AI Face Changer Video

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

• 

  Supervisor Mode Access Prevention

  Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) is a feature of some CPU implementations such as the Intel Broadwell microarchitecture that allows supervisor mode programs to optionally set user-space memory mappings so that access to those mappings from supervisor mode will cause a trap. This makes it harder for malicious programs to "trick" the kernel into using instructions or data from a user-space program. == History == Supervisor Mode Access Prevention is designed to complement Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention (SMEP), which was introduced earlier. SMEP can be used to prevent supervisor mode from unintentionally executing user-space code. SMAP extends this protection to reads and writes. == Benefits == Without Supervisor Mode Access Prevention, supervisor code usually has full read and write access to user-space memory mappings (or has the ability to obtain full access). This has led to the development of several security exploits, including privilege escalation exploits, which operate by causing the kernel to access user-space memory when it did not intend to. Operating systems can block these exploits by using SMAP to force unintended user-space memory accesses to trigger page faults. Additionally, SMAP can expose flawed kernel code which does not follow the intended procedures for accessing user-space memory. However, the use of SMAP in an operating system may lead to a larger kernel size and slower user-space memory accesses from supervisor code, because SMAP must be temporarily disabled any time supervisor code intends to access user-space memory. == Technical details == Processors indicate support for Supervisor Mode Access Prevention through the Extended Features CPUID leaf. SMAP is enabled when memory paging is active and the SMAP bit in the CR4 control register is set. SMAP can be temporarily disabled for explicit memory accesses by setting the EFLAGS.AC (Alignment Check) flag. The stac (Set AC Flag) and clac (Clear AC Flag) instructions can be used to easily set or clear the flag. When the SMAP bit in CR4 is set, explicit memory reads and writes to user-mode pages performed by code running with a privilege level less than 3 will always result in a page fault if the EFLAGS.AC flag is not set. Implicit reads and writes (such as those made to descriptor tables) to user-mode pages will always trigger a page fault if SMAP is enabled, regardless of the value of EFLAGS.AC. == Operating system support == Linux kernel support for Supervisor Mode Access Prevention was implemented by H. Peter Anvin. It was merged into the mainline Linux 3.7 kernel (released December 2012) and it is enabled by default for processors which support the feature. FreeBSD has supported Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention since 2012 and Supervisor Mode Access Prevention since 2018. OpenBSD has supported Supervisor Mode Access Prevention and the related Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention since 2012, with OpenBSD 5.3 being the first release with support for the feature enabled. NetBSD support for Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention (SMEP) was implemented by Maxime Villard in December 2015. Support for Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) was also implemented by Maxime Villard, in August 2017. NetBSD 8.0 was the first release with both features supported and enabled. Haiku support for Supervisor Mode Execution Prevention (SMEP) was implemented by Jérôme Duval in January 2018. macOS has support for SMAP at least since macOS 10.13 released 2017.

  Read more →
• 

  Rayid Ghani

  Rayid Ghani (born 1977) is a Distinguished Career Professor in the Machine Learning Department (in the School of Computer Science) and the Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. Previously, he was the director of the Center for Data Science and Public Policy, research associate professor in the department of computer science, and a senior fellow at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago. He was also the co-founder of Edgeflip, an analytics startup that grew out of the Obama 2012 Campaign, focused on social media products for non-profits, advocacy groups, and charities. In September 2019, it was announced that he will be leaving the University of Chicago and joining Carnegie Mellon University's School of Computer Science and Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy. Prior to that, Rayid was the Chief Scientist of the Obama 2012 Election Campaign and focused on using data science, machine learning, and technology to improve fundraising, volunteer mobilization, voter registration, persuasion, and turnout. Ghani started and runs the Eric & Wendy Schmidt Data Science for Social Good Summer Fellowship. He's also the co-founder of Coleridge Initiative, a nonprofit organization working with governments to ensure that data and evidence is used more effectively for policymaking. == Education and career == Ghani completed his schooling at the Karachi Grammar School, in Karachi, Pakistan. Ghani completed his graduate studies in the machine learning department at Carnegie Mellon University with Tom M. Mitchell on machine learning and text classification and received his undergraduate degrees in computer science and mathematics from University of the South. Before his role at the University of Chicago, he was the chief scientist of the Obama 2012 Campaign. Before that, he was a senior research scientist and director of analytics research at Accenture Labs, where he led a technology research team focused on applied R&D in analytics, machine learning, and data mining for large-scale and emerging business problems. == Policy efforts == Ghani has been actively working with government agencies and non-profits on designing AI and Machine Learning Systems to help tackle societal problems in public health, criminal justice, social services, education, economic development, and workforce development He has also testified in front of the US Senate in 2023 and the US House of Representatives in 2020, on AI Governance and Regulation. == Research contributions == Ghani's research focuses on developing and applying machine learning, data science, and artificial intelligence methods to large-scale social problems in areas such as education, healthcare, economic development, criminal justice, energy, transportation, and public safety. His work has previously focused on text analytics, fundraising, volunteer, and voter mobilization using analytics, social media, and machine learning., and data mining. Rayid's research contributions have been in the areas of text mining, co-training, active learning, consumer behavior modeling, and fraud detection. His research focus has been on 1) dealing with bias and fairness issues in machine learning and AI, 2) designing Human-AI collaborative systems that support people in making decisions, and 3) evaluating AI systems to focus on the entire workflow and outcomes He has given keynote speeches on Analytics and the Presidential Elections (for example at Predictive Analytics World, Digital Leaders Forum, Carnegie Mellon University, and CeBIT Australia), on Business Applications of Data Mining, and Data Science for Social Good. == Selected publications == Big Data and Social Science: A Practical Guide to Methods and Tools. Editors: Ian Foster, Rayid Ghani, Ron Jarmin, Frauke Kreuter, Julia Lane. CRC Press 2016. Empirical observation of negligible fairness–accuracy trade-offs in machine learning for public policy. Kit Rodolfa, Hemank Lamba, Rayid Ghani. Nature Machine Intelligence 2021. Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions. Kasun Amarasinghe, Kit T. Rodolfa, Hemank Lamba, Rayid Ghani. Data and Policy 2023. Data Mining for Business Applications. Editors: Carlos Soares, Rayid Ghani. Book. IOS Press 2010. Mining the Web to Add Semantics to Retail Data Mining. R. Ghani. Invited Paper. Web Mining: From Web to Semantic Web. Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 3209. Berendt, B.; Hotho, A.; Mladenic, D.; van Someren, M.; Spiliopoulou, M.; Stumme, G. (Eds.) 2004

  Read more →
• 

  Weighted automaton

  In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a weighted automaton or weighted finite-state machine is a generalization of a finite-state machine in which the edges have weights, for example real numbers or integers. Finite-state machines are only capable of answering decision problems; they take as input a string and produce a Boolean output, i.e. either "accept" or "reject". In contrast, weighted automata produce a quantitative output, for example a count of how many answers are possible on a given input string, or a probability of how likely the input string is according to a probability distribution. They are one of the simplest studied models of quantitative automata. The definition of a weighted automaton is generally given over an arbitrary semiring R {\displaystyle R} , an abstract set with an addition operation + {\displaystyle +} and a multiplication operation × {\displaystyle \times } . The automaton consists of a finite set of states, a finite input alphabet of characters Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and edges which are labeled with both a character in Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } and a weight in R {\displaystyle R} . The weight of any path in the automaton is defined to be the product of weights along the path, and the weight of a string is the sum of the weights of all paths which are labeled with that string. The weighted automaton thus defines a function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} . Weighted automata generalize deterministic finite automata (DFAs) and nondeterministic finite automata (NFAs), which correspond to weighted automata over the Boolean semiring, where addition is logical disjunction and multiplication is logical conjunction. In the DFA case, there is only one accepting path for any input string, so disjunction is not applied. When the weights are real numbers and the outgoing weights for each state add to one, weighted automata can be considered a probabilistic model and are also known as probabilistic automata. These machines define a probability distribution over all strings, and are related to other probabilistic models such as Markov decision processes and Markov chains. Weighted automata have applications in natural language processing where they are used to assign weights to words and sentences, as well as in image compression. They were first introduced by Marcel-Paul Schützenberger in his 1961 paper On the definition of a family of automata. Since their introduction, many extensions have been proposed, for example nested weighted automata, cost register automata, and weighted finite-state transducers. Researchers have studied weighted automata from the perspective of learning a machine from its input-output behavior (see computational learning theory) and studying decidability questions. == Definition == A commutative semiring (or rig) is a set R equipped with two distinguished elements 0 ≠ 1 {\displaystyle 0\neq 1} and addition and multiplication operations ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } and ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } such that ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is commutative and associative with identity 0 {\displaystyle 0} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } is commutative and associative with identity 1 {\displaystyle 1} , ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } distributes over ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } , and 0 is an absorbing element for ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } . A weighted automaton over R {\displaystyle R} is a tuple A = ( Q , Σ , Δ , I , F ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}=(Q,\Sigma ,\Delta ,I,F)} where: Q {\displaystyle Q} is a finite set of states. Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is a finite alphabet. Δ ⊆ Q × Σ × R × Q {\displaystyle \Delta \subseteq Q\times \Sigma \times R\times Q} is a finite set of transitions ( q , σ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,w,q')} , where σ {\displaystyle \sigma } is called a character and w {\displaystyle w} is called a weight. I : Q → R {\displaystyle I:Q\to R} is an initial weight function. F : Q → R {\displaystyle F:Q\to R} is a final weight function. A path on input w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{}} is a finite path in the graph, where the concatenation of the character labels equals w {\displaystyle w} . The weight of the path q 0 , q 1 , … , q n {\displaystyle q_{0},q_{1},\ldots ,q_{n}} is the product ( ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } ) of the weights along the path, additionally multiplied by the initial and final weights I ( q 0 ) ⊗ F ( q n ) {\displaystyle I(q_{0})\otimes F(q_{n})} . The weight of the word w {\displaystyle w} is the sum ( ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } ) of the weights of all paths on input w {\displaystyle w} (or 0 if there are no accepting paths). In this way the machine defines a function [ [ A ] ] : Σ ∗ → R {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!]:\Sigma ^{}\to R} . == Ambiguity and determinism == Since Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } is a set of transitions, weighted automata allow multiple transitions (or paths) on a single input string. Therefore a weighted automaton can be considered analogous to a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). As is the case with NFAs, restrictions of weighted automata are considered that correspond to the concepts of deterministic finite automaton and unambiguous finite automaton (deterministic weighted automata and unambiguous weighted automata, respectively). First, a preliminary definition: the underlying NFA of A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} is an NFA formed by removing all transitions with weight 0 {\displaystyle 0} and then erasing all of the weights on the transitions Δ {\displaystyle \Delta } , so that the new transition set lies in Q × Σ × Q {\displaystyle Q\times \Sigma \times Q} . The initial states and final states are the set of states q {\displaystyle q} such that I ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle I(q)\neq 0} and F ( q ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle F(q)\neq 0} , respectively. A weighted automaton is deterministic if the underlying NFA is deterministic and unambiguous if the underlying NFA is unambiguous. Every deterministic weighted automaton is unambiguous. In both the deterministic and unambiguous cases, there is always at most one accepting path, so the ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } operation is never applied and can be omitted from the definition. == Variations == The requirement that there is a zero element for ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is sometimes omitted; in this case the machine defines a partial function from Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} to R {\displaystyle R} rather than a total function. It is possible to extend the definition to allow epsilon transitions ( q , ϵ , w , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\epsilon ,w,q')} , where ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the empty string. In this case, one must then require that there are no cycles of epsilon transitions. This does not increase the expressiveness of weighted automata. If epsilon transitions are allowed, the initial weights and final weights can be replaced by initial and final sets of states without loss of expressiveness. Some authors omit the initial and final weight functions I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} . Instead, I {\displaystyle I} and F {\displaystyle F} are replaced by a set of initial and final states. If epsilon transitions are not present, this technically decreases expressiveness as it forces [ [ A ] ] ( ε ) {\displaystyle [\![{\mathcal {A}}]\!](\varepsilon )} to depend only on the number of states that are both initial and final. The transition function can be given as a matrix Δ σ ∈ R Q × Q {\displaystyle \Delta _{\sigma }\in R^{Q\times Q}} with entries in R {\displaystyle R} for each σ {\displaystyle \sigma } , rather than a set of transitions. The entry of the matrix at ( q , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,q')} is the sum of all transitions labeled ( q , σ , q ′ ) {\displaystyle (q,\sigma ,q')} . Some authors restrict to specific semirings, such as N {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} } or Z {\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} } , particularly when studying decidability results.

  Read more →
• 

  Maghi King

  Margaret (Maghi) Daniel King is a retired British computational linguist known for her work on evaluating the quality of machine translation. She is an honorary professor in the Department of Translation Technology of the University of Geneva in Switzerland, and the former director of the Dalle Molle Institute for Semantic and Cognitive Studies at the University of Geneva. == Education and career == King read classics, Ancient History and Philosophy (Greats) at the University of Oxford, worked as a computer programmer, and became a lecturer in the Department of Computation at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology. She moved to the Dalle Molle Institute for Semantic and Cognitive Studies (ISSCO) in 1974. In 1976, ISSCO became part of the University of Geneva, and she continued there, becoming ISSCO's director in 1978. She remained director until her retirement in 2006. == Recognition == King is a Fellow of the European Association for Artificial Intelligence (formerly ECCAI), elected in 1999.

  Read more →
• 

  Voice activity detection

  Voice activity detection (VAD), also known as speech activity detection or speech detection, is the detection of the presence or absence of human speech, used in speech processing. The main uses of VAD are in speaker diarization, speech coding and speech recognition. It can facilitate speech processing, and can also be used to deactivate some processes during non-speech section of an audio session: it can avoid unnecessary coding/transmission of silence packets in Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications, saving on computation and on network bandwidth. VAD is an important enabling technology for a variety of speech-based applications. Therefore, various VAD algorithms have been developed that provide varying features and compromises between latency, sensitivity, accuracy and computational cost. Some VAD algorithms also provide further analysis, for example whether the speech is voiced, unvoiced or sustained. Voice activity detection is usually independent of language. It was first investigated for use on time-assignment speech interpolation (TASI) systems. == Algorithm overview == The typical design of a VAD algorithm is as follows: There may first be a noise reduction stage, e.g. via spectral subtraction. Then some features or quantities are calculated from a section of the input signal. A classification rule is applied to classify the section as speech or non-speech – often this classification rule finds when a value exceeds a certain threshold. There may be some feedback in this sequence, in which the VAD decision is used to improve the noise estimate in the noise reduction stage, or to adaptively vary the threshold(s). These feedback operations improve the VAD performance in non-stationary noise (i.e. when the noise varies a lot). A representative set of recently published VAD methods formulates the decision rule on a frame by frame basis using instantaneous measures of the divergence distance between speech and noise. The different measures which are used in VAD methods include spectral slope, correlation coefficients, log likelihood ratio, cepstral, weighted cepstral, and modified distance measures. Independently from the choice of VAD algorithm, a compromise must be made between having voice detected as noise, or noise detected as voice (between false positive and false negative). A VAD operating in a mobile phone must be able to detect speech in the presence of a range of very diverse types of acoustic background noise. In these difficult detection conditions it is often preferable that a VAD should fail-safe, indicating speech detected when the decision is in doubt, to lower the chance of losing speech segments. The biggest difficulty in the detection of speech in this environment is the very low signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) that are encountered. It may be impossible to distinguish between speech and noise using simple level detection techniques when parts of the speech utterance are buried below the noise. == Applications == VAD is an integral part of different speech communication systems such as audio conferencing, echo cancellation, speech recognition, speech encoding, speaker recognition and hands-free telephony. In the field of multimedia applications, VAD allows simultaneous voice and data applications. Similarly, in Universal Mobile Telecommunications Systems (UMTS), it controls and reduces the average bit rate and enhances overall coding quality of speech. In cellular radio systems (for instance GSM and CDMA systems) based on Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) mode, VAD is essential for enhancing system capacity by reducing co-channel interference and power consumption in portable digital devices. In speech processing applications, voice activity detection plays an important role since non-speech frames are often discarded. For a wide range of applications such as digital mobile radio, Digital Simultaneous Voice and Data (DSVD) or speech storage, it is desirable to provide a discontinuous transmission of speech-coding parameters. Advantages can include lower average power consumption in mobile handsets, higher average bit rate for simultaneous services like data transmission, or a higher capacity on storage chips. However, the improvement depends mainly on the percentage of pauses during speech and the reliability of the VAD used to detect these intervals. On the one hand, it is advantageous to have a low percentage of speech activity. On the other hand, clipping, that is the loss of milliseconds of active speech, should be minimized to preserve quality. This is the crucial problem for a VAD algorithm under heavy noise conditions. === Use in telemarketing === One controversial application of VAD is in conjunction with predictive dialers used by telemarketing firms. In order to maximize agent productivity, telemarketing firms set up predictive dialers to call more numbers than they have agents available, knowing most calls will end up in either "Ring – No Answer" or answering machines. When a person answers, they typically speak briefly ("Hello", "Good evening", etc.) and then there is a brief period of silence. Answering machine messages are usually 3–15 seconds of continuous speech. By setting VAD parameters correctly, dialers can determine whether a person or a machine answered the call and, if it's a person, transfer the call to an available agent. If it detects an answering machine message, the dialer hangs up. Often, even when the system correctly detects a person answering the call, no agent may be available, resulting in a "silent call". Call screening with a multi-second message like "please say who you are, and I may pick up the phone" will frustrate such automated calls. == Performance evaluation == To evaluate a VAD, its output using test recordings is compared with those of an "ideal" VAD – created by hand-annotating the presence or absence of voice in the recordings. The performance of a VAD is commonly evaluated on the basis of the following four parameters: FEC (Front End Clipping): clipping introduced in passing from noise to speech activity; MSC (Mid Speech Clipping): clipping due to speech misclassified as noise; OVER: noise interpreted as speech due to the VAD flag remaining active in passing from speech activity to noise; NDS (Noise Detected as Speech): noise interpreted as speech within a silence period. Although the method described above provides useful objective information concerning the performance of a VAD, it is only an approximate measure of the subjective effect. For example, the effects of speech signal clipping can at times be hidden by the presence of background noise, depending on the model chosen for the comfort noise synthesis, so some of the clipping measured with objective tests is in reality not audible. It is therefore important to carry out subjective tests on VADs, the main aim of which is to ensure that the clipping perceived is acceptable. In VoIP applications, front-end clipping can be reduced by rewinding to shortly before the detection and sending very slightly delayed data. This kind of test requires a certain number of listeners to judge recordings containing the processing results of the VADs being tested, giving marks to several speech sequences on the following features: Quality; Comprehension difficulty; Audibility of clipping. These marks are then used to calculate average results for each of the features listed above, thus providing a global estimate of the behavior of the VAD being tested. To conclude, whereas objective methods are very useful in an initial stage to evaluate the quality of a VAD, subjective methods are more significant. As they require the participation of several people for a few days, increasing cost, they are generally only used when a proposal is about to be standardized. == Implementations == One early standard VAD is that developed by British Telecom for use in the Pan-European digital cellular mobile telephone service in 1991. It uses inverse filtering trained on non-speech segments to filter out background noise, so that it can then more reliably use a simple power-threshold to decide if a voice is present. The G.729 standard calculates the following features for its VAD: line spectral frequencies, full-band energy, low-band energy (<1 kHz), and zero-crossing rate. It applies a simple classification using a fixed decision boundary in the space defined by these features, and then applies smoothing and adaptive correction to improve the estimate. The GSM standard includes two VAD options developed by ETSI. Option 1 computes the SNR in nine bands and applies a threshold to these values. Option 2 calculates different parameters: channel power, voice metrics, and noise power. It then thresholds the voice metrics using a threshold that varies according to the estimated SNR. The Speex audio compression library uses a procedure named Improved Minima Controlled Recursive Averaging, which uses a smoothed representation of spectral pow

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Code-review Tools Compared (2026)

  In search of the best AI code-review tool? An AI code-review tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code-review tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Amazon Polly

  Amazon Polly is a cloud service by Amazon Web Services, a subsidiary of Amazon.com, that converts text into spoken audio. It allows developers to create speech-enabled applications and products. It was launched in November 2016 and (as of December 2024) includes 100+ voices across 41 language variants, some of which are Neural Text-to-Speech voices of higher quality. Users include Duolingo, a language education platform.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Copywriting Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

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

  Read more →
• 

  Purged cross-validation

  Purged cross-validation is a variant of k-fold cross-validation designed to prevent look-ahead bias in time series and other structured data, developed in 2017 by Marcos López de Prado at Guggenheim Partners and Cornell University. It is primarily used in financial machine learning to ensure the independence of training and testing samples when labels depend on future events. It provides an alternative to conventional cross-validation and walk-forward backtesting methods, which often yield overly optimistic performance estimates due to information leakage and overfitting. == Motivation == Standard cross-validation assumes that observations are independently and identically distributed (IID), which often does not hold in time series or financial datasets. If the label of a test sample overlaps in time with the features or labels in the training set, the result may be data leakage and overfitting. Purged cross-validation addresses this issue by removing overlapping observations and, optionally, adding a temporal buffer ("embargo") around the test set to further reduce the risk of leakage. The figure below illustrates standard 5 Fold Cross-Validation == Purging == Purging removes from the training set any observation whose timestamp falls within the time range of formation of a label in the test set. This can be the case for train set observations before and after the test set. Their removal ensures that the algorithm cannot learn during train time information that will be used to assess the performance of the algorithm. See the figure below for an illustration of purging. == Embargoing == Embargoing addresses a more subtle form of leakage: even if an observation does not directly overlap the test set, it may still be affected by test events due to market reaction lag or downstream dependencies. To guard against this, a percentage-based embargo is imposed after each test fold. For example, with a 5% embargo and 1000 observations, the 50 observations following each test fold are excluded from training. Unlike purging, embargoing can only occur after the test set. The figure below illustrates the application of embargo: == Applications == Purged and embargoed cross-validation has been useful in: Backtesting of trading strategies Validation of classifiers on labeled event-driven returns Any machine learning task with overlapping label horizons == Example == To illustrate the effect of purging and embargoing, consider the figures below. Both diagrams show the structure of 5-fold cross-validation over a 20-day period. In each row, blue squares indicate training samples and red squares denote test samples. Each label is defined based on the value of the next two observations, hence creating an overlap. If this overlap is left untreated, test set information leaks into the train set. The second figure applies the Purged CV procedure. Notice how purging removes overlapping observations from the training set and the embargo widens the gap between test and training data. This approach ensures that the evaluation more closely resembles a true out-of-sample test and reduces the risk of backtest overfitting. == Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation == Walk-forward backtesting analysis, another common cross-validation technique in finance, preserves temporal order but evaluates the model on a single sequence of test sets. This leads to high variance in performance estimation, as results are contingent on a specific historical path. Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation (CPCV) addresses this limitation by systematically constructing multiple train-test splits, purging overlapping samples, and enforcing an embargo period to prevent information leakage. The result is a distribution of out-of-sample performance estimates, enabling robust statistical inference and more realistic assessment of a model's predictive power. === Methodology === CPCV divides a time-series dataset into N sequential, non-overlapping groups. These groups preserve the temporal order of observations. Then, all combinations of k groups (where k < N) are selected as test sets, with the remaining N − k groups used for training. For each combination, the model is trained and evaluated under strict controls to prevent leakage. To eliminate potential contamination between training and test sets, CPCV introduces two additional mechanisms: Purging: Any training observations whose label horizon overlaps with the test period are excluded. This ensures that future information does not influence model training. Embargoing: After the end of each test period, a fixed number of observations (typically a small percentage) are removed from the training set. This prevents leakage due to delayed market reactions or auto-correlated features. Each data point appears in multiple test sets across different combinations. Because test groups are drawn combinatorially, this process produces multiple backtest "paths," each of which simulates a plausible market scenario. From these paths, practitioners can compute a distribution of performance statistics such as the Sharpe ratio, drawdown, or classification accuracy. === Formal definition === Let N be the number of sequential groups into which the dataset is divided, and let k be the number of groups selected as the test set for each split. Then: The number of unique train-test combinations is given by the binomial coefficient: ( N k ) {\displaystyle {\binom {N}{k}}} Each observation is used in k {\displaystyle k} test sets and contributes to φ [ N , k ] {\displaystyle \varphi [N,k]} unique backtest paths: φ [ N , k ] = k N ( N k ) {\displaystyle \varphi [N,k]={\frac {k}{N}}{\binom {N}{k}}} This yields a distribution of performance metrics rather than a single point estimate, making it possible to apply Monte Carlo-based or probabilistic techniques to assess model robustness. === Illustrative example === Consider the case where N = 6 and k = 2. The number of possible test set combinations is ( 6 2 ) = 15 {\displaystyle {\binom {6}{2}}=15} . Each of the six groups appears in five test splits. Consequently, five distinct backtest paths can be constructed, each incorporating one appearance from every group. ==== Test group assignment matrix ==== This table shows the 15 test combinations. An "x" indicates that the corresponding group is included in the test set for that split. ==== Backtest path assignment ==== Each group contributes to five different backtest paths. The number in each cell indicates the path to which the group's result is assigned for that split. === Advantages === Combinatorial Purged Cross-Validation offers several key benefits over conventional methods: It produces a distribution of performance metrics, enabling more rigorous statistical inference. The method systematically eliminates lookahead bias through purging and embargoing. By simulating multiple historical scenarios, it reduces the dependence on any single market regime or realization. It supports high-confidence comparisons between competing models or strategies. CPCV is commonly used in quantitative strategy research, especially for evaluating predictive models such as classifiers, regressors, and portfolio optimizers. It has been applied to estimate realistic Sharpe ratios, assess the risk of overfitting, and support the use of statistical tools such as the Deflated Sharpe Ratio (DSR). === Limitations === The main limitation of CPCV stems from its high computational cost. However, this cost can be managed by sampling a finite number of splits from the space of all possible combinations.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Content Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  In search of the best AI content generator? An AI content generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI content generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Is an AI Essay Writer Worth It in 2026?

  Comparing the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Text-to-video Tools in 2026

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

  Read more →
• 

  BeHafizh

  BeHafizh is a mobile application to assist in the effort to memorize Qur'anic verses. The software runs on the Android operating system. This application was made by a team from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) consisting of Farid Amin Ridwanto, Rian Adam Rajagede and Alfian Try Putranto in order to participate in the National Student Musabaqoh Tilawatil Quran (MTQ) held at University of Indonesia (UI) on 1- August 8, 2015. This application then won a gold medal in the branch of Computer Application Design in the competition. == Features == === Audio Player === Audio player, paragraph can be played repeatedly, with pause, and can be done on a certain range of Quranic verses. === Memorization Test === Memorization testing continues users to improve their memorization. Memorization Recorders improves user's ability to recite Quran. === Colour indicators === === Achievements === === Reminders ===

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Text-to-image Tool

  Curious about the best AI text-to-image tool? An AI text-to-image tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-image tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Generalized nondeterministic finite automaton

  In the theory of computation, a generalized nondeterministic finite automaton (GNFA), also known as an expression automaton or a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine, is a variation of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) where each transition is labeled with any regular expression. The GNFA reads blocks of symbols from the input which constitute a string as defined by the regular expression on the transition. There are several differences between a standard finite state machine and a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine. A GNFA must have only one start state and one accept state, and these cannot be the same state, whereas an NFA or DFA both may have several accept states, and the start state can be an accept state. A GNFA must have only one transition between any two states, whereas a NFA or DFA both allow for numerous transitions between states. In a GNFA, a state has a single transition to every state in the machine, although often it is a convention to ignore the transitions that are labelled with the empty set when drawing generalized nondeterministic finite state machines. == Formal definition == A GNFA can be defined as a 5-tuple, (S, Σ, T, s, a), consisting of a finite set of states (S); a finite set called the alphabet (Σ); a transition function (T : (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {a}) × (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {s}) → R); a start state (s ∈ S); an accept state (a ∈ S); where R is the collection of all regular expressions over the alphabet Σ. The transition function takes as its argument a pair of two states and outputs a regular expression (the label of the transition). This differs from other finite state machines, which take as input a single state and an input from the alphabet (or the empty string in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines) and outputs the next state (or the set of possible states in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines). A DFA or NFA can easily be converted into a GNFA and then the GNFA can be easily converted into a regular expression by repeatedly collapsing parts of it to single edges until S = {s, a}. Similarly, GNFAs can be reduced to NFAs by changing regular expression operators into new edges until each edge is labelled with a regular expression matching a single string of length at most 1. NFAs, in turn, can be reduced to DFAs using the powerset construction. This shows that GNFAs recognize the same set of formal languages as DFAs and NFAs.

  Read more →