AI Face Blur

AI Face Blur — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  DreamLab

  DreamLab was a volunteer computing Android and iOS app launched in 2015 by Imperial College London and the Vodafone Foundation. It was discontinued on 2nd April 2025. == Description == The app helped to research cancer, COVID-19, new drugs and tropical cyclones. To do this, DreamLab accessed part of the device's processing power, with the user's consent, while the owner charged their smartphone, to speed up the calculations of the algorithms from Imperial College London. The aim of the tropical cyclone project was to prepare for climate change risks. Other projects aimed to find existing drugs and food molecules that could help people with COVID-19 and other diseases. The performance of 100,000 smartphones would reach the annual output of all research computers at Imperial College in just three months, with a nightly runtime of six hours. The app was developed in 2015 by the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney and the Vodafone Foundation. In May 2020, the project had over 490,000 registered users.

  Read more →
• 

  ArchiMate

  ArchiMate ( AR-ki-mayt) is an open and independent enterprise architecture modeling language to support the description, analysis and visualization of architecture within and across business domains in an unambiguous way. ArchiMate is a technical standard from The Open Group and is based on concepts from the now superseded IEEE 1471 standard. It is supported by various tool vendors and consulting firms. ArchiMate is also a registered trademark of The Open Group. The Open Group has a certification program for ArchiMate users, software tools and courses. ArchiMate distinguishes itself from other languages such as Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN) by its enterprise modelling scope. Also, UML and BPMN are meant for a specific use and they are quite heavy – containing about 150 (UML) and 250 (BPMN) modeling concepts whereas ArchiMate works with just about 50 (in version 2.0). The goal of ArchiMate is to be ”as small as possible”, not to cover every edge scenario imaginable. To be easy to learn and apply, ArchiMate was intentionally restricted “to the concepts that suffice for modeling the proverbial 80% of practical cases". == Overview == ArchiMate offers a common language for describing the construction and operation of business processes, organizational structures, information flows, IT systems, and technical infrastructure. This insight helps the different stakeholders to design, assess, and communicate the consequences of decisions and changes within and between these business domains. The main concepts and relationships of the ArchiMate language can be seen as a framework, the so-called Archimate Framework: It divides the enterprise architecture into a business, application and technology layer. In each layer, three aspects are considered: active elements, an internal structure and elements that define use or communicate information. One of the objectives of the ArchiMate language is to define the relationships between concepts in different architecture domains. The concepts of this language therefore hold the middle between the detailed concepts, which are used for modeling individual domains (for example, the Unified Modeling Language (UML) for modeling software products), and Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), which is used for business process modeling. == History == ArchiMate is partly based on the now superseded IEEE 1471 standard. It was developed in the Netherlands by a project team from the Telematica Instituut in cooperation with several Dutch partners from government, industry and academia. Among the partners were Ordina NV, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, the Leiden Institute for Advanced Computer Science (LIACS) and the Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI). Later, tests were performed in organizations such as ABN AMRO, the Dutch Tax and Customs Administration and the ABP. The development process lasted from July 2002 to December 2004, and took about 35 person years and approximately 4 million euros. The development was funded by the Dutch government (Dutch Tax and Customs Administration), and business partners, including ABN AMRO and the ABP Pension Fund. In 2008 the ownership and stewardship of ArchiMate was transferred to The Open Group. It is now managed by the ArchiMate Forum within The Open Group. In February 2009 The Open Group published the ArchiMate 1.0 standard as a formal technical standard. In January 2012 the ArchiMate 2.0 standard, and in 2013 the ArchiMate 2.1 standard was released. In June 2016, the Open Group released version 3.0 of the ArchiMate Specification. An update to Archimate 3.0.1 came out in August 2017. Archimate 3.1 was published 5 November 2019. The latest version of the ArchiMate Specification is version 3.2 released October 2022. Version 3.0 adds enhanced support for capability-oriented strategic modelling, new entities representing physical resources (for modelling the ingredients, equipment and transport resources used in the physical world) and a generic metamodel showing the entity types and the relationships between them. == ArchiMate framework == === Core framework === The main concepts and elements of the ArchiMate language are being presented as ArchiMate core framework. It consists of three layers and three aspects. This creates a matrix of combinations. Every layer has its passive structure, behavior and active structure aspects. ==== Layers ==== ArchiMate has a layered and service-oriented look on architectural models. The higher layers make use of services that are provided by the lower layers. Although, at an abstract level, the concepts that are used within each layer are similar, we define more concrete concepts that are specific for a certain layer. In this context, we distinguish three main layers: The business layer is about business processes, services, functions and events of business units. This layer "offers products and services to external customers, which are realized in the organization by business processes performed by business actors and roles". The application layer is about software applications that "support the components in the business with application services". The technology layer deals "with the hardware and communication infrastructure to support the application layer. This layer offers infrastructural services needed to run applications, realized by computer and communication hardware and system software". Each of these main layers can be further divided in sub-layers. For example, in the business layer, the primary business processes realising the products of a company may make use of a layer of secondary (supporting) business processes; in the application layer, the end-user applications may make use of generic services offered by supporting applications. On top of the business layer, a separate environment layer may be added, modelling the external customers that make use of the services of the organisation (although these may also be considered part of the business layer). In line with service orientation, the most important relation between layers is formed by use relations, which show how the higher layers make use of the services of lower layers. However, a second type of link is formed by realisation relations: elements in lower layers may realise comparable elements in higher layers; e.g., a ‘data object’ (application layer) may realise a ‘business object’ (business layer); or an ‘artifact’ (technology layer) may realise either a ‘data object’ or an ‘application component’ (application layer). ==== Aspects ==== Passive structure is the set of entities on which actions are conducted. In the business layer the example would be information objects, in the application layer data objects and in the technology layer, they could include physical objects. Behavior refers to the processes and functions performed by the actors. "Structural elements are assigned to behavioral elements, to show who or what displays the behavior". Active structure is the set of entities that display some behavior, e.g. business actors, devices, or application components. === Full framework === The Full ArchiMate framework is enriched by the physical layer, which was added to allow modeling of “physical equipment, materials, and distribution networks” and was not present in the previous version. The implementation and migration layer adds elements that allow architects to model a state of transition, to mark parts of the architecture that are temporary for the purpose, as the name says, of implementation and migration. Strategy layer adds three elements: resource, capability and course of action. These elements help to incorporate strategic dimension to the ArchiMate language by allowing it to depict the usage of resources and capabilities in order to achieve some strategic goals. Finally, there is a motivation aspect that allows different stakeholders to describe the motivation of specific actors or domains, which can be quite important when looking at one thing from several different angles. It adds several elements like stakeholder, value, driver, goal, meaning etc. == ArchiMate language == The ArchiMate language is formed as a top-level and is hierarchical. On the top, there is a model. A model is a collection of concepts. A concept can be either an element or a relationship. An element can be either of behavior type, structure, motivation or a so-called composite element (which means that it does not fit just one aspect of the framework, but two or more). The functionality of all concepts without a dependency on a specific layer is described by the generic metamodel. This layer-independent description of concepts is useful when trying to understand the mechanics of the Archimate language. === Concepts === ==== Elements ==== The generic elements are distributed into the same categories as the layers: Active structure elements Behavior elements Passive structure elements Motivation elements Active structure e

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic Puzzles

  Algorithmic Puzzles is a book of puzzles based on computational thinking. It was written by computer scientists Anany and Maria Levitin, and published in 2011 by Oxford University Press. == Topics == The book begins with a "tutorial" introducing classical algorithm design techniques including backtracking, divide-and-conquer algorithms, and dynamic programming, methods for the analysis of algorithms, and their application in example puzzles. The puzzles themselves are grouped into three sets of 50 puzzles, in increasing order of difficulty. A final two chapters provide brief hints and more detailed solutions to the puzzles, with the solutions forming the majority of pages of the book. Some of the puzzles are well known classics, some are variations of known puzzles making them more algorithmic, and some are new. They include: Puzzles involving chessboards, including the eight queens puzzle, knight's tours, and the mutilated chessboard problem Balance puzzles River crossing puzzles The Tower of Hanoi Finding the missing element in a data stream The geometric median problem for Manhattan distance == Audience and reception == The puzzles in the book cover a wide range of difficulty, and in general do not require more than a high school level of mathematical background. William Gasarch notes that grouping the puzzles only by their difficulty and not by their themes is actually an advantage, as it provides readers with fewer clues about their solutions. Reviewer Narayanan Narayanan recommends the book to any puzzle aficionado, or to anyone who wants to develop their powers of algorithmic thinking. Reviewer Martin Griffiths suggests another group of readers, schoolteachers and university instructors in search of examples to illustrate the power of algorithmic thinking. Gasarch recommends the book to any computer scientist, evaluating it as "a delight".

  Read more →
• 

  Randomized rounding

  In computer science and operations research, randomized rounding is a widely used approach for designing and analyzing approximation algorithms. Many combinatorial optimization problems are computationally intractable to solve exactly (to optimality). For such problems, randomized rounding can be used to design fast (polynomial time) approximation algorithms—that is, algorithms that are guaranteed to return an approximately optimal solution given any input. The basic idea of randomized rounding is to convert an optimal solution of a relaxation of the problem into an approximately-optimal solution to the original problem. The resulting algorithm is usually analyzed using the probabilistic method. == Overview == The basic approach has three steps: Formulate the problem to be solved as an integer linear program (ILP). Compute an optimal fractional solution x {\displaystyle x} to the linear programming relaxation (LP) of the ILP. Round the fractional solution x {\displaystyle x} of the LP to an integer solution x ′ {\displaystyle x'} of the ILP. (Although the approach is most commonly applied with linear programs, other kinds of relaxations are sometimes used. For example, see Goemans' and Williamson's semidefinite programming-based Max-Cut approximation algorithm.) In the first step, the challenge is to choose a suitable integer linear program. Familiarity with linear programming, in particular modelling using linear programs and integer linear programs, is required. For many problems, there is a natural integer linear program that works well, such as in the Set Cover example below. (The integer linear program should have a small integrality gap; indeed randomized rounding is often used to prove bounds on integrality gaps.) In the second step, the optimal fractional solution can typically be computed in polynomial time using any standard linear programming algorithm. In the third step, the fractional solution must be converted into an integer solution (and thus a solution to the original problem). This is called rounding the fractional solution. The resulting integer solution should (provably) have cost not much larger than the cost of the fractional solution. This will ensure that the cost of the integer solution is not much larger than the cost of the optimal integer solution. The main technique used to do the third step (rounding) is to use randomization, and then to use probabilistic arguments to bound the increase in cost due to the rounding (following the probabilistic method from combinatorics). Therein, probabilistic arguments are used to show the existence of discrete structures with desired properties. In this context, one uses such arguments to show the following: Given any fractional solution x {\displaystyle x} of the LP, with positive probability the randomized rounding process produces an integer solution x ′ {\displaystyle x'} that approximates x {\displaystyle x} according to some desired criterion. Finally, to make the third step computationally efficient, one either shows that x ′ {\displaystyle x'} approximates x {\displaystyle x} with high probability (so that the step can remain randomized) or one derandomizes the rounding step, typically using the method of conditional probabilities. The latter method converts the randomized rounding process into an efficient deterministic process that is guaranteed to reach a good outcome. == Example: the set cover problem == The following example illustrates how randomized rounding can be used to design an approximation algorithm for the set cover problem. Fix any instance ⟨ c , S ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle c,{\mathcal {S}}\rangle } of set cover over a universe U {\displaystyle {\mathcal {U}}} . === Computing the fractional solution === For step 1, let IP be the standard integer linear program for set cover for this instance. For step 2, let LP be the linear programming relaxation of IP, and compute an optimal solution x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} to LP using any standard linear programming algorithm. This takes time polynomial in the input size. The feasible solutions to LP are the vectors x {\displaystyle x} that assign each set s ∈ S {\displaystyle s\in {\mathcal {S}}} a non-negative weight x s {\displaystyle x_{s}} , such that, for each element e ∈ U {\displaystyle e\in {\mathcal {U}}} , x ′ {\displaystyle x'} covers e {\displaystyle e} —the total weight assigned to the sets containing e {\displaystyle e} is at least 1, that is, ∑ s ∋ e x s ≥ 1. {\displaystyle \sum _{s\ni e}x_{s}\geq 1.} The optimal solution x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} is a feasible solution whose cost ∑ s ∈ S c ( S ) x s ∗ {\displaystyle \sum _{s\in {\mathcal {S}}}c(S)x_{s}^{}} is as small as possible. Note that any set cover C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} for S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} gives a feasible solution x {\displaystyle x} (where x s = 1 {\displaystyle x_{s}=1} for s ∈ C {\displaystyle s\in {\mathcal {C}}} , x s = 0 {\displaystyle x_{s}=0} otherwise). The cost of this C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} equals the cost of x {\displaystyle x} , that is, ∑ s ∈ C c ( s ) = ∑ s ∈ S c ( s ) x s . {\displaystyle \sum _{s\in {\mathcal {C}}}c(s)=\sum _{s\in {\mathcal {S}}}c(s)x_{s}.} In other words, the linear program LP is a relaxation of the given set-cover problem. Since x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} has minimum cost among feasible solutions to the LP, the cost of x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} is a lower bound on the cost of the optimal set cover. === Randomized rounding step === In step 3, we must convert the minimum-cost fractional set cover x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} into a feasible integer solution x ′ {\displaystyle x'} (corresponding to a true set cover). The rounding step should produce an x ′ {\displaystyle x'} that, with positive probability, has cost within a small factor of the cost of x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} .Then (since the cost of x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} is a lower bound on the cost of the optimal set cover), the cost of x ′ {\displaystyle x'} will be within a small factor of the optimal cost. As a starting point, consider the most natural rounding scheme: For each set s ∈ S {\displaystyle s\in {\mathcal {S}}} in turn, take x s ′ = 1 {\displaystyle x'_{s}=1} with probability min ( 1 , x s ∗ ) {\displaystyle \min(1,x_{s}^{})} , otherwise take x s ′ = 0 {\displaystyle x'_{s}=0} . With this rounding scheme, the expected cost of the chosen sets is at most ∑ s c ( s ) x s ∗ {\displaystyle \sum _{s}c(s)x_{s}^{}} , the cost of the fractional cover. This is good. Unfortunately the coverage is not good. When the variables x s ∗ {\displaystyle x_{s}^{}} are small, the probability that an element e {\displaystyle e} is not covered is about ∏ s ∋ e 1 − x s ∗ ≈ ∏ s ∋ e exp ⁡ ( − x s ∗ ) = exp ⁡ ( − ∑ s ∋ e x s ∗ ) ≈ exp ⁡ ( − 1 ) . {\displaystyle \prod _{s\ni e}1-x_{s}^{}\approx \prod _{s\ni e}\exp(-x_{s}^{})=\exp {\Big (}-\sum _{s\ni e}x_{s}^{}{\Big )}\approx \exp(-1).} So only a constant fraction of the elements will be covered in expectation. To make x ′ {\displaystyle x'} cover every element with high probability, the standard rounding scheme first scales up the rounding probabilities by an appropriate factor λ > 1 {\displaystyle \lambda >1} . Here is the standard rounding scheme: Fix a parameter λ ≥ 1 {\displaystyle \lambda \geq 1} . For each set s ∈ S {\displaystyle s\in {\mathcal {S}}} in turn, take x s ′ = 1 {\displaystyle x'_{s}=1} with probability min ( λ x s ∗ , 1 ) {\displaystyle \min(\lambda x_{s}^{},1)} , otherwise take x s ′ = 0 {\displaystyle x'_{s}=0} . Scaling the probabilities up by λ {\displaystyle \lambda } increases the expected cost by λ {\displaystyle \lambda } , but makes coverage of all elements likely. The idea is to choose λ {\displaystyle \lambda } as small as possible so that all elements are provably covered with non-zero probability. Here is a detailed analysis. ==== Lemma (approximation guarantee for rounding scheme) ==== Fix λ = ln ⁡ ( 2 | U | ) {\displaystyle \lambda =\ln(2|{\mathcal {U}}|)} . With positive probability, the rounding scheme returns a set cover x ′ {\displaystyle x'} of cost at most 2 ln ⁡ ( 2 | U | ) c ⋅ x ∗ {\displaystyle 2\ln(2|{\mathcal {U}}|)c\cdot x^{}} (and thus of cost O ( log ⁡ | U | ) {\displaystyle O(\log |{\mathcal {U}}|)} times the cost of the optimal set cover). (Note: with care the O ( log ⁡ | U | ) {\displaystyle O(\log |{\mathcal {U}}|)} can be reduced to ln ⁡ ( | U | ) + O ( log ⁡ log ⁡ | U | ) {\displaystyle \ln(|{\mathcal {U}}|)+O(\log \log |{\mathcal {U}}|)} .) ==== Proof ==== The output x ′ {\displaystyle x'} of the random rounding scheme has the desired properties as long as none of the following "bad" events occur: the cost c ⋅ x ′ {\displaystyle c\cdot x'} of x ′ {\displaystyle x'} exceeds 2 λ c ⋅ x ∗ {\displaystyle 2\lambda c\cdot x^{}} , or for some element e {\displaystyle e} , x ′ {\displaystyle x'} fails to cover e {\displaystyle e} . The expectation of each x s ′ {\displaystyle x'_{s}} is at most λ x s ∗ {\displaystyle \lambda x_{s

  Read more →
• 

  Big data

  Big data primarily refers to data sets that are too large or complex to be dealt with by traditional data-processing software. Data with many entries (rows) offers greater statistical power, while data with higher complexity (more attributes or columns) may lead to a higher false discovery rate. Big data analysis challenges include capturing data, data storage, data analysis, search, sharing, transfer, visualization, querying, updating, information privacy, and data sources. Big data was originally associated with three key concepts: volume, variety, and velocity. The analysis of big data that have only volume, velocity, and variety can pose challenges in sampling. A fourth concept, veracity, which refers to the level of reliability of data, was thus added. Without sufficient investment in expertise to ensure big data veracity, the volume and variety of data can produce costs and risks that exceed an organization's capacity to create and capture value from big data. Current usage of the term big data tends to refer to the use of predictive analytics, user behavior analytics, or certain other advanced data analytics methods that extract value from big data, and seldom to a particular size of data set. "There is little doubt that the quantities of data now available are indeed large, but that's not the most relevant characteristic of this new data ecosystem." Analysis of data sets can find new correlations to "spot business trends, prevent diseases, combat crime and so on". Scientists, business executives, medical practitioners, advertising and governments alike regularly meet difficulties with large datasets in areas including Internet searches, fintech, healthcare analytics, geographic information systems, urban informatics, and business informatics. Scientists encounter limitations in e-Science work, including meteorology, genomics, connectomics, complex physics simulations, biology, and environmental research. The size and number of available data sets have grown rapidly as data is collected by devices such as mobile devices, cheap and numerous information-sensing Internet of things devices, aerial (remote sensing) equipment, software logs, cameras, microphones, radio-frequency identification (RFID) readers and wireless sensor networks. The world's technological per-capita capacity to store information has roughly doubled every 40 months since the 1980s; as of 2012, every day 2.5 exabytes (2.17×260 bytes) of data are generated. Based on an IDC report prediction, the global data volume was predicted to grow exponentially from 4.4 zettabytes to 44 zettabytes between 2013 and 2020. By 2025, IDC predicts there will be 163 zettabytes of data. According to IDC, global spending on big data and business analytics (BDA) solutions is estimated to reach $215.7 billion in 2021. Statista reported that the global big data market is forecasted to grow to $103 billion by 2027. In 2011 McKinsey & Company reported, if US healthcare were to use big data creatively and effectively to drive efficiency and quality, the sector could create more than $300 billion in value every year. In the developed economies of Europe, government administrators could save more than €100 billion ($149 billion) in operational efficiency improvements alone by using big data. And users of services enabled by personal-location data could capture $600 billion in consumer surplus. One question for large enterprises is determining who should own big-data initiatives that affect the entire organization. Relational database management systems and desktop statistical software packages used to visualize data often have difficulty processing and analyzing big data. The processing and analysis of big data may require "massively parallel software running on tens, hundreds, or even thousands of servers". What qualifies as "big data" varies depending on the capabilities of those analyzing it and their tools. Furthermore, expanding capabilities make big data a moving target. "For some organizations, facing hundreds of gigabytes of data for the first time may trigger a need to reconsider data management options. For others, it may take tens or hundreds of terabytes before data size becomes a significant consideration." == Definition == The term big data has been in use since the 1990s, with some giving credit to John Mashey for popularizing the term. Big data usually includes data sets with sizes beyond the ability of commonly used software tools to capture, curate, manage, and process data within a tolerable elapsed time. Big data philosophy encompasses unstructured, semi-structured and structured data; however, the main focus is on unstructured data. Big data "size" is a constantly moving target; as of 2012 ranging from a few dozen terabytes to many zettabytes of data. Big data requires a set of techniques and technologies with new forms of integration to reveal insights from datasets that are diverse, complex, and of a massive scale. Variability is often included as an additional quality of big data. A 2018 definition states "Big data is where parallel computing tools are needed to handle data", and notes, "This represents a distinct and clearly defined change in the computer science used, via parallel programming theories, and losses of some of the guarantees and capabilities made by Codd's relational model." In a comparative study of big datasets, Kitchin and McArdle found that none of the commonly considered characteristics of big data appear consistently across all of the analyzed cases. For this reason, other studies identified the redefinition of power dynamics in knowledge discovery as the defining trait. Instead of focusing on the intrinsic characteristics of big data, this alternative perspective pushes forward a relational understanding of the object claiming that what matters is the way in which data is collected, stored, made available and analyzed. === Big data vs. business intelligence === The growing maturity of the concept more starkly delineates the difference between "big data" and "business intelligence": Business intelligence uses applied mathematics tools and descriptive statistics with data with high information density to measure things, detect trends, etc. Big data uses mathematical analysis, optimization, inductive statistics, and concepts from nonlinear system identification to infer laws (regressions, nonlinear relationships, and causal effects) from large sets of data with low information density to reveal relationships and dependencies, or to perform predictions of outcomes and behaviors. == Characteristics == Big data can be described by the following characteristics: Volume The quantity of generated and stored data. The size of the data determines the value and potential insight, and whether it can be considered big data or not. The size of big data is usually larger than terabytes and petabytes. Variety The type and nature of the data. Earlier technologies like RDBMSs were capable to handle structured data efficiently and effectively. However, the change in type and nature from structured to semi-structured or unstructured challenged the existing tools and technologies. Big data technologies evolved with the prime intention to capture, store, and process the semi-structured and unstructured (variety) data generated with high speed (velocity), and huge in size (volume). Later, these tools and technologies were explored and used for handling structured data also but preferable for storage. Eventually, the processing of structured data was still kept as optional, either using big data or traditional RDBMSs. This helps in analyzing data towards effective usage of the hidden insights exposed from the data collected via social media, log files, sensors, etc. Big data draws from text, images, audio, video; plus it completes missing pieces through data fusion. Velocity The speed at which the data is generated and processed to meet the demands and challenges that lie in the path of growth and development. Big data is often available in real-time. Compared to small data, big data is produced more continually. Two kinds of velocity related to big data are the frequency of generation and the frequency of handling, recording, and publishing. Veracity The truthfulness or reliability of the data, which refers to the data quality and the data value. Big data must not only be large in size, but also must be reliable in order to achieve value in the analysis of it. The data quality of captured data can vary greatly, affecting an accurate analysis. Value The worth in information that can be achieved by the processing and analysis of large datasets. Value also can be measured by an assessment of the other qualities of big data. Value may also represent the profitability of information that is retrieved from the analysis of big data. Variability The characteristic of the changing formats, structure, or sources of big data. Big data can include structured, unstructured,

  Read more →
• 

  The Citation Project

  The Citation Project is a series of studies that measure and analyze first-year college writing students' source use and their ability to understand and implement sources within their own writing. The Citation Project reveals students' source-use habits and the issues that can be seen based on their lack of proper citation skills, such as the prevalence of plagiarism, institution policies, and the results of current writing pedagogy. The Citation Project's central findings were first presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication in 2012. Although The Citation Project originally referred to this single 2012 study, the feedback received led to the conception of the Project as a broader initiative and as a place to gather and publish studies and data relating to student writing habits for the usage of other researches. == Method == The Citation Project's data comes from the work of 20 researchers analyzing 174 first-year composition students' research papers. The student papers studied originated from 16 institutions across the United States of America, including community colleges, public and private universities, denominational colleges, and Ivy Leagues. Researchers used bibliographic coding to aggregate data regarding the type, length, reading level, and usage of students' sources. == Findings == === Student source assessment and use === This study found that students were capable of identifying, locating, and accessing librarian-approved academic sources, most commonly accessing them with the internet. Despite students demonstrating their ability to find appropriate sources, they tend to exclusively cite the first few pages of their sources. Students' use and analysis of their citations are often limited, frequently resorting to patchwriting, directly restating their source's points, and omitting their own interpretations of their reference's ideas. The Citation Project also highlights students' struggle to accurately determine, address, and value their sources' bias, authority, and credibility. According to the Project's researchers' analysis, these habits demonstrate that first-year college writing students minimally engage with their sources and the academic conversations between them. One researcher from the Citation Project, Rebecca Moore Howard, believes these findings do not point towards students being lazy, but is rather a result of a writing pedagogy that prioritizes efficient, product-focused writing. Another interpretation offered by Sandra Jamieson, another researcher from the Citation Project explains their findings as a result of a lack of adherence to Information Learning (IL) Standards. === Pedagogy === A significant focus of The Citation Project is the development of pedagogical practices intended to equip students with writing and research techniques that will set them up for future success. Writers associated with The Citation Project, such as Tricia Serviss, believe that the practices of teachers surrounding academic integrity and writing practices are what form the foundation of how students think about writing and how to engage with assignments throughout their academic career. They also stress the importance of teaching students to effectively engage with sources rather than simply how to correctly cite them. The Citation Project asserts that endowing students with the ability to read, understand, and synthesize a variety of sources in their writing is a skill that will benefit them throughout their academic careers, and that the surface level typographical focus that many writing programs utilize is inadequate. == Plagiarism == One of the areas that The Citation Project also looks at is how students commit plagiarism throughout their writing. Plagiarism tends to be a checkpoint that gives instructors a sense where students' citation skills stand. Findings from The Citation Project reveal that the most common type of plagiarism is patchwriting which is the act of using the same sentence with only changing a couple of words. These types of issues can be seen as a learning curve due to lack of proper training. Student's that commit plagiarism are often unaware. === Policies === Another issue found is that academic plagiarism policies may not benefit a student's growth but may instead obstruct it. Policies against plagiarism tend to be harsh on the student that committed of offense. Even though student plagiarism is often unintentional academic institutions see this behavior as intentional. Student may then face harsh consequences as a result from their lack of citation knowledge. Additionally, higher level institutions assume that new students already have the skill set to avoid plagiarism which may be an unrealistic expectation. == Legacy == === Inspired studies === ==== Parrott and Napier ==== In one study, "Critical Reading and Student Self-Selected Texts: Results of a Collaborative, Explicit Curricular Approach," Jill Parrot and Trenia Napier quoted the Citation Project's findings as evidence that current collegiate writing curriculums are an ineffective means of teaching students how to properly write academic research papers. The researchers accredited current writing pedagogy's lack of emphasis on teaching critical reading skills. Parrott and Napier tested their thesis by seeing if students would produce more academic writing if they partook in a writing course that taught critical reading. Their results mostly went against this hypothesis, finding students who received additional critical reading training only significantly improved in how they integrated their sources. ==== Kocatepe ==== In May Mehtap Kocatep's study, "Reconceptualising the notion of finding information: How undergraduate students construct information as they read-to-write in an academic writing class," Kocatep expresses that she believes current conversations around writing pedagogy, including the Citation Project, operate with the underlying misconception that information is an easily discoverable static entity and its retrieval is an objective, unbiased decision. Kocatepe instead offers the analysis of what students view as valuable information and if it is worth using is influenced by the socially constructed meanings available to writers at the moment. To further examine students' source engagement, Kocatepe did a study on how female university students from the United Arab Emirates find, retrieve, use, and value sources. Kocatepe's results mainly noted students' almost exclusive reliance on using Google to find sources, as well as how students' navigated mainly English-speaking academic conversations as non-native English speakers. ==== Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez, and Graff ==== Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez, and Graff built their study off The Citation Project research in order to explore the attitudes and practices of students in an undergraduate writing course. As the researchers acknowledge, data collected by the Citation Project was the subject of the bulk of their analysis. This study sought to examine undergraduate writing practices tied to source-usage and elucidate any relevant trends. Dahlen, Nordstrom-Sanchez and Graff found that undergraduate writing students were not engaging with outside sources properly. Key issues discussed include lack of engagement with broad source ideas (in favor of picking out quotes), lack of paraphrasing, and inability to link information between multiple sources. ==== Davis ==== Phillip M. Davis based much of the analysis in his study on data gathered by the Citation Project. This study aimed to examine the particular effects web-based research and study had on undergraduate's papers and the replicability of their bibliographies. Davis sought to see how the shift from physical in-person library based research to online, often at-home research changed the function and usability of the bibliography as a form of documenting source usage in a given work. The primary method of analysis involved examining students' bibliographies to see where they were finding information online and how these sources were accessed. A main issue Davis found was "persistency" of URLs used for online citations. He found that only 18% of URL-based citations continued to function (the others either no longer pointing to the correct document or ceasing to exist altogether) within 3 years of their usage by students, and more than half of claimed online citations could not be found in any form. He suggests that this result brings up questions about how web-based citations should be dealt with in a university context.

  Read more →
• 

  Iteration

  Iteration means repeating a process to generate a (possibly unbounded) sequence of outcomes. Each repetition of the process is a single iteration, and the outcome of each iteration is the starting point of the next iteration. In mathematics and computer science, iteration (along with the related technique of recursion) is a standard element of algorithms. == Mathematics == In mathematics, iteration may refer to the process of iterating a function, i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviors and difficult problems – for examples, see the Collatz conjecture and juggler sequences. Another use of iteration in mathematics is in iterative methods which are used to produce approximate numerical solutions to certain mathematical problems. Newton's method is an example of an iterative method. Manual calculation of a number's square root is a common use and a well-known example. == Computing == In computing, iteration is a technique that marks out of a block of statements within a computer program for a defined number of repetitions. That block of statements is said to be iterated. A computer programmer might also refer to that block of statements as an iteration. === Implementations === Loops constitute the most common language constructs for performing iterations. The following pseudocode "iterates" three times the line of code between begin & end through a for loop, and uses the values of i as increments. It is permissible, and often necessary, to use values from other parts of the program outside the bracketed block of statements, to perform the desired function. Iterators constitute alternative language constructs to loops, which ensure consistent iterations over specific data structures. They can eventually save time and effort in later coding attempts. In particular, an iterator allows one to repeat the same kind of operation at each node of such a data structure, often in some pre-defined order. Iteratees are purely functional language constructs, which accept or reject data during the iterations. === Relation with recursion === Recursions and iterations have different algorithmic definitions, even though they can generate identical results. The primary difference is that recursion can be a solution without prior knowledge as to how many times the action must repeat, while a successful iteration requires that foreknowledge. Some types of programming languages, known as functional programming languages, are designed such that they do not set up a block of statements for explicit repetition, as with the for loop. Instead, those programming languages exclusively use recursion. Rather than call out a block of code to repeate a pre-defined number of times, the executing code block instead "divides" the work into a number of separate pieces, after which the code block executes itself on each individual piece. Each piece of work is divided repeatedly until the "amount" of work is as small as possible, at which point the algorithm does that work very quickly. The algorithm then "reverses" and reassembles the pieces into a complete whole. The classic example of recursion is in list-sorting algorithms, such as merge sort. The merge sort recursive algorithm first repeatedly divides the list into consecutive pairs. Each pair is then ordered, then each consecutive pair of pairs, and so forth until the elements of the list are in the desired order. The code below is an example of a recursive algorithm in the Scheme programming language that outputs the same result as the pseudocode under the previous heading. == Education == In some schools of pedagogy, iterations are used to describe the process of teaching or guiding students to repeat experiments, assessments, or projects, until more accurate results are found, or the student has mastered the technical skill. This idea is found in the old adage, "Practice makes perfect." In particular, "iterative" is defined as the "process of learning and development that involves cyclical inquiry, enabling multiple opportunities for people to revisit ideas and critically reflect on their implication." Unlike computing and math, educational iterations are not predetermined; instead, the task is repeated until success according to some external criteria (often a test) is achieved.

  Read more →
• 

  Interviewer effect

  The interviewer effect (also called interviewer variance or interviewer error) is the distortion of response to an interviewer-administered data collection effort which results from differential reactions to the social style and personality of interviewers or to their presentation of particular questions. The use of fixed-wording questions is one method of reducing interviewer bias. Anthropological research and case-studies are also affected by the problem, which is exacerbated by the self-fulfilling prophecy, when the researcher is also the interviewer it is also any effect on data gathered from interviewing people that is caused by the behavior or characteristics (real or perceived) of the interviewer. Interviewer effects can also be associated with the characteristics of the interviewer, such as race. Whether black respondents are interviewed by white interviewers or black interviewers has a strong impact on their responses to both attitude questions and behavioral ones. In the latter case, for example, if black respondents are interviewed by black interviewers in pre-election surveys, they are more likely to actually vote in the upcoming election than if they are interviewed by white interviewers. Furthermore, the race of the interviewer can also affect answers to factual questions that might take the form of a test of how informed the respondent is. Black respondents in a survey of political knowledge, for example, get fewer correct answers to factual questions about politics when interviewed by white interviewers than when interviewed by black interviewers. This is consistent with the research literature on stereotype threat, which finds diminished test performance of potentially stigmatised groups when the interviewer or test supervisor is from a perceived higher status group. Interviewer effects can be mitigated somewhat by randomly assigning subjects to different interviewers, or by using tools such as computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI).

  Read more →
• 

  List of robotics journals

  List of robotics journals includes notable academic and scientific journals that focus on research in the field of robotics and automation. == Journals == Acta Mechanica et Automatica Advanced Robotics Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters IEEE Transactions on Robotics IEEE Transactions on Field Robotics The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology International Journal of Humanoid Robotics International Journal of Robotics Research Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making Journal of Field Robotics Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems Paladyn Robotics and Autonomous Systems Robotics Science Robotics SLAS Technology

  Read more →
• 

  Agentic commerce

  Agentic commerce (also referred to as agent-based commerce) describes an emerging form of e-commerce in which autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) agents independently execute purchasing and payment processes on behalf of users or organizations. Unlike conventional digital commerce systems, which require direct human interaction at key decision points, agentic commerce systems are designed to search for products or services, evaluate options, make purchasing decisions, and complete payments without real-time human involvement. An emerging development within the broader fields of e-commerce, fintech, and artificial intelligence; agentic commerce combines advances in generative AI, autonomous agents, application programming interfaces (APIs), and digital payment infrastructures to direct transactions with no direct human interaction. == Characteristics == A defining feature of agentic commerce is the delegation of end-to-end commercial activities to software agents. These agents typically operate according to predefined user preferences, rules, or constraints, such as price limits, quality criteria, delivery times, or preferred payment methods. Based on these parameters, an agent can autonomously perform tasks including product discovery, price comparison, contract selection, order placement, and payment execution. In contrast to decision-support systems, which provide recommendations to human users, agentic commerce systems are designed to act independently. Human involvement may be limited to initial configuration, periodic supervision, or exception handling. == Comparison with traditional and AI-assisted commerce == Traditional e-commerce requires users to manually browse products, select offers, and authorize payments. Generative AI systems used in commerce commonly assist users by answering questions or suggesting options, and do not complete transactions autonomously. Agentic commerce differs in that decision-making authority is partially or fully transferred to AI agents. As a result, the conventional customer journey, characterized by conscious decision points, may be replaced by continuous, automated micro-decisions performed by software. == Applications and business use cases == Potential applications of agentic commerce include recurring purchases, subscription management, business-to-business procurement, inventory replenishment, and price monitoring. In such contexts, transactions are often predictable and standardized, making them suitable for automation. From a business perspective, agentic commerce systems may be used to optimize supply chains, manage inventory levels, negotiate prices algorithmically, or execute transactions across multiple platforms. Enterprises adopting the new technology include retailers Walmart, Home Depot, Wayfair and Urban Outfitters, and ad tech DSPs, including Google Ads, Amazon, and Yahoo. Chinese tech firms are using apps to provide full-service shopping and payment tools. These includes Alibaba, Tencent, and ByteDance who are currently developing AI powered shopping apps. The Qwen AI chatbot allows users to complete transactions directly within its interface. US firms are still leading in developing AI models but integration is slower due to privacy restrictions. == Payments and technical infrastructure == Agentic commerce relies on digital payment systems capable of supporting automated, machine-initiated transactions, including API-based payment processing, tokenization, real-time authorization, and continuous risk monitoring. Typical user interfaces, such as shopping carts, may be replaced by backend integrations between AI agents, merchants, and payment service providers. For example, Iike 2025, Alibaba launched Alipay AI Pay, which grew and began operating as an application for different retailers. In December 2025, Alipay teamed up with Rokid to enable developers to integrate AI payments into AI agents on Rokid's Lingzhu platform. In January 2025, Alipay unveiled the Agentic Commerce Trust Protocol in partnership with Alibaba's consumer AI applications, such as the Qwen App and Taobao Instant Commerce. Qwen adopted the platform first, connecting it to Taobao Instant Commerce and Alipay AI Pay. Users could use Qwen's agentic feature to place food and drink orders within the application instead of having to click outside to an external browser. For merchants, participation in agentic commerce may require products and services to be presented in structured, machine-readable formats to ensure discoverability and interoperability with autonomous agents. == Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP) == In January 2026, Google announced the Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP), an open-source web standard intended to enable interoperability between AI agents and retail systems across the shopping journey, from discovery and checkout to post-purchase support. UCP makes use of REST, JSON-RPC transports, and support for Agent Payments Protocol (AP2), Agent2Agent (A2A), and Model Context Protocol (MCP). == Legal, regulatory, and security considerations == The use of autonomous agents in commerce raises legal and regulatory questions, particularly regarding authorization, liability, consumer protection, and fraud prevention. Existing payment and contract frameworks are generally based on human decision-makers, and their applicability to autonomous agents remains an area of active discussion. Open issues include responsibility for unauthorized or erroneous transactions, mechanisms for dispute resolution, standards for agent authentication, and compliance with data protection and financial regulations. Continuous, automated transaction patterns may also require new approaches to security and risk assessment. Traditional fraud models centered on identity verification may be insufficient for agentic commerce, and that merchants may need intent-based detection methods using machine learning and behavioral analysis to distinguish legitimate AI agents from malicious automation. === Governance frameworks === The deployment of autonomous AI agents in commercial environments has prompted the development of dedicated governance frameworks. These aim to define operational boundaries, decision authority, oversight mechanisms, and accountability structures for agentic systems. The Agentic Commerce Framework (ACF), created in 2025 by Vincent Dorange, is a governance standard that structures the deployment of autonomous AI agents around four founding principles (Decision Sovereignty, Governance by Design, Ultimate Human Control, Traceable Accountability), four operational layers, and 18 governance KPIs. In January 2026, Singapore's Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) published the Model AI Governance Framework for Agentic AI, extending its existing AI governance guidelines to address agent-specific risks including delegation chains and multi-agent coordination. The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) has also proposed an Agentic Trust Framework applying zero-trust principles to AI agent governance. == Ecosystem and implementation == The adoption of agentic commerce typically requires changes in commerce architecture, data modeling, identity and permissions, and API-based orchestration of checkout and post-purchase workflows. Management consultancies have identified agentic commerce as a structural evolution of digital commerce, emphasizing the role of AI-driven agents in automating discovery, decision-making, and transaction processes across commerce systems. McKinsey & Company has described agentic commerce as a significant shift in how consumers interact with brands and how enterprises design their commerce operating models. In Europe, this ecosystem also includes digital commerce consultancies specializing in the adoption of agentic commerce. Consulting firms such as Horrea support brands in understanding and implementing the technological and organizational shifts associated with agentic commerce. == Market development and outlook == Agentic commerce is generally regarded as an early-stage development. Industry analysts have projected that AI-driven agents could account for a small but growing share of digital payment transactions within the coming years. Due to the scale of global digital commerce, even limited adoption could represent substantial transaction volumes. Analysts expect that by 2029, AI agents could handle between 1% and 4% of all digital payment transactions. With a projected total transaction volume of over $36 trillion a year, even a small share translates into a market worth up to $1.47 trillion. According to a McKinsey study from October 2025, agentic commerce projects that by 2030, the U.S. business-to-consumer retail market alone could see up to $1 trillion in revenue orchestrated through agentic commerce. On a global scale, the opportunity could range from $3 trillion to $5 trillion. Early experiments and pilot projects have demonstrated both the potential and current limitations of the

  Read more →
• 

  Transaction data

  Transaction data or transaction information is a category of data describing transactions. Transaction data/information gather variables generally referring to reference data or master data – e.g. dates, times, time zones, currencies. Typical transactions are: Financial transactions about orders, invoices, payments; Work transactions about plans, activity records; Logistic transactions about deliveries, storage records, travel records, etc.. == Management == Recording and storing transactions is called records management. The record of the transaction is stored in a place where the retention can be guaranteed and where data is archived or removed following a retention period. Formats of recorded transactions can be digital data in databases and spreadsheets, or handwritten texts in physical documents like former bankbooks. Transaction processing systems are application software that generate transactions and manage transaction data/information, e.g. SAP and Oracle Financials. == Data warehousing == Transaction data can be summarised in a data warehouse, which helps accessibility and analysis of the data.

  Read more →
• 

  Knowledge spillover

  Knowledge spillover is an exchange of ideas among individuals. Knowledge spillover is usually replaced by terminations of technology spillover, R&D spillover and/or spillover (economics) when the concept is specific to technology management and innovation economics. In knowledge management economics, knowledge spillovers are non-rival knowledge market costs incurred by a party not agreeing to assume the costs that has a spillover effect of stimulating technological improvements in a neighbor through one's own innovation. Such innovations often come from specialization within an industry. There are two kinds of knowledge spillovers: internal and external. Internal knowledge spillover occurs if there is a positive impact of knowledge between individuals within an organization that produces goods and/or services. An external knowledge spillover occurs when the positive impact of knowledge is between individuals outside of a production organization. Marshall–Arrow–Romer (MAR) spillovers, Porter spillovers and Jacobs spillovers are three types of spillovers. == Conceptualizations == === Marshall–Arrow–Romer === Marshall–Arrow–Romer (MAR) spillover has its origins in 1890, where the English economist Alfred Marshall developed a theory of knowledge spillovers. Knowledge spillovers later were extended by economists Kenneth Arrow (1962) and Paul Romer (1986). In 1992, Edward Glaeser, Hedi Kallal, José Scheinkman, and Andrei Shleifer pulled together the Marshall–Arrow–Romer views on knowledge spillovers and accordingly named the view MAR spillover in 1992. Under the Marshall–Arrow–Romer (MAR) spillover view, the proximity of firms within a common industry often affects how well knowledge travels among firms to facilitate innovation and growth. The closer the firms are to one another, the greater the MAR spillover. The exchange of ideas is largely from employee to employee, in that employees from different firms in an industry exchange ideas about new products and new ways to produce goods. The opportunity to exchange ideas that lead to innovations key to new products and improved production methods. Research on the Cambridge IT Cluster (UK) suggests that technological knowledge spillovers might only happen rarely and are less important than other cluster benefits such as labour market pooling. === Porter === Porter (1990), like MAR, argues that knowledge spillovers in specialized, geographically concentrated industries stimulate growth. He insists, however, that local competition, as opposed to local monopoly, fosters the pursuit and rapid adoption of innovation. He gives examples of Italian ceramics and gold jewellery industries, in which hundreds of firms are located together and fiercely compete to innovate since the alternative to innovation is demise. Porter's externalities are maximized in cities with geographically specialized, competitive industries. === Jacobs === Under the Jacobs spillover view, the proximity of firms from different industries affect how well knowledge travels among firms to facilitate innovation and growth. This is in contrast to MAR spillovers, which focus on firms in a common industry. The diverse proximity of a Jacobs spillover brings together ideas among individuals with different perspectives to encourage an exchange of ideas and foster innovation in an industrially diverse environment. Developed in 1969 by urbanist Jane Jacobs and John Jackson the concept that Detroit’s shipbuilding industry from the 1830s was the critical antecedent leading to the 1890s development of the auto industry in Detroit since the gasoline engine firms easily transitioned from building gasoline engines for ships to building them for automobiles. == Incoming and outgoing spillovers == Knowledge spillover has asymmetric directions. The focal entity and receives or outflows know-how to others, creating incoming and outgoing spillovers. Cassiman and Veugelers (2002) use survey data and estimate incoming and outgoing spillover and study the economic impacts. Incoming spillover increases growth opportunity and productivity improvements of receivers, while outgoing spillover leads to free rider problem in the technology competition. Chen et al. (2013) use econometric method to gauge incoming spillover, a way that applies for all companies without survey. They find that incoming spillover explains R&D profits of industrial firms. == Policy implications == As information is largely non-rival in nature, certain measures must be taken to ensure that, for the originator, the information remains a private asset. As the market cannot do this efficiently, public regulations have been implemented to facilitate a more appropriate equilibrium. As a result, the concept of intellectual property rights have developed and ensure the ability of entrepreneurs to temporarily hold on to the profitability of their ideas through patents, copyrights, trade secrets, and other governmental safeguards. Conversely, such barriers to entry prevent the exploitation of informational developments by rival firms within an industry. For example, Wang (2023) indicates that technology spillovers are reduced by 27% to 51% when trade secrets laws are implemented by the Uniform Trade Secrets Act in the US. On the other hand, when the research and development of a private firm results in a social benefit, unaccounted for within the market price, often greater than the private return of the firm's research, then a subsidy to offset the underproduction of that benefit might be offered to the firm in return for its continued output of that benefit. Government subsidies are often controversial, and while they might often result in a more appropriate social equilibrium, they could also lead to undesirable political repercussions as such a subsidy must come from taxpayers, some of whom may not directly benefit from the researching firm's subsidized knowledge spillover. The concept of knowledge spillover is also used to justify subsidies to foreign direct investment, as foreign investors help diffuse technology among local firms. == Examples == Business parks are a good specific example of concentrated businesses that may benefit from MAR spillover. Many semiconductor firms intentionally located their research and development facilities in Silicon Valley to take advantage of MAR spillover. In addition, the film industry in Los Angeles, California, and elsewhere relies on a geographic concentration of specialists (directors, producers, scriptwriters, and set designers) to bring together narrow aspects of movie-making into a final product. A general example of a knowledge spillover could be the collective growth associated with the research and development of online social networking tools like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Such tools have not only created a positive feedback loop, and a host of originally unintended benefits for their users, but have also created an explosion of new software, programming platforms, and conceptual breakthroughs that have perpetuated the development of the industry as a whole. The advent of online marketplaces, the utilization of user profiles, the widespread democratization of information, and the interconnectivity between tools within the industry have all been products of each tool's individual developments. These developments have since spread outside the industry into the mainstream media as news and entertainment firms have developed their own market feedback applications within the tools themselves, and their own versions of online networking tools (e.g. CNN’s iReport).

  Read more →
• 

  DoorDash

  DoorDash, Inc. is an American company operating online food ordering and food delivery. It trades under the symbol DASH. With a 56% market share, DoorDash is the largest food delivery platform in the United States. It also has a 60% market share in the convenience delivery category. As of December 31, 2020, the platform was used by 450,000 merchants, 20 million consumers, and had over one million delivery couriers. Founded by Tony Xu, Andy Fang, Stanley Tang and Evan Moore, DoorDash made its debut on the Fortune 500 list in 2024, ranking No. 443. DoorDash has been sued for or held legally liable for withholding tips, reducing tip transparency, antitrust price manipulation, listing restaurants without permission, misclassifying workers, withholding sick time, and illegally selling personal data. As of April 2026, DoorDash operates in the United States (including Puerto Rico), Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Through its subsidiaries Deliveroo and Wolt, the company also operates across Europe, as well as in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Israel, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. == History == In January 2013, Stanford University students Tony Xu, Stanley Tang, Andy Fang and Evan Moore launched PaloAltoDelivery.com in Palo Alto, California. In the summer of 2013, it received US$120,000 in seed money from Y Combinator in exchange for a 7% stake. It incorporated as DoorDash in June 2013. DoorDash's first partnership with a fast food burger restaurant chain was in April 2016, when it partnered with CKE Restaurants, parent company of Carl's Jr. and Hardee's, for food delivery. In December 2017, DoorDash announced its partnership with Wendy's for delivery from its restaurants. In December 2018, DoorDash overtook Uber Eats to hold the second position in total US food delivery sales, behind GrubHub. By March 2019, it had exceeded GrubHub in total sales, at 27.6% of the on-demand delivery market. By early 2019, DoorDash was the largest food delivery provider in the U.S., as measured by consumer spending. In October 2019, DoorDash opened its first ghost kitchen, DoorDash Kitchen, in Redwood City, California, with four restaurants operating at the location. By June 2020, DoorDash had raised more than $2.5 billion over several financing rounds from investors including Y Combinator, Charles River Ventures, SV Angel, Khosla Ventures, Sequoia Capital, SoftBank Group, GIC, and Kleiner Perkins. DoorDash announced a partnership with KFC in September 2020, followed by Taco Bell in October 2020. In November 2020, DoorDash announced the opening of its first physical restaurant location, partnering up with Bay Area restaurant Burma Bites to offer delivery and pick-up orders. In December 2020, it became a public company via an initial public offering, raising $3.37 billion. In November 2021, DoorDash acquired Finland's Wolt for €7bn. In August 2022, DoorDash announced it would end its partnership with Walmart in September, ending the companies' cooperation agreement from 2018. In November 2022, DoorDash announced plans to lay off 1,250 corporate employees, or about six percent of its workforce, to rein in expenses. In June 2023, DoorDash announced it would give its drivers the option of earning an hourly minimum wage instead of being paid per delivery. However, drivers are only paid hourly when on an active delivery. In September 2023, the company transferred its stock listing from the New York Stock Exchange to the Nasdaq. On December 18, 2023, DoorDash was added to the Nasdaq-100 index. In March 2025, DoorDash announced a partnership with Klarna, a Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) service, letting customers schedule small payments over a set period of time. DoorDash received widespread criticism from this decision, including internet mockery, given concerns about the increase of household debt in America. In 2025, DoorDash acquired the UK-based delivery service Deliveroo for $3.88 billion. The combined company operates in 40 countries and serves 50 million users monthly. In September 2025, DoorDash and Ace Hardware (the largest hardware cooperative) announced their partnership to offer delivery for home use products from over 4,000 Ace locations. == Lawsuits against DoorDash == === 2017 class-action lawsuit for misclassifying workers === In 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against DoorDash for allegedly misclassifying delivery drivers in California and Massachusetts as independent contractors. In 2022, a tentative settlement was reached in which DoorDash would pay $100 million total, with $61 million going to over 900,000 drivers, paying out just over $130 per driver, and $28 million for the lawyers. Gizmodo criticized the settlement, noting that the $413 million that DoorDash CEO Tony Xu received the previous year was one of the largest CEO compensation packages of all time. === 2019 data breach lawsuit === On May 4, 2019, DoorDash confirmed 4.9 million customers, delivery workers and merchants had sensitive information stolen via a data breach. Those who joined the platform after April 5, 2018, were unaffected by the breach. A class-action lawsuit for the breach was filed against DoorDash in October 2019. === Withholding of tips and subsequent class-action lawsuits === In July 2019, the company's tipping policy was criticized by The New York Times, and later The Verge and Vox and Gothamist. Drivers receive a guaranteed minimum per order that is paid by DoorDash by default. When a customer added a tip, instead of going directly to the driver, it first went to the company to cover the guaranteed minimum. Drivers then only directly received the part of the tip that exceeded the guaranteed minimum per order. In January 2020, it was reported that DoorDash had lied about skimming tips from its drivers, causing them to earn an average of $1.45 an hour after expenses, and that after the company had allegedly overhauled its tipping system, DoorDash was still manipulating per-delivery payouts at the expense of drivers. A DoorDash customer filed a class action lawsuit against the company for its "materially false and misleading" tipping policy. The case was referred to arbitration in August 2020. Under pressure, the company revised its policy. The company settled a lawsuit with District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine for $2.5 million, with funds going to deliverers, the government, and to charity. ==== 2021 driver strike for tip transparency ==== In July 2021, DoorDash drivers went on strike to protest lack of tip transparency and to ask for higher pay. At the time of the strike, and, as of June 2022, DoorDash did not allow drivers to see the full tip amounts prior to accepting a delivery in the app. If customers tip over a set amount for the order total, Doordash hides a portion of the tip until the delivery is complete. The strike occurred after DoorDash rewrote its code to cut off access to Para, a third-party app that drivers had been using to see the full tip amounts. ==== 2025 class-action lawsuit settlement ==== In 2025, DoorDash agreed to pay around $17 million for "misleading both consumers and delivery workers" with tips being docked from drivers' pay instead of directly going to drivers. === 2020 antitrust litigation === In April 2020, in the case of Davitashvili v. GrubHub Inc. DoorDash, Grubhub, Postmates, and Uber Eats were accused of monopolistic power by only listing restaurants on its apps if the restaurant owners signed contracts which include clauses that require prices be the same for dine-in customers as for customers receiving delivery. The plaintiffs stated that this arrangement increases the cost for dine-in customers, as they are required to subsidize the cost of delivery; and that the apps charge "exorbitant" fees, which range from 13% to 40% of revenue, while the average restaurant's profit ranges from 3% to 9% of revenue. The lawsuit seeks treble damages, including for overcharges, since April 14, 2016, for dine-in and delivery customers in the United States at restaurants using the defendants’ delivery apps. Although several preliminary documents in the case have now been filed, a trial date has not yet been set. === Litigation for illegal unauthorized restaurant listing === In May 2021, DoorDash was criticized for unauthorized listings of restaurants who had not given permission to appear on the app. The company was sued by Lona's Lil Eats in St. Louis, with the lawsuit claiming that DoorDash had listed them without permission, then prevented any orders to the restaurant from going through and redirecting customers to other restaurants instead, because Lona's was "too far away," when in reality it had not paid DoorDash a fee for listing. This aspect of DoorDash's business practice is illegal in California. === 2021 lawsuit by the city of Chicago === In August 2021, the city of Chicago sued DoorDash and GrubHub. According to Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot, the companies broke the law by using "unfair and deceptive t

  Read more →
• 

  Friendly artificial intelligence

  Friendly artificial intelligence (friendly AI or FAI) is hypothetical artificial general intelligence (AGI) that would have a positive (benign) effect on humanity or at least align with human interests such as fostering the improvement of the human species. It is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence and is closely related to machine ethics. While machine ethics is concerned with how an artificially intelligent agent should behave, friendly artificial intelligence research is focused on how to practically bring about this behavior and ensuring it is adequately constrained. == Etymology and usage == The term was coined by Eliezer Yudkowsky, who is best known for popularizing the idea, to discuss superintelligent artificial agents that reliably implement human values. Stuart J. Russell and Peter Norvig's leading artificial intelligence textbook, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, describes the idea: Yudkowsky (2008) goes into more detail about how to design a Friendly AI. He asserts that friendliness (a desire not to harm humans) should be designed in from the start, but that the designers should recognize both that their own designs may be flawed, and that the robot will learn and evolve over time. Thus the challenge is one of mechanism design—to define a mechanism for evolving AI systems under a system of checks and balances, and to give the systems utility functions that will remain friendly in the face of such changes. "Friendly" is used in this context as technical terminology, and picks out agents that are safe and useful, not necessarily ones that are "friendly" in the colloquial sense. The concept is primarily invoked in the context of discussions of recursively self-improving artificial agents that rapidly explode in intelligence, on the grounds that this hypothetical technology would have a large, rapid, and difficult-to-control impact on human society. == Risks of unfriendly AI == The roots of concern about artificial intelligence are very old. Kevin LaGrandeur showed that the dangers specific to AI can be seen in ancient literature concerning artificial humanoid servants such as the golem, or the proto-robots of Gerbert of Aurillac and Roger Bacon. In those stories, the extreme intelligence and power of these humanoid creations clash with their status as slaves (which by nature are seen as sub-human), and cause disastrous conflict. By 1942 these themes prompted Isaac Asimov to create the "Three Laws of Robotics"—principles hard-wired into all the robots in his fiction, intended to prevent them from turning on their creators, or allowing them to come to harm. In modern times as the prospect of superintelligent AI looms nearer, philosopher Nick Bostrom has said that superintelligent AI systems with goals that are not aligned with human ethics are intrinsically dangerous unless extreme measures are taken to ensure the safety of humanity. He put it this way: Basically we should assume that a 'superintelligence' would be able to achieve whatever goals it has. Therefore, it is extremely important that the goals we endow it with, and its entire motivation system, is 'human friendly.' In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky called for the creation of "friendly AI" to mitigate existential risk from advanced artificial intelligence. He explains: "The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." Steve Omohundro says that a sufficiently advanced AI system will, unless explicitly counteracted, exhibit a number of basic "drives", such as resource acquisition, self-preservation, and continuous self-improvement, because of the intrinsic nature of any goal-driven systems and that these drives will, "without special precautions", cause the AI to exhibit undesired behavior. Alexander Wissner-Gross says that AIs driven to maximize their future freedom of action (or causal path entropy) might be considered friendly if their planning horizon is longer than a certain threshold, and unfriendly if their planning horizon is shorter than that threshold. Luke Muehlhauser, writing for the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, recommends that machine ethics researchers adopt what Bruce Schneier has called the "security mindset": Rather than thinking about how a system will work, imagine how it could fail. For instance, he suggests even an AI that only makes accurate predictions and communicates via a text interface might cause unintended harm. In 2014, Luke Muehlhauser and Nick Bostrom underlined the need for 'friendly AI'; nonetheless, the difficulties in designing a 'friendly' superintelligence, for instance via programming counterfactual moral thinking, are considerable. == Coherent extrapolated volition == Yudkowsky advances the Coherent Extrapolated Volition (CEV) model. According to him, our coherent extrapolated volition is "our wish if we knew more, thought faster, were more the people we wished we were, had grown up farther together; where the extrapolation converges rather than diverges, where our wishes cohere rather than interfere; extrapolated as we wish that extrapolated, interpreted as we wish that interpreted". Rather than a Friendly AI being designed directly by human programmers, it is to be designed by a "seed AI" programmed to first study human nature and then produce the AI that humanity would want, given sufficient time and insight, to arrive at a satisfactory answer. The appeal to an objective through contingent human nature (perhaps expressed, for mathematical purposes, in the form of a utility function or other decision-theoretic formalism), as providing the ultimate criterion of "Friendliness", is an answer to the meta-ethical problem of defining an objective morality; extrapolated volition is intended to be what humanity objectively would want, all things considered, but it can only be defined relative to the psychological and cognitive qualities of present-day, unextrapolated humanity. == Other approaches == Steve Omohundro has proposed a "scaffolding" approach to AI safety, in which one provably safe AI generation helps build the next provably safe generation. Seth Baum argues that the development of safe, socially beneficial artificial intelligence or artificial general intelligence is a function of the social psychology of AI research communities and so can be constrained by extrinsic measures and motivated by intrinsic measures. Intrinsic motivations can be strengthened when messages resonate with AI developers; Baum argues that, in contrast, "existing messages about beneficial AI are not always framed well". Baum advocates for "cooperative relationships, and positive framing of AI researchers" and cautions against characterizing AI researchers as "not want(ing) to pursue beneficial designs". In his book Human Compatible, AI researcher Stuart J. Russell lists three principles to guide the development of beneficial machines. He emphasizes that these principles are not meant to be explicitly coded into the machines; rather, they are intended for the human developers. The principles are as follows: The machine's only objective is to maximize the realization of human preferences. The machine is initially uncertain about what those preferences are. The ultimate source of information about human preferences is human behavior. The "preferences" Russell refers to "are all-encompassing; they cover everything you might care about, arbitrarily far into the future." Similarly, "behavior" includes any choice between options, and the uncertainty is such that some probability, which may be quite small, must be assigned to every logically possible human preference. == Public policy == James Barrat, author of Our Final Invention, suggested that "a public-private partnership has to be created to bring A.I.-makers together to share ideas about security—something like the International Atomic Energy Agency, but in partnership with corporations." He urges AI researchers to convene a meeting similar to the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA, which discussed risks of biotechnology. John McGinnis encourages governments to accelerate friendly AI research. Because the goalposts of friendly AI are not necessarily eminent, he suggests a model similar to the National Institutes of Health, where "Peer review panels of computer and cognitive scientists would sift through projects and choose those that are designed both to advance AI and assure that such advances would be accompanied by appropriate safeguards." McGinnis feels that peer review is better "than regulation to address technical issues that are not possible to capture through bureaucratic mandates". McGinnis notes that his proposal stands in contrast to that of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, which generally aims to avoid government involvement in friendly AI. == Criticism == Some critics believe that both human-level AI and superintelligence are unlikely and that, therefore, friendly AI is unlik

  Read more →
• 

  Wearable technology

  Wearable technology is a category of small electronic and mobile devices with wireless communications capability designed to be worn on the human body and are incorporated into gadgets, accessories, or clothes. Common types of wearable technology include smartwatches, fitness trackers, and smartglasses. Wearable electronic devices are often close to or on the surface of the skin, where they detect, analyze, and transmit information such as vital signs, and/or ambient data and which allow in some cases immediate biofeedback to the wearer. Wearable devices collect vast amounts of data from users making use of different behavioral and physiological sensors, which monitor their health status and activity levels. Wrist-worn devices include smartwatches with a touchscreen display, while wristbands are mainly used for fitness tracking but do not contain a touchscreen display. Wearable devices such as activity trackers are an example of the Internet of things, since "things" such as electronics, software, sensors, and connectivity are effectors that enable objects to exchange data (including data quality) through the internet with a manufacturer, operator, and/or other connected devices, without requiring human intervention. Wearable technology offers a wide range of possible uses, from communication and entertainment to improving health and fitness, however, there are worries about privacy and security because wearable devices have the ability to collect personal data. Wearable technology has a variety of use cases which is growing as the technology is developed and the market expands. It can be used to encourage individuals to be more active and improve their lifestyle choices. Healthy behavior is encouraged by tracking activity levels and providing useful feedback to enable goal setting. This can be shared with interested stakeholders such as healthcare providers. Wearables are popular in consumer electronics, most commonly in the form factors of smartwatches, smart rings, and implants. Apart from commercial uses, wearable technology is being incorporated into navigation systems, advanced textiles (e-textiles), and healthcare. As wearable technology is being proposed for use in critical applications, like other technology, it is vetted for its reliability and security properties. == History == In the 1500s, German inventor Peter Henlein (1485–1542) created small watches that were worn as necklaces. A century later, pocket watches grew in popularity as waistcoats became fashionable for men. Wristwatches were created in the late 1600s but were worn mostly by women as bracelets. Pedometers were developed around the same time as pocket watches. The concept of a pedometer was described by Leonardo da Vinci around 1500, and the Germanic National Museum in Nuremberg has a pedometer in its collection from 1590. In the late 1800s, the first wearable hearing aids were introduced. In 1904, aviator Alberto Santos-Dumont pioneered the modern use of the wristwatch. In 1949, American biophysicist Norman Holter invented the very first health monitoring device. His invention, the Holter monitor, was groundbreaking as one of the first wearable devices capable of tracking vital health data outside of a clinical setting. In the 1970s, calculator watches became available, reaching the peak of their popularity in the 1980s. From the early 2000s, wearable cameras were being used as part of a growing sousveillance movement. Expectations, operations, usage and concerns about wearable technology was floated on the first International Conference on Wearable Computing. In 2008, Ilya Fridman incorporated a hidden Bluetooth microphone into a pair of earrings. Big tech companies such as Apple, Samsung, and Fitbit have expanded on this idea by interfacing with smartphones and personal computer software to collect a wide variety of data. Wearable devices include dedicated health monitors, fitness bands, and smartwatches. In 2010, Fitbit released its first step counter. Wearable technology which tracks information such as walking and heart rate is part of the quantified self movement. In 2013, McLear, also known as NFC Ring, released a "smart ring". The smart ring could make bitcoin payments, unlock other devices, and transfer personally identifying information, and also had other features. In 2013, one of the first widely available smartwatches was the Samsung Galaxy Gear. Apple followed in 2015 with the Apple Watch. === Prototypes === From 1991 to 1997, Rosalind Picard and her students, Steve Mann and Jennifer Healey, at the MIT Media Lab designed, built, and demonstrated data collection and decision making from "Smart Clothes" that monitored continuous physiological data from the wearer. These "smart clothes", "smart underwear", "smart shoes", and smart jewellery collected data that related to affective state and contained or controlled physiological sensors and environmental sensors like cameras and other devices. At the same time, also at the MIT Media Lab, Thad Starner and Alex "Sandy" Pentland develop augmented reality. In 1997, their smartglass prototype is featured on 60 Minutes and enables rapid web search and instant messaging. Though the prototype's glasses are nearly as streamlined as modern smartglasses, the processor was a computer worn in a backpack – the most lightweight solution available at the time. In 2009, Sony Ericsson teamed up with the London College of Fashion for a contest to design digital clothing. The winner was a cocktail dress with Bluetooth technology making it light up when a call is received. Zach "Hoeken" Smith of MakerBot fame made keyboard pants during a "Fashion Hacking" workshop at a New York City creative collective. The Tyndall National Institute in Ireland developed a "remote non-intrusive patient monitoring" platform which was used to evaluate the quality of the data generated by the patient sensors and how the end users may adopt to the technology. More recently, London-based fashion company CuteCircuit created costumes for singer Katy Perry featuring LED lighting so that the outfits would change color both during stage shows and appearances on the red carpet such as the dress Katy Perry wore in 2010 at the MET Gala in NYC. In 2012, CuteCircuit created the world's first dress to feature Tweets, as worn by singer Nicole Scherzinger. In 2010, McLear, also known as NFC Ring, developed prototypes of its "smart ring" devices, before a Kickstarter fundraising in 2013. In 2014, graduate students from the Tisch School of Arts in New York designed a hoodie that sent pre-programmed text messages triggered by gesture movements. Around the same time, prototypes for digital eyewear with heads up display (HUD) began to appear. The US military employs headgear with displays for soldiers using a technology called holographic optics. In 2010, Google started developing prototypes of its optical head-mounted display Google Glass, which went into customer beta in March 2013. == Usage == In the consumer space, sales of smart wristbands (aka activity trackers such as the Jawbone UP and Fitbit Flex) started accelerating in 2013. One in five American adults have a wearable device, according to the 2014 PriceWaterhouseCoopers Wearable Future Report. As of 2009, decreasing cost of processing power and other components was facilitating widespread adoption and availability. In professional sports, wearable technology has applications in monitoring and real-time feedback for athletes. Examples of wearable technology in sport include accelerometers, pedometers, and GPS's which can be used to measure an athlete's energy expenditure and movement pattern. In cybersecurity and financial technology, secure wearable devices have captured part of the physical security key market. McLear, also known as NFC Ring, and VivoKey developed products with one-time pass secure access control. In health informatics, wearable devices have enabled better capturing of human health statistics for data driven analysis. This has facilitated data-driven machine learning algorithms to analyse the health condition of users. In business, wearable technology helps managers easily supervise employees by knowing their locations and what they are currently doing. Employees working in a warehouse also have increased safety when working around chemicals or lifting something. Smart helmets are employee safety wearables that have vibration sensors that can alert employees of possible danger in their environment. == Wearable technology and health == Wearable technology is often used to monitor a user's health. Given that such a device is in close contact with the user, it can easily collect data. It started as soon as 1980 where first wireless ECG was invented. In the last decades, there has been substantial growth in research of e.g. textile-based, tattoo, patch, and contact lenses as well as circulation of a notion of "quantified self", transhumanism-related ideas, and growth of life ex

  Read more →