AI Detector Zero

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

  • KoalaPad

    KoalaPad

    The KoalaPad is a graphics tablet, released in 1983 by US company Koala Technologies Corporation, for the Apple II, TRS-80 Color Computer (as the TRS-80 Touch Pad), Atari 8-bit computers, Commodore 64, and IBM PC compatibles. Originally designed by Dr. David Thornburg as a low-cost computer drawing tool for schools, the Koala Pad and the bundled drawing program, KoalaPainter, was popular with home users as well. KoalaPainter was called KoalaPaint in some versions for the Apple II, and PC Design for the IBM PC. A program called Graphics Exhibitor was included for creating slideshow presentations from KoalaPainter drawings. == Description == The pad was four inches square (i.e. roughly 10×10 cm) and mounted on a slightly inclined base with the back of the pad higher than the front. At the top, "behind" the pad, were two buttons. The pad hooked into the computer using the analog signals of the joystick ports (the so-called paddle inputs), which meant that it had a low resolution and tended to jostle the cursor if moved during use. As an alternative to the drawing stylus, the pad could as easily be operated by the user's fingers for tasks that demanded less precision, such as selecting between menu items (thus using the pad as a kind of "indirect touch screen"). The top-mounted buttons tended to be somewhat frustrating to use, as the user had to "reach around" the stylus to push the buttons in order to start or stop drawing. A similar tablet from Atari, the Atari CX77 Touch Tablet, addressed this with a built-in button on the stylus, which some enterprising users adapted for use with their KoalaPad. == KoalaPainter == The pad shipped with a simple bitmap graphics editor developed by Audio Light called KoalaPainter, PC Design or Micro Illustrator depending on the target machine (see release history). Although bundled with the pad, KoalaPainter could also be operated using an ordinary digital joystick. One unique feature of the program, for its time, was that it held two pictures in the computer's memory, allowing the user to flip from one to the other—a function commonly used in order to study the differences between an original and a modified picture, and to copy and paste between two different pictures. Some third-party bitmap editors could also be used with the KoalaPad, such as Broderbund's Dazzle Draw for the Apple II. === Release history === KoalaPainter for Commodore 64 (1983) and Atari 8-bit computers (1983) PC Design for the IBM PC (1983) Micro Illustrator for the Apple II (1983), Atari 8-bit computers (1983) and Commodore Plus/4 (1984) KoalaPainter II for Commodore 64 (1984) === Reception === Ahoy! called KoalaPainter "a very powerful and effective color drawing package", and concluded that it and the KoalaPad were "excellent in ease of use, a fine choice for a beginner as well as young children". BYTE's reviewer stated in December 1984 that he made far fewer errors when using an Apple Mouse with MousePaint than with a KoalaPad and its software. He found that MousePaint was easier to use and more efficient, predicting that the mouse would receive more software support than the pad. Cassie Stahl in InfoWorld's Essential Guide to Atari Computers praised the tablet and its documentation, rating it "Excellent" among all categories and stating that "Playing with the KoalaPad becomes addictive. It does everything it claims to, and it does it well". She also liked Micro Illustrator, rating it "Excellent" except for "Good" for Performance. While criticizing the limited erase function, Stahl reported an undocumented feature enabling exporting pictures to other software. === File format === The Commodore 64 version of KoalaPainter used a fairly simple file format corresponding directly to the way bitmapped graphics are handled on the computer: A two-byte load address, followed immediately by 8,000 bytes of raw bitmap data, 1,000 bytes of raw "Video Matrix" data, 1,000 bytes of raw "Color RAM" data, and a one-byte Background Color field. == KoalaWare == Koala Technologies offered more software beyond the bundled KoalaPainter and Graphics Exhibitor for use with the pad. Among these applications, marketed under the moniker KoalaWare (like KoalaPainter itself), was educational software for use with customized keypads and overlays, such as spelling tools, music programs, and mathematics instruction software, as well as software for "translating" graphical designs into Logo programs.

    Read more →
  • Yorick Wilks

    Yorick Wilks

    Yorick Alexander Wilks FBCS (27 October 1939 – 14 April 2023) was a British computer scientist. He was an emeritus professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Sheffield, visiting professor of artificial intelligence at Gresham College (a post created especially for him), senior research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, senior scientist at the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, and a member of the Epiphany Philosophers. In February 2023, Wilks joined WiredVibe as Director of AI and a Board Member, with the goal of commercializing his previous research and ideas. He remained in this role until his death, which occurred shortly before WiredVibe was acquired by AKY X, a company that continues to build on his legacy and contributions. == Biography == Wilks was born in Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire in England. He was educated at Torquay Boys' Grammar School, followed by Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he read Philosophy, joined the Epiphany Philosophers and obtained his Doctor of Philosophy degree (1968) under Professor R. B. Braithwaite for the thesis 'Argument and Proof'; he was an early pioneer in meaning-based approaches to the understanding of natural language content by computers. His main early contribution in the 1970s was called "Preference Semantics" (Wilks, 1973; Wilks and Fass, 1992), an algorithmic method for assigning the "most coherent" interpretation to a sentence in terms of having the maximum number of internal preferences of its parts (normally verbs or adjectives) satisfied. That early work was hand-coded with semantic entries (of the order of some hundreds) as was normal at the time, but since then has led to the empirical determinations of preferences (chiefly of English verbs) in the 1980s and 1990s. A key component of the notion of preference in semantics was that the interpretation of an utterance is not a well- or ill-formed notion, as was argued in Chomskyan approaches, such as those of Jerry Fodor and Jerrold Katz. It was rather that a semantic interpretation was the best available, even though some preferences might not be satisfied. So, in "The machine answered the question with a low whine" the agent of "answer" does not satisfy that verb's preference for a human answerer—which would cause it to be deemed ill-formed by Fodor and Katz—but is accepted as sub-optimal or metaphorical, and, now, conventional. The function of the algorithm is not to determine well-formedness at all but to make the optimal selection of word-senses to participate in the overall interpretation. Thus, in "The Pole answered..." the system will always select the human sense of the agent and not the inanimate one if it gives a more coherent interpretation overall. Preference Semantics is thus some of the earliest computational work—with programs run at Systems Development Corporation in Santa Monica in 1967 in LISP on an IBM360—in the now established field of word sense disambiguation. This approach was used in the first operational machine translation system based principally on meaning structures and built by Wilks at Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory in the early 1970s (Wilks, 1973) at the same time and place as Roger Schank was applying his "Conceptual Dependency" approach to machine translation. The LISP code of Wilks' system was in The Computer Museum, Boston. Wilks was elected a fellow of the American and European Associations for Artificial Intelligence, of the British Computer Society, a member of the UK Computing Research Committee, and a permanent member of ICCL, the International Committee on Computational Linguistics. He was professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Sheffield and a senior research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute. In 1991 he received a Defense Advanced Projects Agency grant on interlingual pragmatics-based machine translation and in 1994 he received a grant by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council to investigate in the field of large-scale information extraction (LaSIE); in the following years he would obtain more grants to carry on exploring the field of information extraction (AVENTINUS, ECRAN, PASTA...). In the 1990s Wilks also became interested in modelling human-computer dialogue and the team led by David Levy and him as chief researcher won the Loebner Prize in 1997. He was the founding director of the EU funded Companions Project on creating long-term computer companions for people. At his Festschrift in 2007 at the British Computer Society in London a volume of his own papers was presented along with a volume of essays in his honour. He was awarded the Antonio Zampolli prize in honour of his lifetime work at the LREC 2008 conference on 28 May 2008, and the Lifetime Achievement Award at the ACL 2008 conference on 18 June 2008. In 2009, he was awarded the British Computer Society's Lovelace Medal, its annual award for research achievement, and was awarded the Fellowship of the Association for Computing Machinery. In 1998, Wilks became head of the Department of Computer Science of the University of Sheffield, where he had started working in the year 1993 as professor of artificial intelligence, a post he still held. In 1993 he became the founding director of the Institute of Language, Speech and Hearing (ILASH). Wilks also set up the Natural Language Processing Group of the University of Sheffield. In 1994 he (along with Rob Gaizauskas and Hamish Cunningham) designed GATE, an advanced NLP architecture that has been widely distributed. National Life Stories conducted an oral history interview (C1672/24) with Yorick Wilks in 2016 for its Science and Religion collection held by the British Library. Wilks died on 14 April 2023, at the age of 83. == Awards == Wilks received many awards: (2009) Elected Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery (2009) Lovelace Medal by the British Computer Society (2008) Zampolli Prize (ELRA, awarded at LREC in Marrakech, Morocco) (2008) Lifetime Achievement Award (Association for Computational Linguistics, in Columbus) (2006) Visiting Professor, University of Oxford (2004) Elected to UK Computing Research Committee (2004) Elected Fellow, British Computer Society (2003) Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute (1998) Elected Fellow of European Association for Artificial Intelligence (1997) Elected Fellow, EPSRC College of Computing (1991) Visiting Fellow, Trinity Hall, Cambridge (1991) Elected Fellow of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (1983) Royal Society Travel Fellowship (1983) Commonwealth of Australia Visiting Professor (1981) Visiting Sloan Fellow, University of California, Berkeley (1980) Invited Participant in the Nobel Symposium on Language, Stockholm (1979) NATO Senior Scientist Fellowship (1979) Visiting Sloan Fellow, Yale University (1975) SRC Senior Visiting Fellowship, University of Edinburgh == Membership == Wilks was an active member of the following associations: Association for Computational Linguistics Society for the Study of AI and Simulation of Behaviour Association for Computing Machinery Cognitive Science Society British Society for the Philosophy of Science American Association for Artificial Intelligence Aristotelian Society == Selected works == === Books === Wilks, Y. (2019) Artificial Intelligence: Modern Magic or Dangerous Future?.Icon Books. New illustrated edition, 2023, MIT Press. Wilks, Y. (2015) Machine Translation: its scope and limits. Springer Wilks, Y (ed.) (2010) Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological and Design issues. John Benjamins; Amsterdam Wilks, Y., Brewster, C. (2009) Natural Language Processing as a Foundation of the Semantic Web. Now Press: London. Wilks, Y. (2007) Words and Intelligence I, Selected papers by Yorick Wilks. In K. Ahmad, C. Brewster & M. Stevenson (eds.), Springer: Dordrecht. Wilks, Y. (ed. and with introduction and commentaries). (2006) Language, cohesion and form: selected papers of Margaret Masterman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wilks, Y., Nirenburg, S., Somers, H. (eds.) (2003) Readings in Machine Translation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wilks, Y.(ed.). (1999) Machine Conversations. Kluwer: New York. Wilks, Y., Slator, B., Guthrie, L. (1996) Electric Words: dictionaries, computers and meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ballim, A., Wilks, Y. (1991) Artificial Believers. Norwood, NJ: Erlbaum. Wilks, Y.(ed.). (1990) Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. Norwood, NJ: Erlbaum. Wilks, Y., Partridge, D. (eds. plus three YW chapters and an introduction). (1990) The Foundations of Artificial Intelligence: a sourcebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wilks, Y., Sparck-Jones, K.(eds.). (1984) Automatic Natural Language Processing, paperback edition. New York: Wiley. Originally published by Ellis Horwood. Wilks, Y., Charniak, E. (eds and principal authors). (1976) Computational Semantics—an Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and

    Read more →
  • Factored language model

    Factored language model

    The factored language model (FLM) is an extension of a conventional language model introduced by Jeff Bilmes and Katrin Kirchoff in 2003. In an FLM, each word is viewed as a vector of k factors: w i = { f i 1 , . . . , f i k } . {\displaystyle w_{i}=\{f_{i}^{1},...,f_{i}^{k}\}.} An FLM provides the probabilistic model P ( f | f 1 , . . . , f N ) {\displaystyle P(f|f_{1},...,f_{N})} where the prediction of a factor f {\displaystyle f} is based on N {\displaystyle N} parents { f 1 , . . . , f N } {\displaystyle \{f_{1},...,f_{N}\}} . For example, if w {\displaystyle w} represents a word token and t {\displaystyle t} represents a Part of speech tag for English, the expression P ( w i | w i − 2 , w i − 1 , t i − 1 ) {\displaystyle P(w_{i}|w_{i-2},w_{i-1},t_{i-1})} gives a model for predicting current word token based on a traditional Ngram model as well as the Part of speech tag of the previous word. A major advantage of factored language models is that they allow users to specify linguistic knowledge such as the relationship between word tokens and Part of speech in English, or morphological information (stems, root, etc.) in Arabic. Like N-gram models, smoothing techniques are necessary in parameter estimation. In particular, generalized back-off is used in training an FLM.

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Headshot Generator

    How to Choose an AI Headshot Generator

    Comparing the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

    Read more →
  • Universal IR Evaluation

    Universal IR Evaluation

    In computer science, Universal IR Evaluation (information retrieval evaluation) aims to develop measures of database retrieval performance that shall be comparable across all information retrieval tasks. == Measures of "relevance" == IR (information retrieval) evaluation begins whenever a user submits a query (search term) to a database. If the user is able to determine the relevance of each document in the database (relevant or not relevant), then for each query, the complete set of documents is naturally divided into four distinct (mutually exclusive) subsets: relevant documents that are retrieved, not relevant documents that are retrieved, relevant documents that are not retrieved, and not relevant documents that are not retrieved. These four subsets (of documents) are denoted by the letters a, b, c, d respectively and are called Swets variables, named after their inventor. In addition to the Swets definitions, four relevance metrics have also been defined: Recall refers to the fraction of relevant documents that are retrieved (a/(a+b)), and Precision refers to the fraction of retrieved documents that are relevant (a/(a+c)). These are the most commonly used and well-known relevance metrics found in the IR evaluation literature. Two less commonly used metrics include the Fallout, i.e., the fraction of not relevant documents that are retrieved (b/(b+d)), and the Miss, which refers to the fraction of relevant documents that are not retrieved (c/(c+d)) during any given search. == Universal IR evaluation techniques == Universal IR evaluation addresses the mathematical possibilities and relationships among the four relevance metrics Precision, Recall, Fallout and Miss, denoted by P, R, F and M, respectively. One aspect of the problem involves finding a mathematical derivation of a complete set of universal IR evaluation points. The complete set of 16 points, each one a quadruple of the form (P, R, F, M), describes all the possible universal IR outcomes. For example, many of us have had the experience of querying a database and not retrieving any documents at all. In this case, the Precision would take on the undetermined form 0/0, the Recall and Fallout would both be zero, and the Miss would be any value greater than zero and less than one (assuming a mix of relevant and not relevant documents were in the database, none of which were retrieved). This universal IR evaluation point would thus be denoted by (0/0, 0, 0, M), which represents only one of the 16 possible universal IR outcomes. The mathematics of universal IR evaluation is a fairly new subject since the relevance metrics P, R, F, M were not analyzed collectively until recently (within the past decade). A lot of the theoretical groundwork has already been formulated, but new insights in this area await discovery.

    Read more →
  • The Best Free AI Paragraph Rewriter for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Paragraph Rewriter for Beginners

    Shopping for the best AI paragraph rewriter? An AI paragraph rewriter is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paragraph rewriter slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

    Read more →
  • AI Code Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    AI Code Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    Trying to pick the best AI code generator? An AI code generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • Diane Litman

    Diane Litman

    Diane Litman is an American professor of computer science at the University of Pittsburgh. She also jointly holds the positions of senior scientist with the Learning Research and Development Center and faculty with the Intelligent Systems department. Litman is noted for her work in the areas of artificial intelligence, computational linguistics, knowledge representation and reasoning, natural language processing, and user modeling. == Education == Litman did her undergraduate studies at the College of William and Mary and her master's and PhD degrees at the University of Rochester. == Career == Before joining the University of Pittsburgh, she was an assistant professor at Columbia University. She additionally held the position of a research scientist in the Artificial Intelligence Principles Research Department Laboratory at AT&T Labs. Litman has held the position of Chair of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics two times, elected twice for the position, whose tenure lasts four years. She is also a distinguished member of the executive committee of the Association for Computational Linguistics, and a member of the editorial boards of Computational Linguistics and User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction. She has also held the position of Leverhulme Professor at the University of Edinburgh. Litman was the keynote speaker at the Speech and Language Technology in Education 2013 symposium, the 2006 SIGdial Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, and at the 2008 Symposium of the Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour. She also sits on the board of the several interest groups, including the International Speech Communication Association's Special Interest Group on Speech and Language Technology in Education. Litman has served as chair, organizer, and a senior member of numerous committees of peer-reviewed scientific journals. == Awards and recognition == She has also co-authored numerous award-winning papers and was awarded senior member status by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in 2011, an award designed to honor those who have "achieved significant accomplishments within the field of artificial intelligence."

    Read more →
  • WorkingPoint

    WorkingPoint

    WorkingPoint is a web-based application that provides a suite of small business management tools. It is designed to serve as a single point of access for various business operations, featuring a user-friendly interface. WorkingPoint's functionalities include double-entry bookkeeping, contact management, inventory management, invoicing, and bill and expense management. == Company == WorkingPoint, formerly Netbooks Inc, is a privately held corporation based in San Francisco, CA. The company is backed by CMEA Capital, also based in San Francisco. WorkingPoint has about ten employees and is led by CEO Tate Holt and Chairman Tom Proulx. Proulx is a co-founder of Intuit and an original author of that company’s Quicken personal finance software. The company was founded in 2007 under its original name Netbooks by co-creator Ridgely Evers. Evers set out to design a product that was more user-friendly than Intuit’s Quickbooks, which he also co-created. In mid-2009 the company officially rebranded itself and its flagship product “WorkingPoint”. The purpose of the re-branding was to disassociate the company from the product category of small laptops also known as netbooks. == Social Media Presence == WorkingPoint maintains a daily blog geared toward small business owners and managers. Each week the blog is updated with 3 WorkingPoint product feature or “how-to” posts, 2 subscriber company profiles, and 2 small business coaching posts. The company also maintains a Twitter page and a Facebook page. == Product Description (Free Version) == WorkingPoint allows businesses to invoice up to five customers (repeatedly) and provides account access for up to two individual users free of charge. Online Invoicing WorkingPoint allows users to create customized quotes and invoices online. The invoices can be used to bill customers via email or hardcopy post. WorkingPoint compiles the info from these invoices so users can track customer payments, inventory costs, shipping charges, accounts receivable and sales taxes. Users can also manage customer overpayments, provide customer loyalty discounts, and view a customer invoice history. Bill & Expense Management Users can track their bills and expenses by entering info into the WorkingPoint interface. WorkingPoint compiles this info so users can track categorized expenses, accounts paid, accounts payable, and vendor purchase history. The interface also allows users to add to their inventory while entering billing info. Double-Entry Bookeeping WorkingPoint automatically records entries under the double-entry bookkeeping system (also known as debits and credits) when the user completes invoicing and expense forms. Users can view transactions in general ledger format and perform closing entries if necessary. This functionality is designed for users who do not have an accounting background. Business Contact Management WorkingPoint provides an interface for users to manage their customer and vendor contact info. The software automatically tracks the user’s relationship with contacts, so users can track a contact’s sales and purchase history. Contacts can be imported and exported via numerous email clients including Microsoft Outlook, Yahoo! Mail, Google Gmail, and Mac Address Book. Inventory Management The software automatically adjusts inventory quantities after every purchase and sale. Users can track their current inventory quantity, average cost of inventory on-hand, cost of goods sold (COGS) and top-selling products. Users can also make manual adjustments to inventory when necessary. Financial Reporting Users can view a balance sheet, income statement, or cash flow statement pertaining to their business. The software automatically manages accruals to produce the balance sheet and income statement. Users can choose a data range from which to draw any of these reports. Financial reports can be converted to pdf format or exported (with formulas intact) to OpenOffice or Microsoft Excel. Cash Management WorkingPoint enables users to monitor cash balances on their bank accounts. The software automatically tracks cash inflows and outflows when users manage their accounts payable and accounts receivable. Business Dashboard The Business Dashboard visually and graphically displays key real-time business data. Users can customize the Dashboard to display data of their choosing. Online Company Profile Users can create an online company profile in order to have a presence on the Internet and as a basis for participation in WorkingPoint’s small business community features. Public profiles are featured in the WorkingPoint Company Directory and can be viewed externally using the URL format: https://businessname.workingpoint.com. == Product Description (Premium Version) == The premium version of WorkingPoint costs $10 per month. It includes all of the functionalities of the free version, allowing unlimited invoicing and account access. It also offers the following functions: 1099 Tax Reporting, invoice payment collection via PayPal, Email Marketing via VerticalResponse, and the Premium Reports & Accounting Package. 1099 Tax Reporting Users can identify qualifying companies and individuals for IRS Form 1099 or IRS Form 1096 reporting. WorkingPoint automatically tracks payments made to these companies and individuals. Users can then generate 1099 reports for distribution. Premium Reports & Accounting Package This includes: a Daily Operating Report providing users with sales and cash flow information, customizable accounts categorization, and cash flow statements using the indirect method of reporting. Invoice Payment Collection via PayPal Users can collect payment on their invoices via PayPal. Email Marketing via VerticalResponse The WorkingPoint premium package includes 500 email credits with the email marketing firm VerticalResponse.

    Read more →
  • Corpus manager

    Corpus manager

    A corpus manager (corpus browser or corpus query system) is a tool for multilingual corpus analysis, which allows effective searching in corpora. A corpus manager usually represents a complex tool that allows one to perform searches for language forms or sequences. It may provide information about the context or allow the user to search by positional attributes, such as lemma, tag, etc. These are called concordances. Other features include the ability to search for collocations, frequency statistics as well as metadata information about the processed text. The narrower meaning of corpus manager refers only to the server side or the corpus query engine, whereas the client side is simply called the user interface. A corpus manager can be software installed on a personal computer or it might be provided as a web service. == List of corpus managers == BNCweb – a web-based interface for the British National Corpus CQPweb - a web-based interface for the study of a large variety of corpora including the Spoken BNC2014 BYU-BNC – a website that allows searches of the British National Corpora and others created at Brigham Young University Coma – a tool extension of the system EXMARaLDA for working with oral corpora on a computer NoSketch Engine – a free open-source corpus management system combining Manatee (back-end) and Bonito (web interface) KonText – an extended and modified web interface to NoSketch Engine (a Bonito replacement) Sketch Engine – text corpus management and analysis software with more than 500 corpora in 90+ languages Spoco WordSmith Tools – a software package primarily for linguists

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Copywriting Tool

    How to Choose an AI Copywriting Tool

    Trying to pick the best AI copywriting tool? An AI copywriting tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI copywriting tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • Round-trip translation

    Round-trip translation

    Round-trip translation (RTT), also known as back-and-forth translation, recursive translation and bi-directional translation, is the process of translating a word, phrase or text into another language (forward translation), then translating the result back into the original language (back translation), using machine translation (MT) software. It is often used by laypeople to evaluate a machine translation system, or to test whether a text is suitable for MT when they are unfamiliar with the target language. Because the resulting text can often differ substantially from the original, RTT can also be a source of entertainment. == Software quality == To compare the quality of different machine translation systems, users perform RTT and compare the resulting text to the original. The theory is that the closer the result of the RTT is to the original text, the higher the quality of the machine translation system. One of the problems with this technique is that if there is a problem with the resulting text it is impossible to know whether the error occurred in the forward translation, in the back translation, or in both. In addition, it is possible to get a good back translation from a bad forward translation. A study using the automatic evaluation methods BLEU and F-score compared five different free online translation programs, evaluating the quality of both the forward translation and the back translation, and found no correlation between the quality of the forward translation and the quality of the back translation (i.e., a high quality forward translation did not always correspond to a high quality back translation). The author concluded that RTT was a poor method of predicting the quality of machine translation software. This conclusion was reinforced by a more in-depth study also using automatic evaluation methods. A subsequent study which included human evaluation of the back translation in addition to automatic evaluation methods found that RTT might have some ability to predict the quality of a machine translation system not on a sentence-by-sentence basis but for larger texts. == Suitability of text for machine translation == It is also suggested that RTT can be used to determine whether a text is suitable for machine translation. The idea being that if RTT results in a text that is close to the original, the text is suitable for MT. If after using RTT, the resulting text is inaccurate, the source text can then be edited until a satisfactory result is achieved. One of the studies looking at RTT as a means of measuring MT system quality also looked at its ability to predict whether a text was suitable for machine translation. It found that using different types of text also did not result in any correlation between the quality of the forward translation and the quality of the back translation. In contrast another study using human evaluation found that there was a correlation between the quality of the forward translation and the back translation and that this correlation could be used to estimate the quality of the forward translation. This correlation could be used to estimate the quality of the forward translation and by simplifying the source text, improve the quality of the forward translation. == Entertainment == Although the use of RTT for assessing MT system quality or the suitability of a text for MT is in doubt, it is a way to have fun with machine translation. The text produced from an RTT can be comically bad. At one time websites existed for the sole purpose of performing RTT for fun. Other variations send the text through several languages before translating it back into the original or continue translating the text back and forth until it reaches equilibrium (i.e., the result of the back translation is identical to the text used for the forward translation). RTT as entertainment appeared in Philip K. Dick's novel Galactic Pot-Healer. The main character runs book titles and sayings through RTT then has his friends try to guess the original. The Australian television show Spicks and Specks had a contest called "Turning Japanese" which used RTT on song lyrics. Contestants needed to correctly guess the title of the song from which the lyrics were taken.

    Read more →
  • DataViva

    DataViva

    DataViva is an information visualization engine created by the Strategic Priorities Office of the government of Minas Gerais. DataViva makes official data about exports, industries, locations and occupations available for the entirety of Brazil through eight apps and more than 100 million possible visualizations. The first set of datum – also available at ALICEWEB – is provided by MDIC (Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade) / SECEX (Secretariat of Foreign Trade), an official institution of the Government of Brazil and shows foreign trade statistics for all exporting municipalities in the country. The other database, provided by Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego (MTE – Ministry of Labor and Employment), shows information about all the industries and occupations in Brazil (RAIS – Annual Social Information Report). The platform consists of eight core applications, each of which allows different ways of visualizing the data available. Some applications are descriptive, that is, showing data aggregated at various levels in a simple and comparative way, such as Treemapping. Others are prescriptive, using calculations that allow an analytic visualization of the data, based on theories such as the Product Space. All the applications are generated using D3plus, an open source JavaScript library built on top of D3.js by Alexander Simoes and Dave Landry. Inspired by The Observatory of Economic Complexity, DataViva is an open data, open-source, and free to use tool. It was developed in a partnership with Datawheel, co-founded by MIT Media Lab Professor César Hidalgo, and is maintained by the Government of Minas Gerais.

    Read more →
  • Apertium

    Apertium

    Apertium is a free/open-source rule-based machine translation platform. It is free software and released under the terms of the GNU General Public License. == Overview == Apertium is a transfer-based machine translation system, which uses finite state transducers for all of its lexical transformations, and Constraint Grammar taggers as well as hidden Markov models or Perceptrons for part-of-speech tagging / word category disambiguation. A structural transfer component is responsible for word movement and agreement; most Apertium language pairs up until now have used "chunking" or shallow transfer rules, though newer pairs use (possibly recursive) rules defined in a Context-free grammar. Many existing machine translation systems available at present are commercial or use proprietary technologies, which makes them very hard to adapt to new usages. Apertium code and data is free software and uses a language-independent specification, to allow for the ease of contributing to Apertium, more efficient development, and enhancing the project's overall growth. At present (December 2020), Apertium has released 51 stable language pairs, delivering fast translation with reasonably intelligible results (errors are easily corrected). Being an open-source project, Apertium provides tools for potential developers to build their own language pair and contribute to the project. == History == Apertium originated as one of the machine translation engines in the project OpenTrad, which was funded by the Spanish government, and developed by the Transducens research group at the Universitat d'Alacant. It was originally designed to translate between closely related languages, although it has recently been expanded to treat more divergent language pairs. To create a new machine translation system, one just has to develop linguistic data (dictionaries, rules) in well-specified XML formats. Language data developed for it (in collaboration with the Universidade de Vigo, the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya and the Universitat Pompeu Fabra) currently support (in stable version) the Arabic, Aragonese, Asturian, Basque, Belarusian, Breton, Bulgarian, Catalan, Crimean Tatar, Danish, English, Esperanto, French, Galician, Hindi, Icelandic, Indonesian, Italian, Kazakh, Macedonian, Malaysian, Maltese, Northern Sami, Norwegian (Bokmål and Nynorsk), Occitan, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Sardinian, Serbo-Croatian, Silesian, Slovene, Spanish, Swedish, Tatar, Ukrainian, Urdu, and Welsh languages. A full list is available below. Several companies are also involved in the development of Apertium, including Prompsit Language Engineering, Imaxin Software and Eleka Ingeniaritza Linguistikoa. The project has taken part in the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 editions of Google Summer of Code and the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 editions of Google Code-In. == Translation methodology == This is an overall, step-by-step view how Apertium works. The diagram displays the steps that Apertium takes to translate a source-language text (the text we want to translate) into a target-language text (the translated text). Source language text is passed into Apertium for translation. The deformatter removes formatting markup (HTML, RTF, etc.) that should be kept in place but not translated. The morphological analyser segments the text (expanding elisions, marking set phrases, etc.), and looks up segments in the language dictionaries, returning dictionary forms and tags for all matches. In pairs that involve agglutinative morphology, including a number of Turkic languages, a Helsinki Finite State Transducer (HFST) is used. Otherwise, an Apertium-specific finite state transducer system called lttoolbox, is used. The morphological disambiguator (the morphological analyser and the morphological disambiguator together form the part of speech tagger) resolves ambiguous segments (i.e., when there is more than one match) by choosing one match. Apertium uses Constraint Grammar rules (with the vislcg3 parser) for most of its language pairs. Retokenisation uses a finite state transducer to match sequences of lexical units and may reorder or translate tags (often used for translating idiomatic expressions into something that more approaches the target language grammar) Lexical transfer looks up disambiguated source-language basewords to find their target-language equivalents (i.e., mapping source language to target language). For lexical transfer, Apertium uses an XML-based dictionary format called bidix. Lexical selection chooses between alternative translations when the source text word has alternative meanings. Apertium uses a specific XML-based technology, apertium-lex-tools, to perform lexical selection. Structural transfer (i.e., it is an XML format that allows writing complex structural transfer rules) can consist of one-step chunking transfer, three-step chunking transfer or a CFG-based transfer module. The chunking modules flag grammatical differences between the source language and target language (e.g. gender or number agreement) by creating a sequence of chunks containing markers for this. They then reorder or modify chunks in order to produce a grammatical translation in the target-language. The newer CFG-based module matches input sequences into possible parse trees, selecting the best-ranking one and applying transformation rules on the tree. The morphological generator uses the tags to deliver the correct target language surface form. The morphological generator is a morphological transducer, just like the morphological analyser. A morphological transducer both analyses and generates forms. The post-generator makes any necessary orthographic changes due to the contact of words (e.g. elisions). The reformatter replaces formatting markup (HTML, RTF, etc.) that was removed by the deformatter in the first step. Apertium delivers the target-language translation. == Supported languages == As of June 2026, the following 108 pairs and 51 languages and languages varieties are supported by Apertium.

    Read more →
  • Top 10 Conversational AI Platforms Compared (2026)

    Top 10 Conversational AI Platforms Compared (2026)

    In search of the best conversational AI platform? An conversational AI platform is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right conversational AI platform slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

    Read more →