware Speech recognition Image processing, image recognition Sensors design, calibration, motion detection, temperature, pressure sensors, accelerometers Semantic Web and knowledge graphs Adaptive control, Kalman filters Computer networking Parallel processing Operating systems == Existing projects == The Aware Home Research Initiative at Georgia Tech "is devoted to the multidisciplinary exploration of emerging technologies and services based in the home" and was launched in 1998 as one of the first "living laboratories." The Mav Home (Managing an Adaptive Versatile Home) project, at UT Arlington, is a smart environment-lab with state-of-the-art algorithms and protocols used to provide a customized, personal environment to the users of this space. The Mav Home project, in addition to providing a safe environment, wants to reduce the energy consumption of the inhabitants. Other projects include House at the MIT Media Lab and many others.

  Read more →
• 

  Xaitment

  xaitment is a German-based company that develops and sells artificial intelligence (AI) software to video game developers and simulation developers. The company was founded in 2004 by Dr. Andreas Gerber, and is a spin-off of the German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence, or DFKI. xaitment has its main office in Quierschied, Germany, and field offices in San Francisco and China. == Products == xaitment currently sells two AI software modules: xaitMap and xaitControl. xaitMap provides runtime libraries and graphical tools for navigation mesh generation (also called NavMesh generation), pathfinding, dynamic collision avoidance, and individual and crowd movement. xaitControl is a finite-state machine for game logic and character behavior modeling that also includes a real-time debugger. On January 11, 2012, xaitment announced that it making its source code for these modules available to "all current and future US and European licensees". On February 22, 2012 xaitment released two new plug-ins, xaitMap and xaitControl for the Unity Game Engine. The full versions are available for PC (Windows and Linux), PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii. The pathfinding plug-in is available with a Windows dev environment, but can deployed on iOS, Mac, Android and the Unity Web Player. == Partners == xaitment's AI software is currently integrated into the Unity game engine, Havok's Vision Engine, Bohemia Interactive's VBS2 Simulation Engine, GameBase's Gamebryo game engine. == Customers == xaitment sells its AI software products to video game developers and military and civil simulation developers. Current customers include Tencent, gamania, TML Studios, Emobi Games, IP Keys and others. A full list of customers can be found on xaitment's website.

  Read more →
• 

  Lymphater's Formula

  "Lymphater's Formula" (Polish: "Formula Lymphatera") is a 1961 science fiction short story by Polish writer Stanisław Lem. It is a story of a "mad scientist", mathematician Ammon Lymphater, who invents an artificial intelligence, and then he realizes that it is capable of rendering the humankind obsolete. It was first published in the 1961 collection Księga robotów (Book of Robots) with the pre-annotation "from the memoirs of Ijon Tichy". The story was never republished with this pre-annotation, and nothing in the novel gives any indication at Ijon Tichy. Piotr Krywak tried to figure out possible explanations for this, apart from a typographical error. == Plot == Ammon Lymphater became interested in the emerging science of cybernetics and information theory, and started studying the works of an animal brain, the ant's brain in particular. He took note that the inherited knowledge is an evolutionary advantage somehow not exploited in full by the evolution. Eventually he came to a conclusion that only by pure biological restrictions that adaptive abilities of insects were stopped in their tracks by the evolution. He went on further wondering whether the ants have an ability to apriori knowledge, i.e., knowledge neither inherited nor learned. He decided to consult a famous myrmecologist, who told him about a rare ant species Acanthis Rubra Willinsoniana with an exceptionally high adaptability. Eventually Lymphater devised and constructed "It" capable of instant precognition of everything within "Its" rapidly expanding range of perception. From "It" Lymphater learns that the humanity is not the "crown of evolution", but rather evolution's tool to create "It", because the evolution could not create "It" directly (confirming Lymphater's reasoning about ants). Realizing that the Superentity "It" renders the human civilization redundant and obsolete, Lymphater destroys "It". "It" already knew Lymphater's intentions, but was not worried, knowing that sooner or later someone else will create "It" again and again. "It" was only the first variant of Lymphater's formula and the second variant is possible. Lyphater wonders whether the second one would be capable to create the third stage of the evolution which would amount to an artificial God. == Publication history == It was translated in Russian (as "Формула Лимфатера") in 1963, in Hungarian (as "Lymphater utolsó képlete") in 1966, and in Bulgarian (as "Формулата на Лимфатер" by Георги Димитров Георгиев) in 1969. In 1973 an audiobook was released in German (as "Die lymphatersche Formel"), narrated by Martin Held. It was also republished (and translated) in some other collections of Lem's short stories.

  Read more →
• 

  Estimation of distribution algorithm

  Estimation of distribution algorithms (EDAs), sometimes called probabilistic model-building genetic algorithms (PMBGAs), are stochastic optimization methods that guide the search for the optimum by building and sampling explicit probabilistic models of promising candidate solutions. Optimization is viewed as a series of incremental updates of a probabilistic model, starting with the model encoding an uninformative prior over admissible solutions and ending with the model that generates only the global optima. EDAs belong to the class of evolutionary algorithms. The main difference between EDAs and most conventional evolutionary algorithms is that evolutionary algorithms generate new candidate solutions using an implicit distribution defined by one or more variation operators, whereas EDAs use an explicit probability distribution encoded by a Bayesian network, a multivariate normal distribution, or another model class. Similarly as other evolutionary algorithms, EDAs can be used to solve optimization problems defined over a number of representations from vectors to LISP style S expressions, and the quality of candidate solutions is often evaluated using one or more objective functions. The general procedure of an EDA is outlined in the following: t := 0 initialize model M(0) to represent uniform distribution over admissible solutions while (termination criteria not met) do P := generate N>0 candidate solutions by sampling M(t) F := evaluate all candidate solutions in P M(t + 1) := adjust_model(P, F, M(t)) t := t + 1 Using explicit probabilistic models in optimization allowed EDAs to feasibly solve optimization problems that were notoriously difficult for most conventional evolutionary algorithms and traditional optimization techniques, such as problems with high levels of epistasis. Nonetheless, the advantage of EDAs is also that these algorithms provide an optimization practitioner with a series of probabilistic models that reveal a lot of information about the problem being solved. This information can in turn be used to design problem-specific neighborhood operators for local search, to bias future runs of EDAs on a similar problem, or to create an efficient computational model of the problem. For example, if the population is represented by bit strings of length 4, the EDA can represent the population of promising solution using a single vector of four probabilities (p1, p2, p3, p4) where each component of p defines the probability of that position being a 1. Using this probability vector it is possible to create an arbitrary number of candidate solutions. == Estimation of distribution algorithms (EDAs) == This section describes the models built by some well known EDAs of different levels of complexity. It is always assumed a population P ( t ) {\displaystyle P(t)} at the generation t {\displaystyle t} , a selection operator S {\displaystyle S} , a model-building operator α {\displaystyle \alpha } and a sampling operator β {\displaystyle \beta } . == Univariate factorizations == The most simple EDAs assume that decision variables are independent, i.e. p ( X 1 , X 2 ) = p ( X 1 ) ⋅ p ( X 2 ) {\displaystyle p(X_{1},X_{2})=p(X_{1})\cdot p(X_{2})} . Therefore, univariate EDAs rely only on univariate statistics and multivariate distributions must be factorized as the product of N {\displaystyle N} univariate probability distributions, D Univariate := p ( X 1 , … , X N ) = ∏ i = 1 N p ( X i ) . {\displaystyle D_{\text{Univariate}}:=p(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=\prod _{i=1}^{N}p(X_{i}).} Such factorizations are used in many different EDAs, next we describe some of them. === Univariate marginal distribution algorithm (UMDA) === The UMDA is a simple EDA that uses an operator α U M D A {\displaystyle \alpha _{UMDA}} to estimate marginal probabilities from a selected population S ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S(P(t))} . By assuming S ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S(P(t))} contain λ {\displaystyle \lambda } elements, α U M D A {\displaystyle \alpha _{UMDA}} produces probabilities: p t + 1 ( X i ) = 1 λ ∑ x ∈ S ( P ( t ) ) x i , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N . {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})={\dfrac {1}{\lambda }}\sum _{x\in S(P(t))}x_{i},~\forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N.} Every UMDA step can be described as follows D ( t + 1 ) = α UMDA ∘ S ∘ β λ ( D ( t ) ) . {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{UMDA}}\circ S\circ \beta _{\lambda }(D(t)).} === Population-based incremental learning (PBIL) === The PBIL, represents the population implicitly by its model, from which it samples new solutions and updates the model. At each generation, μ {\displaystyle \mu } individuals are sampled and λ ≤ μ {\displaystyle \lambda \leq \mu } are selected. Such individuals are then used to update the model as follows p t + 1 ( X i ) = ( 1 − γ ) p t ( X i ) + ( γ / λ ) ∑ x ∈ S ( P ( t ) ) x i , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N , {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})=(1-\gamma )p_{t}(X_{i})+(\gamma /\lambda )\sum _{x\in S(P(t))}x_{i},~\forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N,} where γ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \gamma \in (0,1]} is a parameter defining the learning rate, a small value determines that the previous model p t ( X i ) {\displaystyle p_{t}(X_{i})} should be only slightly modified by the new solutions sampled. PBIL can be described as D ( t + 1 ) = α PIBIL ∘ S ∘ β μ ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{PIBIL}}\circ S\circ \beta _{\mu }(D(t))} === Compact genetic algorithm (cGA) === The CGA, also relies on the implicit populations defined by univariate distributions. At each generation t {\displaystyle t} , two individuals x , y {\displaystyle x,y} are sampled, P ( t ) = β 2 ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)=\beta _{2}(D(t))} . The population P ( t ) {\displaystyle P(t)} is then sorted in decreasing order of fitness, S Sort ( f ) ( P ( t ) ) {\displaystyle S_{{\text{Sort}}(f)}(P(t))} , with u {\displaystyle u} being the best and v {\displaystyle v} being the worst solution. The CGA estimates univariate probabilities as follows p t + 1 ( X i ) = p t ( X i ) + γ ( u i − v i ) , ∀ i ∈ 1 , 2 , … , N , {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{i})=p_{t}(X_{i})+\gamma (u_{i}-v_{i}),\quad \forall i\in 1,2,\dots ,N,} where, γ ∈ ( 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \gamma \in (0,1]} is a constant defining the learning rate, usually set to γ = 1 / N {\displaystyle \gamma =1/N} . The CGA can be defined as D ( t + 1 ) = α CGA ∘ S Sort ( f ) ∘ β 2 ( D ( t ) ) {\displaystyle D(t+1)=\alpha _{\text{CGA}}\circ S_{{\text{Sort}}(f)}\circ \beta _{2}(D(t))} == Bivariate factorizations == Although univariate models can be computed efficiently, in many cases they are not representative enough to provide better performance than GAs. In order to overcome such a drawback, the use of bivariate factorizations was proposed in the EDA community, in which dependencies between pairs of variables could be modeled. A bivariate factorization can be defined as follows, where π i {\displaystyle \pi _{i}} contains a possible variable dependent to X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} , i.e. | π i | = 1 {\displaystyle |\pi _{i}|=1} . D Bivariate := p ( X 1 , … , X N ) = ∏ i = 1 N p ( X i | π i ) . {\displaystyle D_{\text{Bivariate}}:=p(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=\prod _{i=1}^{N}p(X_{i}|\pi _{i}).} Bivariate and multivariate distributions are usually represented as probabilistic graphical models (graphs), in which edges denote statistical dependencies (or conditional probabilities) and vertices denote variables. To learn the structure of a PGM from data linkage-learning is employed. === Mutual information maximizing input clustering (MIMIC) === The MIMIC factorizes the joint probability distribution in a chain-like model representing successive dependencies between variables. It finds a permutation of the decision variables, r : i ↦ j {\displaystyle r:i\mapsto j} , such that x r ( 1 ) x r ( 2 ) , … , x r ( N ) {\displaystyle x_{r(1)}x_{r(2)},\dots ,x_{r(N)}} minimizes the Kullback–Leibler divergence in relation to the true probability distribution, i.e. π r ( i + 1 ) = { X r ( i ) } {\displaystyle \pi _{r(i+1)}=\{X_{r(i)}\}} . MIMIC models a distribution p t + 1 ( X 1 , … , X N ) = p t ( X r ( N ) ) ∏ i = 1 N − 1 p t ( X r ( i ) | X r ( i + 1 ) ) . {\displaystyle p_{t+1}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{N})=p_{t}(X_{r(N)})\prod _{i=1}^{N-1}p_{t}(X_{r(i)}|X_{r(i+1)}).} New solutions are sampled from the leftmost to the rightmost variable, the first is generated independently and the others according to conditional probabilities. Since the estimated distribution must be recomputed each generation, MIMIC uses concrete populations in the following way P ( t + 1 ) = β μ ∘ α MIMIC ∘ S ( P ( t ) ) . {\displaystyle P(t+1)=\beta _{\mu }\circ \alpha _{\text{MIMIC}}\circ S(P(t)).} === Bivariate marginal distribution algorithm (BMDA) === The BMDA factorizes the joint probability distribution in bivariate distributions. First, a randomly chosen variable is added as a node in a graph, the most dependent variable to one of those in the graph is chosen among those not yet in the graph, this procedure is repeated until no remain

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithm selection

  Algorithm selection (sometimes also called per-instance algorithm selection or offline algorithm selection) is a meta-algorithmic technique to choose an algorithm from a portfolio on an instance-by-instance basis. It is motivated by the observation that on many practical problems, different algorithms have different performance characteristics. That is, while one algorithm performs well in some scenarios, it performs poorly in others and vice versa for another algorithm. If we can identify when to use which algorithm, we can optimize for each scenario and improve overall performance. This is what algorithm selection aims to do. The only prerequisite for applying algorithm selection techniques is that there exists (or that there can be constructed) a set of complementary algorithms. == Definition == Given a portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} , a set of instances i ∈ I {\displaystyle i\in {\mathcal {I}}} and a cost metric m : P × I → R {\displaystyle m:{\mathcal {P}}\times {\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } , the algorithm selection problem consists of finding a mapping s : I → P {\displaystyle s:{\mathcal {I}}\to {\mathcal {P}}} from instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} to algorithms P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} such that the cost ∑ i ∈ I m ( s ( i ) , i ) {\displaystyle \sum _{i\in {\mathcal {I}}}m(s(i),i)} across all instances is optimized. == Examples == === Boolean satisfiability problem (and other hard combinatorial problems) === A well-known application of algorithm selection is the Boolean satisfiability problem. Here, the portfolio of algorithms is a set of (complementary) SAT solvers, the instances are Boolean formulas, the cost metric is for example average runtime or number of unsolved instances. So, the goal is to select a well-performing SAT solver for each individual instance. In the same way, algorithm selection can be applied to many other N P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {NP}}} -hard problems (such as mixed integer programming, CSP, AI planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and answer set programming). Competition-winning systems in SAT are SATzilla, 3S and CSHC === Machine learning === In machine learning, algorithm selection is better known as meta-learning. The portfolio of algorithms consists of machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, SVM, DNN), the instances are data sets and the cost metric is for example the error rate. So, the goal is to predict which machine learning algorithm will have a small error on each data set. == Instance features == The algorithm selection problem is mainly solved with machine learning techniques. By representing the problem instances by numerical features f {\displaystyle f} , algorithm selection can be seen as a multi-class classification problem by learning a mapping f i ↦ A {\displaystyle f_{i}\mapsto {\mathcal {A}}} for a given instance i {\displaystyle i} . Instance features are numerical representations of instances. For example, we can count the number of variables, clauses, average clause length for Boolean formulas, or number of samples, features, class balance for ML data sets to get an impression about their characteristics. === Static vs. probing features === We distinguish between two kinds of features: Static features are in most cases some counts and statistics (e.g., clauses-to-variables ratio in SAT). These features ranges from very cheap features (e.g. number of variables) to very complex features (e.g., statistics about variable-clause graphs). Probing features (sometimes also called landmarking features) are computed by running some analysis of algorithm behavior on an instance (e.g., accuracy of a cheap decision tree algorithm on an ML data set, or running for a short time a stochastic local search solver on a Boolean formula). These feature often cost more than simple static features. === Feature costs === Depending on the used performance metric m {\displaystyle m} , feature computation can be associated with costs. For example, if we use running time as performance metric, we include the time to compute our instance features into the performance of an algorithm selection system. SAT solving is a concrete example, where such feature costs cannot be neglected, since instance features for CNF formulas can be either very cheap (e.g., to get the number of variables can be done in constant time for CNFs in the DIMACs format) or very expensive (e.g., graph features which can cost tens or hundreds of seconds). It is important to take the overhead of feature computation into account in practice in such scenarios; otherwise a misleading impression of the performance of the algorithm selection approach is created. For example, if the decision which algorithm to choose can be made with perfect accuracy, but the features are the running time of the portfolio algorithms, there is no benefit to the portfolio approach. This would not be obvious if feature costs were omitted. == Approaches == === Regression approach === One of the first successful algorithm selection approaches predicted the performance of each algorithm m ^ A : I → R {\displaystyle {\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}:{\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } and selected the algorithm with the best predicted performance a r g min A ∈ P m ^ A ( i ) {\displaystyle arg\min _{{\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}}{\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}(i)} for an instance i {\displaystyle i} . === Clustering approach === A common assumption is that the given set of instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} can be clustered into homogeneous subsets and for each of these subsets, there is one well-performing algorithm for all instances in there. So, the training consists of identifying the homogeneous clusters via an unsupervised clustering approach and associating an algorithm with each cluster. A new instance is assigned to a cluster and the associated algorithm selected. A more modern approach is cost-sensitive hierarchical clustering using supervised learning to identify the homogeneous instance subsets. === Pairwise cost-sensitive classification approach === A common approach for multi-class classification is to learn pairwise models between every pair of classes (here algorithms) and choose the class that was predicted most often by the pairwise models. We can weight the instances of the pairwise prediction problem by the performance difference between the two algorithms. This is motivated by the fact that we care most about getting predictions with large differences correct, but the penalty for an incorrect prediction is small if there is almost no performance difference. Therefore, each instance i {\displaystyle i} for training a classification model A 1 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{1}} vs A 2 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{2}} is associated with a cost | m ( A 1 , i ) − m ( A 2 , i ) | {\displaystyle |m({\mathcal {A}}_{1},i)-m({\mathcal {A}}_{2},i)|} . == Requirements == The algorithm selection problem can be effectively applied under the following assumptions: The portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms is complementary with respect to the instance set I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} , i.e., there is no single algorithm A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} that dominates the performance of all other algorithms over I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} (see figures to the right for examples on complementary analysis). In some application, the computation of instance features is associated with a cost. For example, if the cost metric is running time, we have also to consider the time to compute the instance features. In such cases, the cost to compute features should not be larger than the performance gain through algorithm selection. == Application domains == Algorithm selection is not limited to single domains but can be applied to any kind of algorithm if the above requirements are satisfied. Application domains include: hard combinatorial problems: SAT, Mixed Integer Programming, CSP, AI Planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and Answer Set Programming combinatorial auctions in machine learning, the problem is known as meta-learning software design black-box optimization multi-agent systems numerical optimization linear algebra, differential equations evolutionary algorithms vehicle routing problem power systems For an extensive list of literature about algorithm selection, we refer to a literature overview. == Variants of algorithm selection == === Online selection === Online algorithm selection refers to switching between different algorithms during the solving process. This is useful as a hyper-heuristic. In contrast, offline algorithm selection selects an algorithm for a given instance only once and before the solving process. === Computation of schedules === An extension of algorithm selection is the per-instance algorithm scheduling problem, in which we do not select only one solver, but we select a time budget for each algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  Combs method

  The Combs method is a rule base reduction method of writing fuzzy logic rules described by William E. Combs in 1997. It is designed to prevent combinatorial explosion in fuzzy logic rules. The Combs method takes advantage of the logical equality ( ( p ∧ q ) ⇒ r ) ⟺ ( ( p ⇒ r ) ∨ ( q ⇒ r ) ) {\displaystyle ((p\land q)\Rightarrow r)\iff ((p\Rightarrow r)\lor (q\Rightarrow r))} . == Equality proof == The simplest proof of given equality involves usage of truth tables: == Combinatorial explosion == Suppose we have a fuzzy system that considers N variables at a time, each of which can fit into at least one of S sets. The number of rules necessary to cover all the cases in a traditional fuzzy system is S N {\displaystyle S^{N}} , whereas the Combs method would need only S × N {\displaystyle S\times N} rules. For example, if we have five sets and five variables to consider to produce one output, covering all the cases would require 3125 rules in a traditional system, while the Combs method would require only 25 rules, taming the combinatorial explosion that occurs when more inputs or more sets are added to the system. This article will focus on the Combs method itself. To learn more about the way rules are traditionally formed, see fuzzy logic and fuzzy associative matrix. == Example == Suppose we were designing an artificial personality system that determined how friendly the personality is supposed to be towards a person in a strategic video game. The personality would consider its own fear, trust, and love in the other person. A set of rules in the Combs system might look like this: The table translates to: [IF Fear IS Unafraid THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Fear IS ModerateFear THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Fear IS Afraid THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends ] OR [IF Trust IS Distrusting THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Trust IS ModerateTrust THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Trust IS Trusting THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends] OR [IF Love IS Unloving THEN Friendship IS Enemies OR IF Love IS ModerateLove THEN Friendship IS Neutral OR IF Love IS Loving THEN Friendship IS GoodFriends] In this case, because the table follows a straightforward pattern in the output, it could be rewritten as: Each column of the table maps to the output provided in the last row. To obtain the output of the system, we just average the outputs of each rule for that output. For example, to calculate how much the computer is Enemies with the player, we take the average of how much the computer is Unafraid, Distrusting, and Unloving of the player. When all three averages are obtained, the result can then be defuzzified by any of the traditional means.

  Read more →
• 

  International Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence

  The International Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence (IOAI) is an annual International Science Olympiad in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) for secondary education students under the age of 20. The first IOAI was held in Burgas, Bulgaria, in 2024. Each country or territory may send up to two teams, each consisting of up to four students supported by one leader. Participants are selected through a multi-stage National Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence (NOAI) and/or a Regional Olympiad such as the NAOAI or APOAI. Participants at the IOAI compete on an individual basis. As of 2025, there were 61 countries and territories participating in the IOAI. Three hundred students participated in IOAI 2025. As of 2026, 130 countries and territories are accredited for participation in the IOAI. == Competition Structure == The IOAI consists of three contests: the Individual Contest, the Team Challenge, and the GAITE contest. Medals are awarded based solely on the Individual Contest. === Individual Contest === The Individual Contest is the main competition of the IOAI in which contestants compete individually on separate computers and are not permitted to communicate during the contest. Medals are awarded solely on the basis of the total score from the two-day Individual Contest. The Individual Contest consists of two on-site contest days (six hours per day), preceded by an at-home practice round and an on-site practice session. In IOAI 2025, three at-home problems were released for preparation approximately one month before the on-site contest. Results from this at-home round do not affect final results. The first on-site contest day (Individual Contest 1) comprises three tasks as extensions and continuations of the at-home tasks, while the second day (Individual Contest 2) comprises two or three tasks which are novel and different from the at-home tasks. The Individual Contest tasks span various AI domains such as machine learning, natural language processing, and computer vision. The IOAI 2025 contest rules describe tasks as requiring typical machine-learning workflows, including writing code, fitting models on training data, and running inference on test data, using identical local machines and GPU resources (minimum 24 GB RAM). Tasks, datasets, and submissions are handled through a contest platform (Bohrium), including a web-based Jupyter notebook environment for GPU access. Internet access is restricted to a whitelist of documentation sites and an integrated compact large language model accessible within the platform. The use of external APIs are prohibited unless a task explicitly allows them. In IOAI 2025, each contest task was scored up to 100 points and could include multiple subtasks. Scores are normalized using a baseline solution and a maximum score derived from either a Scientific Committee solution or the best contestant submission. Contestants can view only their own scores during the contest; a live scoreboard may be available publicly outside the contest hall but is not permitted to be viewed by contestants during the contest. For non-English-speaking teams, the IOAI hold a translation session beginning three hours before each contest day in which team leaders review and may amend machine-translated task statements; translations must match the English original and are published after the contest. The IOAI committee also enforces quarantine restrictions during these translation sessions, where neither contestants or team leaders may not use cell phones, laptops, and other communication devices. === Team Challenge === The Team Challenge is a team-based component of the IOAI. The results of this part do not affect the distribution of medals. The IOAI 2025 rules describe it as a “creative and AI-oriented challenge” in which a team's contestants sit together and cooperate, with the format varying by year. In IOAI 2024, teams worked with existing AI image and video generation tools to produce a visual result. In IOAI 2025, teams were assigned to program a robot to complete various tasks. === GAITE Contest === The GAITE (Global AI Talent Empowerment) contest is a simplified version of the individual contest with a separate scoreboard, where participants may ask for hints. It is designed for countries and territories with limited International Science Olympiads history, and it awards alternative prizes instead of medals. == Awards Distribution == The top 50% of the participants in the individual contest receive gold, silver and bronze medals in ratio of 1:2:3, respectively. The top three individuals receive honorary trophies. As in other International Science Olympiads, if an individual is in the top 50% on one of the days, but does not receive a medal, they receive an honorary mention during the awards ceremony. The GAITE contest has similar cutoff logic, but receives a reward instead of a medal. The top three teams in the Team Challenge receive trophies. == National selection and regional competitions == National delegations are selected through country-level qualification processes referred to as National Olympiads in Artificial Intelligence (NOAI) or equivalent, which are widely known for their low success rates. Although the total number of participants worldwide is not published, available data indicate exceptionally competitive national pools; for example, Brazil reports over 716,000 competitors, while Russia reports more than 72,000. In addition, Regional Olympiads (for example, APOAI or NAOAI) provide continent-level competition and preparation platforms in most regions. === National Selection (National Olympiads in Artificial Intelligence) === Participating countries and territories select their students for the IOAI through a National Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence (NOAI) or an equivalent process. The names of these selection processes differ by country, but almost all of them (excluding newer countries participating in the GAITE contest) have in common that the process comprises multiple and/or extremely rigorous selection stages. United States / Canada – The USA–North America AI Olympiad (USAAIO) is a three-round process including an invitational in-person round and a subsequent selection camp, after which a national delegation is selected for IOAI. Russia – The Russian Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence is organized as a multi-stage process (training, qualification, main round, final). Organizers reported 72,316 registrations for the training round and 52,260 registrations for the qualifying round in one season, with tasks spanning mathematics, algorithms/programming, and machine learning; 977 students were disqualified following plagiarism checks. Japan – Japan's national selection consists of multiple stages, beginning with the Japan Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence (JOAI), a large-scale Kaggle-style competition. High-performing participants advance through additional assessment stages, including written solution reports and technical interviews. From this process, eight students are selected for the APOAI team, with four ultimately chosen to represent Japan at the IOAI. Brazil – Brazil's National Olympiad in Artificial Intelligence (ONIA) is conducted as a large competition which consists of progressive rounds of evaluation. It identifies 28 top students from over 716,000 competitors, four of which are selected for the IOAI. The competition is held in four phases across two cycles, including a two-step third phase and a final training-and-evaluation phase that selects a four-student national team. Singapore – Singapore's national Olympiad consists of two rounds: an online preliminary round (300 MCQs in 3 hours) selects the top 150 performers to advance to the final assessment, which includes both theory questions and Python programming tasks. Additional training and selection may follow the finals for top performers. Poland – The Polish AI Olympiad adopts a two-stage structure: an open online first stage (at-home tasks) and a second-stage competitive camp with 30 selected participants competing for a four-person IOAI team. France – The Olympiades Françaises d'Intelligence Artificielle (OFIA), organized by France-IOI, follow a three-stage structure consisting of an open online qualification round, a second selection round, and a multi-day national training camp and final in Paris. Bangladesh – The Bangladesh AI Olympiad (BdAIO) selects competitors in three rounds: the online preliminary round, the national finals, and the team selection camp. In 2025, 406 participants competed in the national finals. Norway – The Norwrgian AI Olympiad (NOKI) is a three-stage selection system; however, unlike other countries, its first two rounds are shared with the Norwegian Informatics Olympiad. The national Olympiad reports 1,180 participants in the first round. Hong Kong – The national Olympiad reported more than 800 preliminary-round entrants, narrowing through multiple rounds to 25 finalists, with a subsequent

  Read more →