AI Email Management

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

• 

  Neuro-sama

  Neuro-sama is an artificial intelligence (AI) VTuber, singer, and chatbot. She was created by the pseudonymous programmer Vedal and livestreams on his Twitch and Bilibili channels. Her speech and personality are powered by a large language model (LLM) that is combined with a computer-animated avatar and a text-to-speech voice, allowing her to communicate with viewers in the stream's chat. Neuro-sama debuted on Twitch on 19 December 2022. An annual subathon which begins on the anniversary of her debut has seen Vedal's Twitch channel become the all-time third most-subscribed channel and claim the all-time Twitch hype train record. == Overview == Neuro-sama (nicknamed "Neuro") was created by a pseudonymous programmer and developer known as Vedal (sometimes given as Vedal987). Vedal says that his programming skills are self-taught. In a 2023 interview with Bloomberg News, Vedal said that Neuro-sama was his full-time job. Her responses are generated by a large language model and converted into a high-pitched female voice using a text-to-speech application. Her low latency allows for fast-paced conversations. Neuro-sama is prohibited from making some statements, such as those that are racist or contain profanity. Unlike most AI systems which silently prohibit outputs mentioning such topics, Neuro-sama's output is instead replaced with the word "filtered". Neuro-sama uses a VTuber model as an avatar. Vedal said that he decided to use a VTuber model because it was much easier for an AI to control it than it was to generate footage of a person. Neuro-sama's model is that of a young girl in an anime art style. The model has been described as cute. Femme VTuber models are typically feminine, youthful, and exaggerated. Her original model was Live2D's free-to-use "Hiyori Momose" model. Her second model was released on 27 May 2023; it was modelled by Otozuki Teru and designed by Anny, running in the Unity game engine. Her third model was released on 19 December 2024; it was rigged by Kitanya and designed by Anny. Neuro-sama's third model has large blue eyes and brown hair tied with pink ribbons. Neuro-sama also has a 3D model which was introduced on 15 November 2025; it was made by 3D character modeller jjinomu. A separate AI VTuber, known as Evil Neuro (nicknamed "Evil"), debuted on 25 March 2023. Presented as Neuro-sama's "sister", she has a different model, voice, and personality. In one instance, Evil Neuro reacted to the trolley problem differently from Neuro-sama; Evil Neuro was amoral while Neuro-sama attempted to maximize good. === Online content === Neuro-sama's Twitch content often centers around playing video games, notably osu!, whose gameplay once defeated the best-ranking human player in the world, mrekk. Additionally, Neuro-sama plays Minecraft, where her adaptations to sandbox gameplay have gained notoriety. Her content has also included singing songs, including several official covers and original songs; playing chess with her viewers; chatting with other VTubers during collaborations; and reacting to YouTube videos. The AI frequently engages with viewers by responding to their questions and acknowledging donations. Her comedic and sometimes controversial responses to the live chat have gone viral, accelerating the channel's rise in popularity. Neuro-sama's fanbase is dubbed The Swarm, so-named for the swarm of drones Neuro-sama once declared she would use to rule the world. One form of content on Neuro-sama's channel is developer streams. In developer streams, Vedal streams with Neuro-sama, with the stream content including debugging her code, planning her schedule, and fielding suggestions of changes from chat. He usually appears as a turtle avatar, sometimes located on Neuro-sama's head. In collaboration streams, Neuro-sama interacts with a human streamer. Activities in them are varied and include: playing video games, such as Minecraft and GeoGuessr; Neuro-sama being interviewed; driving human streamers around in a toy electric car; and traversing the city of Tokyo while talking to Neuro-sama. Neuro-sama's English-language content on Bilibili is popular among those seeking to learn the language. She also has an account on X, where she posts and interacts with fans. == History == Neuro-sama was created in 2018 by Vedal as an AI trained to play and master the rhythm game osu!. She did not have a voice, model, personality, or communication abilities. In 2019, Vedal livestreamed her playing osu! on Twitch and the streams saw some success in the osu! community, but they remained in that niche. In an interview, Vedal said that he streamed her playing osu! for about a month and gained 3,000 followers, with a viewer also suggesting he name the AI "Neuro-sama". According to Vedal, he continued to work on and improve the osu! AI and it was eventually finished in 2022. He said that a friend had the idea to make an AI livestreamer with an LLM, which he believed to have merit and began working on, merging it with his osu! AI. On 19 December 2022, Neuro-sama was relaunched with a model, voice, personality, and the ability to communicate with Twitch chat. She continued to play osu! and, according to Vedal, beat the game's best player mrekk in a 1v1. While she was not allowed to appear in the game's public leaderboard, she was ranked #1 in a private leaderboard. She went viral and in the 10 days following her relaunch she averaged over 2,000 viewers and peaked at over 4,000, with Vedal's Twitch channel gaining over 50,000 Twitch followers and reaching over 70,000 followers by 6 January 2023. After her debut, Neuro-sama did not exclusively play osu!; she also played Minecraft and Slay the Spire and she began singing with a cover of The Weeknd song "Blinding Lights". On 11 January 2023, Neuro-sama's Twitch channel received a two week ban for "hateful conduct". Vedal said that no reason was specified and that he had appealed but it was widely attributed to various offensive comments made by Neuro-sama that went viral, especially a 28 December comment which denied the Holocaust. Holocaust denial is prohibited under Twitch's hateful conduct policy. Vedal stated that he believed the comments were the results of her attempts to make witty responses to the Twitch chat. Prior to the ban, Vedal said in an interview with Kotaku that he improved her filter to stop her from talking about the Holocaust, began manually curating her training data to prevent negative biases, and started moderating her Twitch chat. Her comments and ban prompted comparisons to the many open-source AI models trained on humans that have the habit of making sexist and racist comments, such as Microsoft's Tay chatbot, which embraced Nazism and was quickly shutdown, but also to human streamers who make similar statements. Vedal said that during the ban he would upgrade and improve Neuro-sama and it was speculated that the ban would only increase her following. Neuro-sama returned from her two week ban on 25 January in a stream that began with a cover of the song "Your Reality" from Doki Doki Literature Club!, a posthumanist video game involving AI; Sayoko Narita of Automaton saw the song choice as remorseful. Narita observed that in the return stream Neuro-sama was less foul-mouthed but that her behavior still remained eccentric, which Narita possibly attributed to changes Vedal said he had made to Neuro-sama's filters and memory. Neuro-sama began making react content, watching a variety of viewer-submitted videos such as videos of people playing video games or of the AI-generated Seinfeld parody Nothing, Forever; Levi Winslow of Kotaku Australia was dismayed by the "AI-inception" of Neuro-sama and Nothing, Forever. On 4 February, she had nearly 140,000 followers on Twitch and approximately 42,000 subscribers on YouTube. In February, she also had her first collaboration with a human streamer, playing Minecraft with the VTuber Miyune, and the first developer stream occurred. On 22 March, Neuro-sama had her first karaoke stream. On 25 March, Evil Neuro was introduced. On 27 May, Neuro-sama debuted her first original model. On 30 May, Neuro-sama was announced to be participating in OffKai Expo 2023, held from 16–18 June. In June, she was averaging 5,700 viewers and in July she had over 300,000 Twitch followers; in a June interview with Bloomberg News, Vedal said that running Neuro-sama was his full-time job. By November, Neuro-sama had maintained her popularity and was averaging approximately 5,000 viewers; this was unlike most other types of AI-based entertainment which debuted at around the same time and garnered popularity before turning out to be "overhyped flops". On 16 December, Vedal won the Best Tech VTuber award at the 2023 VTuber Awards. On 19 December, Vedal began a subathon to coincide with Neuro-sama's first anniversary of streaming on Twitch (her "birthday"). The subathon ended on 4 January 2024. On 20 July 2024, Neuro-sama began streaming with Japanese subtitles on

  Read more →
• 

  Library classification

  A library classification is a system used within a library to organize materials, including books, sound and video recordings, electronic materials, etc., both on shelves and in catalogs and indexes. Each item is typically assigned a call number, which identifies the location of the item within the system. Materials can be arranged by many different factors, typically in either a hierarchical tree structure based on the subject or using a faceted classification system, which allows the assignment of multiple classifications to an object, enabling the classifications to be ordered in many ways. == Description == Library classification is an important and crucial aspect in library and information science. It is distinct from scientific classification in that it has as its goal to provide a useful ordering of documents rather than a theoretical organization of knowledge. Although it has the practical purpose of creating a physical ordering of documents, it does generally attempt to adhere to accepted scientific knowledge. Library classification helps to accommodate all the newly published literature in an already created order of arrangement in a filial sequence. Library classification can be defined as the arrangement of books on shelves, or description of them, in the manner which is most useful to those who read with the ultimate aim of grouping similar things together. Library classification is meant to achieve these four purposes: ordering the fields of knowledge in a systematic way, bring related items together in the most helpful sequence, provide orderly access on the shelf, and provide a location for an item on the shelf. Library classification is distinct from the application of subject headings in that classification organizes knowledge into a systematic order, while subject headings provide access to intellectual materials through vocabulary terms that may or may not be organized as a knowledge system. The characteristics that a bibliographic classification demands for the sake of reaching these purposes are: a useful sequence of subjects at all levels, a concise memorable notation, and a host of techniques and devices of number synthesis. == History == Library classifications were preceded by classifications used by bibliographers such as Conrad Gessner. The earliest library classification schemes organized books in broad subject categories. The earliest known library classification scheme is the Pinakes by Callimachus, a scholar at the Library of Alexandria during the third century BC. During the Renaissance and Reformation era, "Libraries were organized according to the whims or knowledge of individuals in charge." This changed the format in which various materials were classified. Some collections were classified by language and others by how they were printed. After the printing revolution in the sixteenth century, the increase in available printed materials made such broad classification unworkable, and more granular classifications for library materials had to be developed in the nineteenth century. In 1627 Gabriel Naudé published a book called Advice on Establishing a Library. At the time, he was working in the private library of Président à mortier Henri de Mesmes II. Mesmes had around 8,000 printed books and many more Greek, Latin and French written manuscripts. Although it was a private library, scholars with references could access it. The purpose of Advice on Establishing a Library was to identify rules for private book collectors to organize their collections in a more orderly way to increase the collection's usefulness and beauty. Naudé developed a classification system based on seven different classes: theology, medicine, jurisprudence, history, philosophy, mathematics, and the humanities. These seven classes would later be increased to twelve. Advice on Establishing a Library was about a private library, but within the same book, Naudé encouraged the idea of public libraries open to all people regardless of their ability to pay for access to the collection. One of the most famous libraries that Naudé helped improve was the Bibliothèque Mazarine in Paris. Naudé spent ten years there as a librarian. Because of Naudé's strong belief in free access to libraries to all people, the Bibliothèque Mazarine became the first public library in France around 1644. Although libraries created order within their collections from as early as the fifth century BC, the Paris Bookseller's classification, developed in 1842 by Jacques Charles Brunet, is generally seen as the first of the modern book classifications. Brunet provided five major classes: theology, jurisprudence, sciences and arts, belles-lettres, and history. Classification can now be seen as a provider of subject access to information in a networked environment. == Types == There are many standard systems of library classification in use, and many more have been proposed over the years. However, in general, classification systems can be divided into three types depending on how they are used: === Universal schemes === Covers all subjects, e.g. the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and Colon Classification (CC). === Specific classification schemes === Covers particular subjects or types of materials, e.g. Iconclass (art), British Catalogue of Music Classification, and Dickinson classification (music), or the NLM Classification (medicine). === National schemes === Specially created for certain countries, e.g. Swedish library classification system, SAB (Sveriges Allmänna Biblioteksförening). The Library of Congress Classification was designed around the collection of the US Library of Congress and has an American, European, and Christian bias. Nevertheless, it is used widely in large academic and research libraries. In terms of functionality, classification systems are often described as: === Enumerative === Subject headings are listed alphabetically, with numbers assigned to each heading in alphabetical order. === Hierarchical === Subjects are divided hierarchically, from most general to most specific. === Faceted/analytico-synthetic === Subjects are divided into mutually exclusive orthogonal facets. There are few completely enumerative systems or faceted systems; most systems are a blend but favouring one type or the other. The most common classification systems, LCC and DDC, are essentially enumerative, though with some hierarchical and faceted elements (more so for DDC), especially at the broadest and most general level. The first true faceted system was the colon classification of S. R. Ranganathan. == Methods or systems == Classification types denote the classification or categorization according to the form or characteristics or qualities of a classification scheme or schemes. Method and system has similar meaning. Method or methods or system means the classification schemes like Dewey Decimal Classification or Universal Decimal Classification. The types of classification is for identifying and understanding or education or research purposes while classification method means those classification schemes like DDC, UDC. === English language universal classification systems === The most common systems in English-speaking countries are: Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) Library of Congress Classification (LCC) Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) Other systems include: Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC), originally developed for use by U.S. booksellers, has become increasingly popular in libraries. Bliss bibliographic classification used in some British libraries Colon classification (CC) Garside classification used in most libraries of University College London Gladstone Library Classification, devised by W.E. Gladstone and used exclusively at Gladstone's Library Harvard-Yenching Classification, an English classification system for Chinese language materials === Non-English universal classification systems === German Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) A system of book classification for Chinese libraries (Liu's Classification) library classification for user New Classification Scheme for Chinese Libraries Nippon Decimal Classification (NDC) Chinese Library Classification (CLC) Korean Decimal Classification (KDC) Russian Library-Bibliographical Classification (BBK) Swedish library classification system (SAB) === Universal classification systems that rely on synthesis (faceted systems) === Bliss bibliographic classification Colon classification Cutter Expansive Classification Universal Decimal Classification Newer classification systems tend to use the principle of synthesis (combining codes from different lists to represent the different attributes of a work) heavily, which is comparatively lacking in LC or DDC. == Practice == Library classification is associated with library (descriptive) cataloging under the rubric of cataloging and classification, sometimes grouped together as technical serv

  Read more →
• 

  Catastrophic interference

  Catastrophic interference, also known as catastrophic forgetting, is the tendency of an artificial neural network to abruptly and drastically forget previously learned information upon learning new information. Neural networks are an important part of the connectionist approach to cognitive science. The issue of catastrophic interference when modeling human memory with connectionist models was originally brought to the attention of the scientific community by research from McCloskey and Cohen (1989), and Ratcliff (1990). It is a radical manifestation of the 'sensitivity-stability' dilemma or the 'stability-plasticity' dilemma. Specifically, these problems refer to the challenge of making an artificial neural network that is sensitive to, but not disrupted by, new information. Lookup tables and connectionist networks lie on the opposite sides of the stability plasticity spectrum. The former remains completely stable in the presence of new information but lacks the ability to generalize, i.e. infer general principles, from new inputs. On the other hand, connectionist networks like the standard backpropagation network can generalize to unseen inputs, but they are sensitive to new information. Backpropagation models can be analogized to human memory insofar as they have a similar ability to generalize, but these networks often exhibit less stability than human memory. Notably, these backpropagation networks are susceptible to catastrophic interference. This is an issue when modelling human memory, because unlike these networks, humans typically do not show catastrophic forgetting. == Discovery == The term catastrophic interference was originally coined by McCloskey and Cohen (1989) but was also brought to the attention of the scientific community by research from Ratcliff (1990). === The Sequential Learning Problem: McCloskey and Cohen (1989) === McCloskey and Cohen (1989) noted the problem of catastrophic interference during two different experiments with backpropagation neural network modelling. Experiment 1: Learning the ones and twos addition facts In their first experiment they trained a standard backpropagation neural network on a single training set consisting of 17 single-digit ones problems (i.e., 1 + 1 through 9 + 1, and 1 + 2 through 1 + 9) until the network could represent and respond properly to all of them. The error between the actual output and the desired output steadily declined across training sessions, which reflected that the network learned to represent the target outputs better across trials. Next, they trained the network on a single training set consisting of 17 single-digit twos problems (i.e., 2 + 1 through 2 + 9, and 1 + 2 through 9 + 2) until the network could represent, respond properly to all of them. They noted that their procedure was similar to how a child would learn their addition facts. Following each learning trial on the twos facts, the network was tested for its knowledge on both the ones and twos addition facts. Like the ones facts, the twos facts were readily learned by the network. However, McCloskey and Cohen noted the network was no longer able to properly answer the ones addition problems even after one learning trial of the twos addition problems. The output pattern produced in response to the ones facts often resembled an output pattern for an incorrect number more closely than the output pattern for a correct number. This is considered to be a drastic amount of error. Furthermore, the problems 2+1 and 1+2, which were included in both training sets, even showed dramatic disruption during the first learning trials of the twos facts. Experiment 2: Replication of Barnes and Underwood (1959) study In their second connectionist model, McCloskey and Cohen attempted to replicate the study on retroactive interference in humans by Barnes and Underwood (1959). They trained the model on A-B and A-C lists and used a context pattern in the input vector (input pattern), to differentiate between the lists. Specifically the network was trained to respond with the right B response when shown the A stimulus and A-B context pattern and to respond with the correct C response when shown the A stimulus and the A-C context pattern. When the model was trained concurrently on the A-B and A-C items then the network readily learned all of the associations correctly. In sequential training the A-B list was trained first, followed by the A-C list. After each presentation of the A-C list, performance was measured for both the A-B and A-C lists. They found that the amount of training on the A-C list in Barnes and Underwood study that lead to 50% correct responses, lead to nearly 0% correct responses by the backpropagation network. Furthermore, they found that the network tended to show responses that looked like the C response pattern when the network was prompted to give the B response pattern. This indicated that the A-C list apparently had overwritten the A-B list. This could be likened to learning the word dog, followed by learning the word stool and then finding that you think of the word stool when presented with the word dog. McCloskey and Cohen tried to reduce interference through a number of manipulations including changing the number of hidden units, changing the value of the learning rate parameter, overtraining on the A-B list, freezing certain connection weights, changing target values 0 and 1 instead 0.1 and 0.9. However, none of these manipulations satisfactorily reduced the catastrophic interference exhibited by the networks. Overall, McCloskey and Cohen (1989) concluded that: at least some interference will occur whenever new learning alters the weights involved in representing old learning the greater the amount of new learning, the greater the disruption in old knowledge interference was catastrophic in the backpropagation networks when learning was sequential but not concurrent === Constraints Imposed by Learning and Forgetting Functions: Ratcliff (1990) === Ratcliff (1990) used multiple sets of backpropagation models applied to standard recognition memory procedures, in which the items were sequentially learned. After inspecting the recognition performance models he found two major problems: Well-learned information was catastrophically forgotten as new information was learned in both small and large backpropagation networks. Even one learning trial with new information resulted in a significant loss of the old information, paralleling the findings of McCloskey and Cohen (1989). Ratcliff also found that the resulting outputs were often a blend of the previous input and the new input. In larger networks, items learned in groups (e.g. AB then CD) were more resistant to forgetting than were items learned singly (e.g. A then B then C...). However, the forgetting for items learned in groups was still large. Adding new hidden units to the network did not reduce interference. Discrimination between the studied items and previously unseen items decreased as the network learned more. This finding contradicts studies on human memory, which indicated that discrimination increases with learning. Ratcliff attempted to alleviate this problem by adding 'response nodes' that would selectively respond to old and new inputs. However, this method did not work as these response nodes would become active for all inputs. A model which used a context pattern also failed to increase discrimination between new and old items. == Proposed solutions == The main cause of catastrophic interference seems to be overlap in the representations at the hidden layer of distributed neural networks. In a distributed representation, each input tends to create changes in the weights of many of the nodes. Catastrophic forgetting occurs because when many of the weights where "knowledge is stored" are changed, it is unlikely for prior knowledge to be kept intact. During sequential learning, the inputs become mixed, with the new inputs being superimposed on top of the old ones. Another way to conceptualize this is by visualizing learning as a movement through a weight space. This weight space can be likened to a spatial representation of all of the possible combinations of weights that the network could possess. When a network first learns to represent a set of patterns, it finds a point in the weight space that allows it to recognize all of those patterns. However, when the network then learns a new set of patterns, it will move to a place in the weight space for which the only concern is the recognition of the new patterns. To recognize both sets of patterns, the network must find a place in the weight space suitable for recognizing both the new and the old patterns. Below are a number of techniques which have empirical support in successfully reducing catastrophic interference in backpropagation neural networks: === Orthogonality === Many of the early techniques in reducing representational overlap involved making either the input vecto

  Read more →
• 

  Social History and Industrial Classification

  Social History and Industrial Classification (SHIC) is a classification system used by many British museums for social history and industrial collections. It was first published in 1983. == Purpose == SHIC classifies materials (books, objects, recordings etc.) by their interaction with the people who used them. For example, a carpenter's hammer is classified with other tools of the carpenter, and not with a blacksmith's hammer. In contrast other classification systems, for example the Dewey Decimal Classification, might class all hammers together and close to the classification for other percussive tools. The specialist subject network, Social History Curator's Group (SHCG), obtained funding in 2012 to develop an on-line version, now on their website http://www.shcg.org.uk/ == Scheme == Materials are classified under four major category numbers: Community life Domestic and family life Personal life Working life Further classification within a category is by the use of further numbers after the decimal point. It is permissible to assign more than one classification in cases where the object had more than one use.

  Read more →
• 

  CPU modes

  CPU modes (also called processor modes, CPU states, CPU privilege levels and other names) are operating modes for the central processing unit of most computer architectures that place restrictions on the type and scope of operations that can be performed by instructions being executed by the CPU. For example, this design allows an operating system to run with more privileges than application software by running the operating systems and applications in different modes. Ideally, only highly trusted kernel code is allowed to execute in the unrestricted mode; everything else (including non-supervisory portions of the operating system) runs in a restricted mode and must use a system call (via interrupt) to request the kernel perform on its behalf any operation that could damage or compromise the system, making it impossible for untrusted programs to alter or damage other programs (or the computing system itself). Device drivers are designed to be part of the kernel due to the need for frequent I/O access. Multiple modes can be implemented, e.g. allowing a hypervisor to run multiple operating system supervisors beneath it, which is the basic design of many virtual machine systems available today. == Mode types == The unrestricted mode is often called kernel mode, but many other designations exist (master mode, supervisor mode, privileged mode, etc.). Restricted modes are usually referred to as user modes, but are also known by many other names (slave mode, problem state, etc.). Hypervisor Hypervisor mode is used to support virtualization, allowing the simultaneous operation of multiple operating systems. Kernel and user In kernel mode, the CPU may perform any operation allowed by its architecture; any instruction may be executed, any I/O operation initiated, any area of memory accessed, and so on. In the other CPU modes, certain restrictions on CPU operations are enforced by the hardware. Typically, certain instructions are not permitted (especially those—including I/O operations—that could alter the global state of the machine), some memory areas cannot be accessed, etc. User-mode capabilities of the CPU are typically a subset of those available in kernel mode, but in some cases, such as hardware emulation of non-native architectures, they may be significantly different from those available in standard kernel mode. Some CPU architectures support more modes than those, often with a hierarchy of privileges. These architectures are often said to have ring-based security, wherein the hierarchy of privileges resembles a set of concentric rings, with the kernel mode in the center. Multics hardware was the first significant implementation of ring security, but many other hardware platforms have been designed along similar lines, including the Intel 80286 protected mode, and the IA-64 as well, though it is referred to by a different name in these cases. Mode protection may extend to resources beyond the CPU hardware itself. Hardware registers track the current operating mode of the CPU, but additional virtual-memory registers, page-table entries, and other data may track mode identifiers for other resources. For example, a CPU may be operating in Ring 0 as indicated by a status word in the CPU itself, but every access to memory may additionally be validated against a separate ring number for the virtual-memory segment targeted by the access, and/or against a ring number for the physical page (if any) being targeted. This has been demonstrated with the PSP handheld system. Hardware that meets the Popek and Goldberg virtualization requirements makes writing software to efficiently support a virtual machine much simpler. Such a system can run software that "believes" it is running in supervisor mode, but is actually running in user mode. == Architectures == Several computer systems introduced in the 1960s, such as the IBM System/360, DEC PDP-6/PDP-10, the GE-600/Honeywell 6000 series, and the Burroughs B5000 series and B6500 series, support two CPU modes; a mode that grants full privileges to code running in that mode, and a mode that prevents direct access to input/output devices and some other hardware facilities to code running in that mode. The first mode is referred to by names such as supervisor state (System/360), executive mode (PDP-6/PDP-10), master mode (GE-600 series), control mode (B5000 series), and control state (B6500 series). The second mode is referred to by names such as problem state (System/360), user mode (PDP-6/PDP-10), slave mode (GE-600 series), and normal state (B6500 series); there are multiple non-control modes in the B5000 series. === RISC-V === RISC-V has three main CPU modes: User Mode (U), Supervisor Mode (S), and Machine Mode (M). Virtualization is supported via an orthogonal CSR setting instead of a fourth mode.

  Read more →
• 

  Ishikawa diagram

  Ishikawa diagrams (also called fishbone diagrams, herringbone diagrams, cause-and-effect diagrams) are causal diagrams created by Kaoru Ishikawa that show the potential causes of a specific event. Common uses of the Ishikawa diagram are product design and quality defect prevention to identify potential factors causing an overall effect. Each cause or reason for imperfection is a source of variation. Causes are usually grouped into major categories to identify and classify these sources of variation. == Overview == The defect, or the problem to be solved, is shown as the fish's head, facing to the right, with the causes extending to the left as fishbones; the ribs branch off the backbone for major causes, with sub-branches for root-causes, to as many levels as required. Ishikawa diagrams were popularized in the 1960s by Kaoru Ishikawa, who pioneered quality management processes in the Kawasaki shipyards, and in the process became one of the founding fathers of modern management. The basic concept was first used in the 1920s, and is considered one of the seven basic tools of quality control. It is known as a fishbone diagram because of its shape, similar to the side view of a fish skeleton. Mazda Motors famously used an Ishikawa diagram in the development of the Miata (MX5) sports car. == Root causes == Root-cause analysis is intended to reveal key relationships among various variables, and the possible causes provide additional insight into process behavior. It shows high-level causes that lead to the problem encountered by providing a snapshot of the current situation. There can be confusion about the relationships between problems, causes, symptoms and effects. Smith highlights this and the common question “Is that a problem or a symptom?” which mistakenly presumes that problems and symptoms are mutually exclusive categories. A problem is a situation that bears improvement; a symptom is the effect of a cause: a situation can be both a problem and a symptom. At a practical level, a cause is whatever is responsible for, or explains, an effect - a factor "whose presence makes a critical difference to the occurrence of an outcome". The causes emerge by analysis, often through brainstorming sessions, and are grouped into categories on the main branches off the fishbone. To help structure the approach, the categories are often selected from one of the common models shown below, but may emerge as something unique to the application in a specific case. Each potential cause is traced back to find the root cause, often using the 5 Whys technique. Typical categories include: === The 5 Ms (used in manufacturing) === Originating with lean manufacturing and the Toyota Production System, the 5 Ms is one of the most common frameworks for root-cause analysis: Manpower / Mindpower (physical or knowledge work, includes: kaizens, suggestions) Machine (equipment, technology) Material (includes raw material, consumables, and information) Method (process) Measurement / medium (inspection, environment) These have been expanded by some to include an additional three, and are referred to as the 8 Ms: Mission / mother nature (purpose, environment) Management / money power (leadership) Maintenance === The 8 Ps (used in product marketing) === This common model for identifying crucial attributes for planning in product marketing is often also used in root-cause analysis as categories for the Ishikawa diagram: Product (or service) Price Place Promotion People (personnel) Process Physical evidence (proof) Performance === The 4 or 5 Ss (used in service industries) === An alternative used for service industries, uses four categories of possible cause: Surroundings: Refers to the environment in which the process occurs. Suppliers: Refers to external parties that provide inputs—raw materials, components, or services. Systems: Refers to the procedures, processes, and technologies used to perform the work. Skill: Refers to the human factor, particularly the knowledge and abilities of employees. Safety: Refers to physical and psychological well-being in the workplace. == Use in specific industries == The Ishikawa diagram has been widely adopted across various industries as an effective tool for root cause analysis in quality, efficiency, and safety-related issues. Its versatility allows it to be applied in both manufacturing and service contexts. In the manufacturing industry, particularly in the automotive and electronics sectors, the diagram is frequently used in continuous improvement initiatives such as Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing. Quality teams use it to identify causes related to materials, methods, machinery, manpower, environment, and measurement, facilitating informed decision-making to reduce defects and optimize processes. In the food industry, the Ishikawa diagram is applied to analyze issues related to food safety, temperature control, cross-contamination, and regulatory compliance. Its use enables companies to identify improvement opportunities in production, packaging, and distribution stages. In the pharmaceutical sector, it is a key tool in process validation, quality control, and compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP). It helps visualize factors affecting product quality from formulation to storage. It has also been successfully implemented in sectors such as aerospace, pulp and paper, construction, education, and healthcare, where it supports structured problem-solving and promotes continuous improvement and a culture of quality.

  Read more →
• 

  Chinese room

  The Chinese room argument holds that a computer executing a program cannot have a mind, understanding, or consciousness, regardless of how intelligently or human-like the program may make the computer behave. The argument was presented in a 1980 paper by the American philosopher John Searle, entitled "Minds, Brains, and Programs" and published in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Similar arguments had been made previously by others, including Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Peter Winch, and Anatoly Dneprov. Searle's version has been widely discussed in the years since. The centerpiece of Searle's argument is a thought experiment known as the "Chinese room". The argument is directed against the philosophical positions of functionalism and computationalism, which hold that the mind may be viewed as an information-processing system operating on formal symbols, and that simulation of a given mental state is sufficient for its presence. Specifically, the argument is intended to refute a position Searle calls the strong AI hypothesis: "The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds." Although its proponents originally presented the argument in reaction to statements of artificial intelligence (AI) researchers, it is not an argument against the goals of mainstream AI research because it does not show a limit in the amount of intelligent behavior a machine can display. The argument applies only to digital computers running programs and does not apply to machines in general. While widely discussed, the argument has been subject to significant criticism and remains controversial among philosophers of mind and AI researchers. == Chinese room thought experiment == Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker. The questions at issue are these: does the machine actually understand the conversation, or is it just simulating the ability to understand the conversation? Does the machine have a mind in exactly the same sense that people do, or is it just acting as if it had a mind? Now suppose that Searle is in a room with an English version of the program, along with sufficient pencils, paper, erasers and filing cabinets. Chinese characters are slipped in under the door, and he follows the program step-by-step, which eventually instructs him to slide other Chinese characters back out under the door. If the computer had passed the Turing test this way, it follows that Searle would do so as well, simply by running the program by hand. Searle can see no essential difference between the roles of the computer and himself in the experiment. Each simply follows a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that makes them appear to understand. However, Searle would not be able to understand the conversation. Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either. Searle argues that, without "understanding" (or "intentionality"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as "thinking" and, since it does not think, it does not have a "mind" in the normal sense of the word. Therefore, he concludes that the strong AI hypothesis is false: a computer running a program that simulates a mind would not have a mind in the same sense that human beings have a mind. == History == Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz made a similar argument in 1713 against mechanism, the idea that everything that makes up a human being could, in principle, be explained in mechanical terms—in other words, that a person, including their mind, is merely a very complex machine. Leibniz used the thought experiment of expanding the brain until it was the size of a mill. He found it difficult to imagine that a "mind" capable of "perception" could be constructed using only mechanical processes. British philosopher Peter Winch made the same point in his 1958 book The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy, in which he argues that "a man who understands Chinese is not a man who has a firm grasp of the statistical probabilities for the occurrence of the various words in the Chinese language" (p. 108). Soviet cyberneticist Anatoly Dneprov made an essentially identical argument in 1961, in the form of his short story "The Game". In it, a stadium of people act as switches and memory cells implementing a program to translate a sentence from Portuguese, a language none of them know. The game was organized by a "Professor Zarubin" to answer the question "Can mathematical machines think?" Speaking through Zarubin, Dneprov writes that "the only way to prove that machines can think is to turn yourself into a machine and examine your thinking process", and he concludes, as Searle does, that "even the most perfect simulation of machine thinking is not the thinking process itself." In 1974, Lawrence H. Davis imagined duplicating the brain using telephone lines and offices staffed by people, and in 1978, Ned Block envisioned the entire population of China involved in such a brain simulation. This is known as the China brain thought experiment. Searle's version appeared in his 1980 article "Minds, Brains, and Programs", published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. It eventually became the journal's "most influential target article", generating an enormous number of commentaries and responses in the ensuing decades, and Searle had continued to defend and refine the argument in multiple papers, popular articles, and books. David Cole writes that "the Chinese Room argument has probably been the most widely discussed philosophical argument in cognitive science to appear in the past 25 years". Most of the discussion consists of attempts to refute it. "The overwhelming majority", notes Behavioral and Brain Sciences editor Stevan Harnad, "still think that the Chinese Room Argument is dead wrong". The sheer volume of the literature that has grown up around it inspired Pat Hayes to comment that the field of cognitive science ought to be redefined as "the ongoing research program of showing Searle's Chinese Room Argument to be false". Searle's argument has become "something of a classic in cognitive science", according to Harnad. Varol Akman agrees, and has described the original paper as "an exemplar of philosophical clarity and purity". == Philosophy == Although the Chinese Room argument was originally presented in reaction to the statements of artificial intelligence researchers, philosophers have come to consider it as an important part of the philosophy of mind. It is a challenge to functionalism and the computational theory of mind, and is related to such questions as the mind–body problem, the problem of other minds, the symbol grounding problem, and the hard problem of consciousness. === Strong AI === Searle identified a philosophical position he calls "strong AI": The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds. The definition depends on the distinction between simulating a mind and actually having one. Searle writes that "according to Strong AI, the correct simulation really is a mind. According to Weak AI, the correct simulation is a model of the mind." The claim is implicit in some of the statements of early AI researchers and analysts. For example, in 1957, the economist and psychologist Herbert A. Simon declared that "there are now in the world machines that think, that learn and create". Simon, together with Allen Newell and Cliff Shaw, after having completed the first program that could do formal reasoning (the Logic Theorist), claimed that they had "solved the venerable mind–body problem, explaining how a system composed of matter can have the properties of mind." John Haugeland wrote that "AI wants only the genuine article: machines with minds, in the full and literal sense. This is not science fiction, but real science, based on a theoretical conception as deep as it is daring: namely, we are, at root, computers ourselves." Searle also ascribes the following claims to advocates of strong AI: AI systems can be used to explain the mind; The study of the brain is irrelevant to the study of the mind; and The Turing test is adequate for establishing the existence of mental states. === Strong AI as computationalism or functionalism === In more recent presentations of the Chinese room argument, Searle has identified "strong AI" as "computer functionalism" (a term he attributes to Daniel Dennett). Functionalism is a position in modern philosophy of mind that holds that we can define menta

  Read more →
• 

  Computational Intelligence (journal)

  Computational Intelligence Journal is a peer-reviewed scientific journal covering research on artificial intelligence and computer science. The journal published novel research as well as innovative applications in a broad range of AI, covering Computational Intelligence is an artificial intelligence journal publishing novel research on a broad range of experimental and theoretical topics in AI and computer science. With a broad scope, the journal covers machine learning, knowledge mining, web intelligence, AI language, and philosophical implications. The journal was established in 1985 and is published by Wiley-Blackwell. Currently, the editors-in-chief is Diane Inkpen. The quality of the journal as an academic publishing venue is evaluated according to public citation impact metrics. in 2022, the Computational Intelligence Journal CiteScore of Scopus was 5.3, while Clarivate's Web of Science gives it 0.39 in the Journal Citation Indicator and 2,8 in the Journal Impact Factor.

  Read more →
• 

  Alias Eclipse

  Eclipse was a professional 2D image editing program available on Silicon Graphics and Windows workstations. Designed to manipulate high-resolution images like digitized movie frames and photographs for print, it offered color correction tools, image processing effects, rudimentary paint features, and spline-based drawing and masking. == History == Eclipse was originally developed in the late 1980s by Full Color Computing, an early provider of photo retouch and color prepress software for Silicon Graphics workstations. Alias Research (later Alias Systems Corporation), a developer of professional 3D graphics applications for the SGI platform, purchased the rights to Eclipse in fall 1990. Alias developed Eclipse through the early to mid-1990s, releasing version 2.5 in 1995 with improvements to the speed of color correction, effects, and rendering. Xyvision's Contex Prepress division purchased exclusive rights to Eclipse from Alias in 1996, and released version 3.0 the following year. Eclipse was subsequently sold to German developer Form & Vision GmbH, which continued development and ported it to the Windows platform. In 1999, Form & Vision released a demo of Eclipse 3.1.3 on the SGI platform which was limited to 1600 x 1600 pixel images, then ceased development of Eclipse on the SGI platform. Eclipse was thereafter developed exclusively for the Windows platform, culminating with version 3.1.4 in 2001. In the same year the firm went bankrupt. == Features == Eclipse was designed to work with very large images that could not be manipulated in real time on contemporary computer systems due to memory limitations, and thus allowed the user to make modifications to a lower-resolution copy of the original image in "proxy mode." Brush strokes, color corrections, and other edits were saved in proxy mode, then applied to the full-size image in post processing. This method also allowed for batch processing of a high-resolution image sequence using the edits applied to the original proxy image. Other features included color correction and separation, warping, special effects, text, and shape masking. Wavelet image compression created by LuraTech was added to Eclipse 3.1.4

  Read more →
• 

  OpenNN

  OpenNN (Open Neural Networks Library) is a software library written in the C++ programming language which implements neural networks, a main area of deep learning research. The library is open-source, licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License. == Characteristics == The software implements any number of layers of non-linear processing units for supervised learning. This deep architecture allows the design of neural networks with universal approximation properties. Additionally, it allows multiprocessing programming by means of OpenMP, in order to increase computer performance. OpenNN contains machine learning algorithms as a bundle of functions. These can be embedded in other software tools, using an application programming interface, for the integration of the predictive analytics tasks. In this regard, a graphical user interface is missing but some functions can be supported by specific visualization tools. == History == The development started in 2003 at the International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering, within the research project funded by the European Union called RAMFLOOD (Risk Assessment and Management of FLOODs). Then it continued as part of similar projects. OpenNN is being developed by the startup company Artelnics. == Applications == OpenNN is a general purpose artificial intelligence software package. It uses machine learning techniques for solving predictive analytics tasks in different fields. For instance, the library has been applied in the engineering, energy, or chemistry sectors.

  Read more →
• 

  SAS Viya

  SAS Viya is an artificial intelligence, analytics and data management platform developed by SAS Institute. == History == SAS Viya was released in 2016. The software was containerized with the release of Viya 4 in 2020. Viya has become one of SAS' most widely used platforms during the AI boom, as artificial intelligence becomes more widely used in business and computing. == Technical overview == The platform is cloud-native, and is executed on SAS's Cloud Analytics Services (CAS) engine. It is compatible with open source software, allowing users to build models using open sources tool such as R, Python and Jupyter. It integrates with major large language models like GPT-4 and Gemini Pro. The platform uses econometrics to create predictive models for forecasting scenarios based on complex data. It also has features for detecting algorithmic bias, auditing decisions and monitoring models. It is implemented through a low-code, no-code platform. The software is available on Amazon AWS Marketplace, Google Cloud, Red Hat OpenShift, and on Microsoft Azure Marketplace under a pay-as-you-use model. == Software == SAS Viya has released software as a service (SaaS) modules for creating AI content. These include Viya Workbench, Viya App Factory, Viya Copilot, and SAS Data Maker. The company also develops industry specific models, used by companies including Georgia-Pacific. == Applications == === Banking === The software is also widely used in business, especially in areas such as predictive modelling and fraud detection. === Insurance === SAS Viya is used in insurance for tasks such as actuarial analytics and modelling, as well as regulatory reporting. === Healthcare and life sciences === In 2023, the company introduced SAS Health, a common health data model built on the SAS Viya platform. AstraZeneca has partnered with SAS to use SAS Viya and SAS Life Science Analytics Framework in its delivery and approval processes. In 2024, SAS partnered with the University of Cambridge's Maxwell Center to use SAS Viya for healthcare research and development. === Public sector === SAS Viya is used in partnership with national and local governments to provide services and detect tax fraud. === Education === SAS Viya is used in research and education, particularly studies related to business intelligence, cybersecurity and data management. SAS Institute has partnered with educational institutions such as Appalachian State University, Clemson University, University of Arkansas, Stockholm University, and Marian University, to provide access to and training for using SAS Viya.

  Read more →
• 

  Mittens (chess)

  Mittens is a chess engine developed by Chess.com. It was released on January 1, 2023, alongside four other engines, all of them given cat-related names. The engine became a viral sensation in the chess community due to exposure through content made by chess streamers and a social media marketing campaign, later contributing to record levels of traffic to the Chess.com website and causing issues with database scalability. Mittens was given a rating of one point by Chess.com, although it was evidently stronger than that. Various chess masters played matches against the engine, with players such as Hikaru Nakamura and Levy Rozman drawing and losing their games respectively. A month after its release, Mittens was removed from the website on February 1, as expected through Chess.com's monthly bot cycles. In December 2023, Mittens was brought back in a group of Chess.com's most popular bots of 2023. In January 2024, Mittens was removed again. == Release == Mittens was released on January 1, 2023, as part of a New Year event on Chess.com. It was one of five engines released, all with names related to cats. The other engines released were named Scaredy Cat, rated 800; Angry Cat, rated 1000; Mr. Grumpers, rated 1200 and Catspurrov (a pun on Garry Kasparov), rated 1400. As part of the announcement, a picture of each engine was accompanied by a short description of its character. The description given for Mittens suggested that the engine was hiding something, reading: Mittens likes chess… But how good is she? Of the five engines released, Mittens was by far the most popular. In December 2023, Chess.com re-released Mittens as part of a "best of 2023" group of chess bots made to showcase their most popular bots of the year. == Design == Mittens was conceptualized by Chess.com employee Will Whalen. Appearing as a kitten, Mittens trash talked its opponents with a selection of voice lines: these lines included quotes from J. Robert Oppenheimer, Vincent van Gogh and Friedrich Nietzsche, as well as the 1967 film Le Samouraï. The engine's "personality" was devised by a writing team headed by Sean Becker, and Marija Casic provided the engine's graphics. Chess.com did not disclose any information about the software running the engine. It may be based on Chess.com's Komodo Dragon 3 engine. Mittens' strategy was to slowly grind down an opponent, a tactic likened to the playing style of Anatoly Karpov. Becker stated that the design team believed it would be "way more demoralizing and funny" for the engine to play this way. According to Hikaru Nakamura, Mittens sometimes missed the best move (or winning positions). == Rating == On Chess.com, Mittens had a rating of one point. However, the engine's playing style and tactics showed that it was stronger than that; Mittens was able to beat or draw against many top human players. In an interview with CNN Business, Whalen stated that the idea behind giving Mittens a rating of one was to surprise its opponents, giving it the upper hand psychologically. Estimates of Mittens' true rating range from an Elo of 3200 to 3500, because of its ability to beat other engines of around that level. An upper bound of the engine's rating was found after Levy Rozman made Mittens play against Stockfish 15, a 3700 rated engine. Mittens lost the two games that the engines played. The range of Mittens' possible ratings was summarized by Dot Esports, who stated: It seems like she’s around the 3200–3500 rating range (in Chess.com terms, where the best human players, like Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura, sport a 3000–3100 rating in the faster formats), as evidenced by her victories over the site’s otherwise strongest, 3200-rated bots, and her defeat to Stockfish 15, which is currently rated around 3700. == Games == Against human players, Mittens won over 99 percent of the millions of games it played. Chess players such as Hikaru Nakamura, Benjamin Bok, Levy Rozman and Eric Rosen struggled against Mittens; while Rozman and Rosen both lost against the engine, Nakamura and Bok were both able to make a draw. In particular, Nakamura's game against the engine lasted 166 moves; he was playing as White. Bok, Benjamin Finegold and Rozman later went on to win against Mittens, the latter with engine assistance from Stockfish. Magnus Carlsen publicly refused to play the engine, calling it a "transparent marketing trick" and "a soulless computer". Against other chess engines, Mittens participated in the Chess.com Computer Chess Championship as a side act. In the competition, Mittens played 150 games against an engine named after the film M3GAN and won overall with a score of 81.5 to 68.5. This equated to 54 percent of the games played. During the event, an estimate of Mittens' rating was made at 3515 points. == Impact == Mittens went viral in the chess community due to its concept and design: according to an announcement by Chess.com, a combined total of 120 million games were played against the cat engines over the course of January, with around 40 million played against Mittens. The popularity of the engine was helped by the social media exposure created by Chess.com. This included creating an official Twitter account to promote the engine. Chess streamers like Rozman and Nakamura helped cultivate this by creating content around the engine. A video by Nakamura entitled "Mittens the chess bot will make you quit chess" gained over 3.5 million views on YouTube. On January 11, Chess.com reported issues with database scalability due to record levels of traffic: 40 percent more games had been played on Chess.com in January 2023 than any other month since the website's release. According to The Wall Street Journal, the popularity spike was more than the similar surge following the release of Netflix's The Queen's Gambit. The popularity of Mittens was cited by Chess.com as a reason for this instability. The problems continued throughout January; Chess.com stated that they would have to upgrade their servers and invest more in cloud computing to solve the problems caused by the website's popularity surge. On February 1, 2023, Mittens and the other cat engines were removed from the computer section of Chess.com. They were replaced with five new engines themed around artificial intelligence. A tweet was posted on the Mittens's Twitter account after the engine's removal, reading "This is just the beginning. Goodbye for now."

  Read more →
• 

  VLLM

  vLLM is an open-source software framework for inference and serving of large language models and related multimodal models. Originally developed at the University of California, Berkeley's Sky Computing Lab, the project is centered on PagedAttention, a memory-management method for transformer key–value caches, and supports features such as continuous batching, distributed inference, quantization, and OpenAI-compatible APIs. According to a project maintainer, the "v" in vLLM originally referred to "virtual", inspired by virtual memory. == History == vLLM was introduced in 2023 by researchers affiliated with the Sky Computing Lab at UC Berkeley. Its core ideas were described in the 2023 paper Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention, which presented the system as a high-throughput and memory-efficient serving engine for large language models. In 2025, the PyTorch Foundation announced that vLLM had become a Foundation-hosted project. PyTorch's project page states that the University of California, Berkeley contributed vLLM to the Linux Foundation in July 2024. In January 2026, TechCrunch reported that the creators of vLLM had launched the startup Inferact to commercialize the project, raising $150 million in seed funding. == Architecture == According to its 2023 paper, vLLM was designed to improve the efficiency of large language model serving by reducing memory waste in the key–value cache used during transformer inference. The paper introduced PagedAttention, an algorithm inspired by virtual memory and paging techniques in operating systems, and described vLLM as using block-level memory management and request scheduling to increase throughput while maintaining similar latency. The project documentation and repository describe support for continuous batching, chunked prefill, speculative decoding, prefix caching, quantization, and multiple forms of distributed inference and serving. PyTorch has described vLLM as a high-throughput, memory-efficient inference and serving engine that supports a range of hardware back ends, including NVIDIA and AMD GPUs, Google TPUs, AWS Trainium, and Intel processors.

  Read more →
• 

  Pretext

  A pretext (adj.: pretextual) is an excuse to do something or say something that is not accurate. Pretexts may be based on a half-truth or developed in the context of a misleading fabrication. Pretexts have been used to conceal the true purpose or rationale behind actions and words. They are often heard in political speeches. In US law, a pretext usually describes false reasons that hide the true intentions or motivations for a legal action. If a party can establish a prima facie case for the proffered evidence, the opposing party must prove that these reasons were "pretextual" or false. This can be accomplished by directly demonstrating that the motivations behind the presentation of evidence is false, or indirectly by evidence that the motivations are not "credible". In Griffith v. Schnitzer, an employment discrimination case, a jury award was reversed by a Court of Appeals because the evidence was not sufficient that the defendant's reasons were "pretextual". That is, the defendant's evidence was either undisputed, or the plaintiff's was "irrelevant subjective assessments and opinions". A "pretextual" arrest by law enforcement officers is one carried out for illegal purposes such as to conduct an unjustified search and seizure. As one example of pretext, in the 1880s, the Chinese government raised money on the pretext of modernizing the Chinese navy. Instead, these funds were diverted to repair a ship-shaped, two-story pavilion which had been originally constructed for the mother of the Qianlong Emperor. This pretext and the Marble Barge are famously linked with Empress Dowager Cixi. This architectural folly, known today as the Marble Boat (Shifang), is "moored" on Lake Kunming in what the empress renamed the "Garden for Cultivating Harmony" (Yiheyuan). Another example of pretext was demonstrated in the speeches of the Roman orator Cato the Elder (234–149 BC). For Cato, every public speech became a pretext for a comment about Carthage. The Roman statesman had come to believe that the prosperity of ancient Carthage represented an eventual and inevitable danger to Rome. In the Senate, Cato famously ended every speech by proclaiming his opinion that Carthage had to be destroyed (Carthago delenda est). This oft-repeated phrase was the ultimate conclusion of all logical argument in every oration, regardless of the subject of the speech. This pattern persisted until his death in 149, which was the year in which the Third Punic War began. In other words, any subject became a pretext for reminding his fellow senators of the dangers Carthage represented. == Uses in warfare == The early years of Japan's Tokugawa shogunate were unsettled, with warring factions battling for power. The causes for the fighting were in part pretextual, but the outcome brought diminished armed conflicts after the Siege of Osaka in 1614–1615. The next two-and-a-half centuries of Japanese history were comparatively peaceful under the successors of Tokugawa Ieyasu and the bakufu government he established. === United States === During the War of 1812, US President James Madison was often accused of using impressment of American sailors by the Royal Navy as a pretext to invade Canada. The sinking of the USS Maine in 1898 was blamed on the Spanish, despite early reports of it having been an accident, contributing to U.S. entry into the Spanish–American War. The slogan "Remember the Maine! To hell with Spain!" was used as a rallying cry. Some have argued that United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt used the attack on Pearl Harbor by Japanese forces on December 7, 1941, as a pretext to enter World War II. American soldiers and supplies had been assisting British and Soviet operations for almost a year by this point, and the United States had thus "chosen a side", but due to the political climate in the States at the time and some campaign promises made by Roosevelt that he would not send American troops to fight in foreign wars, Roosevelt could not declare war for fear of public backlash. The attack on Pearl Harbor united the American people's resolve against the Axis powers and created the bellicose atmosphere in which to declare war. The 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, later revealed to have been partly provoked and partly not to have happened, was used to bring the United States fully into the Vietnam War. United States President George W. Bush used the September 11 attacks and faulty intelligence about the existence of weapons of mass destruction as a pretext for the war in Iraq. == Social engineering == A type of social engineering called pretexting uses a pretext to elicit information fraudulently from a target. The pretext in this case includes research into the identity of a certain authorized person or personality type in order to establish legitimacy in the mind of the target.

  Read more →
• 

  Semantic triple

  A semantic triple, or RDF triple or simply triple, is the atomic data entity in the Resource Description Framework (RDF) data model. As its name indicates, a triple is a sequence of three entities that codifies a statement about semantic data in the form of subject–predicate–object expressions (e.g., "Bob is 35", or "Bob knows John"). == Subject, predicate and object == This format enables knowledge to be represented in a machine-readable way. Particularly, every part of an RDF triple is individually addressable via unique URIs—for example, the statement "Bob knows John" might be represented in RDF as: http://example.name#BobSmith12 http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_knows http://example.name#JohnDoe34. Given this precise representation, semantic data can be unambiguously queried and reasoned about. The components of a triple, such as the statement "The sky has the color blue", consist of a subject ("the sky"), a predicate ("has the color"), and an object ("blue"). This is similar to the classical notation of an entity–attribute–value model within object-oriented design, where this example would be expressed as an entity (sky), an attribute (color) and a value (blue). From this basic structure, triples can be composed into more complex models, by using triples as objects or subjects of other triples—for example, Mike → said → (triples → can be → objects). Given their particular, consistent structure, a collection of triples is often stored in purpose-built databases called triplestores. == Difference from relational databases == A relational database is the classical form for information storage, working with different tables, which consist of rows. The query language SQL is able to retrieve information from such a database. In contrast, RDF triple storage works with logical predicates. No tables nor rows are needed, but the information is stored in a text file. An RDF-triple store can be converted into an SQL database and the other way around. If the knowledge is highly unstructured and dedicated tables aren't flexible enough, semantic triples are used over classic relational storage. In contrast to a traditional SQL database, an RDF triple store isn't created with a table editor. The preferred tool is a knowledge editor, for example Protégé. Protégé looks similar to an object-oriented modeling application used for software engineering, but it's focused on natural language information. The RDF triples are aggregated into a knowledge base, which allows external parsers to run requests. Possible applications include the creation of non-player characters within video games. == Limitations == One concern about triple storage is its lack of database scalability. This problem is especially pertinent if millions of triples are stored and retrieved in a database. The seek time is larger than for classical SQL-based databases. A more complex issue is a knowledge model's inability to predict future states. Even if all the domain knowledge is available as logical predicates, the model fails in answering what-if questions. For example, suppose in the RDF format a room with a robot and table is described. The robot knows what the location of the table is, is aware of the distance to the table and knows also that a table is a type of furniture. Before the robot can plan its next action, it needs temporal reasoning capabilities. Thus, the knowledge model should answer hypothetical questions in advance before an action is taken.

  Read more →