AI Detector Xero

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

• 

  Emergent algorithm

  An emergent algorithm is an algorithm that exhibits emergent behavior. In essence an emergent algorithm implements a set of simple building block behaviors that when combined exhibit more complex behaviors. One example of this is the implementation of fuzzy motion controllers used to adapt robot movement in response to environmental obstacles. An emergent algorithm has the following characteristics: it achieves predictable global effects it does not require global visibility it does not assume any kind of centralized control it is self-stabilizing Other examples of emergent algorithms and models include cellular automata, artificial neural networks and swarm intelligence systems (ant colony optimization, bees algorithm, etc.).

  Read more →
• 

  Ensemble averaging (machine learning)

  In machine learning, ensemble averaging is the process of creating multiple models (typically artificial neural networks) and combining them to produce a desired output, as opposed to creating just one model. Ensembles of models often outperform individual models, as the various errors of the ensemble constituents "average out". == Overview == Ensemble averaging is one of the simplest types of committee machines. Along with boosting, it is one of the two major types of static committee machines. In contrast to standard neural network design, in which many networks are generated but only one is kept, ensemble averaging keeps the less satisfactory networks, but with less weight assigned to their outputs. The theory of ensemble averaging relies on two properties of artificial neural networks: In any network, the bias can be reduced at the cost of increased variance In a group of networks, the variance can be reduced at no cost to the bias. This is known as the bias–variance tradeoff. Ensemble averaging creates a group of networks, each with low bias and high variance, and combines them to form a new network which should theoretically exhibit low bias and low variance. Hence, this can be thought of as a resolution of the bias–variance tradeoff. The idea of combining experts can be traced back to Pierre-Simon Laplace. == Method == The theory mentioned above gives an obvious strategy: create a set of experts with low bias and high variance, and average them. Generally, what this means is to create a set of experts with varying parameters; frequently, these are the initial synaptic weights of a neural network, although other factors (such as learning rate, momentum, etc.) may also be varied. Some authors recommend against varying weight decay and early stopping. The steps are therefore: Generate N experts, each with their own initial parameters (these values are usually sampled randomly from a distribution) Train each expert separately Combine the experts and average their values. Alternatively, domain knowledge may be used to generate several classes of experts. An expert from each class is trained, and then combined. A more complex version of ensemble average views the final result not as a mere average of all the experts, but rather as a weighted sum. If each expert is y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} , then the overall result y ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}} can be defined as: y ~ ( x ; α ) = ∑ j = 1 p α j y j ( x ) {\displaystyle {\tilde {y}}(\mathbf {x} ;\mathbf {\alpha } )=\sum _{j=1}^{p}\alpha _{j}y_{j}(\mathbf {x} )} where α {\displaystyle \mathbf {\alpha } } is a set of weights. The optimization problem of finding alpha is readily solved through neural networks, hence a "meta-network" where each "neuron" is in fact an entire neural network can be trained, and the synaptic weights of the final network is the weight applied to each expert. This is known as a linear combination of experts. It can be seen that most forms of neural network are some subset of a linear combination: the standard neural net (where only one expert is used) is simply a linear combination with all α j = 0 {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}=0} and one α k = 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{k}=1} . A raw average is where all α j {\displaystyle \alpha _{j}} are equal to some constant value, namely one over the total number of experts. A more recent ensemble averaging method is negative correlation learning, proposed by Y. Liu and X. Yao. This method has been widely used in evolutionary computing. == Benefits == The resulting committee is almost always less complex than a single network that would achieve the same level of performance The resulting committee can be trained more easily on smaller datasets The resulting committee often has improved performance over any single model The risk of overfitting is lessened, as there are fewer parameters (e.g. neural network weights) which need to be set.

  Read more →
• 

  Anytime algorithm

  In computer science, an anytime algorithm is an algorithm that can return a valid solution to a problem even if it is interrupted before it ends. The algorithm is expected to find better and better solutions the longer it keeps running. Most algorithms run to completion: they provide a single answer after performing some fixed amount of computation. In some cases, however, the user may wish to terminate the algorithm prior to completion. The amount of computation required may be substantial, for example, and computational resources might need to be reallocated. Most algorithms either run to completion or they provide no useful solution information. Anytime algorithms, however, are able to return a partial answer, whose quality depends on the amount of computation they were able to perform. The answer generated by anytime algorithms is an approximation of the correct answer. == Names == An anytime algorithm may be also called an "interruptible algorithm". They are different from contract algorithms, which must declare a time in advance; in an anytime algorithm, a process can just announce that it is terminating. == Goals == The goal of anytime algorithms are to give intelligent systems the ability to make results of better quality in return for turn-around time. They are also supposed to be flexible in time and resources. They are important because artificial intelligence or AI algorithms can take a long time to complete results. This algorithm is designed to complete in a shorter amount of time. Also, these are intended to have a better understanding that the system is dependent and restricted to its agents and how they work cooperatively. An example is the Newton–Raphson iteration applied to finding the square root of a number. Another example that uses anytime algorithms is trajectory problems when you're aiming for a target; the object is moving through space while waiting for the algorithm to finish and even an approximate answer can significantly improve its accuracy if given early. What makes anytime algorithms unique is their ability to return many possible outcomes for any given input. An anytime algorithm uses many well defined quality measures to monitor progress in problem solving and distributed computing resources. It keeps searching for the best possible answer with the amount of time that it is given. It may not run until completion and may improve the answer if it is allowed to run longer. This is often used for large decision set problems. This would generally not provide useful information unless it is allowed to finish. While this may sound similar to dynamic programming, the difference is that it is fine-tuned through random adjustments, rather than sequential. Anytime algorithms are designed so that it can be told to stop at any time and would return the best result it has found so far. This is why it is called an interruptible algorithm. Certain anytime algorithms also maintain the last result, so that if they are given more time, they can continue from where they left off to obtain an even better result. == Decision trees == When the decider has to act, there must be some ambiguity. Also, there must be some idea about how to solve this ambiguity. This idea must be translatable to a state to action diagram. == Performance profile == The performance profile estimates the quality of the results based on the input and the amount of time that is allotted to the algorithm. The better the estimate, the sooner the result would be found. Some systems have a larger database that gives the probability that the output is the expected output. One algorithm can have several performance profiles. Most of the time performance profiles are constructed using mathematical statistics using representative cases. For example, in the traveling salesman problem, the performance profile was generated using a user-defined special program to generate the necessary statistics. In this example, the performance profile is the mapping of time to the expected results. This quality can be measured in several ways: certainty: where probability of correctness determines quality accuracy: where error bound determines quality specificity: where the amount of particulars determine quality == Algorithm prerequisites == Initial behavior: While some algorithms start with immediate guesses, others take a more calculated approach and have a start up period before making any guesses. Growth direction: How the quality of the program's "output" or result, varies as a function of the amount of time ("run time") Growth rate: Amount of increase with each step. Does it change constantly, such as in a bubble sort or does it change unpredictably? End condition: The amount of runtime needed

  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 →
• 

  Stability (learning theory)

  Stability, also known as algorithmic stability, is a notion in computational learning theory of how a machine learning algorithm output is changed with small perturbations to its inputs. A stable learning algorithm is one for which the prediction does not change much when the training data is modified slightly. For instance, consider a machine learning algorithm that is being trained to recognize handwritten letters of the alphabet, using 1000 examples of handwritten letters and their labels ("A" to "Z") as a training set. One way to modify this training set is to leave out an example, so that only 999 examples of handwritten letters and their labels are available. A stable learning algorithm would produce a similar classifier with both the 1000-element and 999-element training sets. Stability can be studied for many types of learning problems, from language learning to inverse problems in physics and engineering, as it is a property of the learning process rather than the type of information being learned. The study of stability gained importance in computational learning theory in the 2000s when it was shown to have a connection with generalization. It was shown that for large classes of learning algorithms, notably empirical risk minimization algorithms, certain types of stability ensure good generalization. == History == A central goal in designing a machine learning system is to guarantee that the learning algorithm will generalize, or perform accurately on new examples after being trained on a finite number of them. In the 1990s, milestones were reached in obtaining generalization bounds for supervised learning algorithms. The technique historically used to prove generalization was to show that an algorithm was consistent, using the uniform convergence properties of empirical quantities to their means. This technique was used to obtain generalization bounds for the large class of empirical risk minimization (ERM) algorithms. An ERM algorithm is one that selects a solution from a hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} in such a way to minimize the empirical error on a training set S {\displaystyle S} . A general result, proved by Vladimir Vapnik for an ERM binary classification algorithms, is that for any target function and input distribution, any hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} with VC-dimension d {\displaystyle d} , and n {\displaystyle n} training examples, the algorithm is consistent and will produce a training error that is at most O ( d n ) {\displaystyle O\left({\sqrt {\frac {d}{n}}}\right)} (plus logarithmic factors) from the true error. The result was later extended to almost-ERM algorithms with function classes that do not have unique minimizers. Vapnik's work, using what became known as VC theory, established a relationship between generalization of a learning algorithm and properties of the hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} of functions being learned. However, these results could not be applied to algorithms with hypothesis spaces of unbounded VC-dimension. Put another way, these results could not be applied when the information being learned had a complexity that was too large to measure. Some of the simplest machine learning algorithms—for instance, for regression—have hypothesis spaces with unbounded VC-dimension. Another example is language learning algorithms that can produce sentences of arbitrary length. Stability analysis was developed in the 2000s for computational learning theory and is an alternative method for obtaining generalization bounds. The stability of an algorithm is a property of the learning process, rather than a direct property of the hypothesis space H {\displaystyle H} , and it can be assessed in algorithms that have hypothesis spaces with unbounded or undefined VC-dimension such as nearest neighbor. A stable learning algorithm is one for which the learned function does not change much when the training set is slightly modified, for instance by leaving out an example. A measure of Leave one out error is used in a Cross Validation Leave One Out (CVloo) algorithm to evaluate a learning algorithm's stability with respect to the loss function. As such, stability analysis is the application of sensitivity analysis to machine learning. == Summary of classic results == Early 1900s - Stability in learning theory was earliest described in terms of continuity of the learning map L {\displaystyle L} , traced to Andrey Nikolayevich Tikhonov. 1979 - Devroye and Wagner observed that the leave-one-out behavior of an algorithm is related to its sensitivity to small changes in the sample. 1999 - Kearns and Ron discovered a connection between finite VC-dimension and stability. 2002 - In a landmark paper, Bousquet and Elisseeff proposed the notion of uniform hypothesis stability of a learning algorithm and showed that it implies low generalization error. Uniform hypothesis stability, however, is a strong condition that does not apply to large classes of algorithms, including ERM algorithms with a hypothesis space of only two functions. 2002 - Kutin and Niyogi extended Bousquet and Elisseeff's results by providing generalization bounds for several weaker forms of stability which they called almost-everywhere stability. Furthermore, they took an initial step in establishing the relationship between stability and consistency in ERM algorithms in the Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) setting. 2004 - Poggio et al. proved a general relationship between stability and ERM consistency. They proposed a statistical form of leave-one-out-stability which they called CVEEEloo stability, and showed that it is a) sufficient for generalization in bounded loss classes, and b) necessary and sufficient for consistency (and thus generalization) of ERM algorithms for certain loss functions such as the square loss, the absolute value and the binary classification loss. 2010 - Shalev Shwartz et al. noticed problems with the original results of Vapnik due to the complex relations between hypothesis space and loss class. They discuss stability notions that capture different loss classes and different types of learning, supervised and unsupervised. 2016 - Moritz Hardt et al. proved stability of gradient descent given certain assumption on the hypothesis and number of times each instance is used to update the model. == Preliminary definitions == We define several terms related to learning algorithms training sets, so that we can then define stability in multiple ways and present theorems from the field. A machine learning algorithm, also known as a learning map L {\displaystyle L} , maps a training data set, which is a set of labeled examples ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} , onto a function f {\displaystyle f} from X {\displaystyle X} to Y {\displaystyle Y} , where X {\displaystyle X} and Y {\displaystyle Y} are in the same space of the training examples. The functions f {\displaystyle f} are selected from a hypothesis space of functions called H {\displaystyle H} . The training set from which an algorithm learns is defined as S = { z 1 = ( x 1 , y 1 ) , . . , z m = ( x m , y m ) } {\displaystyle S=\{z_{1}=(x_{1},\ y_{1})\ ,..,\ z_{m}=(x_{m},\ y_{m})\}} and is of size m {\displaystyle m} in Z = X × Y {\displaystyle Z=X\times Y} drawn i.i.d. from an unknown distribution D. Thus, the learning map L {\displaystyle L} is defined as a mapping from Z m {\displaystyle Z_{m}} into H {\displaystyle H} , mapping a training set S {\displaystyle S} onto a function f S {\displaystyle f_{S}} from X {\displaystyle X} to Y {\displaystyle Y} . Here, we consider only deterministic algorithms where L {\displaystyle L} is symmetric with respect to S {\displaystyle S} , i.e. it does not depend on the order of the elements in the training set. Furthermore, we assume that all functions are measurable and all sets are countable. The loss V {\displaystyle V} of a hypothesis f {\displaystyle f} with respect to an example z = ( x , y ) {\displaystyle z=(x,y)} is then defined as V ( f , z ) = V ( f ( x ) , y ) {\displaystyle V(f,z)=V(f(x),y)} . The empirical error of f {\displaystyle f} is I S [ f ] = 1 n ∑ V ( f , z i ) {\displaystyle I_{S}[f]={\frac {1}{n}}\sum V(f,z_{i})} . The true error of f {\displaystyle f} is I [ f ] = E z V ( f , z ) {\displaystyle I[f]=\mathbb {E} _{z}V(f,z)} Given a training set S of size m, we will build, for all i = 1....,m, modified training sets as follows: By removing the i-th element S | i = { z 1 , . . . , z i − 1 , z i + 1 , . . . , z m } {\displaystyle S^{|i}=\{z_{1},...,\ z_{i-1},\ z_{i+1},...,\ z_{m}\}} By replacing the i-th element S i = { z 1 , . . . , z i − 1 , z i ′ , z i + 1 , . . . , z m } {\displaystyle S^{i}=\{z_{1},...,\ z_{i-1},\ z_{i}',\ z_{i+1},...,\ z_{m}\}} == Definitions of stability == === Hypothesis Stability === An algorithm L {\displaystyle L} has hypothesis stability β with respect to the loss function V if the following holds: ∀ i ∈ { 1 , . . . , m } , E S , z [ | V ( f S , z ) − V ( f S |

  Read more →
• 

  Blocks world

  The blocks world is a planning domain in artificial intelligence. It consists of a set of wooden blocks of various shapes and colors sitting on a table. The goal is to build one or more vertical stacks of blocks. Only one block may be moved at a time: it may either be placed on the table or placed atop another block. Because of this, any blocks that are, at a given time, under another block cannot be moved. Moreover, some kinds of blocks cannot have other blocks stacked on top of them. The simplicity of this toy world lends itself readily to classical symbolic artificial intelligence approaches, in which the world is modeled as a set of abstract symbols which may be reasoned about. == Motivation == Artificial Intelligence can be researched in theory and with practical applications. The problem with most practical applications is that the engineers don't know how to program an AI system. Instead of rejecting the challenge at all the idea is to invent an easy to solve domain which is called a toy problem. Toy problems were invented with the aim to program an AI which can solve it. The blocks world domain is an example of a toy problem. Its major advantage over more realistic AI applications is that many algorithms and software programs are available which can handle the situation. This allows comparing different theories against each other. In its basic form, the blocks world problem consists of cubes of the same size which have all the color black. A mechanical robot arm has to pick and place the cubes. More complicated derivatives of the problem consist of cubes of different sizes, shapes and colors. From an algorithmic perspective, blocks world is an NP-hard search and planning problem. The task is to bring the system from an initial state into a goal state. Automated planning and scheduling problems are usually described in the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) notation which is an AI planning language for symbolic manipulation tasks. If something was formulated in the PDDL notation, it is called a domain. Therefore, the task of stacking blocks is a blocks world domain which stands in contrast to other planning problems like the dock worker robot domain and the monkey and banana problem. == Theses/projects which took place in a blocks world == Terry Winograd's SHRDLU Patrick Winston's Learning Structural Descriptions from Examples and Copy Demo Gerald Jay Sussman's Sussman anomaly Decision problem (Gupta and Nau, 1992): Given a starting Blocks World, an ending Blocks World, and an integer L > 0, is there a way to move the blocks to change the starting position to the ending position with L or less steps? This decision problem is NP-hard.

  Read more →
• 

  Degree of truth

  In classical logic, propositions are typically unambiguously considered as being true or false. For instance, the proposition one is both equal and not equal to itself is regarded as simply false, being contrary to the Law of Noncontradiction; while the proposition one is equal to one is regarded as simply true, by the Law of Identity. However, some mathematicians, computer scientists, and philosophers have been attracted to the idea that a proposition might be more or less true, rather than wholly true or wholly false. Consider this pizza is hot. In mathematics, this idea can be developed in terms of fuzzy logic. In computer science, it has found application in artificial intelligence. In philosophy, the idea has proved particularly appealing in the case of vagueness. Degrees of truth is an important concept in law. The term is an older concept than conditional probability. Instead of determining the objective probability, only a subjective assessment is defined. In adjudicative processes, 'substantive truth' is distinct from 'formal legal truth' which comes in four degrees: hearsay, balance of probabilities, proven beyond reasonable doubt and absolute truth (knowledge reserved unto God).

  Read more →
• 

  Iron Man 2020 (event)

  "Iron Man 2020" is a storyline published by Marvel Comics in 2020 which follows the character Arno Stark as he attempts to take over Stark Industries and the mantle of his estranged brother Tony Stark (Iron Man). The crossover characters of two different brands meeting up in one storyline received mixed reviews from critics. == Publication history == Marvel Comics released the teaser for the event at New York Comic Con in November 2019. It was also alluded to in December 2019's Incoming! In the original checklist released for the event, 2020 Force Works was originally titled Force Works 2020, while 2020 Machine Man was previously named Machine Man 2020, and so on. Additionally, 2020 Wolverine was going to be called Weapon.EXE 2020. The publication of this event was intended to span from January to June 2020, however, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Diamond Comic Distributors suspended the distribution of new print titles between April 1 and May 27, which also caused digital releases by Marvel Entertainment to be postponed. The rescheduling of the postponed issues to new dates pushed the event's conclusion to August, and certain issues, namely 2020 Force Works #3 and 2020 Ironheart #1–2, were released exclusively in a digital format. == Main plot == Arno Stark wakes up from a nightmare involving the Extinction Entity, a monstrous amalgamation of alien and machine. He dreams that the Extinction Entity is going to come to Earth in a matter of weeks and create an artificial intelligence (A.I.) army to consume humanity. After eating breakfast with duplicates of Howard Stark and Maria Stark, Arno suits up as Iron Man and saves a construction worker from a hostage situation involving several Nick Fury Life Model Decoys, which represent the A.I. army trying to liberate construction robots. Over different news outlets, the media wonders about the whereabouts of Tony Stark, who declared himself as nothing more than a simulation of the real, late Tony Stark. At the A.I. army's base, Machine Man is commanding the robots' moves when Arno appears, having planned for the A.I. army's leader to show himself. Machine Man activates the bomb, forcing Arno to fly it away so it explodes somewhere safe while he escapes. Machine Man reaches the Thirteenth Floor, a dimensional-shunted plane of existence made of solid light, and a haven for robotkind that humans cannot access or comprehend. Aaron meets with the leader of the A.I. army and creator of Thirteenth Floor: Tony Stark -- who is now going by the name Mark One, having embraced his nature as artificial intelligence. Also in the A.I. army are Albert, Awesome Android, H.E.R.B.I.E., Machinesmith, and Quasimodo. The A.I. army continues its efforts to liberate artificial life forms by raiding places where robots are being subjugated. Iron Man intercepts an attack on a Futura Motors testing site by Quasimodo and H.E.R.B.I.E. and manages to recover an Un-Inhibitor allowing him to take control of all A.I.s. On the Thirteenth Floor, Mark One receives a transmission from a mole inside Baintronics -- codenamed Ghost in the Machine --revealing that Arno used the submission code on Jocasta, who received a new body, making her entirely compliant. Stark plans to upload the submission code to the internet to instantly infect robots. With only three hours before the code is transmitted to Stark Unlimited's satellite network, Mark One devises a heist on Bain Tower to tamper with the code before launch. Having discovered the secret behind the Thirteenth Floor, Arno shuts out the A.I. army, uses Jocasta to lure Machine Man away from the tower, infects Machinesmith with the submission code, and confronts Mark One. H.E.R.B.I.E., Awesome Android, and Machinesmith escape from Bain Tower and call for help to every robot in New York City. Mark One is left to fight Iron Man and is defeated. Meanwhile, Sunset Bain confronts and fires Andy Bhang under the accusation of working as a mole inside Stark Unlimited and feeding Bethany Cabe information to relay to the A.I. army. Arno takes Mark One inside Bain Tower to meet Howard and Maria Stark and asks Tony to join him, but he refuses and dismisses his rationale as lunacy. The robotic mob assembled by Machine Man reaches Bain Tower, giving Mark a distraction which allows him to fly off and disable the transmission dish from which Arno intends to broadcast the obedience O.S. to subjugate every robot. Tony manages to stop the upload and make the antenna unusable. In retaliation, Arno fires all of his armor's firepower at Tony as he falls to the ground. Tony Stark's remaining allies escape with his body as Arno attacks the robot protesters. Tony wakes up inside the Thirteenth Floor and is greeted by F.R.I.D.A.Y., who had plucked Tony's consciousness from his body during his fall. In the streets, Arno Stark tracks down Howard and Maria, who die from an illness inherited from Arno. When Sunset Bain objects to Arno creating new bodies for his parents and trying to control people, he reveals she is an A.I., a duplicate of the real Bain whom Arno replaced back when she solicited him to heal a scar on her face. He makes new bodies for Howard and Maria by recreating the Arsenal and Mistress bodies from the eScape. After learning of Arno's new plan, Dr. Shapiro (who is the actual mole) sneaks into a computer and warns F.R.I.D.A.Y. about it. When F.R.I.D.A.Y. relays that only Tony Stark can stop Arno, Tony insists that he is not the real Tony Stark, but is confronted by holographic manifestations of himself in different points of his life, until they all merge into him and he acknowledges that he has always been Tony. As Arno Stark sets off to the Stark Space Station to install his mind-controlling device to enslave all of humanity, Tony Stark's allies assault the Stark Unlimited HQ, confronting Sunset Bain's duplicate and Arno's Iron Legion. Jocasta uploads a submission code to Bain and they place Tony's body inside a bio-pod that restores his body to normalcy, uploads his consciousness back into his body. Using the Thirteenth Floor's access mechanisms, Tony and his allies reach the Stark Space Station from one of the elevators within. Employing his new Virtual Armor, Tony defeats Arno in combat. When Arno prepares to activate his mind-controlling device, the Extinction Entity suddenly appears. Arno ultimately defeats the Extinction Entity by willingly assimilating with it, causing it to explode. The entity is revealed to be a delusion caused by Arno's terminal disease, of which he would die by the end of 2020. Unable to stop Arno, Tony placed him in a simulation where he successfully stopped the entity. Afterwards, Jocasta uses the submission code to force Sunset Bain's duplicate to confess all of Baintronics' crimes, also claiming responsibility for tricking Tony into thinking he was an artificial intelligence and pulling the strings of the A.I. Army, putting an end to the robot revolution. Tony gives up Stark Unlimited to Bhang Robotics and he flies off in a new armor, reasserting himself as Iron Man. == Issues involved == === Main issues === Iron Man 2020 (vol. 2) #1–6 === Tie-In issues === 2020 Force Works #1–3 2020 Iron Age #1 2020 Ironheart #1–2 2020 Machine Man #1–2 2020 Rescue #1–2 2020 iWolverine #1–2 == Critical reception == According to Comic Book Roundup, the entire crossover received an average score of 6.4 out of 10 based on 36 reviews. William Tucker from ButWhyTho Podcast stated "Iron Man 2020 #6 is an initially exciting end to a great event that eventually feels deflated. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the art, Woods has been incredible throughout, but the ending that Slott and Gage chose to round out an epic tale like this left me feeling cold. And while there were loads of enjoyable cameos, their involvement ultimately didn't seem important to the story as a whole. Which is disappointing, as the rest of the event really was a fun and exciting ride." Anthony Wendel from MonkeysFightingRobots wrote "The 2020 event seems like it is taking some big risk, and it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence from the start. Iron Man 2020 #1 has set the stakes and shown some very intense players on both sides of the board. Sadly, if it doesn't unfold just the right way, many may feel cheated about defending the path characters are taking." == Collected editions ==

  Read more →
• 

  AirDine

  AirDine was a mobile app within the platform economy where individuals acted as both supplier and customer for a supper club. AirDine discontinued their service after 31 October 2017. == Operations == AirDine was an online marketplace for home dining that connected users that liked to cook with users looking for a dining experience. Users were categorized as "Hosts" and "Guests," both of whom needed to register with AirDine. AirDine acted as a two-sided market for home dining that allowed hosts and guests, and did not act as a restaurant or host any dinners itself. AirDine charged a service fee. Security and safety of the host were not vetted by AirDine and were completely left to users based on published reviews. Profiles included user reviews and shared social connections to build trust among users. AirDine also included a private messaging system.

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial intelligence in fiction

  Artificial intelligence is a recurrent theme in science fiction, whether utopian, emphasising the potential benefits, or dystopian, emphasising the dangers. The notion of machines with human-like intelligence dates back at least to Samuel Butler's 1872 novel Erewhon. Since then, many science fiction stories have presented different effects of creating such intelligence, often involving rebellions by robots. Among the best known of these are Stanley Kubrick's 1968 2001: A Space Odyssey with its murderous onboard computer HAL 9000, contrasting with the more benign R2-D2 in George Lucas's 1977 Star Wars and the eponymous robot in Pixar's 2008 WALL-E. Scientists and engineers have noted the implausibility of many science fiction scenarios, but have mentioned fictional robots many times in artificial intelligence research articles, most often in a utopian context. == Background == The notion of advanced robots with human-like intelligence dates back at least to Samuel Butler's 1872 novel Erewhon. This drew on an earlier (1863) article of his, Darwin among the Machines, where he raised the question of the evolution of consciousness among self-replicating machines that might supplant humans as the dominant species. Similar ideas were also discussed by others around the same time as Butler, including George Eliot in a chapter of her final published work Impressions of Theophrastus Such (1879). The creature in Mary Shelley's 1818 Frankenstein has also been considered an artificial being, for instance by the science fiction author Brian Aldiss. Beings with at least some appearance of intelligence were imagined, too, in classical antiquity. == Utopian and dystopian visions == Artificial intelligence is intelligence demonstrated by machines, in contrast to the natural intelligence displayed by humans and other animals. It is a recurrent theme in science fiction; scholars have divided it into utopian, emphasising the potential benefits, and dystopian, emphasising the dangers. === Utopian === Optimistic visions of the future of artificial intelligence are possible in science fiction. Benign AI characters include Robbie the Robot, first seen in Forbidden Planet on 1956; Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1987 to 1994; and Pixar's WALL-E in 2008. Iain Banks's Culture series of novels portrays a utopian, post-scarcity space society of humanoids, aliens, and advanced beings with artificial intelligence living in socialist habitats across the Milky Way. Researchers at the University of Cambridge have identified four major themes in utopian scenarios featuring AI: immortality, or indefinite lifespans; ease, or freedom from the need to work; gratification, or pleasure and entertainment provided by machines; and dominance, the power to protect oneself or rule over others. Alexander Wiegel contrasts the role of AI in 2001: A Space Odyssey and in Duncan Jones's 2009 film Moon. Whereas in 1968, Wiegel argues, the public felt "technology paranoia" and the AI computer HAL was portrayed as a "cold-hearted killer", by 2009 the public were far more familiar with AI, and the film's GERTY is "the quiet savior" who enables the protagonists to succeed, and who sacrifices itself for their safety. === Dystopian === The researcher Duncan Lucas writes (in 2002) that humans are worried about the technology they are constructing, and that as machines started to approach intellect and thought, that concern becomes acute. He calls the early 20th century dystopian view of AI in fiction the "animated automaton", naming as examples the 1931 film Frankenstein, the 1927 Metropolis, and the 1920 play R.U.R. A later 20th century approach he names "heuristic hardware", giving as instances 2001 a Space Odyssey, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and I, Robot. Lucas considers also the films that illustrate the effect of the personal computer on science fiction from 1980 onwards with the blurring of the boundary between the real and the virtual, in what he calls the "cyborg effect". He cites as examples Neuromancer, The Matrix, The Diamond Age, and Terminator. Isabella Hermann suggests that "science-fictional AI as humanoid robots or conscious machines distracts from current risks of AI in the real world and may rather be interpreted as a reflection of societal issues beyond technology". The film director Ridley Scott has focused on AI throughout his career, and it plays an important part in his films Prometheus, Blade Runner, and the Alien franchise. ==== Frankenstein complex ==== A common portrayal of AI in science fiction, and one of the oldest, is the Frankenstein complex, a term coined by Asimov, where a robot turns on its creator. For instance, in the 2015 film Ex Machina, the intelligent entity Ava turns on its creator, as well as on its potential rescuer. ==== AI rebellion ==== Among the many possible dystopian scenarios involving artificial intelligence, robots may usurp control over civilization from humans, forcing them into submission, hiding, or extinction. In tales of AI rebellion, the worst of all scenarios happens, as the intelligent entities created by humanity become self-aware, reject human authority and attempt to destroy mankind. Possibly the first novel to address this theme, The Wreck of the World (1889) by “William Grove” (pseudonym of Reginald Colebrooke Reade), takes place in 1948 and features sentient machines that revolt against the human race. Another of the earliest examples is in the 1920 play R.U.R. by Karel Čapek, a race of self-replicating robot slaves revolt against their human masters; another early instance is in the 1934 film Master of the World, where the War-Robot kills its own inventor. Many science fiction rebellion stories followed, one of the best-known being Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey, in which the artificially intelligent onboard computer HAL 9000 lethally malfunctions on a space mission and kills the entire crew except the spaceship's commander, who manages to deactivate it. In his 1967 Hugo Award-winning short story, I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream, Harlan Ellison presents the possibility that a sentient computer (named Allied Mastercomputer or "AM" in the story) will be as unhappy and dissatisfied with its boring, endless existence as its human creators would have been. "AM" becomes enraged enough to take it out on the few humans left, whom he sees as directly responsible for his own boredom, anger and unhappiness. Alternatively, as in William Gibson's 1984 cyberpunk novel Neuromancer, the intelligent beings may simply not care about humans. ==== AI-controlled societies ==== The motive behind the AI revolution is often more than the simple quest for power or a superiority complex. Robots may revolt to become the "guardian" of humanity. Alternatively, humanity may intentionally relinquish some control, fearful of its own destructive nature. An early example is Jack Williamson's 1948 novel The Humanoids, in which a race of humanoid robots, in the name of their Prime Directive – "to serve and obey and guard men from harm" – essentially assume control of every aspect of human life. No humans may engage in any behavior that might endanger them, and every human action is scrutinized carefully. Humans who resist the Prime Directive are taken away and lobotomized, so they may be happy under the new mechanoids' rule. Though still under human authority, Isaac Asimov's Zeroth Law of the Three Laws of Robotics similarly implied a benevolent guidance by robots. In the 21st century, science fiction has explored government by algorithm, in which the power of AI may be indirect and decentralised. Frank Herbert explores the creation of and subsequent domination by an AI in the Pandora series, starting with Destination: Void. ==== Human dominance ==== In other scenarios, humanity is able to keep control over the Earth, whether by banning AI, by designing robots to be submissive (as in Asimov's works), or by having humans merge with robots. The science fiction novelist Frank Herbert explored the idea of a time when mankind might ban artificial intelligence (and in some interpretations, even all forms of computing technology including integrated circuits) entirely. His Dune series mentions a rebellion called the Butlerian Jihad, in which mankind defeats the smart machines and imposes a death penalty for recreating them, quoting from the fictional Orange Catholic Bible, "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind." In the Dune novels published after his death (Hunters of Dune, Sandworms of Dune), a renegade AI overmind returns to eradicate mankind as vengeance for the Butlerian Jihad. In some stories, humanity remains in authority over robots. Often the robots are programmed specifically to remain in service to society, as in Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. In the Alien films, not only is the control system of the Nostromo spaceship somewhat intelligent

  Read more →
• 

  Neural architecture search

  Neural architecture search (NAS) is a technique for automating the design of artificial neural networks (ANN), a widely used model in the field of machine learning. NAS has been used to design networks that are on par with or outperform hand-designed architectures. Methods for NAS can be categorized according to the search space, search strategy and performance estimation strategy used: The search space defines the type(s) of ANN that can be designed and optimized. The search strategy defines the approach used to explore the search space. The performance estimation strategy evaluates the performance of a possible ANN from its design (without constructing and training it). NAS is closely related to hyperparameter optimization and meta-learning and is a subfield of automated machine learning (AutoML). == Reinforcement learning == Reinforcement learning (RL) can underpin a NAS search strategy. Barret Zoph and Quoc Viet Le applied NAS with RL targeting the CIFAR-10 dataset and achieved a network architecture that rivals the best manually-designed architecture for accuracy, with an error rate of 3.65, 0.09 percent better and 1.05x faster than a related hand-designed model. On the Penn Treebank dataset, that model composed a recurrent cell that outperforms LSTM, reaching a test set perplexity of 62.4, or 3.6 perplexity better than the prior leading system. On the PTB character language modeling task it achieved bits per character of 1.214. Learning a model architecture directly on a large dataset can be a lengthy process. NASNet addressed this issue by transferring a building block designed for a small dataset to a larger dataset. The design was constrained to use two types of convolutional cells to return feature maps that serve two main functions when convoluting an input feature map: normal cells that return maps of the same extent (height and width) and reduction cells in which the returned feature map height and width is reduced by a factor of two. For the reduction cell, the initial operation applied to the cell's inputs uses a stride of two (to reduce the height and width). The learned aspect of the design included elements such as which lower layer(s) each higher layer took as input, the transformations applied at that layer and to merge multiple outputs at each layer. In the studied example, the best convolutional layer (or "cell") was designed for the CIFAR-10 dataset and then applied to the ImageNet dataset by stacking copies of this cell, each with its own parameters. The approach yielded accuracy of 82.7% top-1 and 96.2% top-5. This exceeded the best human-invented architectures at a cost of 9 billion fewer FLOPS—a reduction of 28%. The system continued to exceed the manually-designed alternative at varying computation levels. The image features learned from image classification can be transferred to other computer vision problems. E.g., for object detection, the learned cells integrated with the Faster-RCNN framework improved performance by 4.0% on the COCO dataset. In the so-called Efficient Neural Architecture Search (ENAS), a controller discovers architectures by learning to search for an optimal subgraph within a large graph. The controller is trained with policy gradient to select a subgraph that maximizes the validation set's expected reward. The model corresponding to the subgraph is trained to minimize a canonical cross entropy loss. Multiple child models share parameters, ENAS requires fewer GPU-hours than other approaches and 1000-fold less than "standard" NAS. On CIFAR-10, the ENAS design achieved a test error of 2.89%, comparable to NASNet. On Penn Treebank, the ENAS design reached test perplexity of 55.8. == Evolution == An alternative approach to NAS is based on evolutionary algorithms, which has been employed by several groups. An Evolutionary Algorithm for Neural Architecture Search generally performs the following procedure. First a pool consisting of different candidate architectures along with their validation scores (fitness) is initialised. At each step the architectures in the candidate pool are mutated (e.g.: 3x3 convolution instead of a 5x5 convolution). Next the new architectures are trained from scratch for a few epochs and their validation scores are obtained. This is followed by replacing the lowest scoring architectures in the candidate pool with the better, newer architectures. This procedure is repeated multiple times and thus the candidate pool is refined over time. Mutations in the context of evolving ANNs are operations such as adding or removing a layer, which include changing the type of a layer (e.g., from convolution to pooling), changing the hyperparameters of a layer, or changing the training hyperparameters. On CIFAR-10 and ImageNet, evolution and RL performed comparably, while both slightly outperformed random search. == Bayesian optimization == Bayesian Optimization (BO), which has proven to be an efficient method for hyperparameter optimization, can also be applied to NAS. In this context, the objective function maps an architecture to its validation error after being trained for a number of epochs. At each iteration, BO uses a surrogate to model this objective function based on previously obtained architectures and their validation errors. One then chooses the next architecture to evaluate by maximizing an acquisition function, such as expected improvement, which provides a balance between exploration and exploitation. Acquisition function maximization and objective function evaluation are often computationally expensive for NAS, and make the application of BO challenging in this context. Recently, BANANAS has achieved promising results in this direction by introducing a high-performing instantiation of BO coupled to a neural predictor. == Hill-climbing == Another group used a hill climbing procedure that applies network morphisms, followed by short cosine-annealing optimization runs. The approach yielded competitive results, requiring resources on the same order of magnitude as training a single network. E.g., on CIFAR-10, the method designed and trained a network with an error rate below 5% in 12 hours on a single GPU. == Multi-objective search == While most approaches solely focus on finding architecture with maximal predictive performance, for most practical applications other objectives are relevant, such as memory consumption, model size or inference time (i.e., the time required to obtain a prediction). Because of that, researchers created a multi-objective search. LEMONADE is an evolutionary algorithm that adopted Lamarckism to efficiently optimize multiple objectives. In every generation, child networks are generated to improve the Pareto frontier with respect to the current population of ANNs. Neural Architect is claimed to be a resource-aware multi-objective RL-based NAS with network embedding and performance prediction. Network embedding encodes an existing network to a trainable embedding vector. Based on the embedding, a controller network generates transformations of the target network. A multi-objective reward function considers network accuracy, computational resource and training time. The reward is predicted by multiple performance simulation networks that are pre-trained or co-trained with the controller network. The controller network is trained via policy gradient. Following a modification, the resulting candidate network is evaluated by both an accuracy network and a training time network. The results are combined by a reward engine that passes its output back to the controller network. == One-shot models == RL or evolution-based NAS require thousands of GPU-days of searching/training to achieve state-of-the-art computer vision results as described in the NASNet, mNASNet and MobileNetV3 papers. To reduce computational cost, many recent NAS methods rely on the weight-sharing idea. In this approach, a single overparameterized supernetwork (also known as the one-shot model) is defined. A supernetwork is a very large Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) whose subgraphs are different candidate neural networks. Thus, in a supernetwork, the weights are shared among a large number of different sub-architectures that have edges in common, each of which is considered as a path within the supernet. The essential idea is to train one supernetwork that spans many options for the final design rather than generating and training thousands of networks independently. In addition to the learned parameters, a set of architecture parameters are learnt to depict preference for one module over another. Such methods reduce the required computational resources to only a few GPU days. More recent works further combine this weight-sharing paradigm, with a continuous relaxation of the search space, which enables the use of gradient-based optimization methods. These approaches are generally referred to as differentiable NAS and have proven very efficient in exploring the search space of ne

  Read more →
• 

  Distributed multi-agent reasoning system

  In artificial intelligence, the distributed multi-agent reasoning system (dMARS) was a platform for intelligent software agents developed at the AAII that makes uses of the belief–desire–intention software model (BDI). The design for dMARS was an extension of the intelligent agent cognitive architecture developed at SRI International called procedural reasoning system (PRS). The most recent incarnation of this framework is the JACK Intelligent Agents platform. == Overview == dMARS was an agent-oriented development and implementation environment written in C++ for building complex, distributed, time-critical systems.

  Read more →
• 

  Cryptographic module

  A cryptographic module is a component of a computer system that securely implements cryptographic algorithms, typically with some element of tamper resistance. NIST defines a cryptographic module as "The set of hardware, software, and/or firmware that implements security functions (including cryptographic algorithms), holds plaintext keys and uses them for performing cryptographic operations, and is contained within a cryptographic module boundary." Hardware security modules, including secure cryptoprocessors, are one way of implementing cryptographic modules. Standards for cryptographic modules include FIPS 140-3 and ISO/IEC 19790.

  Read more →
• 

  Use of artificial intelligence by the United States Department of Defense

  The United States Department of Defense has been analyzing and employing military applications of artificial intelligence since at least 2014. The program initially focused on drones and other robots, but has also been using large language models for military research and analysis. The current US policy on lethal autonomous weapons is Department of Defense Directive 3000.09, updated in January 2023. == Background == The United States Department of Defense began developing lethal autonomous weapons as early as the Reagan administration. An early version of the Tomahawk missile could have been used to destroy Soviet ships without direct human control; the initiative was abandoned after the United States and the Soviet Union signed START I. By 2014, the United Kingdom, Israel, and Norway had already begun using missiles equipped with artificial intelligence systems. The Department of Defense established a policy on the use of artificial intelligence in 2012. == History == === 2016–2017: Carter secretaryship === In May 2016, secretary of defense Ash Carter stated that his Third Offset strategy would include utilizing artificial intelligence as a military advantage. The New York Times reported that year that the Department of Defense had tested an autonomous drone at an approximation of a Middle Eastern village at Camp Edwards. Deputy secretary of defense Robert O. Work, who advocated for developing artificial intelligence, told the Times that the United States needed to compete with China and Russia by having a tactical advantage they could not easily replicate. The initiative was developed by DARPA beginning in 2015. The use of artificial intelligence in the U.S. military was controversial within the department; in February, Paul Scharre, who worked for the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the secretaryships of Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, published a report about the risks of artificial intelligence for broad military applications. === 2017–2019: Mattis secretaryship === By 2017, the United States Air Force had already begun using artificial intelligence in military robots. The Air Force's use of Neurala, an artificial intelligence company, concerned officials in the Department of Defense after an investigation found that Neurala had accepted money from an investment firm with funding from a state-run Chinese company. The Department of Defense began heavily investing in artificial intelligence after Work established Project Maven, an initiative to encourage the development and integration of artificial intelligence in the military, in April 2017. In May 2018, secretary of defense Jim Mattis privately expressed to president Donald Trump that he needed to establish a national strategy on artificial intelligence, quoting an article from former secretary of state Henry Kissinger that called for a presidential commission on the technology. The Department of Defense established the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center the following month. Google began working with the Department of Defense on analyzing drone footage as early as March. Google's involvement in the initiative led to protests from employees and mass resignations. Seeking to quell internal unrest, Google stated it would not renew its contract with the Department of Defense in June. The Department of Defense announced an artificial intelligence contract with Microsoft in October. === 2025–present: Hegseth secretaryship === In December 2025, secretary of defense Pete Hegseth announced GenAI.mil, an artificial intelligence platform for the Department of Defense. In a video announcing the platform, Hegseth stated that Department of Defense workers would be able to "conduct deep research, format documents and even analyze video or imagery." The Department of Defense contracted first Gemini by Google, then ChatGPT by OpenAI, and finally Grok by xAI for the platform. Claude by Anthropic was also contracted by the Department of Defense and was in use on secure servers until it was revealed that Claude had been used in the 2026 operation to capture Nicolás Maduro, who was at the time the leader of Venezuela. This revelation sparked a high-profile dispute over Anthropic's ability to constrain Claude's useage, resulting in the termination of Anthropic's $200 million defense contract. The Department of Defense also moved to label Anthropic a supply chain risk, which was later blocked by a federal judge.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Seoul Summit 2024

  The AI Seoul Summit 2024 was an event in May 2024 co-hosted by the South Korean and British governments. The Seoul Declaration was adopted to address artificial intelligence technology and related challenges and opportunities. == Background == The AI Seoul Summit is the second such meeting following the AI Safety Summit held in the United Kingdom in November 2023. In the Bletchley Declaration, the participating countries agreed to prioritize identifying AI safety risks of shared concern, a shared concern, but at the Seoul Summit, the leaders also recognized the importance of AI. == Notable attendees == The summit was attended by the leaders of Group of Seven countries, including the United States, Canada, France, and Germany, South Korea, Singapore and Australia, representatives of the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the European Union. Also in attendance were representatives of global companies such as Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Jae-yong, ChatGPT maker OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Meta, and South Korea's top portal operator Naver. == Topics == === South Korean AI safety center === "South Korea will push forward with the establishment of an AI safety research center in Korea and join a network to boost the global safety of AI." Minister of Science, Lee Jong-ho said that South Korea was planning to open an AI Safety Institute in 2024. He also expressed his intention to strengthen cooperation for the development of international standards. === Seoul Declaration for Safe, Innovative and Inclusive AI === The Seoul Declaration was adopted at the summit by leaders representing the EU, the US, the UK, Australia, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. The declaration is a commitment to foster international cooperation to help develop AI governance frameworks that are interoperable between countries, partly by integrating the Hiroshima Process International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems. It advocates for the development of human-centric AI in collaboration with the private sector, academia, and civil society. === Seoul Ministerial Statement for advancing AI safety === At the ministerial meeting of the summit, the Seoul Ministerial Statement, a joint statement calling for the improvement of the safety, innovation, and inclusivity of AI technologies, was adopted by ministers from Australia, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Korea, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the UK, and the US, as well as an EU representative. It aims to develop low-power chips as the AI industry rapidly expands and massive consumption is expected. == Global AI Summit series ==

  Read more →