AI Email Tools

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

  • Truth discovery

    Truth discovery

    Truth discovery (also known as truth finding) is the process of choosing the actual true value for a data item when different data sources provide conflicting information on it. Several algorithms have been proposed to tackle this problem, ranging from simple methods like majority voting to more complex ones able to estimate the trustworthiness of data sources. Truth discovery problems can be divided into two sub-classes: single-truth and multi-truth. In the first case only one true value is allowed for a data item (e.g birthday of a person, capital city of a country). While in the second case multiple true values are allowed (e.g. cast of a movie, authors of a book). Typically, truth discovery is the last step of a data integration pipeline, when the schemas of different data sources have been unified and the records referring to the same data item have been detected. == General principles == The abundance of data available on the web makes more and more probable to find that different sources provide (partially or completely) different values for the same data item. This, together with the fact that we are increasing our reliance on data to derive important decisions, motivates the need of developing good truth discovery algorithms. Many currently available methods rely on a voting strategy to define the true value of a data item. Nevertheless, recent studies, have shown that, if we rely only on majority voting, we could get wrong results even in 30% of the data items. The solution to this problem is to assess the trustworthiness of the sources and give more importance to votes coming from trusted sources. Ideally, supervised learning techniques could be exploited to assign a reliability score to sources after hand-crafted labeling of the provided values; unfortunately, this is not feasible since the number of needed labeled examples should be proportional to the number of sources, and in many applications the number of sources can be prohibitive. == Single-truth vs multi-truth discovery == Single-truth and multi-truth discovery are two very different problems. Single-truth discovery is characterized by the following properties: only one true value is allowed for each data item; different values provided for a given data item oppose to each other; values and sources can either be correct or erroneous. While in the multi-truth case the following properties hold: the truth is composed by a set of values; different values could provide a partial truth; claiming one value for a given data item does not imply opposing to all the other values; the number of true values for each data item is not known a priori. Multi-truth discovery has unique features that make the problem more complex and should be taken into consideration when developing truth-discovery solutions. The examples below point out the main differences of the two methods. Knowing that in both examples the truth is provided by source 1, in the single truth case (first table) we can say that sources 2 and 3 oppose to the truth and as a result provide wrong values. On the other hand, in the second case (second table), sources 2 and 3 are neither correct nor erroneous, they instead provide a subset of the true values and at the same time they do not oppose the truth. == Source trustworthiness == The vast majority of truth discovery methods are based on a voting approach: each source votes for a value of a certain data item and, at the end, the value with the highest vote is select as the true one. In the more sophisticated methods, votes do not have the same weight for all the data sources, more importance is indeed given to votes coming from trusted sources. Source trustworthiness usually is not known a priori but estimated with an iterative approach. At each step of the truth discovery algorithm the trustworthiness score of each data source is refined, improving the assessment of the true values that in turn leads to a better estimation of the trustworthiness of the sources. This process usually ends when all the values reach a convergence state. Source trustworthiness can be based on different metrics, such as accuracy of provided values, copying values from other sources and domain coverage. Detecting copying behaviors is very important, in fact, copy allows to spread false values easily making truth discovery very hard, since many sources would vote for the wrong values. Usually systems decrease the weight of votes associated to copied values or even don’t count them at all. == Single-truth methods == Most of the currently available truth discovery methods have been designed to work well only in the single-truth case. Below are reported some of the characteristics of the most relevant typologies of single-truth methods and how different systems model source trustworthiness. === Majority voting === Majority voting is the simplest method, the most popular value is selected as the true one. Majority voting is commonly used as a baseline when assessing the performances of more complex methods. === Web-link based === These methods estimate source trustworthiness exploiting a similar technique to the one used to measure authority of web pages based on web links. The vote assigned to a value is computed as the sum of the trustworthiness of the sources that provide that particular value, while the trustworthiness of a source is computed as the sum of the votes assigned to the values that the source provides. === Information-retrieval based === These methods estimate source trustworthiness using similarity measures typically used in information retrieval. Source trustworthiness is computed as the cosine similarity (or other similarity measures) between the set of values provided by the source and the set of values considered true (either selected in a probabilistic way or obtained from a ground truth). === Bayesian based === These methods use Bayesian inference to define the probability of a value being true conditioned on the values provided by all the sources. P ( v ∣ ψ ( o ) ) = P ( ψ ( o ) ∣ v ) ⋅ P ( v ) P ( ψ ( o ) ) {\displaystyle P(v\mid \psi (o))={\frac {P(\psi (o)\mid v)\cdot P(v)}{P(\psi (o))}}} where v {\displaystyle \textstyle v} is a value provided for a data item o {\displaystyle \textstyle o} and ψ ( o ) {\displaystyle \textstyle \psi (o)} is the set of the observed values provided by all the sources for that specific data item. The trustworthiness of a source is then computed based on the accuracy of the values that provides. Other more complex methods exploit Bayesian inference to detect copying behaviors and use these insights to better assess source trustworthiness. == Multi-truth methods == Due to its complexity, less attention has been devoted to the study of the multi-truth discovery Below are reported two typologies of multi-truth methods and their characteristics. === Bayesian based === These methods use Bayesian inference to define the probability of a group of values being true conditioned on the values provided by all the data sources. In this case, since there could be multiple true values for each data item, and sources can provide multiple values for a single data item, it is not possible to consider values individually. An alternative is to consider mappings and relations between set of provided values and sources providing them. The trustworthiness of a source is then computed based on the accuracy of the values that provides. More sophisticated methods also consider domain coverage and copying behaviors to better estimate source trustworthiness. === Probabilistic Graphical Models based === These methods use probabilistic graphical models to automatically define the set of true values of given data item and also to assess source quality without need of any supervision. == Applications == Many real-world applications can benefit from the use of truth discovery algorithms. Typical domains of application include: healthcare, crowd/social sensing, crowdsourcing aggregation, information extraction and knowledge base construction. Truth discovery algorithms could be also used to revolutionize the way in which web pages are ranked in search engines, going from current methods based on link analysis like PageRank, to procedures that rank web pages based on the accuracy of the information they provide.

    Read more →
  • Extremely online

    Extremely online

    An extremely online (often capitalized), terminally online, or chronically online person is someone who is closely engaged with Internet culture. People said to be extremely online often believe that online posts are very important. Events and phenomena can themselves be extremely online; while often used as a descriptive term, the phenomenon of extreme online usage has been described as "both a reformation of the delivery of ideas – shared through words and videos and memes and GIFs and copypasta – and the ideas themselves". Here, "online" is used to describe "a way of doing things, not [simply] the place they are done". == Criteria == While the term was in use as early as 2014, it gained popularity over the latter half of the 2010s in conjunction with the increasing prevalence and notability of Internet phenomena in all areas of life. Extremely online people, according to The Daily Dot, are interested in topics "no normal, healthy person could possibly care about", and have been analogized to "pop culture fandoms, just without the pop". Extremely online phenomena such as fan culture and reaction GIFs have been described as "swallowing democracy" by journalists such as Amanda Hess in The New York Times, who claimed that a "great convergence between politics and culture, values and aesthetics, citizenship and commercialism" had become "a dominant mode of experiencing politics". Vulture – formerly the pop culture section of New York magazine, now a stand-alone website – has a section for articles tagged "extremely online". == Historical background == In the 2010s, many categories and labels came into wide use from media outlets to describe Internet-mediated cultural trends, such as the alt-right, the dirtbag left, and doomerism. These ideological categories are often defined by their close association with online discourse. For example, the term "alt-right" was added to the Associated Press' stylebook in 2016 to describe the "digital presence" of far-right ideologies, the dirtbag left refers to a group of "underemployed and overly online millennials" who "have no time for the pieties of traditional political discourse", and the doomer's "blackpilled despair" is combined with spending "too much time on message boards in high school" to produce an eclectic "anti-socialism". Extreme onlineness transcends ideological boundaries. For example, right-wing figures like Alex Jones and Laura Loomer have been described as "extremely online", but so have those on the left like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fans of the Chapo Trap House podcast. Extremely online phenomena can range from acts of offline violence (such as the 2019 Christchurch shootings) to "[going] on NPR to explain the anti-capitalist irony inherent in kids eating Tide Pods". United States President Donald Trump's posts on social media have been frequently cited as extremely online, during both his presidency and his 2020 presidential campaign; Vox claimed his approach to re-election veered into being "Too Online", and Reason questioned whether the final presidential debate was "incomprehensible to normies". While individual people are often given the description, being extremely online has also been posited as an overall cultural phenomenon, applying to trends like lifestyle movements suffixed with "-wave" and "-core" based heavily on Internet media, as well as an increasing expectation for digital social researchers to have an "online presence" to advance in their careers. == Participants and media coverage == One example of a phenomenon considered to be extremely online is the "wife guy" (a guy who posts about his wife); despite being a "stupid online thing" which spent several years as a piece of Internet slang, in 2019 it became the subject of five articles in leading U.S. media outlets. Like many extremely online phrases and phenomena, the "wife guy" has been attributed in part to the in-character Twitter account dril. The account frequently parodies how people behave on the Internet, and has been widely cited as influential on online culture. In one tweet, his character refuses to stop using the Internet, even when someone shouts outside his house that he should log off. Many of dril's other coinages have become ubiquitous parts of Internet slang. Throughout the 2010s, posters such as dril inspired commonly used terms like "corncobbing" (referring to someone losing an argument and failing to admit it); while originally a piece of obscure Internet slang used on sites like Twitter, use of the term (and controversy over its misinterpretation) became a subject of reporting from traditional publications, with some noting that keeping up with the rapid turnover of inside jokes, memes, and quotes online required daily attention to avoid embarrassment. Twitch has been described as "talk radio for the extremely online". Another example of an event cited as extremely online is No Nut November. Increasingly, researchers are expected to have more of an online presence, to advance in their careers, as networking and portfolios continue to transition to the digital world. In November 2020, an article in The Washington Post criticized the filter bubble theory of online discourse on the basis that it "overgeneralized" based on a "small subset of extremely online people". The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol was described as extremely online, with "pro-Trump internet personalities", such as Baked Alaska, and fans livestreaming and taking selfies. People who have been described as extremely online include Chrissy Teigen, Jon Ossoff, and Andrew Yang. In contrast, Joe Biden has been cited as the antithesis of extremely online—The New York Times wrote in 2019 that he had "zero meme energy".

    Read more →
  • FreePBX Distro

    FreePBX Distro

    The FreePBX Distro was a freeware unified communications software system that consisted of FreePBX, a graphical user interface (GUI) for configuring, controlling and managing Asterisk PBX software. The FreePBX Distro included packages that offer VoIP, PBX, Fax, IVR, voice-mail and email functions. The FreePBX Distro Linux distribution was based on CentOS, which maintains binary compatibility with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. FreePBX has contributed to the popularity of Asterisk. As a result of CentOS Linux being discontinued and the last version of CentOS 7 going out of support on June 30, 2024, FreePBX 17 has moved over to and is supported on Debian Linux. FreePBX will no longer be providing a pre-configured FreePBX Distro, but will provide a script to install FreePBX on a fresh install of Debian Linux. In-place migration will not be possible, but will be possible by restoring a backup on the new version from the previous version. As FreePBX 16 will be supported until the release of FreePBX 18, FreePBX on this distribution will still work and be supported, however, there will be no further support for the underlying operating system. == Installation == The Official FreePBX Distro is installed from a ISO image available by web download, that includes the system CentOS, Asterisk, FreePBX GUI and assorted dependencies. This can then either be burned to DVD or written to a USB stick for installation == Support for telephony hardware == The FreePBX Distro has built-in support for cards from multiple vendors, including Digium, OpenVox, Alto, Rhino Equipment, Xorcom and Sangoma. The FreePBX Distro supports a large number of phone models via open-source modules. Supported VoIP phone manufacturers include Algo, AND, AudioCodes, Cisco, Cyberdata, Digium, Grandstream, Mitel/Aastra, Nortel/Avaya, Panasonic, Polycom, Sangoma, Snom, Xorcom and Yealink. == Development == FreePBX made its debut in 2004 as the AMP project (Asterisk Management Portal). The FreePBX Distro was released in 2011 as an turnkey solution for building a PBX using Asterisk, CentOS and FreePBX. FreePBX has over 1 million active production PBXs and over 20,000 new systems added each month. The core telephony engine is Asterisk, as configured by the Open Source FreePBX GUI. The last stable release is FreePBX Distro Stable SNG7-PBX16-64bit-2302-1 based on these main components: FreePBX 16 CentOS 7.8 Asterisk 16, 18, 19 (20 supported by upgrade once installed)

    Read more →
  • Front-end web development

    Front-end web development

    Front-end web development is the development of the graphical user interface of a website through the use of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript so users can view and interact with that website. == Tools used for front-end development == There are several tools and platforms, such as WordPress, Joomla, and Drupal, available that can be used to develop the front end of a website. === HyperText Markup Language === HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is the modern standard for displaying and structuring web content across the internet. HTML defines what elements will be displayed on a website, and how they will be arranged. All major web browsers are designed to interpret HTML, and most modern websites serve HTML to the user. Hypertext is text displayed on a computer with references to other text, these references (or links,) are termed "hyperlinks." When an internet user interacts with a hyperlinked item, the website serves the user the linked data. This data can be another HTML web-page, JavaScript, or anything else. The latest major release of HTML is HTML5, originally published on October 28, 2014 as a W3C recommendation. A web page may be developed to include many markup tags. For each pair of markup tag normally starts with a Start tag and ends with a matching end tag. The text in between the Start tag and the End tag is called an HTML Element. [1] === Cascading Style Sheets === Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) control the presentation and style of a website. CSS uses a cascading system to resolve style conflicts by applying style rules based on specificity, inheritance, and importance. Media queries allow for adjustments to the site's layout and appearance depending on factors such as screen size and resolution. CSS can be applied in three ways: external stylesheets linked in an HTML file, internal