AI Email Management

AI Email Management — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Couch to 5K

Couch to 5K, abbreviated C25K, is an exercise plan that gradually progresses from beginner running toward a 5 kilometre (3.1 mile) run over nine weeks. == Operations == The Couch to 5K running plan, also known as C25K, created by Josh Clark in 1996, was developed with the expectation of creating a plan for new runners to start running. The plan is aimed to have users work out for 20 to 30 minutes, three days a week. Within the program, users can be expected to perform different tasks such as intervals of running with period of short walks in between to help build endurance in the weeks up to the final goal of a 5K run. During the nine weeks leading up to the race, the runner will learn to set their own pace and where their strengths and weaknesses are within running. Often, the daily workouts start with a five-minute warm-up walk and works up to running five kilometres without a walking break within nine weeks. Users are not expected to have any experience in running and can be some of the first running that they ever do. The main goal is to turn that unexperienced runner into someone who can run a 5K. Clark started the website Kick and featured C25K on the site. In 2001, Kick merged with Cool Running, a New England–based running site. Clark later sold his stake in Cool Running and the Couch to 5K program. Cool Running was absorbed into Active.com, operated by Active Network, LLC. Active Network provides mobile apps for Couch to 5K, as well as 5K to 10K, a follow-up program. The NHS in the UK provides downloadable podcasts and a smartphone app (Android and iOS) for the plan. A mobile app, created by Zen Labs, has training plans that are based on the Couch to 5K running plan from CoolRunning.com. It is one of the highest-rated health and fitness apps available on Android and iOS. As of 2016, the C25K app has been used by over 5 million people.
Read more →
Quantum finite automaton

In quantum computing, quantum finite automata (QFA) or quantum state machines are a quantum analog of probabilistic automata or a Markov decision process. They provide a mathematical abstraction of real-world quantum computers. Several types of automata may be defined, including measure-once and measure-many automata. Quantum finite automata can also be understood as the quantization of subshifts of finite type, or as a quantization of Markov chains. QFAs are, in turn, special cases of geometric finite automata or topological finite automata. The automata work by receiving a finite-length string σ = ( σ 0 , σ 1 , … , σ k ) {\displaystyle \sigma =(\sigma _{0},\sigma _{1},\dots ,\sigma _{k})} of letters σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} from a finite alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , and assigning to each such string a probability Pr ⁡ ( σ ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Pr} (\sigma )} indicating the probability of the automaton being in an accept state; that is, indicating whether the automaton accepted or rejected the string. The languages accepted by QFAs are not the regular languages of deterministic finite automata, nor are they the stochastic languages of probabilistic finite automata. Study of these quantum languages remains an active area of research. == Informal description == There is a simple, intuitive way of understanding quantum finite automata. One begins with a graph-theoretic interpretation of deterministic finite automata (DFA). A DFA can be represented as a labelled directed graph, with states as nodes in the graph, and arrows representing state transitions. Each arrow is labelled with a possible input symbol, so that, given a specific state and an input symbol, the arrow points at the next state. One way of representing such a graph is by means of a set of adjacency matrices, with one matrix for each input symbol. In this case, a list of possible DFA states is written as a column vector. For a given input symbol, the adjacency matrix indicates how any given state (row in the state vector) will transition to the next state; a state transition is given by matrix multiplication. One needs a distinct adjacency matrix for each possible input symbol, since each input symbol can result in a different transition. The entries in the adjacency matrix must be zero's and one's. For any given column in the matrix, only one entry can be non-zero: this is the entry that indicates the next (unique) state transition. Similarly, the state of the system is a column vector, in which only one entry is non-zero: this entry corresponds to the current state of the system. Let Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } denote the set of input symbols. For a given input symbol α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } , write U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} as the adjacency matrix that describes the evolution of the DFA to its next state. The set { U α | α ∈ Σ } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }|\alpha \in \Sigma \}} then completely describes the state transition function of the DFA. Let Q represent the set of possible states of the DFA. If there are N states in Q, then each matrix U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} is N by N-dimensional. The initial state q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} corresponds to a column vector with a one in the q0'th row. A general state q is then a column vector with a one in the q'th row. By abuse of notation, let q0 and q also denote these two vectors. Then, after reading input symbols α β γ ⋯ {\displaystyle \alpha \beta \gamma \cdots } from the input tape, the state of the DFA will be given by q = ⋯ U γ U β U α q 0 . {\displaystyle q=\cdots U_{\gamma }U_{\beta }U_{\alpha }q_{0}.} The state transitions are given by ordinary matrix multiplication (that is, multiply q0 by U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , etc.); the order of application is 'reversed' only because we follow the standard notation of linear algebra. The above description of a DFA, in terms of linear operators and vectors, almost begs for generalization, by replacing the state-vector q by some general vector, and the matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by some general operators. This is essentially what a QFA does: it replaces q by a unit vector, and the { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by unitary matrices. Other, similar generalizations also become obvious: the vector q can be some distribution on a manifold; the set of transition matrices become automorphisms of the manifold; this defines a topological finite automaton. Similarly, the matrices could be taken as automorphisms of a homogeneous space; this defines a geometric finite automaton. Before moving on to the formal description of a QFA, there are two noteworthy generalizations that should be mentioned and understood. The first is the non-deterministic finite automaton (NFA). In this case, the vector q is replaced by a vector that can have more than one entry that is non-zero. Such a vector then represents an element of the power set of Q; it’s just an indicator function on Q. Likewise, the state transition matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} are defined in such a way that a given column can have several non-zero entries in it. Equivalently, the multiply-add operations performed during component-wise matrix multiplication should be replaced by Boolean and-or operations so that the semantics are kept intact. A well-known theorem states that, for each DFA, there is an equivalent NFA, and vice versa. This implies that the set of languages that can be recognized by DFA's and NFA's are the same; these are the regular languages. In the generalization to QFAs, the set of recognized languages will be different to the regular languages. Describing that set is one of the outstanding research problems in QFA theory. Another generalization that should be immediately apparent is to use a stochastic matrix for the transition matrices, and a probability vector for the state; this gives a probabilistic finite automaton. The entries in the state vector must be real numbers, positive, and sum to one, in order for the state vector to be interpreted as a probability. The transition matrices must preserve this property: this is why they must be stochastic. Each state vector should be imagined as specifying a point in a simplex; thus, this is a topological automaton, with the simplex being the manifold, and the stochastic matrices being linear automorphisms of the simplex onto itself. Since each transition is (essentially) independent of the previous (if we disregard the distinction between accepted and rejected languages), the PFA essentially becomes a kind of Markov chain. By contrast, in a QFA, the manifold is complex projective space C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} , and the transition matrices are unitary matrices. Each point in C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} corresponds to a (pure) quantum-mechanical state; the unitary matrices can be thought of as governing the time evolution of the system (viz in the Schrödinger picture). The generalization from pure states to mixed states should be straightforward: A mixed state is simply a measure-theoretic probability distribution on C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} . A worthy point to contemplate is the distributions that result on the manifold during the input of a language. In order for an automaton to be 'efficient' in recognizing a language, that distribution should be 'as uniform as possible'. This need for uniformity is the underlying principle behind maximum entropy methods: these simply guarantee crisp, compact operation of the automaton. Put in other words, the machine learning methods used to train hidden Markov models generalize to QFAs as well: the Viterbi algorithm and the forward–backward algorithm generalize readily to the QFA. Although the study of QFA was popularized in the work of Kondacs and Watrous in 1997 and later by Moore and Crutchfeld, they were described as early as 1971, by Ion Baianu. == Measure-once automata == Measure-once automata were introduced by Cris Moore and James P. Crutchfield. They may be defined formally as follows. As with an ordinary finite automaton, the quantum automaton is considered to have N {\displaystyle N} possible internal states, represented in this case by an N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle } . More precisely, the N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ ∈ P ( C N ) {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle \in P(\mathbb {C} ^{N})} is an element of ( N − 1 ) {\displaystyle (N-1)} -dimensional complex projective space, carrying an inner product ‖ ⋅ ‖ {\displaystyle \Vert \cdot \Vert } that is the Fubini–Study metric. The state transitions, transition matrices or de Bruijn graphs are represented by a collection of N × N {\displaystyle N\times N} unitary matrices U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , with one unitary matrix for each letter α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } . That is, given an input letter α {\displaystyle \alpha } , the unitary matrix describe
Read more →
Trie

In computer science, a trie (, ), also known as a digital tree or prefix tree, is a specialized search tree data structure used to store and retrieve strings from a dictionary or set. Unlike a binary search tree, nodes in a trie do not store their associated key. Instead, each node's position within the trie determines its associated key, with the connections between nodes defined by individual characters rather than the entire key. Tries are particularly effective for tasks such as autocomplete, spell checking, and IP routing, offering advantages over hash tables due to their prefix-based organization and lack of hash collisions. Every child node shares a common prefix with its parent node, and the root node represents the empty string. While basic trie implementations can be memory-intensive, various optimization techniques such as compression and bitwise representations have been developed to improve their efficiency. A notable optimization is the radix tree, which provides more efficient prefix-based storage. While tries store character strings, they can be adapted to work with any ordered sequence of elements, such as permutations of digits or shapes. A notable variant is the bitwise trie, which uses individual bits from fixed-length binary data (such as integers or memory addresses) as keys. == History, etymology, and pronunciation == The idea of a trie for representing a set of strings was first abstractly described by Axel Thue in 1912. Tries were first described in a computer context by René de la Briandais in 1959. The idea was independently described in 1960 by Edward Fredkin, who coined the term trie, pronouncing it (as "tree"), after the middle syllable of retrieval. However, other authors pronounce it (as "try"), in an attempt to distinguish it verbally from "tree". == Overview == Tries are a form of string-indexed look-up data structure, which is used to store a dictionary list of words that can be searched on in a manner that allows for efficient generation of completion lists. A prefix trie is an ordered tree data structure used in the representation of a set of strings over a finite alphabet set, which allows efficient storage of words with common prefixes. Tries can be efficacious on string-searching algorithms such as predictive text, approximate string matching, and spell checking in comparison to binary search trees. A trie can be seen as a tree-shaped deterministic finite automaton. == Operations == Tries support various operations: insertion, deletion, and lookup of a string key. Tries are composed of nodes that contain links, which either point to other suffix child nodes or null. As for every tree, each node except the root is pointed to by only one other node, called its parent. Each node contains as many links as the number of characters in the applicable alphabet (although tries tend to have a substantial number of null links). In some cases, the alphabet used is simply that of the character encoding—resulting in, for example, a size of 128 in the case of ASCII. The null links within the children of a node emphasize the following characteristics: Characters and string keys are implicitly stored in the trie, and include a character sentinel value indicating string termination. Each node contains one possible link to a prefix of strong keys of the set. A basic structure type of nodes in the trie is as follows: Node {\displaystyle {\text{Node}}} may contain an optional Value {\displaystyle {\text{Value}}} , which is associated with the key that corresponds to the node. === Searching === Searching for a value in a trie is guided by the characters in the search string key, as each node in the trie contains a corresponding link to each possible character in the given string. Thus, following the string within the trie yields the associated value for the given string key. A null link during the search indicates the inexistence of the key. The following pseudocode implements the search procedure for a given string key in a rooted trie x. In the above pseudocode, x and key correspond to the pointer of the trie's root node and the string key, respectively. The search operation takes O ( m ) {\displaystyle O(m)} time, where m {\displaystyle m} is the size of the string parameter key. In a balanced binary search tree, on the other hand, it takes O ( m log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(m\log n)} time, in the worst case, since key needs to be compared with O ( log ⁡ n ) {\displaystyle O(\log n)} other keys and each comparison takes O ( m ) {\displaystyle O(m)} time, in the worst case. The trie occupies less space, in comparison with a binary search tree, in the case of a large number of short strings, since nodes share common initial string subsequences and store the keys implicitly. === Insertion === Insertion into a trie is guided by using the character sets as indexes to the children array until the last character of the string key is reached. Each node in the trie corresponds to one call of the radix sorting routine, as the trie structure reflects the execution pattern of the top-down radix sort. If null links are encountered before reaching the last character of the string key, new nodes are created. The input value is assigned to the value of the last node traversed, which is the node that corresponds to the key. === Deletion === Deletion of a key–value pair from a trie involves finding the node corresponding to the key, setting its value to null, and recursively removing nodes that have no children. The procedure begins by examining key; an empty string indicates arrival at the node corresponding to the (original) key, in which case its value is set to null. If the node, then, has null value and no children, it is removed from the trie by returning null; otherwise, the node is kept by returning the node itself. == Replacing other data structures == === Replacement for hash tables === A trie can be used to replace a hash table, over which it has the following advantages: Searching for a node with an associated key of size m {\displaystyle m} has the complexity of O ( m ) {\displaystyle O(m)} , whereas an imperfect hash function may have numerous colliding keys, and the worst-case lookup speed of such a table would be O ( N ) {\displaystyle O(N)} , where N {\displaystyle N} denotes the total number of nodes within the table. Tries do not need a hash function for the operation, unlike a hash table; there are also no collisions of different keys in a trie. Within a trie, keys can be efficiently sorted lexicographically. However, tries are less efficient than a hash table when the data is directly accessed on a secondary storage device such as a hard disk drive that has higher random access time than the main memory. == Implementation strategies == Tries can be represented in several ways, corresponding to different trade-offs between memory use and speed of the operations. Using a vector of pointers for representing a trie consumes enormous space; however, memory space can be reduced at the expense of running time if a singly linked list is used for each node vector, as most entries of the vector contains nil {\displaystyle {\text{nil}}} . Techniques such as alphabet reduction may reduce the large space requirements by reinterpreting the original string as a longer string over a smaller alphabet. For example, a string of n bytes can alternatively be regarded as a string of 2n four-bit units. This can reduce memory usage by a factor of eight; but lookups need to visit twice as many nodes in the worst case. Another technique includes storing a vector of 256 ASCII pointers as a bitmap of 256 bits representing ASCII alphabet, which reduces the size of individual nodes dramatically. === Bitwise tries === Bitwise tries are used to address the enormous space requirement for the trie nodes in a naive simple pointer vector implementations. Each character in the string key set is represented via individual bits, which are used to traverse the trie over a string key. The implementations for these types of trie use vectorized CPU instructions to find the first set bit in a fixed-length key input (e.g. GCC's __builtin_clz() intrinsic function). Accordingly, the set bit is used to index the first item, or child node, in the 32- or 64-entry based bitwise tree. Search then proceeds by testing each subsequent bit in the key. This procedure is also cache-local and highly parallelizable due to register independency, and thus performant on out-of-order execution CPUs. === Compressed tries === Radix tree, also known as a compressed trie, is a space-optimized variant of a trie in which any node with only one child gets merged with its parent; elimination of branches of the nodes with a single child results in better metrics in both space and time. This works best when the trie remains static and set of keys stored are very sparse within their representation space. One more approach for static tries is to "pack" the trie by storing disjoint
Read more →
Law and Corpus Linguistics

Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) is an academic sub-discipline that uses large databases of examples of language usage equipped with tools designed by linguists called corpora to better get at the meaning of words and phrases in legal texts (statutes, constitutions, contracts, etc.). Thus, LCL is the application of corpus linguistic tools, theories, and methodologies to issues of legal interpretation in much the same way law and economics is the application of economic tools, theories, and methodologies to various legal issues. == History == A 2005 law review article by Lawrence Solan noted in passing that corpus linguistics had potential for its application to interpreting legal texts. But the first systematic exploration and advocacy of applying the tools and methodologies of corpus linguistics to legal interpretive questions of law and corpus linguistics came in the fall of 2010, when the BYU Law Review published a note by Stephen Mouritsen, entitled The Dictionary is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning. The note argued that dictionaries are the primary linguistic tool used by judges to determine the plain or ordinary meaning of words and phrases, and highlighted the deficiencies of such an approach. In its stead, the note proposed using corpus linguistics. And the note would be later cited by Adam Liptak in a New York Times article on statutory construction. Law and corpus linguistics (LCL) gained greater legitimacy in July 2011 with the first judicial opinion in American history utilizing corpus linguistics to determine the meaning of a legal text: In re the Adoption of Baby E.Z. In a concurrence in part and in the judgment, Justice Thomas Lee wrote to put forth an alternative ground for the majority's holding—interpreting the phrase "custody determination" by using corpus linguistics. Justice Lee looked at 500 randomized sample sentences from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and found that the most common sense of "custody" was in the context of divorce rather than adoption. Further, he found that "custody" is ten times more likely to co-occur (or collocate) with "divorce" than with "adoption". From that evidence Justice Lee concluded that he "would find that the custody proceedings covered by the Act are limited to proceedings resulting in the modifiable custody orders of a divorce", rather than the broader range of custody proceedings. Other jurisprudence and scholarship would follow. In a 2015 concurrence in State v. Rasabout, Justice Lee used a COCA search to determine that "discharge" when used with a firearm (or one of its synonyms) overwhelmingly referred to a single shot rather than emptying the entire magazine of the weapon. And in 2016, four of the five justices joined a footnote in a majority opinion by Justice Lee commending a party for using corpus linguistics in its briefing even though the Court found it unnecessary to resolve the related question. Finally, in 2016 the Michigan Supreme Court became the first court to use a linguist-designed corpus in a majority opinion (COCA), with both the majority and the dissent turning to COCA to determine the meaning of the word "information". In 2020, courts desiring to bolster the legal theory of original intent have sought the opportunity to undertake analyses of statutes utilizing corpus linguistics. In a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Jones v. Becerra (No. 20-56174), a case involving the Second Amendment and the constitutionality of a California statute which bans the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21, a Ninth Circuit panel requested that the parties address three questions: 1) “What is the original public meaning of the Second Amendment phrases: ‘A well regulated Militia’; ‘the right of the people’; and ‘shall not be infringed’? 2) How does the tool of corpus linguistics help inform the determination of the original public meaning of those Second Amendment phrases?” 3) How do the data yielded from corpus linguistics assist in the interpretation of the constitutionality of age-based restrictions under the Second Amendment? As to scholarship, in 2012, Mouritsen followed up his original work with an article in the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, where he further refined and promoted the use of corpus-based methods for determining questions of legal ambiguity. Additionally, in 2016 two essays and an article on law and corpus linguistics were published. The Yale Law Journal Forum published Corpus Linguistics & Original Public Meaning: A New Tool to Make Originalism More Empirical. Written by Justice Lee and two co-authors, the essay urged originalists to turn to corpus linguistics to improve the rigor and accuracy of originalist scholarship. And in response, the Forum published an essay by Lawrence Solan (a Brooklyn Law professor with a PhD in linguistics), Can Corpus Linguistics Help Make Originalism Scientific? The Boston University Public Interest Law Journal published The Merciful Corpus: The Rule of Lenity, Ambiguity and Corpus Linguistics by Daniel Ortner. In the article Ortner applied corpus linguistics to determining whether sufficient ambiguity exists to trigger the rule of lenity in five Supreme Court cases. Looking forward, in 2017 two more articles are slated for publication. Lee Strang focuses on corpus linguistics and originalism in the U.C. Davis Law Review, and Lawrence Solan and Tammy Gales explore corpus linguistics in the context of finding ordinary meaning in statutory interpretation in the International Journal of Legal Discourse. Lawyers and journalists have also taken notice of corpus linguistics at it relates to the law. In 2010, Neal Goldfarb filed the first known brief in the Supreme Court using corpus linguistics (COCA) to determine whether the ordinary meaning of "personal" referred to corporations in the case FCC v. AT&T. The amicus brief looked at the top collocates (words that co-occur) of "personal" in COHA as well as BYU's Time Magazine Corpus. And writing for The Atlantic, Ben Zimmer took note of this new trend, referring to corpus linguistics in the courts as "Like Lexis on Steroids". On the academic front, in 2013 BYU Law School started the first class on law and corpus linguistics, co-taught by Mouritsen, Lee, and (now Dean) Gordon Smith. The class is currently in its fourth year. And in February 2016, BYU Law School hosted the inaugural conference on LCL, with over two dozen legal and linguistic scholars from around the country discussing and debating the next steps forward for the growing academic movement. The conference has been held regularly in subsequent years. At the 2016 conference BYU Law School announced its plans and progress on the Corpus of Founding Era American English (COFEA), a corpus that covers 1760–1799 and contains more than 120 million words have been collected from founding era letters, diaries, newspapers, non-fiction books, fiction, sermons, speeches, debates, legal cases, and other legal materials.
Read more →
Automatic taxonomy construction

Automatic taxonomy construction (ATC) is the use of software programs to generate taxonomical classifications from a body of texts called a corpus. ATC is a branch of natural language processing, which in turn is a branch of artificial intelligence. A taxonomy (or taxonomical classification) is a scheme of classification, especially, a hierarchical classification, in which things are organized into groups or types. Among other things, a taxonomy can be used to organize and index knowledge (stored as documents, articles, videos, etc.), such as in the form of a library classification system, or a search engine taxonomy, so that users can more easily find the information they are searching for. Many taxonomies are hierarchies (and thus, have an intrinsic tree structure), but not all are. Manually developing and maintaining a taxonomy is a labor-intensive task requiring significant time and resources, including familiarity of or expertise in the taxonomy's domain (scope, subject, or field), which drives the costs and limits the scope of such projects. Also, domain modelers have their own points of view which inevitably, even if unintentionally, work their way into the taxonomy. ATC uses artificial intelligence techniques to quickly automatically generate a taxonomy for a domain in order to avoid these problems and remove limitations. == Approaches == There are several approaches to ATC. One approach is to use rules to detect patterns in the corpus and use those patterns to infer relations such as hyponymy. Other approaches use machine learning techniques such as Bayesian inferencing and Artificial Neural Networks. === Keyword extraction === One approach to building a taxonomy is to automatically gather the keywords from a domain using keyword extraction, then analyze the relationships between them (see Hyponymy, below), and then arrange them as a taxonomy based on those relationships. === Hyponymy and "is-a" relations === In ATC programs, one of the most important tasks is the discovery of hypernym and hyponym relations among words. One way to do that from a body of text is to search for certain phrases like "is a" and "such as". In linguistics, is-a relations are called hyponymy. Words that describe categories are called hypernyms and words that are examples of categories are hyponyms. For example, dog is a hypernym and Fido is one of its hyponyms. A word can be both a hyponym and a hypernym. So, dog is a hyponym of mammal and also a hypernym of Fido. Taxonomies are often represented as is-a hierarchies where each level is more specific than (in mathematical language "a subset of") the level above it. For example, a basic biology taxonomy would have concepts such as mammal, which is a subset of animal, and dogs and cats, which are subsets of mammal. This kind of taxonomy is called an is-a model because the specific objects are considered instances of a concept. For example, Fido is-a instance of the concept dog and Fluffy is-a cat. == Applications == ATC can be used to build taxonomies for search engines, to improve search results. ATC systems are a key component of ontology learning (also known as automatic ontology construction), and have been used to automatically generate large ontologies for domains such as insurance and finance. They have also been used to enhance existing large networks such as Wordnet to make them more complete and consistent. == ATC software == == Other names == Other names for automatic taxonomy construction include: Automated outline building Automated outline construction Automated outline creation Automated outline extraction Automated outline generation Automated outline induction Automated outline learning Automated outlining Automated taxonomy building Automated taxonomy construction Automated taxonomy creation Automated taxonomy extraction Automated taxonomy generation Automated taxonomy induction Automated taxonomy learning Automatic outline building Automatic outline construction Automatic outline creation Automatic outline extraction Automatic outline generation Automatic outline induction Automatic outline learning Automatic taxonomy building Automatic taxonomy creation Automatic taxonomy extraction Automatic taxonomy generation Automatic taxonomy induction Automatic taxonomy learning Outline automation Outline building Outline construction Outline creation Outline extraction Outline generation Outline induction Outline learning Semantic taxonomy building Semantic taxonomy construction Semantic taxonomy creation Semantic taxonomy extraction Semantic taxonomy generation Semantic taxonomy induction Semantic taxonomy learning Taxonomy automation Taxonomy building Taxonomy construction Taxonomy creation Taxonomy extraction Taxonomy generation Taxonomy induction Taxonomy learning
Read more →
The Best Free AI Virtual Assistant for Beginners

Comparing the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual assistant 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 virtual assistant 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 Coding Assistants Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

Comparing the best AI coding assistant? An AI coding assistant 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 coding assistant 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 →
Is an AI Code Generator Worth It in 2026?

Comparing the best AI code generator? An AI code 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 code generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Read more →
Situated approach (artificial intelligence)

In artificial intelligence research, the situated approach builds agents that are designed to behave effectively successfully in their environment. This requires designing AI "from the bottom-up" by focussing on the basic perceptual and motor skills required to survive. The situated approach gives a much lower priority to abstract reasoning or problem-solving skills. The approach was originally proposed as an alternative to traditional approaches (that is, approaches popular before 1985 or so). After several decades, classical AI technologies started to face intractable issues (e.g. combinatorial explosion) when confronted with real-world modeling problems. All approaches to address these issues focus on modeling intelligences situated in an environment. They have become known as the situated approach to AI. == Emergence of a concept == === From traditional AI to Nouvelle AI === During the late 1980s, the approach now known as Nouvelle AI (Nouvelle means new in French) was pioneered at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory by Rodney Brooks. As opposed to classical or traditional artificial intelligence, Nouvelle AI purposely avoided the traditional goal of modeling human-level performance, but rather tries to create systems with intelligence at the level of insects, closer to real-world robots. But eventually, at least at MIT new AI did lead to an attempt for humanoid AI in the Cog Project. === From Nouvelle AI to behavior-based and situated AI === The conceptual shift introduced by nouvelle AI flourished in the robotics area, given way to behavior-based robotics (BBR), a methodology for developing AI based on a modular decomposition of intelligence. It was made famous by Rodney Brooks: his subsumption architecture was one of the earliest attempts to describe a mechanism for developing BBAI. It is extremely popular in robotics and to a lesser extent to implement intelligent virtual agents because it allows the successful creation of real-time dynamic systems that can run in complex environments. For example, it underlies the intelligence of the Sony Aibo and many RoboCup robot teams. Realizing that in fact all these approaches were aiming at building not an abstract intelligence, but rather an intelligence situated in a given environment, they have come to be known as the situated approach. In fact, this approach stems out from early insights of Alan Turing, describing the need to build machines equipped with sense organs to learn directly from the real-world instead of focusing on abstract activities, such as playing chess. == Definitions == Classically, a software entity is defined as a simulated element, able to act on itself and on its environment, and which has an internal representation of itself and of the outside world. An entity can communicate with other entities, and its behavior is the consequence of its perceptions, its representations, and its interactions with the other entities. === AI loop === Simulating entities in a virtual environment requires simulating the entire process that goes from a perception of the environment, or more generally from a stimulus, to an action on the environment. This process is called the AI loop and technology used to simulate it can be subdivided in two categories. Sensorimotor or low-level AI deals with either the perception problem (what is perceived?) or the animation problem (how are actions executed?). Decisional or high-level AI deals with the action selection problem (what is the most appropriate action in response to a given perception, i.e. what is the most appropriate behavior?). === Traditional or symbolic AI === There are two main approaches in decisional AI. The vast majority of the technologies available on the market, such as planning algorithms, finite-state machines (FSA), or expert systems, are based on the traditional or symbolic AI approach. Its main characteristics are: It is top-down: it subdivides, in a recursive manner, a given problem into a series of sub-problems that are supposedly easier to solve. It is knowledge-based: it relies on a symbolic description of the world, such as a set of rules. However, the limits of traditional AI, which goal is to build systems that mimic human intelligence, are well-known: inevitably, a combinatorial explosion of the number of rules occurs due to the complexity of the environment. In fact, it is impossible to predict all the situations that will be encountered by an autonomous entity. === Situated or behavioral AI === In order to address these issues, another approach to decisional AI, also known as situated or behavioral AI, has been proposed. It does not attempt to model systems that produce deductive reasoning processes, but rather systems that behave realistically in their environment. The main characteristics of this approach are the following: It is bottom-up: it relies on elementary behaviors, which can be combined to implement more complex behaviors. It is behavior-based: it does not rely on a symbolic description of the environment, but rather on a model of the interactions of the entities with their environment. The goal of situated AI is to model entities that are autonomous in their environment. This is achieved thanks to both the intrinsic robustness of the control architecture, and its adaptation capabilities to unforeseen situations. === Situated agents === In artificial intelligence and cognitive science, the term situated refers to an agent which is embedded in an environment. The term situated is commonly used to refer to robots, but some researchers argue that software agents can also be situated if: they exist in a dynamic (rapidly changing) environment, which they can manipulate or change through their actions, and which they can sense or perceive. Examples might include web-based agents, which can alter data or trigger processes (such as purchases) over the Internet, or virtual-reality bots which inhabit and change virtual worlds, such as Second Life. Being situated is generally considered to be part of being embodied, but it is useful to consider each perspective individually. The situated perspective emphasizes that intelligent behavior derives from the environment and the agent's interactions with it. The nature of these interactions are defined by an agent's embodiment. == Implementation principles == === Modular decomposition === The most important attribute of a system driven by situated AI is that the intelligence is controlled by a set of independent semi-autonomous modules. In the original systems, each module was actually a separate device or was at least conceived of as running on its own processing thread. Generally, though, the modules are just abstractions. In this respect, situated AI may be seen as a software engineering approach to AI, perhaps akin to object oriented design. Situated AI is often associated with reactive planning, but the two are not synonymous. Brooks advocated an extreme version of cognitive minimalism which required initially that the behavior modules were finite-state machines and thus contained no conventional memory or learning. This is associated with reactive AI because reactive AI requires reacting to the current state of the world, not to an agent's memory or preconception of that world. However, learning is obviously key to realistic strong AI, so this constraint has been relaxed, though not entirely abandoned. === Action selection mechanism === The situated AI community has presented several solutions to modeling decision-making processes, also known as action selection mechanisms. The first attempt to solve this problem goes back to subsumption architectures, which were in fact more an implementation technique than an algorithm. However, this attempt paved the way to several others, in particular the free-flow hierarchies and activation networks. A comparison of the structure and performances of these two mechanisms demonstrated the advantage of using free-flow hierarchies in solving the action selection problem. However, motor schemas and process description languages are two other approaches that have been used with success for autonomous robots. == Notes and references == Arsenio, Artur M. (2004) Towards an embodied and situated AI, In: Proceedings of the International FLAIRS conference, 2004. (online) The Artificial Life Route To Artificial Intelligence: Building Embodied, Situated Agents, Luc Steels and Rodney Brooks Eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Publishing, 1995. (ISBN 978-0805815184) Rodney A. Brooks Cambrian Intelligence (MIT Press, 1999) ISBN 0-262-52263-2; collection of early papers including "Intelligence without representation" and "Intelligence without reason", from 1986 & 1991 respectively. Ronald C. Arkin Behavior-Based Robotics (MIT Press, 1998) ISBN 0-262-01165-4 Hendriks-Jansen, Horst (1996) Catching Ourselves in the Act: Situated Activity, Interactive Emergence, Evolution, and Human Thought. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Read more →
Michael Kearns (computer scientist)

Michael Justin Kearns is an American computer scientist, professor and National Center Chair at the University of Pennsylvania, the founding director of Penn's Singh Program in Networked & Social Systems Engineering (NETS), the founding director of Warren Center for Network and Data Sciences, and also holds secondary appointments in Penn's Wharton School and department of Economics. He is a leading researcher in computational learning theory and algorithmic game theory, and interested in machine learning, artificial intelligence, computational finance, algorithmic trading, computational social science and social networks. He previously led the Advisory and Research function in Morgan Stanley's Artificial Intelligence Center of Excellence team, and is currently an Amazon Scholar within Amazon Web Services. == Biography == Kearns was born into an academic family, where his father David R Kearns is Professor Emeritus at University of California, San Diego in chemistry, who won Guggenheim Fellowship in 1969, and his uncle Thomas R. Kearns is Professor Emeritus at Amherst College in Philosophy and Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought. His paternal grandfather Clyde W. Kearns was a pioneer in insecticide toxicology and was a professor at University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign in Entomology, and his maternal grandfather Chen Shou-Yi (1899–1978) was a professor at Pomona College in history and literature, who was born in Canton (Guangzhou, China) into a family noted for their scholarship and educational leadership. Kearns received his B.S. degree at the University of California at Berkeley in math and computer science in 1985, and Ph.D. in computer science from Harvard University in 1989, under the supervision of Turing Award winner Leslie Valiant. His doctoral dissertation was The Computational Complexity of Machine Learning, later published by MIT press as part of the ACM Doctoral Dissertation Award Series in 1990. Before joining AT&T Bell Labs in 1991, he continued with postdoctoral positions at the Laboratory for Computer Science at MIT hosted by Ronald Rivest, and at the International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) in UC Berkeley hosted by Richard M. Karp, both of whom are Turing Award winners. Kearns is currently a full professor and National Center Chair at the University of Pennsylvania, where his appointment is split across the Department of Computer and Information Science, and Statistics and Operations and Information Management in the Wharton School. Prior to joining the Penn faculty in 2002, he spent a decade (1991–2001) in AT&T Labs and Bell Labs, including as head of the AI department with colleagues including Michael L. Littman, David A. McAllester, and Richard S. Sutton; Secure Systems Research department; and Machine Learning department with members such as Michael Collins and the leader Fernando Pereira. Other AT&T Labs colleagues in Algorithms and Theoretical Computer Science included Yoav Freund, Ronald Graham, Mehryar Mohri, Robert Schapire, and Peter Shor, as well as Sebastian Seung, Yann LeCun, Corinna Cortes, and Vladimir Vapnik (the V in VC dimension). Kearns was named Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery (2014) for contributions to machine learning, and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (2012). His former graduate students and postdoctoral visitors include Ryan W. Porter, John Langford, and Jennifer Wortman Vaughan. Kearns' work has been reported by media, such as MIT Technology Review (2014) Can a Website Help You Decide to Have a Kid?, Bloomberg News (2014) Schneiderman (and Einstein) Pressure High-Speed Trading and NPR audio (2012) Online Education Grows Up, And For Now, It's Free. == Academic life == === Computational learning theory === Kearns and Umesh Vazirani published An introduction to computational learning theory, which has been a standard text on computational learning theory since it was published in 1994. === Weak learnability and the origin of Boosting algorithms === The question "is weakly learnability equivalent to strong learnability?" posed by Kearns and Valiant (Unpublished manuscript 1988, ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 1989) is the origin of boosting machine learning algorithms, which got a positive answer by Robert Schapire (1990, proof by construction, not practical) and Yoav Freund (1993, by voting, not practical) and then they developed the practical AdaBoost (European Conference on Computational Learning Theory 1995, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 1997), an adaptive boosting algorithm that won the prestigious Gödel Prize (2003). == Honors and awards == 2021. Member of the U. S. National Academy of Sciences. 2014. ACM Fellow. For contributions to machine learning, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic game theory and computational social science. 2012. American Academy of Arts and Sciences Fellow. == Selected works == 2019. The Ethical Algorithm: The Science of Socially Aware Algorithm Design. (with Aaron Roth). Oxford University Press. 1994. An introduction to computational learning theory. (with Umesh Vazirani). MIT press. Widely used as a text book in computational learning theory courses. 1990. The computational complexity of machine learning. MIT press. Based on his 1989 doctoral dissertation; ACM Doctoral Dissertation Award Series in 1990 Archived 2014-11-03 at the Wayback Machine 1989. Cryptographic limitations on learning Boolean formulae and finite automata. (with Leslie Valiant) Proceedings of the twenty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing (STOC'89). The open question: is weakly learnability equivalent to strong learnability?; The origin of boosting algorithms; Important publication in machine learning.
Read more →
Thomas G. Dietterich

Thomas G. Dietterich is emeritus professor of computer science at Oregon State University. He is one of the pioneers of the field of machine learning. He served as executive editor of Machine Learning (journal) (1992–98) and helped co-found the Journal of Machine Learning Research. In response to the media's attention on the dangers of artificial intelligence, Dietterich has been quoted for an academic perspective to a broad range of media outlets including National Public Radio, Business Insider, Microsoft Research, CNET, and The Wall Street Journal. Among his research contributions were the invention of error-correcting output coding to multi-class classification, the formalization of the multiple-instance problem, the MAXQ framework for hierarchical reinforcement learning, and the development of methods for integrating non-parametric regression trees into probabilistic graphical models. == Biography and education == Thomas Dietterich was born in South Weymouth, Massachusetts, in 1954. His family later moved to New Jersey and then again to Illinois, where Tom graduated from Naperville Central High School. Dietterich then entered Oberlin College and began his undergraduate studies. In 1977, Dietterich graduated from Oberlin with a degree in mathematics, focusing on probability and statistics. Dietterich spent the following two years at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. After those two years, he began his doctoral studies in the Department of Computer Science at Stanford University. Dietterich received his Ph.D. in 1984 and moved to Corvallis, Oregon, where he was hired as an assistant professor in computer science. in 2013, he was named "Distinguished Professor". In 2016, Dietterich retired from his position at Oregon State University. Throughout his career, Dietterich has worked to promote scientific publication and conference presentations. For many years, he was the editor of the MIT Press series on Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning. He also held the position of co-editor of the Morgan Claypool Synthesis Series on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. He has organized several conferences and workshops including serving as Technical Program Co-Chair of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), Technical Program Chair of the Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS-2000) and General Chair of NIPS-2001. He served as founding President of the International Machine Learning Society and he has been a member of the IMLS Board since its founding. He is currently also a member of the Steering Committee of the Asian Conference on Machine Learning. == Research interests == Professor Dietterich is interested in all aspects of machine learning. There are three major strands of his research. First, he is interested in the fundamental questions of artificial intelligence and how machine learning can provide the basis for building integrated intelligent systems. Second, he is interested in ways that people and computers can collaborate to solve challenging problems. And third, he is interested in applying machine learning to problems in the ecological sciences and ecosystem management as part of the emerging field of computational sustainability. Over his career, he has worked on a wide variety of problems ranging from drug design to user interfaces to computer security. His current focus is on ways that computer science methods can help advance ecological science and improve our management of the Earth's ecosystems. This passion has led to several projects including research in wildfire management, invasive vegetation and understanding the distribution and migration of birds. For example, Dietterich's research is helping scientists at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology answer questions like: How do birds decide to migrate north? How do they know when to land and stopover for a few days? How do they choose where to make a nest? Tens of thousands of volunteer birdwatchers (citizen scientists) all over the world contribute data to the study by submitting their bird sightings to the eBird website. The amount of data is overwhelming – in March 2012 they had over 3.1 million bird observations. Machine learning can uncover patterns in data to model the migration of species. But there are many other applications for the same techniques which will allow organizations to better manage our forests, oceans, and endangered species, as well as improve traffic flow, water systems, the electrical power grid, and more. I realized I wanted to have an impact on something that really mattered – and certainly the whole Earth's ecosystem, of which we are a part, is under threat in so many ways. And so if there's some way that I can use my technical skills to improve both the science base and the tools needed for policy and management decisions, then I would like to do that. I am passionate about that. == Dangers of AI: an academic perspective == Dietterich has argued that the most realistic risks about the dangers of artificial intelligence are basic mistakes, breakdowns and cyberattacks, and the fact that it simply may not always work, rather than machines that become super powerful or destroy the human race. Dietterich considers machines becoming self-aware and trying to exterminate humans to be more science fiction than scientific fact. But to the extent that computer systems are given increasingly dangerous tasks, and asked to learn from and interpret their experiences, he said they may simply make mistakes. Instead, much of the work done in the AI safety community does indeed focus around accidents and design flaws. == Positions held == 2014–2016: President, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 2013–present: Distinguished Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 2011–present: Chief Scientist, BigML, Corvallis, OR. 2005–present: Director of Intelligent Systems Research, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Oregon State University. 2006–2008: Chief Scientist, Smart Desktop, Inc., Seattle, WA. 2004–2005: Chief Scientist, MyStrands, Inc., Corvallis, OR. 1995-2013: Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1998–1999: Visiting Senior Scientist, Institute for the Investigation of Artificial Intelligence, Barcelona, Spain. (Sabbatical leave position) 1988–1995: Associate Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1991–1993: Senior Scientist, Arris Pharmaceutical Corporation, S. San Francisco, CA. 1985–1988: Assistant Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1979–1984: Research Assistant, Heuristic Programming Project, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University. 1979 (Summer): Member of Technical Staff, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Naperville, Illinois. Computer-to-computer file transfer and micro-code distribution to remote switching systems. 1977 (Summer): Assistant to the Director of Planning and Research, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. Developed institutional planning database. == Awards and honors == Thomas Dietterich was honored by Oregon State University in the spring of 2013 as a "Distinguished Professor" for his work as a pioneer in the field of machine learning and being one of the mostly highly cited scientists in his field. He has also earned exclusive "Fellow" status in the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Association for Computing Machinery. Over his career, he obtained more than $30 million in research grants, helped build a world-class research group at Oregon State, and created three software companies. He also co-founded two of the field's leading journals and was elected first president of the International Machine Learning Society. His other awards and honors include: ACM Distinguished Lecturer, 2012-2013 Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2007 Oregon State University, College of Engineering Collaboration Award, 2004 Winner, JAIR Award for Best Paper in Previous Five Years, 2003 Fellow, Association for Computing Machinery, elected 2003 Oregon State University, College of Engineering Research Award, 1998 Fellow, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, elected 1994 NSF Presidential Young Investigator, 1987-92 Nominated for Carter Award for Graduate Teaching, 1987, 1988 IBM Graduate Fellow, 1982, 1983 Upsilon Pi Epsilon, 1996 Sigma Xi, 1979–present State Farm Companies Foundation Fellowship, 1978 Member, Board of Trustees, Oberlin College, 1977-1980 Graduation with Honors in Mathematics, Oberlin College, 1977 Phi Beta Kappa, 1977 National Merit Scholar, 1973 == Selected publications == Liping Liu, Thomas G. Dietterich, Nan Li, Zhi-Hua Zhou (2016). Transductive Optimization of Top k Precision. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-2016). pp. 1781–1787. New York, NY Md. Amran Siddiqui, Alan Fern, Thomas G. Dietterich, Shubhomoy Da
Read more →
Statistical machine translation

Statistical machine translation (SMT) is a machine translation approach where translations are generated on the basis of statistical models whose parameters are derived from the analysis of bilingual text corpora. The statistical approach contrasts with the rule-based approaches to machine translation as well as with example-based machine translation, that superseded the previous rule-based approach that required explicit description of each and every linguistic rule, which was costly, and which often did not generalize to other languages. The first ideas of statistical machine translation were introduced by Warren Weaver in 1949, including the ideas of applying Claude Shannon's information theory. Statistical machine translation was re-introduced in the late 1980s and early 1990s by researchers at IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center. Before the introduction of neural machine translation, it was by far the most widely studied machine translation method. == Basis == The idea behind statistical machine translation comes from information theory. A document is translated according to the probability distribution p ( e | f ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)} that a string e {\displaystyle e} in the target language (for example, English) is the translation of a string f {\displaystyle f} in the source language (for example, French). The problem of modeling the probability distribution p ( e | f ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)} has been approached in a number of ways. One approach which lends itself well to computer implementation is to apply Bayes' theorem, that is p ( e | f ) ∝ p ( f | e ) p ( e ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)\propto p(f|e)p(e)} , where the translation model p ( f | e ) {\displaystyle p(f|e)} is the probability that the source string is the translation of the target string, and the language model p ( e ) {\displaystyle p(e)} is the probability of seeing that target language string. This decomposition is attractive as it splits the problem into two subproblems. Finding the best translation e ~ {\displaystyle {\tilde {e}}} is done by picking up the one that gives the highest probability: e ~ = a r g max e ∈ e ∗ p ( e | f ) = a r g max e ∈ e ∗ p ( f | e ) p ( e ) {\displaystyle {\tilde {e}}=arg\max _{e\in e^{}}p(e|f)=arg\max _{e\in e^{}}p(f|e)p(e)} . For a rigorous implementation of this one would have to perform an exhaustive search by going through all strings e ∗ {\displaystyle e^{}} in the native language. Performing the search efficiently is the work of a machine translation decoder that uses the foreign string, heuristics and other methods to limit the search space and at the same time keeping acceptable quality. This trade-off between quality and time usage can also be found in speech recognition. As the translation systems are not able to store all native strings and their translations, a document is typically translated sentence by sentence. Language models are typically approximated by smoothed n-gram models, and similar approaches have been applied to translation models, but this introduces additional complexity due to different sentence lengths and word orders in the languages. Statistical translation models were initially word based (Models 1-5 from IBM Hidden Markov model from Stephan Vogel and Model 6 from Franz-Joseph Och), but significant advances were made with the introduction of phrase based models. Later work incorporated syntax or quasi-syntactic structures. == Benefits == The most frequently cited benefits of statistical machine translation (SMT) over rule-based approach are: More efficient use of human and data resources There are many parallel corpora in machine-readable format and even more monolingual data. Generally, SMT systems are not tailored to any specific pair of languages. More fluent translations owing to use of a language model == Shortcomings == Corpus creation can be costly. Specific errors are hard to predict and fix. Results may have superficial fluency that masks translation problems. Statistical machine translation usually works less well for language pairs with significantly different word order. The benefits obtained for translation between Western European languages are not representative of results for other language pairs, owing to smaller training corpora and greater grammatical differences. == Word-based translation == In word-based translation, the fundamental unit of translation is a word in some natural language. Typically, the number of words in translated sentences are different, because of compound words, morphology and idioms. The ratio of the lengths of sequences of translated words is called fertility, which tells how many foreign words each native word produces. Necessarily it is assumed by information theory that each covers the same concept. In practice this is not really true. For example, the English word corner can be translated in Spanish by either rincón or esquina, depending on whether it is to mean its internal or external angle. Simple word-based translation cannot translate between languages with different fertility. Word-based translation systems can relatively simply be made to cope with high fertility, such that they could map a single word to multiple words, but not the other way about. For example, if we were translating from English to French, each word in English could produce any number of French words— sometimes none at all. But there is no way to group two English words producing a single French word. An example of a word-based translation system is the freely available GIZA++ package (GPLed), which includes the training program for IBM models and HMM model and Model 6. The word-based translation is not widely used today; phrase-based systems are more common. Most phrase-based systems are still using GIZA++ to align the corpus. The alignments are used to extract phrases or deduce syntax rules. And matching words in bi-text is still a problem actively discussed in the community. Because of the predominance of GIZA++, there are now several distributed implementations of it online. == Phrase-based translation == In phrase-based translation, the aim is to reduce the restrictions of word-based translation by translating whole sequences of words, where the lengths may differ. The sequences of words are called blocks or phrases. These are typically not linguistic phrases, but phrasemes that were found using statistical methods from corpora. It has been shown that restricting the phrases to linguistic phrases (syntactically motivated groups of words, see syntactic categories) decreased the quality of translation. The chosen phrases are further mapped one-to-one based on a phrase translation table, and may be reordered. This table could be learnt based on word-alignment, or directly from a parallel corpus. The second model is trained using the expectation maximization algorithm, similarly to the word-based IBM model. == Syntax-based translation == Syntax-based translation is based on the idea of translating syntactic units, rather than single words or strings of words (as in phrase-based MT), i.e. (partial) parse trees of sentences/utterances. Until the 1990s, with advent of strong stochastic parsers, the statistical counterpart of the old idea of syntax-based translation did not take off. Examples of this approach include DOP-based MT and later synchronous context-free grammars. == Hierarchical phrase-based translation == Hierarchical phrase-based translation combines the phrase-based and syntax-based approaches to translation. It uses synchronous context-free grammar rules, but the grammars can be constructed by an extension of methods for phrase-based translation without reference to linguistically motivated syntactic constituents. This idea was first introduced in Chiang's Hiero system (2005). == Language models == A language model is an essential component of any statistical machine translation system, which aids in making the translation as fluent as possible. It is a function that takes a translated sentence and returns the probability of it being said by a native speaker. A good language model will for example assign a higher probability to the sentence "the house is small" than to "small the is house". Other than word order, language models may also help with word choice: if a foreign word has multiple possible translations, these functions may give better probabilities for certain translations in specific contexts in the target language. == Systems implementing statistical machine translation == Google Translate (started transition to neural machine translation in 2016) Microsoft Translator (started transition to neural machine translation in 2016) Yandex.Translate (switched to hybrid approach incorporating neural machine translation in 2017) == Challenges with statistical machine translation == Problems with statistical machine translation include: === Sentence alignment === Single sentences in one language can be found translated into several sentences in the o
Read more →
Chinchilla (language model)

Chinchilla is a family of large language models (LLMs) developed by the research team at Google DeepMind, presented in March 2022. == Models == It is named "chinchilla" because it is a further development over a previous model family named Gopher. Both model families were trained in order to investigate the scaling laws of large language models. It claimed to outperform GPT-3. It considerably simplifies downstream utilization because it requires much less computer power for inference and fine-tuning. Based on the training of previously employed language models, it has been determined that if one doubles the model size, one must also have twice the number of training tokens. This hypothesis has been used to train Chinchilla by DeepMind. Similar to Gopher in terms of cost, Chinchilla has 70B parameters and four times as much data. Chinchilla has an average accuracy of 67.5% on the Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark, which is 7% higher than Gopher's performance. Chinchilla was still in the testing phase as of January 12, 2023. Chinchilla contributes to developing an effective training paradigm for large autoregressive language models with limited compute resources. The Chinchilla team recommends that the number of training tokens is twice for every model size doubling, meaning that using larger, higher-quality training datasets can lead to better results on downstream tasks. It has been used for the Flamingo vision-language model. == Architecture == Both the Gopher family and Chinchilla family are families of transformer models. In particular, they are essentially the same as GPT-2, with different sizes and minor modifications. Gopher family uses RMSNorm instead of LayerNorm; relative positional encoding rather than absolute positional encoding. The Chinchilla family is the same as the Gopher family, but trained with AdamW instead of Adam optimizer. The Gopher family contains six models of increasing size, from 44 million parameters to 280 billion parameters. They refer to the largest one as "Gopher" by default. Similar naming conventions apply for the Chinchilla family. Table 1 of shows the entire Gopher family: Table 4 of compares the 70-billion-parameter Chinchilla with Gopher 280B.
Read more →
AI Analytics Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

In search of the best AI analytics tool? An AI analytics tool 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 AI analytics tool 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 →
Top 10 AI Subtitle Generators Compared (2026)

Curious about the best AI subtitle generator? An AI subtitle generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI subtitle generator 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 →