AI Face Fusion

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

Engineering Historical Memory

Engineering Historical Memory (EHM) is an online database in the digital humanities, serving as an open-access research tool for primary historical materials focused on 11th to 15th century Afro-Eurasia. It adopts computational methods to make historical documents machine-understandable. EHM parses traditional artifacts such as historical maps, travel accounts, chronicles and codices into computer-readable formats, and links them to secondary multi-media references, a process referred to as the "automatic narrative generation". This approach generates cultural narratives and facilitates interaction with the historical artifacts, making them accessible to audiences from various backgrounds. == History == EHM was first theorised in 2007 by researcher Andrea Nanetti when he was a visiting scholar at Princeton University, and the preliminary test results were published between 2008 and 2011. In 2013, the EHM research team was set up in Singapore following Nanetti's professorship at Nanyang Technological University (NTU). Two years later, after receiving several Microsoft research grants, EHM went live on Microsoft Azure. In 2018, the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (CoHASS) at NTU Singapore formed the Digital Humanities Research Cluster, as part of which, EHM has been an ongoing interdisciplinary research project led by Nanetti. Partnering with international educational and cultural institutions such as Ca' Foscari University of Venice, University of Florence, Taylor & Francis Group, Delft University of Technology (TUDelft), and SenticNet, EHM has been supported by over 130 scholars and engineers. == Applications == Primary historical materials on EHM are curated into several categories, including maps, travel accounts, chronicles, codices, sites, archival documents, and paintings, such as the Morosini Codex (listed under Chronicles) and Pope Gregory X's Privilege for the Holy Monastery of St Catherine of Sinai (listed under Archival Documents). EHM has been adopted by cultural organisations as an exhibition and research tool in the digital humanities field. An example is the publication of a digital interactive edition of Fra Mauro's Map of the World on EHM, a collaboration project between NTU Singapore and the Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana of Venice. The digitisation process of the map on EHM involved transcribing and geo-referencing the textual content in the 15th-century map, followed by creating semantic annotations to connect the map's content with related secondary data sources. The e-map was subsequently adopted and launched online by Museo Galileo in March 2022 and incorporated into the virtual exhibition "Venezia and Suzhou: Water Cities along the Silk Roads" (online, September-December 2022). In 2024, the Fra Mauro's Map of the World application on EHM was awarded the Digital Humanities and Multimedia Studies Prize (DHMS) by the Medieval Academy of America. Image-Based Video Search Engine is another experimental project under the EHM scope led by the research teams at Delft University of Technology (TUDelft) and NTU Singapore. This ongoing project aims to improve the efficiency of retrieving targeted objects from audio-visuals. == Awards == In 2021, EHM won the GLAMi Awards (MuseWeb Conference - Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums Innovation awards) in the "Resources for Scholars and Researchers" category. In the same year, EHM was a Falling Walls finalist for Science Breakthrough of the Year in the category Social Sciences and Humanities after nominated by the School of Advanced Study at the University of London. In April 2022, the Italian National Commission for UNESCO has selected and sent the EHM project to the organisers of the "Jikji Memory of the World" Award for final evaluation. In January 2024, the Medieval Academy of America announced its 2024 Digital Humanities and Multimedia Studies Prize (DHMS) goes to the Fra Mauro's Map of the World application on EHM.
Read more →
Civitai

Civitai is an online platform and marketplace for generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) content, primarily focused on AI-generated images and models, and AI-generated videos. == History == Civitai was founded in 2022 by Justin Maier. By January 2023, the site reached 100,000 registered users and 3 million by November. In November 2023, Civitai secured funding from venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. By April 2024, Civitai had 23.2 million monthly accesses. The company is headquartered in Boise, Idaho. == Platform == Civitai allows users to share and download AI models, particularly those used for image generation. The platform supports various AI models, including Stable Diffusion and Flux, and provides a space for users to showcase and monetize their AI-generated content. Users have profile pages and can comment on other users' models and images. The website also features a virtual currency called Buzz that can be used to generate images on Civitai's servers. Buzz can be bought or earned by engaging with the site. The platform is open source. == Controversies == In 2023, 404 Media reported that Civitai began a "Bounties" marketplace where users could commission deepfakes, of real or fake people. Users are rewarded with Buzz for completing Bounties. In December 2023, AI provider OctoML announced it had ended its business relationship with Civitai after concerns were raised users were generating images that “could be categorized as child pornography.”
Read more →
AI-assisted virtualization software

AI-assisted virtualization software is a type of technology that combines the principles of virtualization with advanced artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms. This software is designed to improve efficiency and management of virtual environments and resources. This technology has been used in cloud computing and for various industries. == History == Virtualization originated in mainframe computers in the 1960s in order to divide system resources between different applications. The term has since broadened. The use of AI in virtualization significantly increased in the early 2020s. == Uses == AI-assisted virtualization software uses AI-related technology such as machine learning, deep learning, and neural networks to attempt to make more accurate predictions and decisions regarding the management of virtual environments. Features include intelligent automation, predictive analytics, and dynamic resource allocation. Intelligent Automation: Automating tasks such as resource provisioning and routine maintenance. The AI learns from ongoing operations and can predict and perform necessary tasks autonomously. Predictive Analytics: Utilizing AI to analyze data patterns and trends, predicting future issues or resource requirements. It aids in proactive management and mitigation of potential problems. Dynamic Resource Allocation: Through the analysis of real-time and historical data, the AI system dynamically assigns resources based on demand and need, optimizing overall system performance and reducing wastage. AI-assisted virtualization software has been used in cloud computing to optimize the use of resources and reduce costs. In healthcare, these technologies have been used to create virtual patient profiles. They are also used in data centers to improve performance and energy efficiency. It has also been used in network function virtualization (NFV) to improve virtual network infrastructure. Implementing this type of software requires a high degree of technological sophistication and can incur significant costs. There are also concerns about the risks associated with AI, such as algorithmic bias and security vulnerabilities. Additionally, there are issues related to governance, the ethics of artificial intelligence, and regulations of AI technologies.
Read more →
Parents & Kids Safe AI Coalition

The Parents & Kids Safe AI Coalition is a political action committee that advocates for regulation of artificial intelligence on child safety. As of April 2026, the group is funded solely by the artificial intelligence company OpenAI, which pledged $10 million to the effort. == History == In October 2025, California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed Assembly Bill 1064. Sponsored by Common Sense Media, the bill would have introduced stronger child safety protections for AI chatbots. The following month, Common Sense Media founder Jim Steyer filed a ballot initiative intended to restore the "guardrails" lost in the veto. In response, OpenAI introduced a competing initiative. In January 2026, Common Sense Media and OpenAI announced that they would be working together on a compromise ballot initiative, the Parents & Kids Safe AI Act. Reporting indicated that initial outreach emails to child safety organizations failed to disclose OpenAI's involvement. Several advocacy groups signed an open letter claiming the initiative would shield AI companies from liability and undermine age verification, among other concerns. After Common Sense Media met with opposing groups in February, the ballot initiative was put on hold and the organizations involved sought to negotiate with the Legislature instead. The Parents & Kids Safe AI Coalition was founded to support this effort. In March 2026, the group reached out to some of the same groups contacted earlier, asking them to endorse its list of policy priorities. Again, some organizations reported being unaware of OpenAI's level of involvement. At least two groups withdrew from the coalition after learning about the financial ties. The priorities themselves were described as "vague but fairly uncontroversial" by The San Francisco Standard.
Read more →
Color normalization

Color normalization is a topic in computer vision concerned with artificial color vision and object recognition. In general, the distribution of color values in an image depends on the illumination, which may vary depending on lighting conditions, cameras, and other factors. Color normalization allows for object recognition techniques based on color to compensate for these variations. == Main concepts == === Color constancy === Color constancy is a feature of the human internal model of perception, which provides humans with the ability to assign a relatively constant color to objects even under different illumination conditions. This is helpful for object recognition as well as identification of light sources in an environment. For example, humans see an object approximately as the same color when the sun is bright or when the sun is dim. === Applications === Color normalization has been used for object recognition on color images in the field of robotics, bioinformatics and general artificial intelligence, when it is important to remove all intensity values from the image while preserving color values. One example is in case of a scene shot by a surveillance camera over the day, where it is important to remove shadows or lighting changes on same color pixels and recognize the people that passed. Another example is automated screening tools used for the detection of diabetic retinopathy as well as molecular diagnosis of cancer states, where it is important to include color information during classification. == Known issues == The main issue about certain applications of color normalization is that the result looks unnatural or too distant from the original colors. In cases where there is a subtle variation between important aspects, this can be problematic. More specifically, the side effect can be that pixels become divergent and not reflect the actual color value of the image. A way of combating this issue is to use color normalization in combination with thresholding to correctly and consistently segment a colored image. == Transformations and algorithms == There is a vast array of different transformations and algorithms for achieving color normalization and a limited list is presented here. The performance of an algorithm is dependent on the task and one algorithm which performs better than another in one task might perform worse in another (no free lunch theorem). Additionally, the choice of the algorithm depends on the preferences of the user for the end-result, e.g. they may want a more natural-looking color image. === Grey world === The grey world normalization makes the assumption that changes in the lighting spectrum can be modelled by three constant factors applied to the red, green and blue channels of color. More specifically, a change in illuminated color can be modelled as a scaling α, β and γ in the R, G and B color channels and as such the grey world algorithm is invariant to illumination color variations. Therefore, a constancy solution can be achieved by dividing each color channel by its average value as shown in the following formula: ( α R , β G , γ B ) → ( α R α n ∑ i R , β G β n ∑ i G , γ B γ n ∑ i B ) {\displaystyle \left(\alpha R,\beta G,\gamma B\right)\rightarrow \left({\frac {\alpha R}{{\frac {\alpha }{n}}\sum _{i}R}},{\frac {\beta G}{{\frac {\beta }{n}}\sum _{i}G}},{\frac {\gamma B}{{\frac {\gamma }{n}}\sum _{i}B}}\right)} As mentioned above, grey world color normalization is invariant to illuminated color variations α, β and γ, however it has one important problem: it does not account for all variations of illumination intensity and it is not dynamic; when new objects appear in the scene it fails. To solve this problem there are several variants of the grey world algorithm. Additionally there is an iterative variation of the grey world normalization, however it was not found to perform significantly better. === Histogram equalization === Histogram equalization is a non-linear transform which maintains pixel rank and is capable of normalizing for any monotonically increasing color transform function. It is considered to be a more powerful normalization transformation than the grey world method. The results of histogram equalization tend to have an exaggerated blue channel and look unnatural, due to the fact that in most images the distribution of the pixel values is usually more similar to a Gaussian distribution, rather than uniform. === Histogram specification === Histogram specification transforms the red, green and blue histograms to match the shapes of three specific histograms, rather than simply equalizing them. It refers to a class of image transforms which aims to obtain images of which the histograms have a desired shape. As specified, firstly it is necessary to convert the image so that it has a particular histogram. Assume an image x. The following formula is the equalization transform of this image: y = f ( x ) = ∫ 0 x p x ( u ) d u {\displaystyle y=f(x)=\int \limits _{0}^{x}p_{x}(u)du} Then assume wanted image z. The equalization transform of this image is: y ′ = g ( z ) = ∫ 0 z p z ( u ) d u {\displaystyle y'=g(z)=\int \limits _{0}^{z}p_{z}(u)du} Of course p z ( u ) {\displaystyle p_{z}(u)} is the histogram of the output image. The formula to find the inverse of the above transform is: z = g − 1 ( y ′ ) {\displaystyle z=g^{-1}(y')} Therefore, since images y and y' have the same equalized histogram they are actually the same image, meaning y = y' and the transform from the given image x to the wanted image z is: z = g − 1 ( y ′ ) = g − 1 ( y ) = g − 1 ( f ( x ) ) {\displaystyle z=g^{-1}(y')=g^{-1}(y)=g^{-1}(f(x))} Histogram specification has the advantage of producing more realistic looking images, as it does not exaggerate the blue channel like histogram equalization. === Comprehensive Color Normalization === The comprehensive color normalization is shown to increase localization and object classification results in combination with color indexing. It is an iterative algorithm which works in two stages. The first stage is to use the red, green and blue color space with the intensity normalized, to normalize each pixel. The second stage is to normalize each color channel separately, so that the sum of the color components is equal to one third of the number of pixels. The iterations continue until convergence, meaning no additional changes. Formally: Normalize the color image f ( t ) = [ f i j ( t ) ] i = 1... N , j = 1... M {\displaystyle f^{(t)}=[f_{ij}^{(t)}]_{i=1...N,j=1...M}} which consists of color vectors f i j ( t ) = ( r i j ( t ) , g i j ( t ) , b i j ( t ) ) T . {\displaystyle f_{ij}^{(t)}=(r_{ij}^{(t)},g_{ij}^{(t)},b_{ij}^{(t)})^{T}.} For the first step explained above, compute: S i j := r i j ( t ) + g i j ( t ) + b i j ( t ) {\displaystyle S_{ij}:=r_{ij}^{(t)}+g_{ij}^{(t)}+b_{ij}^{(t)}} which leads to r i j ( t + 1 ) = r i j ( t ) S i j , g i j ( t + 1 ) = g i j ( t ) S i j {\displaystyle r_{ij}^{(t+1)}={\frac {r_{ij}^{(t)}}{S_{ij}}},g_{ij}^{(t+1)}={\frac {g_{ij}^{(t)}}{S_{ij}}}} and b i j ( t + 1 ) = b i j ( t ) S i j . {\displaystyle b_{ij}^{(t+1)}={\frac {b_{ij}^{(t)}}{S_{ij}}}.} For the second step explained above, compute: r ′ = 3 N M ∑ i = 1 N ∑ j = 1 M r i j ( t + 1 ) {\displaystyle r'={\frac {3}{NM}}\sum _{i=1}^{N}\sum _{j=1}^{M}r_{ij}^{(t+1)}} and normalize r i j ( t + 2 ) = r i j ( t + 1 ) r ′ . {\displaystyle r_{ij}^{(t+2)}={\frac {r_{ij}^{(t+1)}}{r'}}.} Of course the same process is done for b' and g'. Then these two steps are repeated until the changes between iteration t and t+2 are less than some set threshold. Comprehensive color normalization, just like the histogram equalization method previously mentioned, produces results that may look less natural due to the reduction in the number of color values.
Read more →
POSC Caesar

POSC Caesar Association (PCA) is an international, open and not-for-profit, member organization that promotes the development of open specifications to be used as standards for enabling the interoperability of data, software and related matters. PCA is the initiator of ISO 15926 "Integration of life-cycle data for process plants including oil and gas production facilities" and is committed to its maintenance and enhancement. Nils Sandsmark has been the General Manager of POSC Caesar Association since 1999 and Thore Langeland, Norwegian Oil Industry Association (Norwegian: Oljeindustriens Landsforening, OLF), is the chairman of the board. == History == === Caesar Offshore === The first predecessor of POSC Caesar Association, the Caesar Offshore program, started in 1993. The original focus was on standardizing technical data definitions for capital intensive projects at the handover from the EPC contractor to the owner/operators of onshore and offshore oil and gas production facilities. The program was sponsored by The Research Council of Norway, two EPC contractors (Aker Maritime and Kværner), three owners/operators (Norsk Hydro, Saga Petroleum and Statoil) and DNV as service provider and project owner. === POSC Caesar project === During the period 1994–96, Caesar Offshore Program was defined as a project of Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation (POSC) (now Energistics), and changed its name to the POSC Caesar Project. In 1995 the project was joined by BP, Brown and Root and Elf Aquitaine and in 1997 by Intergraph, IBM, Oracle, Lloyd's, Shell, ABB and UMOE Technologies. During that time, POSC Caesar also became a member of European Process Industries STEP Technical Liaison Executive (EPISTLE) where it collaborates with PISTEP (UK), and USPI-NL (The Netherlands) on the development of ISO 10303, also known as "Standard for the Exchange of Product model data (STEP)". === POSC Caesar Association === In 1997, POSC Caesar Association was founded as an independent, global, non-profit, member organization. POSC Caesar Association serves an international membership and collaborates with other international organizations. It has its main office in Norway. Albeit the name of POSC Caesar Association still hints to its past as a project within the Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation (POSC) (now Energistics), from 1997 onwards, the organization has been independent. Energistics and POSC Caesar Association do collaborate, and are formally member in each other's organization. == Membership == POSC Caesar Association has with its current 36 members from around the world and has established an international footprint (with a strong membership in Norway) that includes a variety of backgrounds, from academia and solution providers to engineering contractors and owners/operators. The members are (subdivided by organization type): Associations: Energistics (USA) and The Norwegian Oil Industry Association (OLF, Norway); Universities and Research Institutes: International Research Institute of Stavanger (IRIS, Norway), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU, Norway), Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST, Korea), SINTEF (Norway), University of Bergen (Norway), University of Oslo (Norway), University of Stavanger (Norway), University of Tromsø (Norway) and Western Norway Research Institute (Norway); Oil and Gas Companies: BP (UK), Petronas (Malaysia) and Statoil (Norway); Engineering contractors and consultants: Akvaplan-niva (Norway), Aker Solutions (Norway), Asset Life Cycle Information Management (ALCIM, Malaysia), CAESAR systems (USA), Bechtel (USA), Det Norske Veritas (DNV, Norway), Information Logic (USA) and iXIT Engineering Technology (Germany), Phusion IM Ltd (UK); Solution providers: Aveva (UK), Bentley Systems (USA), Jotne EPM Technology (Norway), Epsis (Norway), Eurostep (Sweden), International Business Machines Corporation (IBM, USA), Siemens - Comos Industry Solutions (before Innotec) (Germany), Intergraph (USA), Invenia (Norway), Keel Solution (Denmark), Noumenon (UK), NRX (Canada), Octaga (Norway) and Tektonisk (Norway). In general, the organization holds three membership meetings a year; one in January / February in North-America (typically USA), one in April / May in Europe (typically Norway) and one in October in Asia (typically Malaysia). == Activities and services == === Initiator and custodian of ISO 15926 === In consultation with the other EPISTLE members and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), it was decided in 2003 (some say already in 1997) that for modeling-technical reasons it was better to discontinue the development of ISO 10303 and to initiate the development of ISO 15926 "Integration of life-cycle data for process plants including oil and gas production facilities." Over the years, the scope of the standard has increased from the initial capital-intensive projects in the upstream oil and gas industry, to include also relevant terminology for downstream oil and gas industry applications and to deal with real-time data related to the actual oil and gas production. ISO 15926 has also over the years evolved from a dictionary (a list of terms with definitions), over a taxonomy (added hierarchy) to an ontology (a formal representation of a set of concepts within a domain and the relationships between those concepts). ISO 15926 is therefore sometimes nicknamed the "Oil and Gas Ontology", for some considered to be an essential prerequisite together with Semantic Web technologies to get to better interoperability, an optimal use of all available data across boundaries and an increase in efficiency. This is what some call the next generation of Integrated Operations. === Reference data services === Placeholders: Flow scheme of WIP - RDS - ISO and role of SIGs RDS Standards in database pilot (ISO) === Special interest groups === Placeholders: Overview of SIGs Drilling and Completion Reservoir and Production Operations and Maintenance == Projects == There are a number of projects (co-)organized by POSC Caesar Association working on the extension of the ISO 15926 standard in different application areas. === Capital intensive projects application domain === The following projects are running at the moment (August 2009): The ADI Project of FIATECH, to build the tools (which will then be made available in the public domain) The IDS Project of POSC Caesar Association, to define product models required for data sheets A joint collaboration project between FIATECH POSC Caesar Association is the ADI-IDS project is the ISO 15926 WIP === Upstream oil and gas industry application domain === The following projects are currently running (August 2009): The Integrated Operations in the High North (IOHN) project is working on extending ISO 15926 to handle real-time data transmission and (pre-)processing to enable the next generation of Integrated Operations. The Environment Web project to include environmental reporting terms and definitions as used in EPIM's EnvironmentWeb in ISO 15926. Finalised projects include: The Integrated Information Platform (IIP) project working on establishing a real-time information pipeline based on open standards. It worked among others on: Daily Drilling Report (DDR) to including all terms and definitions in ISO 15926. This standard became mandatory on February 1, 2008 for reporting on the Norwegian Continental Shelf by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) and Safety Authority Norway (PSA). NPD says that the quality of the reports has improved considerably since. Daily Production Report (DPR) to including all terms and definitions in ISO 15926. This standard was tested successfully on the Valhall (BP-operated) and Åsgard (StatoilHydro-operated) fields offshore Norway. The terminology and XML schemata developed have also been included in Energistics’ PRODML standard. == Conferences and events == === Semantic Days === === Sogndal academic network meeting === == Collaborations == POSC Caesar is collaborating with a number of standardization bodies, including: Mimosa: collaboration on open information standards for Operations and Maintenance mainly for the downstream oil and gas industry; FIATECH: collaboration on open information standards for life cycle data of capital projects; Energistics: collaboration on information standards for the upstream oil and gas industry, including WITSML and PRODML; OASIS: collaboration on e-business standards; ISO TC184/SC4: the host of the ISO 15926 standard.
Read more →
Simulation decomposition

SimDec, or Simulation decomposition, is a hybrid uncertainty and sensitivity analysis method, for visually examining the relationships between the output and input variables of a computational model. SimDec maps multivariable scenarios onto the distribution of the model output. This visual analytics approach exposes the underlying nature of the model behavior, including its nonlinear and multivariate interaction effects. SimDec can be used in any range of science, engineering, and social domains. Existing applications include business and environmental issues. == Method == SimDec operates on Monte Carlo simulation (or measured) data where both output and input values are recorded. At least one thousand observations (or simulated iterations) are typically recommended to preserve the readability of the resulting histograms. An outline of the decomposition algorithm, which is readily available in multiple programming languages, proceeds as follows: Select the input variables for decomposition. One can use sensitivity indices (see variance-based sensitivity analysis) to define the most influential variables for decomposition or choose them manually according to the decision-problem context (for example, only those input variables that the decision-maker can act upon). Two to three input variables, ordered by decreasing value of their sensitivity indices, usually provide the most meaningful decomposition results. Divide the inputs into states. The numeric ranges of the inputs are split into several intervals with an equal number of observations in each. For categorical variables, the categories represent states. Form scenarios. All combinations of states of the selected input variables produce unique scenarios or subsets of the data. For example, if the range of X2 is divided into low, medium and high, and X3 takes values of 1 or 2, six scenarios are formed: (i) X2 low & X3 = 1, (ii) X2 low & X3 = 2, (iii) X2 medium & X3 = 1, (iv) X2 medium & X3 = 2, (v) X2 high & X3 = 1, and (vi) X2 high & X3 = 2. Assign scenarios to each output value. The simulation data is used to define the scenario index for each simulation run. For example, if an X2 value falls into the low state and X3 is equal to 2, the corresponding scenario, defined in Step 3, is (ii). Color-code the output distribution. When all output values are assigned scenario indices, they are plotted as series in a stacked histogram, visually separated by color-coding. For ease of visual perception, the states of the most influential input variable are assigned distinct colors, and all the remaining partitions take shades of those colors (see Figure). All of these steps can be run automatically on the given data using the open-source SimDec packages currently available in Python, R, Julia, and Matlab. A SimDec template in Excel runs a Monte Carlo simulation of a spreadsheet model but possesses only a manual option for input selection. == How to read SimDec == === Histogram === Histogram is an approximate representation of the distribution of numerical data. Its horizontal axis shows the range of the variable of interest, and its vertical axis denotes count, also called frequency, or, if divided by the total number of data points, probability. The distribution alone can supply only limited information about the data – its minimum, maximum, and shape (where the most of data occurs). === Judging the importance of inputs === If an input variable has no effect on the output, its states (e.g., low & high) would lie on top of each other on the SimDec histogram, occupying fully overlapping ranges of the output. If an input variable has a strong effect and explains most of the variance of the output, the border between its states on the SimDec histogram would be vertical. Such visualization has an important decision-making implication – e.g., if the high state of X can be achieved, it would guarantee a certain range of Y. All cases in-between with low-to-strong effects would show a diagonal border between the states. The less they overlap, the larger the effect of X on Y. While the horizontal displacement of sub-distributions on the SimDec histogram is the key to interpreting the results, the vertical disposition of sub-distributions is just a technical matter of the order of plotting the series of the stacked histogram. === Exploring the interaction of inputs === When two or more input variables are used for decomposition, it becomes possible to examine their joint effects. A schematic visualization portrays how different types of joint effects of input variables on the output appear on SimDec visualization. Understanding the nature of interaction effects in a computational model and its behavior in general is crucial for effective decision-making. == Limitations == The SimDec method has several limitations: It is based on Monte Carlo simulation and thus requires running a computational model a thousand of times or more. To models that take hours to evaluate once, it would be impossible to use SimDec (unless a supercomputer and/or large of time are available). SimDec is based on a histogram, thus, for binary or categorical output variables, the visualization would be very limited (e.g., only a few bins). The more input variables one selects for the decomposition, the less readable the histogram becomes. Only cases with two and three input variables are presented in.
Read more →
Semantic similarity network

A semantic similarity network (SSN) is a special form of semantic network. designed to represent concepts and their semantic similarity. Its main contribution is reducing the complexity of calculating semantic distances. Bendeck (2004, 2008) introduced the concept of semantic similarity networks (SSN) as the specialization of a semantic network to measure semantic similarity from ontological representations. Implementations include genetic information handling. The concept is formally defined (Bendeck 2008) as a directed graph, with concepts represented as nodes and semantic similarity relations as edges. The relationships are grouped into relation types. The concepts and relations contain attribute values to evaluate the semantic similarity between concepts. The semantic similarity relationships of the SSN represent several of the general relationship types of the standard Semantic network, reducing the complexity of the (normally, very large) network for calculations of semantics. SSNs define relation types as templates (and taxonomy of relations) for semantic similarity attributes that are common to relations of the same type. SSN representation allows propagation algorithms to faster calculate semantic similarities, including stop conditions within a specified threshold. This reduces the computation time and power required for calculation. A more recent publications on Semantic Matching and Semantic Similarity Networks could be found in (Bendeck 2019). Specific Semantic Similarity Network application on healthcare was presented at the Healthcare information exchange Format (FHIR European Conference) 2019. The latest evolution in Artificial Intelligence (like ChatGPT, based on Large language model), relay strongly on evolutionary computation, the next level will be to include semantic unification (like in the Semantic Networks and this Semantic similarity network) to extend the current models with more powerful understanding tools.
Read more →
Swizzling (computer graphics)

In computer graphics, swizzles are a class of operations that transform vectors by rearranging components. Swizzles can also project from a vector of one dimensionality to a vector of another dimensionality, such as taking a three-dimensional vector and creating a two-dimensional or five-dimensional vector using components from the original vector. For example, if A = {1,2,3,4}, where the components are x, y, z, and w respectively, one could compute B = A.wwxy, whereupon B would equal {4,4,1,2}. Additionally, one could create a two-dimensional vector with A.wx or a five-dimensional vector with A.xyzwx. Combining vectors and swizzling can be employed in various ways. This is common in GPGPU applications. In terms of linear algebra, this is equivalent to multiplying by a matrix whose rows are standard basis vectors. If A = ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ) T {\displaystyle A=(1,2,3,4)^{T}} , then swizzling A {\displaystyle A} as above looks like A . w w x y = [ 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 ] [ 1 2 3 4 ] = [ 4 4 1 2 ] . {\displaystyle A.\!wwxy={\begin{bmatrix}0&0&0&1\\0&0&0&1\\1&0&0&0\\0&1&0&0\end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}1\\2\\3\\4\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}4\\4\\1\\2\end{bmatrix}}.}
Read more →
Lethal autonomous weapon

A lethal autonomous weapon (LAW), also known as a lethal autonomous weapon system (LAWS), autonomous weapon system (AWS), robotic weapon, or killer robot, is a type of military drone or military robot, which is autonomous in that it can independently search for and engage targets based on programmed constraints and descriptions. As of 2025, most military drones (including unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned combat aerial vehicles) and military robots are not truly autonomous. LAWs may engage in drone warfare in the air, on land, on water, underwater, or in space. == Definitions == In weapons development, the term "autonomous" is somewhat ambiguous and can vary hugely between different scholars, nations and organizations. There is no definition of lethal autonomous weapon systems that is generally agreed upon among different countries. The official United States Department of Defense Policy on Autonomy in Weapon Systems (Department of Defense Directive 3000.09) defines an Autonomous Weapon System as one that "...once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator." Heather Roff, a writer for Case Western Reserve University School of Law, describes autonomous weapon systems as "... capable of learning and adapting their 'functioning in response to changing circumstances in the environment in which [they are] deployed,' as well as capable of making firing decisions on their own." The British Ministry of Defence states "Whilst definitions can vary, the key difference is that an automated system is capable of carrying out complicated tasks but is incapable of complex decision-making, whereas an autonomous system is capable of deciding a course of action without depending on human oversight and control." Scholars such as Peter Asaro and Mark Gubrud believe that any weapon system that is capable of releasing a lethal force without the operation, decision, or confirmation of a human supervisor can be deemed autonomous. == Automatic defensive systems == Some definitions of autonomous weapon systems are broad enough to include land mines and naval mines, simple automatically-triggered lethal weapons that have been in use for centuries. Some current examples of LAWs are automated "hardkill" active protection systems, such as a radar-guided close-in weapon systems (CIWS) used to defend ships that have been in use since the 1970s (e.g., the US Phalanx CIWS). Such systems can autonomously identify and attack oncoming missiles, rockets, artillery fire, aircraft, and surface vessels according to criteria set by the human operator. Similar systems exist for tanks, such as the Russian Arena, the Israeli Trophy, and the German AMAP-ADS. Several types of stationary sentry guns, which can fire at humans and vehicles, are used in South Korea and Israel. Many missile defence systems, such as Iron Dome, also have autonomous targeting capabilities. The main reason for not having a "human in the loop" in these systems is the need for rapid response. They have generally been used to protect personnel and installations against incoming projectiles. == Autonomous offensive systems == According to The Economist in 2018, as technology advances, applications of uncrewed undersea vehicles could include mine clearance, mine-laying, anti-submarine sensor networking in contested waters, patrolling with active sonar, resupplying manned submarines, and becoming low-cost missile platforms. In 2017 the Russian Federation was developing artificially intelligent missiles, drones, unmanned vehicles, military robots and medic robots. In 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review alleged that Russia was developing a "new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo" named "Status 6". Israeli Minister Ayoob Kara stated in 2017 that Israel is developing military robots, including ones as small as flies. In October 2018, Zeng Yi, a senior executive at the Chinese defense firm Norinco, gave a speech in which he said that "In future battlegrounds, there will be no people fighting", and that the use of lethal autonomous weapons in warfare is "inevitable". In 2019, US Defense Secretary Mark Esper lashed out at China for selling drones capable of taking life with no human oversight. As of 2020, DARPA was working on making swarms of 250 autonomous lethal drones available to the American military. The US Navy is developing unmanned surface vehicles, also called sea drones, including Ghost Fleet Overlord, with plans to equip them with weapons and with the potential to use them semi-autonomously. In 2020 a Kargu 2 drone hunted down and attacked a human target in Libya, according to a report from the UN Security Council's Panel of Experts on Libya, published in March 2021. This may have been the first time an autonomous killer robot armed with lethal weaponry attacked human beings. In May 2021 Israel conducted an AI-guided combat drone swarm attack in Gaza. In the Russo-Ukrainian war, Ukraine has developed advanced drones with integrated artificial intelligence for a range of drone warfare purposes, including to attack infrastructure in Russia, although as of May 2026, Al Jazeera reported that humans remain in control of operation. == Ethical and legal issues == === Degree of human control === Three classifications of the degree of human control of autonomous weapon systems were laid out by Bonnie Docherty in a 2012 Human Rights Watch report. human-in-the-loop: a human must instigate the action of the weapon (in other words not fully autonomous). human-on-the-loop: a human may abort an action. human-out-of-the-loop: no human action is involved. === Standard used in US policy === Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 states that "Autonomous … weapons systems shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force." However, as noted in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the policy requires that autonomous weapon systems that kill people or use kinetic force, selecting and engaging targets without further human intervention, be certified as compliant with "appropriate levels" and other standards, not that such weapon systems cannot meet these standards and are therefore forbidden. "Semi-autonomous" hunter-killers that autonomously identify and attack targets do not even require certification. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert O. Work said in 2016 that the Defense Department would "not delegate lethal authority to a machine to make a decision", but might need to reconsider this since "authoritarian regimes" may do so. In October 2016 President Barack Obama stated that early in his career he was wary of a future in which a US president making use of drone warfare could "carry on perpetual wars all over the world, and a lot of them covert, without any accountability or democratic debate". In the US, security-related AI has fallen under the purview of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence since 2018. On October 31, 2019, the United States Department of Defense's Defense Innovation Board published the draft of a report outlining five principles for weaponized AI and making 12 recommendations for the ethical use of artificial intelligence by the Department of Defense that would ensure a human operator would always be able to look into the 'black box' and understand the kill-chain process. A major concern is how the report will be implemented. === Possible violations of ethics and international acts === Stuart Russell, professor of computer science from University of California, Berkeley stated the concern he has with LAWs is that his view is that it is unethical and inhumane. The main issue with this system is it is hard to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. There is concern by some economists and legal scholars about whether LAWs would violate International Humanitarian Law, especially the principle of distinction, which requires the ability to discriminate combatants from non-combatants, and the principle of proportionality, which requires that damage to civilians be proportional to the military aim. This concern is often invoked as a reason to ban "killer robots" altogether - but it is doubtful that this concern can be an argument against LAWs that do not violate International Humanitarian Law. A 2021 report by the American Congressional Research Service states that "there are no domestic or international legal prohibitions on the development of use of LAWs," although it acknowledges ongoing talks at the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). LAWs are said by some to blur the boundaries of who is responsible for a particular killing. Philosopher Robert Sparrow argues that autonomous weapons are causally but not morally responsible, similar to child soldiers. In each case, he argues there is a risk of atrocities occurring without an appropriate subject to hold responsible, which violates jus in bell
Read more →
Linde–Buzo–Gray algorithm

The Linde–Buzo–Gray algorithm (named after its creators Yoseph Linde, Andrés Buzo and Robert M. Gray, who designed it in 1980) is an iterative vector quantization algorithm to improve a small set of vectors (codebook) to represent a larger set of vectors (training set), such that it will be locally optimal. It combines Lloyd's Algorithm with a splitting technique in which larger codebooks are built from smaller codebooks by splitting each code vector in two. The core idea of the algorithm is that by splitting the codebook such that all code vectors from the previous codebook are present, the new codebook must be as good as the previous one or better. == Description == The Linde–Buzo–Gray algorithm may be implemented as follows: algorithm linde-buzo-gray is input: set of training vectors training, codebook to improve old-codebook output: codebook that is twice the size and better or as good as old-codebook new-codebook ← {} for each old-codevector in old-codebook do insert old-codevector into new-codebook insert old-codevector + 𝜖 into new-codebook where 𝜖 is a small vector return lloyd(new-codebook, training) algorithm lloyd is input: codebook to improve, set of training vectors training output: improved codebook do previous-codebook ← codebook clusters ← divide training into |codebook| clusters, where each cluster contains all vectors in training who are best represented by the corresponding vector in codebook for each cluster cluster in clusters do the corresponding code vector in codebook ← the centroid of all training vectors in cluster while difference in error representing training between codebook and previous-codebook > 𝜖 return codebook
Read more →
Chinese room

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

Computational heuristic intelligence (CHI) refers to specialized programming techniques in computational intelligence (also called artificial intelligence, or AI). These techniques have the express goal of avoiding complexity issues, also called NP-hard problems, by using human-like techniques. They are best summarized as the use of exemplar-based methods (heuristics), rather than rule-based methods (algorithms). Hence the term is distinct from the more conventional computational algorithmic intelligence, or symbolic AI. An example of a CHI technique is the encoding specificity principle of Tulving and Thompson. In general, CHI principles are problem solving techniques used by people, rather than programmed into machines. It is by drawing attention to this key distinction that the use of this term is justified in a field already replete with confusing neologisms. Note that the legal systems of all modern human societies employ both heuristics (generalisations of cases) from individual trial records as well as legislated statutes (rules) as regulatory guides. Another recent approach to the avoidance of complexity issues is to employ feedback control rather than feedforward modeling as a problem-solving paradigm. This approach has been called computational cybernetics, because (a) the term 'computational' is associated with conventional computer programming techniques which represent a strategic, compiled, or feedforward model of the problem, and (b) the term 'cybernetic' is associated with conventional system operation techniques which represent a tactical, interpreted, or feedback model of the problem. Of course, real programs and real problems both contain both feedforward and feedback components. A real example which illustrates this point is that of human cognition, which clearly involves both perceptual (bottom-up, feedback, sensor-oriented) and conceptual (top-down, feedforward, motor-oriented) information flows and hierarchies. The AI engineer must choose between mathematical and cybernetic problem solution and machine design paradigms. This is not a coding (program language) issue, but relates to understanding the relationship between the declarative and procedural programming paradigms. The vast majority of STEM professionals never get the opportunity to design or implement pure cybernetic solutions. When pushed, most responders will dismiss the importance of any difference by saying that all code can be reduced to a mathematical model anyway. Unfortunately, not only is this belief false, it fails most spectacularly in many AI scenarios. Mathematical models are not time agnostic, but by their very nature are pre-computed, i.e. feedforward. Dyer [2012] and Feldman [2004] have independently investigated the simplest of all somatic governance paradigms, namely control of a simple jointed limb by a single flexor muscle. They found that it is impossible to determine forces from limb positions- therefore, the problem cannot have a pre-computed (feedforward) mathematical solution. Instead, a top-down command bias signal changes the threshold feedback level in the sensorimotor loop, e.g. the loop formed by the afferent and efferent nerves, thus changing the so-called ‘equilibrium point’ of the flexor muscle/ elbow joint system. An overview of the arrangement reveals that global postures and limb position are commanded in feedforward terms, using global displacements (common coding), with the forces needed being computed locally by feedback loops. This method of sensorimotor unit governance, which is based upon what Anatol Feldman calls the ‘equilibrium Point’ theory, is formally equivalent to a servomechanism such as a car's ‘cruise control’.
Read more →
Noam Shazeer

Noam Shazeer (born 1975 or 1976) is an American computer scientist and entrepreneur known for his contributions to the field of artificial intelligence and deep learning, particularly in the development of transformer models and natural language processing. He lives in Palo Alto, California. == Career == Noam Shazeer joined Google in 2000. One of his first major achievements was improving the spelling corrector of Google's search engine. In 2017, Shazeer was one of the lead authors of the seminal paper "Attention Is All You Need", which introduced the transformer architecture. At Google, Shazeer and his colleague Daniel de Freitas built a chatbot named Meena. Following the refusal of Google to release the chatbot to the public, Shazeer and Freitas left the company in 2021 to found Character.AI. In September 2023, Time Magazine chose Shazeer as one of the 100 most influential people in the AI world. In August 2024, it was reported that Shazeer would be returning to Google to co-lead the Gemini AI project. Shazeer was appointed as technical lead on Gemini, along with Jeff Dean and Oriol Vinyals. It was part of a $2.7 billion deal for Google to license Character's technology. Since he owns 30-40% of the company, it is estimated he netted $750 million-$1 billion. In 2026, he was elected a member of the National Academy of Engineering. == Views == Shazeer said about artificial general intelligence that he doesn't "particularly care about AGI in the sense of wanting something that can do absolutely everything a person can do”. When asked in 2023 if he is afraid that AGI will destroy the world, he said: "No. Not yet. [...] We’re going to work on it as the technology improves". When asked why do large language models work he answered: "My best guess is divine benevolence [...] Nobody really understands what’s going on. This is a very experimental science [...] It’s more like alchemy or whatever chemistry was in the Middle Ages.” Shazeer has stated, "I do not believe that humans have an attribute called gender... I do not believe that G-d puts people in the wrong bodies. I do not believe that it is okay to sterilize children." == Personal life == Shazeer is an orthodox Jew. His grandparents escaped the Holocaust into the Soviet Union and later lived some time in Israel before emigrating to the USA. His father, Dov Shazeer, was a math teacher who became an engineer and his mother was a homemaker. His sister was ordained as a rabbi by Hebrew College. Shazeer was born in Philadelphia, attended grade school at Cohen Hillel Academy in Marblehead, Massachusetts, and attended Swampscott High School in Swampscott, Massachusetts. He won a gold medal with perfect score at International Mathematical Olympiad 1994 as a member of the USA team. He went on to study math and computer science at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina from 1994 to 1998. At Duke he was a recipient of the Angier B. Duke Memorial Scholarship, and, as part of the Duke math team, won prizes in several math tournaments. He started studying in a graduate program in Berkeley but did not finish it. He is a father of three and is married to Yael Shacham Shazeer
Read more →
Knowledge Engineering Environment

Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) is a frame-based development tool for expert systems. It was developed and sold by IntelliCorp, and was first released in 1983. It ran on Lisp machines, and was later ported to Lucid Common Lisp with the CLX library, an X Window System (X11) interface for Common Lisp. This version was available on several different UNIX workstations. On KEE, several extensions were offered: Simkit, a frame-based simulation library KEEconnection, database connection between the frame system and relational databases In KEE, frames are called units. Units are used for both individual instances and classes. Frames have slots and slots have facets. Facets can describe, for example, a slot's expected values, its working value, or its inheritance rule. Slots can have multiple values. Behavior can be implemented using a message passing model. KEE provides an extensive graphical user interface (GUI) to create, browse, and manipulate frames. KEE also includes a frame-based rule system. In the KEE knowledge base, rules are frames. Both forward chaining and backward chaining inference are available. KEE supports non-monotonic reasoning through the concepts of worlds. Worlds allow providing alternative slot-values of frames. Through an assumption-based truth or reason maintenance system, inconsistencies can be detected and analyzed. ActiveImages allows graphical displays to be attached to slots of Units. Typical examples are buttons, dials, graphs, and histograms. The graphics are also implemented as Units via KEEPictures, a frame-based graphics library.
Read more →