AI Face Live

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

• 

  List of computer graphics journals

  List of computer graphics journals includes notable peer-reviewed scientific and academic journals that focus on computer graphics, visualization, and related areas such as rendering, animation, image processing, and geometric modeling. == Journals == ACM Transactions on Graphics Computers & Graphics IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems Graphical Models Journal of Computer Graphics Techniques Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments Virtual Reality Simulation & Gaming

  Read more →
• 

  The Sword in the Stoned

  "The Sword in the Stoned" is the fifth episode of the second season of the American fantasy comedy television series Ted. Written by Julius Sharpe, and directed by Seth MacFarlane, it premiered on the American streaming service Peacock, along with the rest of season two, on March 5, 2026. The series acts as a precursor to the Ted film franchise, showcasing the childhood lives of the protagonists. The series, set in 1994, focuses on John Bennett (Max Burkholder), the series' primary protagonist, an awkward high-school aged boy; along with Ted (MacFarlane), the series' titular anthropomorphic teddy bear. The two live with John's family, Susan (Alanna Ubach), his mild mannered mother, and Matty (Scott Grimes), his conservative father. Also residing with the family is Blaire (Giorgia Whigham), his radically liberal cousin whom often clashes with Matty. In the episode, Ted and John join the school play so they can have more extracurricular activities for their college applications, but the latter grows a connection with the school's popular teenager, Erin (Francesca Xuereb). Concurrently, Susan and Matty get a job at Dunkin' Donuts to help with their financial troubles, and Matty is given an opportunity to tell off Bill Clinton. Burkholder wore prop armor during the episode's play scenes. Bill Clinton’s appearance in the episode was portrayed by MacFarlane. After conventional makeup and visual techniques failed to convincingly resemble Clinton, the production used artificial intelligence to digitally replace MacFarlane's face with Clinton's likeness. Upon release, the episode received generally positive reviews from critics, though the use of AI in the Clinton scene was polarizing among audiences and reviewers. == Plot == John tells Ted that he is the last single guy left at their school, to which Ted points out the popular, single cheerleader, Erin, but John dismisses this. At home, Blaire tells John that he needs extracurricular activities to get into college, while Susan and Matty discuss their financial troubles, especially regarding John's college tuition. Looking over their options, they decide to audition for a school production of the play Camelot. Matty takes a job at Dunkin' Donuts, despite being told that nobody will give him a tip, and having to wear an incorrect name tag. Waiting for their auditions, John and Ted watch several poor auditions for the play before seeing Erin's, who delivers a flawless performance; John and Ted do less serious auditions, getting cast as knights, while Erin gets the role of Guinevere. Matty complains about his low salary, and Susan decides to get a job at Dunkin' Donuts beside him to help earn more income. Erin clashes with Lancelot's actor while rehearsing, and John compliments her performance, which she ignores, but, seeing Ted and John give good performances in a repetition exercise, she becomes interested in him, particularly since he treats her better than her stage-partner. Matty and Susan watch an employee training video, explaining how they should treat customers politely, not affecting Matty's nihilistic attitude. The manager announces that Bill Clinton is visiting their Dunkin' Donuts for publicity, and Matty sees this as a chance to tell Bill off. John and Erin practice lines, as she reveals the show is being taped so it can be sent to Emerson College in hopes of her getting in; Erin asks John to go out with her after the show. At dinner, Matty enthusiastically reveals what he plans to tell Bill, as John becomes stressed about the play when Susan tells there will be a large audience. Bill comes to the Dunkin' Donuts, and, seeing Matty is nervously insulting him, stages a private meeting with him, where Bill yells at Matty, calling him a loser before posing for a picture with Matty and subsequently throwing the cold coffee onto him. To ease the pressure, Ted and John take edibles from Blaire, but learn at the show that they contained mushrooms, causing them to stress further. On stage, Ted and John yell nervously that they're on drugs as the latter urinates in his costume, causing Erin to angrily storm off. == Production == "The Sword in the Stoned" was directed by series creator and lead Seth MacFarlane, and written by Julius Sharpe in his third and final writing credit for the series. When Ted and John are doing repetition exercises, they tackle each other to the ground, which required a stuntman named Ashton to play the role of Ted, according to Max Burkholder, who portrays John. Burkholder also recalled that, when Ted was choking John in the scene, he kept making a noise during the choking, which made Bill, the cameraman, laugh, despite being a "stone face" that never laughs, noting that seeing him be amused by the noise he was making assured Burkholder that what he was doing was "hilarious". Burkholder found the filming of the play scenes "weird", as he was put in fake armor with a hose inside his suit—which was filled with water mixed with yellow food coloring—that was made to create the urine stream that comes out of John's armor in the episode; he also noted that it took around 45 minutes to put on and take off the armor. He revealed that he himself had to urinate during the filming, as doing a scene about a character having to do so "really [broke] my brain", with the fact that it took 45 minutes to get the suit off adding to the frustration. Jennifer Ashley Connell, who worked for wardrobe, had to repeatedly go to Burkholder quickly between takes to dry off his pants with two hair dryers to make it look like the fake urine hadn't already streamed down his pants, so they could get as many shots of it as possible. Francesca Xuereb guest stars in the episode as Erin, the cheerleader who stars in the play. Incumbent president Bill Clinton was portrayed by MacFarlane, with artificial intelligence (AI) being used to digitally make MacFarlane's face look like Clinton's during post-production. Before settling on AI, the crew tried to use traditional computer-generated imagery and prosthetics, which made him look "terrifying", resulting in them deciding that AI would give them a more accurate look. One of the original technologies considered was one where, after scanning MacFarlane, a mesh of his head was created, and they had to use computer graphics to replace MacFarlane's face with Clinton's. An issue was faced, however, when they found the archival footage used as reference from the Clinton Library—an official Presidential Library containing information related to Clinton—to be extremely low-quality, making it hard to properly emulate his face, since only still images were of acceptable quality, and there weren't references of his moving face to work off of. A forensic artist was hired to help with this, and they created a 3D model of Clinton's head in ZBrush, based off of his presidential portrait. The model head worked for still frames, but movement was still difficult to do realistically, due to it being made for a "single-point perspective", which made details like the cheekbones or other minor issues more noticeable when using it for the scene. Since this did not work, AI was ultimately chosen through the studio Deep Voodoo, which used large language models to teach the tool how to correctly replicate Clinton's appearance. Defending the episode's use of AI, MacFarlane noted that the crew did not want people to focus on the tool being used, trying to utilize it in a way that wouldn't distract from the humor and narrative. Like the rest of the series, the episode was shot using ViewScreen; MacFarlane was able to act live with the cast as Ted due to ViewScreen, a technology that allows the production crew to visualize what Ted will look like in each scene in real time. == Release and reception == "The Sword in the Stoned" was first released on March 5, 2026, on the American streaming service Peacock, along with the rest of the second season. Nate Richards of Collider highlighted the Dunkin' Donuts subplot as an example of Scott Grimes delivering a "lot of laughs" through his performance as Matty. Dustin Rowles of Pajiba called "The Sword in the Stoned" one of the season's many episodes he'd recommend, particularly for the scenes of Ted and John being high on mushrooms during the play. Oppositely, Nick Valdez of ComicBook.com ranked the episode as the worst of the second season, criticizing it for not having a "huge impact" on the Bennett family dynamic like other episodes of the season do, and Susan and Matty's side story as the main reason he felt it was "[kept] from being great". Valdez noted the episode for likely being an advertisement for Dunkin' Donuts, calling the plot's ending scene involving Clinton the reason "it just all sticks out like a sore thumb". === Response to AI usage === The episode's use of AI for MacFarlane's portrayal of Clinton proved controversial, mainly on social media, where audiences asserted that the crew should have gotten an actor that resembl

  Read more →
• 

  Project Debater

  Project Debater is an IBM artificial intelligence project, designed to participate in a full live debate with expert human debaters. It follows on from the Watson project which played Jeopardy! == Development == Project Debater was developed at IBM's lab in Haifa, Israel. The project was proposed by Noam Slonim in 2011 as the IBM Research next Grand Challenge, following Deep Blue and the victory of Watson in Jeopardy! It was exposed for the first time in a closed media event at June 18, 2018, in San Francisco, under the leadership of Ranit Aharonov and Slonim, both from the IBM Research lab in Haifa, Israel. The AI technology debated two human debaters, Noa Ovadia, who was the 2016 Israeli debate champion and Dan Zafrir. The two debated on the topics "We should subsidize space exploration" and "Should we increase the use of telemedicine." A demonstration of Project Debater also aired on the Discovery Channel in June 2018 debating the question of whether sports gambling should be legalized. == Live Debate == On February 11, 2019, Project Debater was revealed to the world in a live debate in San Francisco. Nonpartisan media group Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates hosted the debate which was moderated by journalist John Donvan. The debate took place between Project Debater and Harish Natarajan, who holds the world record in number of debate competition victories. The motion was “We should subsidize preschools.” == That's Debatable Television Show == Project Debater was featured in a television series called “That’s Debatable” presented by Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates and Bloomberg Media. For each episode of “That’s Debatable,” Project Debater provided insight into three distinct debate topics on the redistribution of wealth, modern monetary theory, and a US-China space race. More than 5,000 arguments were submitted online from around the world across the three topics, which were then analyzed and distilled into key points that were highlighted on the television show and discussed by human debaters. == Artificial Intelligence Capabilities == To develop Project Debater, the IBM Research team had to endow the system with the following AI capabilities: Data-driven speech writing and delivery: Project Debater is the first demonstration of a computer that can digest massive corpora, and given a short description of a controversial topic, write a well-structured speech, and deliver it with clarity and purpose, while even incorporating humor where appropriate. Listening comprehension: the ability to identify the key concepts and claims hidden within long continuous spoken language. Four minutes of persuasive speech: the guarantee of producing four minutes of persuasive speech. Modeling human dilemmas: modeling the world of human controversy and dilemmas in a unique knowledge representation, enabling the system to suggest principled arguments as needed. An article on the project was published in Nature in March 2021.

  Read more →
• 

  Take Us to Your Chief: and Other Stories

  Take Us to Your Chief: and Other Stories is a collection of nine short stories by Canadian author, playwright, and journalist Drew Hayden Taylor published in 2016 by Douglas & McIntyre. Taylor, who is part Caucasian, part Ojibwe, explains in the acknowledgments section of the book that the origin of the project lies in several failed attempts "to compile an anthology of Native sci-fi from Canada’s best First Nations writers." The stories explore contemporary First Nations social issues through employing a number of 1950s-era science fiction tropes and themes in these stories, including time travel, alien contact, and superpowers. Many reviews of the books have noted Taylor's use of humor to examine dark subject matter, such as the heritage of Canadian Indian residential schools, First Nations suicide rates, or the water quality crisis on Canadian reserves. == The Stories == "Andrei nas" "I Am...Am I" "Lost in Space" "Dreams of Doom" "Mr. Gizmo" "Petropaths" "Stars" "Superdisappointed" "Take Us to Your Chief" == Story summaries == === Foreword === In his foreword, Taylor describes the genesis of Take Us to Your Chief: and Other Stories and invites readers into, in his term, a “new terra nullius.” He begins by describing his biracial upbringing and heritage. He points out that First Nations people are rarely associated with technology or science fiction, in part because Indigenous peoples were often at a technological disadvantage against European colonizers. He references the few examples that he can think of from popular culture, such as the Star Trek episode called “The Paradise Syndrome,” in which First Nations people are portrayed as stereotypical Indians in hippie clothing. He also elaborates on his fascination with the world of sci-fi, which first started in comic books. He enjoyed the literary work of H.G. Wells, such as The Time Machine and The Invisible Man. Since sci-fi is a world of endless opportunities, he intends that these short stories help people explore science fiction through Native peoples’ minds, something that needs to be explored more thoroughly. === "A Culturally Inappropriate Armageddon" === “A Culturally Inappropriate Armageddon” is set on a Haudenosaunee reserve, towards the end of the Oka Crisis, with a handful of people that work at its first ever radio station, C-RES, which opens in 1991. Part 1, titled “C-Res Is on the Air,” depicts Emily, Aaron, and Tracey on their first days at the station. Within the group, there is a constant debate between broadcasting popular programming, including science fiction and film reviews, and culturally-relevant programming meant to aid in cultural revitalization efforts. One night, Aaron is late to work but once he shows up he can't stop talking about radio transmissions broadcasting into deep space, an event that has been occurring since the initial discovery of the radio waves by Heinrich Hertz. The story then skips ahead seven years to 1998, when Emily is struggling to find better content for her station until Tracey stumbles upon an old anthropological record named “The Calling Song” that they decide to broadcast to their audience. The story then jumps to the year 2018 where they are all huddled around a television watching a news station reporting that extraterrestrial life is heading towards them. The discussion of what is going to happen comes into the picture and they all decide it would either be like Contact or The Day the Earth Stood Still. A year later in 2019, the aliens have invaded the planet and destroyed everything. As the three former radio station employees suffer from radioactive fallout, they realize that the aliens received the broadcast of “The Calling Song” and took it as a message to come to Earth. They thus realize that the Haudenosaunee people were inadvertently responsible for the destruction of the Earth. Part 2, titled “Old Men and Old Sayings,” tells us of an elderly man that is watching the news and listening to the radio about a spaceship coming to earth. He knows that he and everyone will die, but the people around him are excited. He finds a book on his night stand and flips to a page where he underlined a sentence a long time ago about the European colonization of the Americas. That sentence reads “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (23). He closes the book and Taylor concludes the story by writing, “he hated it when white people were right." === "I Am...Am I" === “I Am...Am I” chronicles the accidental creation and unexpected ending of artificial intelligence. Professor Mark King has a plethora of degrees and works for a research firm called FUTUREVISION. One night as Professor King searches the lab for his car keys—a common occurrence for him—he notices something unusual in the Matrix room. He reads on a computer the phrase “I am.” First believing it to be a prank, King later comes to the realization that his Matrix project has evolved into a responsive Artificial Intelligence. After this realization, Professor King calls his peer Dr. Gayle Chambers to further investigate this miraculous event. After receiving approval from their superiors, Professor King and Dr. Chambers move forward in feeding the AI information, with Chambers serving as the lead communicator. With more information, it becomes increasingly concerned with its own existence and the concept of whether it has a soul. After several days of conversation with the AI, Chambers and King begin to feel uneasy about the AI's responses, which show signs of neuroses. Despite this behavior, Chambers decides to feed the AI information about the culture and history of the human race. Upon receiving this information, the AI becomes obsessed with Indigenous spirituality prior to the colonization of the Americas, and it requests more information on First Nations people. Dr. Chambers is hesitant at first, but gives in and continues to feed the AI the information with the intention to return to it in the morning. This leads to the AI finding out about colonization and genocide of Indigenous peoples. Upon her arrival the next day, Chambers discovers that the code for the AI has been completely wiped from the hard drive and a single message is left on the screen—"I was”—that signifies the AI's suicide. === "Lost in Space" === "Lost in Space" is told from the perspective of Mitchell, an Anishinabe astrosurveyor who is aboard a space shuttle on a two-year tour collecting rocks from an asteroid belt. He is accompanied by an Artificial general intelligence named Mac, short for “machine.” Mac is aboard this tour in order to accompany Mitchell and keep him sane; however, his company is a burden because for Mitchell, “true space exploration consists largely of boredom.” In the midst of Mitchell seeking a way to occupy his downtime, Mac interrupts with news about his grandfather, Papa Peter, dying. Papa Peter was Mitchell's only real tie to his Indigenous identity. After receiving the news Mitchell begins to reminisce on all of the things Papa Peter had taught him throughout his life. He constantly posed questions concerning the world above (Father Sky) and how it is more important than the land they live on (Mother Earth), which eventually led Mitchell to the selection of his career. During his state of mourning, Mitchell begins to go through all the videos his grandfather had sent him throughout his space tours. Papa Peter had sent Mitchell videos from Otter Lake, a First Nations reserve; these videos are about controversial topics regarding being both native and an astronaut. In the midst of Mitchell's grieving, Mac tries to relieve the situation by finding an online video of Mitchell's grandfather participating in a drum ceremony at Ottawa’s National Aboriginal Day festival. He reconnects to his roots and his grandfather’s spirit as he listens to the Indigenous music by feeling the drum beat and humming along. Mac’s small act of kindness leads Mitchell to gain a new-found appreciation for his presence. Mitchell feels responsible to moving forward in his life in memory of Papa Peter. === "Dreams of Doom" === "Dreams of Doom" is narrated by an Ojibway reporter named Pamela Wanishin who works for an aboriginal newspaper called the West Wind. One day she receives a mysterious package with a broken dreamcatcher and a flash drive containing highly classified files. As she reads the files, she keeps seeing the term “Project Nightlight,” and out of curiosity, she Googles it. Once she Googles this, she is contacted by a nameless agent from Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and told that she must be relocated because the knowledge she now possesses must never be released to the public. She quickly flees the area to a cabin at Otter Lake, owned by a family member, to lie low for a few days. Eventually, the government organization tracks her down using drones, which forces her to fight back and flee once again. Pamela then runs to her friend and coworker Sally's hous

  Read more →
• 

  Vulnerabilities Equities Process

  The Vulnerabilities Equities Process (VEP) is a process used by the U.S. federal government to determine on a case-by-case basis how it should treat zero-day computer security vulnerabilities: whether to disclose them to the public to help improve general computer security, or to keep them secret for offensive use against the government's adversaries. The VEP was first developed during the period 2008–2009, but only became public in 2016, when the government released a redacted version of the VEP in response to a FOIA request by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Following public pressure for greater transparency in the wake of the Shadow Brokers affair, the U.S. government made a more public disclosure of the VEP process in November 2017. == Participants == According to the VEP plan published in 2017, the Equities Review Board (ERB) is the primary forum for interagency deliberation and determinations concerning the VEP. The ERB meets monthly, but may also be convened sooner if an immediate need arises. The ERB consists of representatives from the following agencies: Office of Management and Budget Office of the Director of National Intelligence (including the Intelligence Community-Security Coordination Center) United States Department of the Treasury United States Department of State United States Department of Justice (including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force) Department of Homeland Security (including the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center and the United States Secret Service) United States Department of Energy United States Department of Defense (to include the National Security Agency, including Information Assurance and Signals Intelligence elements), United States Cyber Command, and DoD Cyber Crime Center) United States Department of Commerce Central Intelligence Agency The National Security Agency serves as the executive secretariat for the VEP. == Process == According to the November 2017 version of the VEP, the process is as follows: === Submission and notification === When an agency finds a vulnerability, it will notify the VEP secretariat as soon as is possible. The notification will include a description of the vulnerability and the vulnerable products or systems, together with the agency's recommendation to either disseminate or restrict the vulnerability information. The secretariat will then notify all participants of the submission within one business day, requesting them to respond if they have an relevant interest. === Equity and discussions === An agency expressing an interest must indicate whether it concurs with the original recommendation to disseminate or restrict within five business days. If it does not, it will hold discussions with the submitting agency and the VEP secretariat within seven business days to attempt to reach consensus. If no consensus is reached, the participants will suggest options for the Equities Review Board. === Determination to disseminate or restrict === Decisions whether to disclose or restrict a vulnerability should be made quickly, in full consultation with all concerned agencies, and in the overall best interest of the competing interests of the missions of the U.S. government. As far as possible, determinations should be based on rational, objective methodologies, taking into account factors such as prevalence, reliance, and severity. If the review board members cannot reach consensus, they will vote on a preliminary determination. If an agency with an equity disputes that decision, they may, by providing notice to the VEP secretariat, elect to contest the preliminary determination. If no agency contests a preliminary determination, it will be treated as a final decision. === Handling and follow-on actions === If vulnerability information is released, this will be done as quickly as possible, preferably within seven business days. Disclosure of vulnerabilities will be conducted according to guidelines agreed on by all members. The submitting agency is presumed to be most knowledgeable about the vulnerability and, as such, will be responsible for disseminating vulnerability information to the vendor. The submitting agency may elect to delegate dissemination responsibility to another agency on its behalf. The releasing agency will promptly provide a copy of the disclosed information to the VEP secretariat for record keeping. Additionally, the releasing agency is expected to follow up so the ERB can determine whether the vendor's action meets government requirements. If the vendor chooses not to address a vulnerability, or is not acting with urgency consistent with the risk of the vulnerability, the releasing agency will notify the secretariat, and the government may take other mitigation steps. == Criticism == The VEP process has been criticized for a number of deficiencies, including restriction by non-disclosure agreements, lack of risk ratings, special treatment for the NSA, and less than whole-hearted commitment to disclosure as the default option. == UK equivalent == British intelligence agencies—GCHQ in particular—follow a similar approach, also known as the Equities Process, to determine whether to disclose or retain security vulnerabilities. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 was amended in 2022 to bring oversight of the operation of the process within the remit of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner. Details of the process were made public in 2018.

  Read more →
• 

  Residuated Boolean algebra

  In mathematics, a residuated Boolean algebra is a residuated lattice whose lattice structure is that of a Boolean algebra. Examples include Boolean algebras with the monoid taken to be conjunction, the set of all formal languages over a given alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } under concatenation, the set of all binary relations on a given set X {\displaystyle X} under relational composition, and more generally the power set of any equivalence relation, again under relational composition. The original application was to relation algebras as a finitely axiomatized generalization of the binary relation example, but there exist interesting examples of residuated Boolean algebras that are not relation algebras, such as the language example. == Definition == A residuated Boolean algebra is an algebraic structure ( L , ∧ , ∨ , ¬ , 0 , 1 , ∙ , I , / , ∖ ) {\displaystyle (L,\wedge ,\vee ,\neg ,0,1,\bullet ,\mathbf {I} ,/,\backslash )} such that An equivalent signature better suited to the relation algebra application is ( L , ∧ , ∨ , ¬ , 0 , 1 , ∙ , I , ▹ , ◃ ) {\displaystyle (L,\wedge ,\vee ,\neg ,0,1,\bullet ,\mathbf {I} ,\triangleright ,\triangleleft )} where the unary operations x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } and x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } are intertranslatable in the manner of De Morgan's laws via x ∖ y = ¬ ( x ▹ ¬ y ) {\displaystyle x\backslash y=\neg (x\triangleright \neg y)} , x ▹ y = ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ y ) {\displaystyle x\triangleright y=\neg (x\backslash \neg y)} , and dually / y {\displaystyle /y} and ◃ y {\displaystyle \triangleleft y} as x / y = ¬ ( ¬ x ◃ y ) {\displaystyle x/y=\neg (\neg x\triangleleft y)} , x ◃ y = ¬ ( ¬ x / y ) {\displaystyle x\triangleleft y=\neg (\neg x/y)} , with the residuation axioms in the residuated lattice article reorganized accordingly (replacing z {\displaystyle z} by ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg z} ) to read ( x ▹ z ) ∧ y = 0 ⇔ ( x ∙ y ) ∧ z = 0 ⇔ ( z ◃ y ) ∧ x = 0 {\displaystyle (x\triangleright z)\wedge y=0\ \Leftrightarrow \ (x\bullet y)\wedge z=0\ \Leftrightarrow \ (z\triangleleft y)\wedge x=0} This De Morgan dual reformulation is motivated and discussed in more detail in the section below on conjugacy. Since residuated lattices and Boolean algebras are each definable with finitely many equations, so are residuated Boolean algebras, whence they form a finitely axiomatizable variety. == Examples == Any Boolean algebra, with the monoid multiplication ∙ {\displaystyle \bullet } taken to be conjunction and both residuals taken to be material implication x → y {\displaystyle x\to y} . Of the remaining 15 binary Boolean operations that might be considered in place of conjunction for the monoid multiplication, only five meet the monotonicity requirement, namely 0 , 1 , x , y {\displaystyle 0,1,x,y} and x ∨ y {\displaystyle x\vee y} . Setting y = z = 0 {\displaystyle y=z=0} in the residuation axiom y ≤ x ∖ z ⇔ x ∙ y ≤ z {\displaystyle y\leq x\backslash z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\leq z} , we have 0 ≤ x ∖ 0 ⇔ x ∙ 0 ≤ 0 {\displaystyle 0\leq x\backslash 0\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet 0\leq 0} , which is falsified by taking x = 1 {\displaystyle x=1} when x ∙ y = 1 {\displaystyle x\bullet y=1} , x {\displaystyle x} , or x ∨ y {\displaystyle x\vee y} . The dual argument for z / y {\displaystyle z/y} rules out x ∙ y = y {\displaystyle x\bullet y=y} . This just leaves x ∙ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\bullet y=0} (a constant binary operation independent of x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} ), which satisfies almost all the axioms when the residuals are both taken to be the constant operation x / y = x ∖ y = 1 {\displaystyle x/y=x\backslash y=1} . The axiom it fails is x ∙ I = x = I ∙ x {\displaystyle x\bullet \mathbf {I} =x=\mathbf {I} \bullet x} , for want of a suitable value for I {\displaystyle \mathbf {I} } . Hence conjunction is the only binary Boolean operation making the monoid multiplication that of a residuated Boolean algebra. The power set 2 X 2 {\displaystyle 2^{X^{2}}} made a Boolean algebra as usual with ∩ {\displaystyle \cap } , ∪ {\displaystyle \cup } and complement relative to X 2 {\displaystyle X^{2}} , and made a monoid with relational composition. The monoid unit I {\displaystyle \mathbf {I} } is the identity relation { ( x , x ) | x ∈ X } {\displaystyle \{(x,x)|x\in X\}} . The right residual R ∖ S {\displaystyle R\backslash S} is defined by x ( R ∖ S ) y ⇔ ∀ z ∈ X , z R x ⇒ z S y {\displaystyle x(R\backslash S)y\ \Leftrightarrow \ \forall z\in X,zRx\Rightarrow zSy} . Dually the left residual S / R {\displaystyle S/R} is defined by y ( S / R ) x ⇔ ∀ z ∈ X , x R z ⇒ y S z {\displaystyle y(S/R)x\ \Leftrightarrow \ \forall z\in X,xRz\Rightarrow ySz} . The power set 2 Σ ∗ {\displaystyle 2^{\Sigma ^{}}} made a Boolean algebra as for Example 2, but with language concatenation for the monoid. Here the set Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is used as an alphabet while Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} denotes the set of all finite (including empty) words over that alphabet. The concatenation L M {\displaystyle LM} of languages L {\displaystyle L} and M {\displaystyle M} consists of all words u v {\displaystyle uv} such that u ∈ L {\displaystyle u\in L} and v ∈ M {\displaystyle v\in M} . The monoid unit is the language { ε } {\displaystyle \{\varepsilon \}} consisting of just the empty word ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } . The right residual M ∖ L {\displaystyle M\backslash L} consists of all words w {\displaystyle w} over Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } such that M w ⊆ L {\displaystyle Mw\subseteq L} . The left residual L / M {\displaystyle L/M} is the same with w M {\displaystyle wM} in place of M w {\displaystyle Mw} . == Conjugacy == The De Morgan duals ▹ {\displaystyle \triangleright } and ◃ {\displaystyle \triangleleft } of residuation arise as follows. Among residuated lattices, Boolean algebras are special by virtue of having a complementation operation ¬ {\displaystyle \neg } . This permits an alternative expression of the three inequalities y ≤ x ∖ z ⇔ x ∙ y ≤ z ⇔ x ≤ z / y {\displaystyle y\leq x\backslash z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\leq z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\leq z/y} in the axiomatization of the two residuals in terms of disjointness, via the equivalence x ≤ y ⇔ x ∧ ¬ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\leq y\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\wedge \neg y=0} . Abbreviating x ∧ y = 0 {\displaystyle x\wedge y=0} to x # y {\displaystyle x\#y} as the expression of their disjointness, and substituting ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg z} for z {\displaystyle z} in the axioms, they become with a little Boolean manipulation ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ z ) # y ⇔ x ∙ y # z ⇔ ¬ ( ¬ z / y ) # x {\displaystyle \neg (x\backslash \neg z)\#y\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\#z\ \Leftrightarrow \ \neg (\neg z/y)\#x} Now ¬ ( x ∖ ¬ z ) {\displaystyle \neg (x\backslash \neg z)} is reminiscent of De Morgan duality, suggesting that x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } be thought of as a unary operation f {\displaystyle f} , defined by f ( y ) = x ∖ y {\displaystyle f(y)=x\backslash y} , that has a De Morgan dual ¬ f ( ¬ y ) {\displaystyle \neg f(\neg y)} , analogous to ∀ x ϕ ( x ) = ¬ ∃ x ¬ ϕ ( x ) {\displaystyle \forall x\phi (x)=\neg \exists x\neg \phi (x)} . Denoting this dual operation as x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } , we define x ▹ z {\displaystyle x\triangleright z} as ¬ x ∖ ¬ z {\displaystyle \neg x\backslash \neg z} . Similarly we define another operation z ◃ y {\displaystyle z\triangleleft y} as ¬ ( ¬ z / y ) {\displaystyle \neg (\neg z/y)} . By analogy with x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } as the residual operation associated with the operation x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } , we refer to x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } as the conjugate operation, or simply conjugate, of x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } . Likewise ◃ y {\displaystyle \triangleleft y} is the conjugate of ∙ y {\displaystyle \bullet y} . Unlike residuals, conjugacy is an equivalence relation between operations: if f {\displaystyle f} is the conjugate of g {\displaystyle g} then g {\displaystyle g} is also the conjugate of f {\displaystyle f} , i.e. the conjugate of the conjugate of f {\displaystyle f} is f {\displaystyle f} . Another advantage of conjugacy is that it becomes unnecessary to speak of right and left conjugates, that distinction now being inherited from the difference between x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } and ∙ x {\displaystyle \bullet x} , which have as their respective conjugates x ▹ {\displaystyle x\triangleright } and ◃ x {\displaystyle \triangleleft x} . (But this advantage accrues also to residuals when x ∖ {\displaystyle x\backslash } is taken to be the residual operation to x ∙ {\displaystyle x\bullet } .) All this yields (along with the Boolean algebra and monoid axioms) the following equivalent axiomatization of a residuated Boolean algebra. y # x ▹ z ⇔ x ∙ y # z ⇔ x # z ◃ y {\displaystyle y\#x\triangleright z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\bullet y\#z\ \Leftrightarrow \ x\#z\triangleleft y} With this signature it remains the case that this axiomatization can be expressed as

  Read more →
• 

  International Aerial Robotics Competition

  The International Aerial Robotics Competition (IARC) is a university-based robotics competition held on the campus of the Georgia Institute of Technology, currently hosted by RoboNation. Since 1991, collegiate teams with the backing of industry and government have fielded autonomous flying robots in an attempt to perform missions requiring robotic behaviors not previously exhibited by a flying machine. The term “aerial robotics” was coined by competition creator Robert Michelson in 1990 to describe a new class of small highly intelligent flying machines. Successive years of competition saw these aerial robots grow from vehicles that could barely maintain themselves in the air, to automatons which are self-stable, self-navigating, and able to interact with their environment. The goal of the competition has been to provide a reason for the state-of-the-art of aerial robotics to move forward. Challenges have been geared towards producing advances. From 1991 through 2009, six missions were proposed. Each involved fully autonomous robotic behavior undemonstrated at the time. In October 2013 a seventh mission was proposed. It was the first to involve interaction between aerial robots and multiple ground robots. In 2016, the competition and its creator were recognized during the Georgia legislative session in the form of a senate resolution as the longest running aerial robotics competition in the world. == History == === First mission === The initial mission to move a metallic disc from one side of an arena to the other was seen by many as almost impossible. The college teams improved their entries over the next two years when the competition saw its first autonomous takeoff, flight, and landing by a team from the Georgia Institute of Technology. In 1995, a team from Stanford University was able to acquire a single disk and move it from one side of the arena to the other in a fully autonomous flight—half. === Second mission === The competition mission was toughened and made less abstract by requiring teams to search for a toxic waste dump, map the location of partially buried randomly oriented toxic waste drums, identify the contents of each drum from the hazard labels on the outside of each drum, and bring a sample back from one of the drums. In 1996, a team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University, with backing from Draper Labs, created a small fully autonomous flying robot that repeatedly and correctly mapped the location of all five of the toxic waste drums, and correctly identified the contents of two from the air, completing approximately seventy five percent of the mission. The following year, an aerial robot developed by a team from Carnegie Mellon University completed the entire mission. === Third mission === The third mission began in 1998. It was a search and rescue mission requiring fully autonomous robots to take off, fly to a disaster area and search amid fires, broken water mains, clouds of toxic gas, and rubble. The scenario was recreated at the U.S. Department of Energy's Hazardous Material Management and Emergency Response (HAMMER) training facility. Because of the realism of the scenario, animatrons were used instead of human actors to simulate survivors incapable of extracting themselves from the disaster area. An aerial robot from Germany's Technische Universität Berlin was able to detect and avoid all of the obstacles, identify all the dead on the ground and the survivors (distinguishing between the two based on movement), and relay pictures of the survivors along with their locations back to first responders who would attempt a rescue. This mission was completed in 2000. === Fourth mission === The fourth mission was initiated in 2001. It involved three scenarios requiring the same autonomous behavior: a hostage rescue mission where a submarine 3 kilometers off the coast must send an aerial robot to find a coastal city, identify the embassy where hostages are being held, locate valid openings in the embassy building, enter (or send in a sensor probe/subvehicle) and relay pictures of the hostages 3 km to the submarine prior to mounting an amphibious assault on the embassy to free the hostages; the discovery of an ancient mausoleum where a virus had killed the archaeological team, who had radioed that an important and undocumented tapestry was hanging inside, with 15 minutes to send an autonomous aerial robot to find the mausoleum, enter it (or send in a sensor probe/subvehicle) and relay pictures of the tapestry back prior to the destruction of the mausoleum and its contents; and an explosion at a nuclear reactor facility where scientists must send in an aerial robot to find the operating reactor building, enter the building (or send in a sensor probe/subvehicle) and relay pictures of the control panels to determine if a melt-down is imminent. All three missions involved the same elements of ingress, locating, identification, entry, and relaying pictures within 15 minutes. It was conducted at the U.S. Army's Fort Benning Soldier Battle Lab using the McKenna MOUT (Military Operations on Urban Terrain) site. The fourth mission was completed in 2008 with 27 teams who had demonstrated each of the required aerial robotic behaviors, except being able to demonstrate these behaviors in under 15 minutes—a feat considered by the judges to be inevitable given more time, and therefore no longer a significant challenge. Thus the fourth mission was terminated, $80,000 in awards distributed, and the fifth mission established. === Fifth mission === The fifth mission picked up where the fourth mission left off by demonstrating the fully autonomous aerial robotic behaviors necessary to rapidly negotiate the confined internal spaces of a structure once it has been penetrated by an air vehicle. The nuclear reactor complex explosion scenario of the fourth mission was used as the backdrop for the fifth mission. The fifth mission required a fully autonomous aerial vehicle to penetrate the structure and negotiate the more complex interior space containing hallways, small rooms, obstacles, and dead ends in order to search for a designated target without the aid of global-positioning navigational aids, and relay pictures back to a monitoring station some distance from the structure. The First Symposium on Indoor Flight Issues was held in conjunction with this 2009 IARC event. === Sixth mission === The sixth mission began in 2010 as an extension of the fifth mission theme of autonomous indoor flight behavior, however it demanded more advanced behaviors than were possible by any aerial robot extant in 2010. This espionage mission involved covertly stealing a flash drive from a particular room in a building and depositing an identical drive to avoid detection of the theft. The 2010 Symposium on Indoor Flight Issues was held concurrently at the University of Puerto Rico - Mayagüez during the 20th anniversary competition. === Seventh mission === The seventh mission began in 2014 demanding more advanced behaviors than were possible by any aerial robot extant in 2014. A single autonomous aerial robot had to herd up to 10 autonomous ground robot targets across one designated end of a 20m x 20m (65.62 feet x 65.62 feet) arena in under 10 minutes. The arena had neither walls for SLAM mapping nor GPS availability. Techniques such as optical flow or optical odometry were possible solutions to navigation within the arena. Collisions with obstacle ground robots ended the run with no score. The autonomous aerial robots interacted with the ground robots in the following way: if an aerial robot touched the ground robot on top, the ground robot would turn clockwise 45°. If the aerial robot blocked its forward motion by landing in front of it, the ground robot would reverse direction. Ground robots that feely escaped the arena, counted against the aerial robot's overall score, so the autonomous aerial robots had to decide which ground robots were in imminent danger of crossing any boundary except the designated one, and redirect them toward the designated boundary.Zhejiang University was the overall winner of Mission 7, of 52 teams from 12 nations entered as competitors. === Eighth mission === In 2018, the 8th mission was announced. Mission 8 focused on non-electronic human-machine interaction for the first time, with four aerial robots assisting humans to complete tasks that one person could not independently accomplish. The gist of mission 8 involved a swarm of autonomous aerial robots working with a human to achieve a task in the presence of hostile "Sentry aerial robots" which were trying to impede the human. In 2018, the inaugural year of mission 8, the American Venue was held on the campus of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia, and the Asia/Pacific Venue was conducted at Beihang University in Beijing China. The following year, Mission 8 was successfully completed in Kunming China at the Yunnan Innovation

  Read more →
• 

  Random-fuzzy variable

  In measurements, the measurement obtained can suffer from two types of uncertainties. The first is the random uncertainty which is due to the noise in the process and the measurement. The second contribution is due to the systematic uncertainty which may be present in the measuring instrument. Systematic errors, if detected, can be easily compensated as they are usually constant throughout the measurement process as long as the measuring instrument and the measurement process are not changed. But it can not be accurately known while using the instrument if there is a systematic error and if there is, how much? Hence, systematic uncertainty could be considered as a contribution of a fuzzy nature. This systematic error can be approximately modeled based on our past data about the measuring instrument and the process. Statistical methods can be used to calculate the total uncertainty from both systematic and random contributions in a measurement. However, the computational complexity is very high, and hence not desirable. L.A.Zadeh introduced the concepts of fuzzy variables and fuzzy sets. Fuzzy variables are based on the theory of possibility and hence are possibility distributions. This makes them suitable to handle any type of uncertainty, i.e., both systematic and random contributions to the total uncertainty. Random-fuzzy variable (RFV) is a type 2 fuzzy variable, defined using the mathematical possibility theory, used to represent the entire information associated to a measurement result. It has an internal possibility distribution and an external possibility distribution called membership functions. The internal distribution is the uncertainty contributions due to the systematic uncertainty and the bounds of the RFV are because of the random contributions. The external distribution gives the uncertainty bounds from all contributions. == Definition == A random-fuzzy Variable (RFV) is defined as a type 2 fuzzy variable which satisfies the following conditions: Both the internal and the external functions of the RFV can be identified. Both the internal and the external functions are modeled as possibility distributions (PD). Both the internal and external functions have a unitary value for possibility to the same interval of values. An RFV can be seen in the figure. The external membership function is the distribution in blue and the internal membership function is the distribution in red. Both the membership functions are possibility distributions. Both the internal and external membership functions have a unitary value of possibility only in the rectangular part of the RFV. Therefore, all three conditions have been satisfied. If there are only systematic errors in the measurement, then the RFV simply becomes a fuzzy variable which consists of just the internal membership function. Similarly, if there is no systematic error, then the RFV becomes a fuzzy variable with just the random contributions and therefore, is just the possibility distribution of the random contributions. == Construction == A random-fuzzy variable can be constructed using an internal possibility distribution (rinternal) and a random possibility distribution (rrandom). === The random distribution (rrandom) === rrandom is the possibility distribution of the random contributions to the uncertainty. Any measurement instrument or process suffers from random error contributions due to intrinsic noise or other effects. This is completely random in nature and is a normal probability distribution when several random contributions are combined according to the central limit theorem. However, there can also be random contributions from other probability distributions, such as a uniform distribution, gamma distribution and so on. The probability distribution can be modeled from the measurement data. Then, the probability distribution can be used to model an equivalent possibility distribution using the maximally specific probability-possibility transformation. Some common probability distributions and the corresponding possibility distributions can be seen in the figures. === The internal distribution (rinternal) === rinternal is the internal distribution in the RFV which is the possibility distribution of the systematic contribution to the total uncertainty. This distribution can be built based on the information that is available about the measuring instrument and the process. The largest possible distribution is the uniform or rectangular possibility distribution. This means that every value in the specified interval is equally possible. This actually represents the state of total ignorance according to the theory of evidence which means it represents a scenario in which there is maximum lack of information. This distribution is used for the systematic error when we have absolutely no idea about the systematic error except that it belongs to a particular interval of values. This is quite common in measurements. However, in certain cases, it may be known that certain values have a higher or lower degrees of belief than certain other values. In this case, depending on the degrees of belief for the values, an appropriate possibility distribution could be constructed. === The construction of the external distribution (rexternal) and the RFV === After modeling the random and internal possibility distribution, the external membership function, rexternal, of the RFV can be constructed by using the following equation: where x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} is the mode of r random {\displaystyle r_{\textit {random}}} , which is the peak in the membership function of r r a n d o m {\displaystyle r_{random}} and Tmin is the minimum triangular norm. RFV can also be built from the internal and random distributions by considering the α-cuts of the two possibility distributions (PDs). An α-cut of a fuzzy variable F can be defined as Therefore, essentially an α-cut is the set of values for which the value of the membership function μ F ( a ) {\displaystyle \mu _{\rm {F}}(a)} of the fuzzy variable is greater than α. This gives the upper and lower bounds of the fuzzy variable F for each α-cut. The α-cut of an RFV, however, has 4 specific bounds and is given by R F V α = [ X a α , X b α , X c α , X d α ] {\displaystyle RFV^{\alpha }=[X_{a}^{\alpha },X_{b}^{\alpha },X_{c}^{\alpha },X_{d}^{\alpha }]} . X a α {\displaystyle X_{a}^{\alpha }} and X d α {\displaystyle X_{d}^{\alpha }} are the lower and upper bounds respectively of the external membership function (rexternal) which is a fuzzy variable on its own. X b α {\displaystyle X_{b}^{\alpha }} and X c α {\displaystyle X_{c}^{\alpha }} are the lower and upper bounds respectively of the internal membership function (rinternal) which is a fuzzy variable on its own. To build the RFV, let us consider the α-cuts of the two PDs i.e., rrandom and rinternal for the same value of α. This gives the lower and upper bounds for the two α-cuts. Let them be [ X L R α , X U R α ] {\displaystyle [X_{LR}^{\alpha },X_{UR}^{\alpha }]} and [ X L I α , X U I α ] {\displaystyle [X_{LI}^{\alpha },X_{UI}^{\alpha }]} for the random and internal distributions respectively. [ X L R α , X U R α ] {\displaystyle [X_{LR}^{\alpha },X_{UR}^{\alpha }]} can be again divided into two sub-intervals [ X L R α , x ∗ ] {\displaystyle [X_{LR}^{\alpha },x^{}]} and [ x ∗ , X U R α ] {\displaystyle [x^{},X_{UR}^{\alpha }]} where x ∗ {\displaystyle x^{}} is the mode of the fuzzy variable. Then, the α-cut for the RFV for the same value of α, R F V α = [ X a α , X b α , X c α , X d α ] {\displaystyle RFV^{\alpha }=[X_{a}^{\alpha },X_{b}^{\alpha },X_{c}^{\alpha },X_{d}^{\alpha }]} can be defined by Using the above equations, the α-cuts are calculated for every value of α which gives us the final plot of the RFV. A random-fuzzy variable is capable of giving a complete picture of the random and systematic contributions to the total uncertainty from the α-cuts for any confidence level as the confidence level is nothing but 1-α. An example for the construction of the corresponding external membership function (rexternal) and the RFV from a random PD and an internal PD can be seen in the following figure.

  Read more →
• 

  Quantum artificial life

  Quantum artificial life is the application of quantum algorithms with the ability to simulate biological behavior. Quantum computers offer many potential improvements to processes performed on classical computers, including machine learning and artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence applications are often inspired by the idea of mimicking human brains through closely related biomimicry. This has been implemented to a certain extent on classical computers (using neural networks), but quantum computers offer many advantages in the simulation of artificial life. Artificial life and artificial intelligence are extremely similar, with minor differences; the goal of studying artificial life is to understand living beings better, while the goal of artificial intelligence is to create intelligent beings. In 2016, Alvarez-Rodriguez et al. developed a proposal for a quantum artificial life algorithm with the ability to simulate life and Darwinian evolution. In 2018, the same research team led by Alvarez-Rodriguez performed the proposed algorithm on the IBM ibmqx4 quantum computer, and received optimistic results. The results accurately simulated a system with the ability to undergo self-replication at the quantum scale. == Artificial life on quantum computers == The growing advancement of quantum computers has led researchers to develop quantum algorithms for simulating life processes. Researchers have designed a quantum algorithm that can accurately simulate Darwinian Evolution. Since the complete simulation of artificial life on quantum computers has only been actualized by one group, this section shall focus on the implementation by Alvarez-Rodriguez, Sanz, Lomata, and Solano on an IBM quantum computer. Individuals were realized as two qubits, one representing the genotype of the individual and the other representing the phenotype. The genotype is copied to transmit genetic information through generations, and the phenotype is dependent on the genetic information as well as the individual's interactions with their environment. In order to set up the system, the state of the genotype is instantiated by some rotation of an ancillary state ( | 0 ⟩ ⟨ 0 | {\displaystyle |0\rangle \langle 0|} ). The environment is a two-dimensional spatial grid occupied by individuals and ancillary states. The environment is divided into cells that are able to possess one or more individuals. Individuals move throughout the grid and occupy cells randomly; when two or more individuals occupy the same cell they interact with each other. === Self replication === The ability to self-replicate is critical for simulating life. Self-replication occurs when the genotype of an individual interacts with an ancillary state, creating a genotype for a new individual; this genotype interacts with a different ancillary state in order to create the phenotype. During this interaction, one would like to copy some information about the initial state into the ancillary state, but by the no cloning theorem, it is impossible to copy an arbitrary unknown quantum state. However, physicists have derived different methods for quantum cloning which does not require the exact copying of an unknown state. The method that has been implemented by Alvarez-Rodriguez et al. is one that involves the cloning of the expectation value of some observable. For a unitary U {\displaystyle U} which copies the expectation value of some set of observables X {\displaystyle {\mathsf {X}}} of state ρ {\displaystyle \rho } into a blank state ρ e {\displaystyle \rho _{e}} , the cloning machine is defined by any ( U , ρ e , X ) {\displaystyle (U,\rho _{e},{\mathsf {X}})} that fulfill the following: ∀ ρ ∀ X ∈ X {\displaystyle \forall \rho \forall X\in {\mathsf {X}}} X ¯ = X 1 ¯ = X 2 ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {X}}={\bar {X_{1}}}={\bar {X_{2}}}} Where X ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {X}}} is the mean value of the observable in ρ {\displaystyle \rho } before cloning, X 1 ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {X_{1}}}} is the mean value of the observable in ρ {\displaystyle \rho } after cloning, and X 2 ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {X_{2}}}} is the mean value of the observable in ρ e {\displaystyle \rho _{e}} after cloning. Note that the cloning machine has no dependence on ρ {\displaystyle \rho } because we want to be able to clone the expectation of the observables for any initial state. It is important to note that cloning the mean value of the observable transmits more information than is allowed classically. The calculation of the mean value is defined naturally as: X ¯ = T r [ ρ X ] {\displaystyle {\bar {X}}=Tr[\rho X]} , X 1 ¯ = T r [ R X ⊗ I ] {\displaystyle {\bar {X_{1}}}=Tr[RX\otimes I]} , X 2 ¯ = T r [ R I ⊗ X ] {\displaystyle {\bar {X_{2}}}=Tr[RI\otimes X]} where R = U ρ ⊗ ρ e U † {\displaystyle R=U\rho \otimes \rho _{e}U^{\dagger }} The simplest cloning machine clones the expectation value of σ z {\displaystyle \sigma _{z}} in arbitrary state ρ = | ψ ⟩ ⟨ ψ | {\displaystyle \rho =|\psi \rangle \langle \psi |} to ρ e = | 0 ⟩ ⟨ 0 | {\displaystyle \rho _{e}=|0\rangle \langle 0|} using U = C N O T {\displaystyle U=CNOT} . This is the cloning machine implemented for self-replication by Alvarez-Rodriguez et al. The self-replication process clearly only requires interactions between two qubits, and therefore this cloning machine is the only one necessary for self replication. === Interactions === Interactions occur between individuals when the two take up the same space on the environmental grid. The presence of interactions between individuals provides an advantage for shorter-lifespan individuals. When two individuals interact, exchanges of information between the two phenotypes may or may not occur based on their existing values. When both individual's control qubits (genotypes) are alike, no information will be exchanged. When the control qubits differ, the target qubits (phenotype) will be exchanged between the two individuals. This procedure produces a constantly changing predator-prey dynamic in the simulation. Therefore, long-living qubits, with a larger genetic makeup in the simulation, are at a disadvantage. Since information is only exchanged when interacting with an individual of different genetic makeup, the short-lived population has the advantage. === Mutation === Mutations exist in the artificial world with limited probability, equivalent to their occurrence in the real world. There are two ways in which the individual can mutate: through random single qubit rotations and by errors in the self-replication process. There are two different operators that act on the individual and cause mutations. The M operation causes a spontaneous mutation within the individual by rotating a single qubit by parameter θ. The parameter θ is random for each mutation, which creates biodiversity within the artificial environment. The M operation is a unitary matrix which can be described as: M = ( cos ⁡ ( θ ) s i n ( θ ) s i n ( θ ) − c o s ( θ ) ) {\displaystyle M={\begin{pmatrix}\cos(\theta )&sin(\theta )\\sin(\theta )&-cos(\theta )\end{pmatrix}}} The other possible way for mutations to occur is due to errors in the replication process. Due to the no-cloning theorem, it is impossible to produce perfect copies of systems that are originally in unknown quantum states. However, quantum cloning machines make it possible to create imperfect copies of quantum states, in other words, the process introduces some degree of error. The error that exists in current quantum cloning machines is the root cause for the second kind of mutations in the artificial life experiment. The imperfect cloning operation can be seen as: U M ( θ ) = I 4 + 1 2 ( 0 0 0 1 ) ⊗ ( − 1 1 1 − 1 ) ( c o s θ + i s i n θ + 1 ) {\displaystyle U_{M}(\theta )=\mathrm {I} _{4}+{\frac {1}{2}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&1\end{pmatrix}}\otimes {\begin{pmatrix}-1&1\\1&-1\end{pmatrix}}(cos\theta +isin\theta +1)} The two kinds of mutations affect the individual differently. While the spontaneous M operation does not affect the phenotype of the individual, the self-replicating error mutation, UM, alters both the genotype of the individual, and its associated lifetime. The presence of mutations in the quantum artificial life experiment is critical for providing randomness and biodiversity. The inclusion of mutations helps to increase the accuracy of the quantum algorithm. === Death === At the instant the individual is created (when the genotype is copied into the phenotype), the phenotype interacts with the environment. As time evolves, the interaction of the individual with the environment simulates aging which eventually leads to the death of the individual. The death of an individual occurs when the expectation value of σ z {\displaystyle \sigma _{z}} is within some ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } of 1 in the phenotype, or, equivalently, when ρ p = | 0 ⟩ ⟨ 0 | {\displaystyle \rho _{p}=|0\rangle \langle 0|} The Lindbladian describes the interaction of the individual with the environment: ρ

  Read more →
• 

  Loab

  Loab ( LOBE) is a fictional character that artist and writer Steph Maj Swanson claimed to have discovered with a text-to-image AI model in April 2022. In a viral Twitter thread, Swanson described the images of Loab as an unexpectedly emergent property of the software, saying they discovered them when asking the model to produce something "as different from the prompt as possible". == History == The Sweden-based artist Steph Maj Swanson said that they first generated these images in April 2022 by using the algorithmic technique of "negative prompt weights" accessing latent space. The initial prompt - 'Brando::-1', requesting the opposite of actor Marlon Brando - generated a "skyline logo" with the cryptic lettering "DIGITA PNTICS". Attempting to generate the opposite of this image using the prompt "DIGITA PNTICS skyline logo::-1" yielded what Swanson described as "off-putting images, all of the same devastated-looking older woman with defined triangles of rosacea(?) on her cheeks". Swanson nicknamed the character "Loab", after one of the generated images resembled an album cover that included the printed word "loab". Swanson says that using the image as a prompt for further images produced increasingly violent and gory results. Swanson speculated that something about the image could be "adjacent to extremely gory and macabre imagery in the distribution of the AI's world knowledge". Swanson says that when they combined images of Loab with other pictures, the subsequent results consistently return an image including Loab, regardless of how much distortion they added to the prompts to try and remove her visage. Swanson speculated that the latent space region of the AI map that Loab is located in, in addition to being near gruesome imagery, must be isolated enough that any combinations with other images could only use Loab from her area and no related images due to its isolation. After enough crossbreeding of images and dilution attempts, Swanson was able to eventually generate images without Loab, but found that crossbreeding those diluted images would also eventually lead to a version of Loab to reappear in the resulting images. Swanson has said that "for various reasons" they declined to disclose the software used to create the images. Loab has been referred to as the "first AI-generated cryptid" and as such has gone viral. Despite hyping up the cryptid nature of the discovery in their wording, Swanson admitted that "Loab isn't really haunted, of course", but noted that the mythos that has sprung up around the AI-generated character has gone beyond their initial involvement. Swanson speculated that people sharing pictures and memes of Loab would lead future AIs to use those images as a part of their latent space maps, making her an innate part of the internet landscape, with Swanson adding "If we want to get rid of her, it's already too late." == Response == There has been discussion of whether the Loab series of images are "a legitimate quirk of AI art software, or a cleverly disguised creepypasta." Smithsonian magazine has written that "Loab sparked some lengthy ethical conversations around visual aesthetics, art and technology," and some have criticized the labeling of a woman with rosacea as a horror image, considering this to be "stigmatizing disability". Swanson responded that if the AI map is combining Loab with violent imagery, then that is a "social bias" in the data being used for the image modeling software. The Atlantic writer Stephen Marche described Loab as a "form of expression that has never existed before" whose authorship is unclear and that exists as an "emanation of the collective imagistic heritage, the unconscious visual mind". Laurens Verhagen in de Volkskrant commented that rather than showing that there are "dark horror creatures hidden deep within AI", the existence of Loab instead implies that our current "understanding of AI is limited". Mhairi Aitken at the Alan Turing Institute stated that rather than a "creepy" emergent property, output results like Loab were representative of the "limitations of AI image-generator models" and was more concerned about the urban legends that are born from such "boring" innocuous things and how easily "other people take these things seriously". Carly Cassella for ScienceAlert described Loab as a "modern day tronie" (a style of Dutch painting) that is not representative of an actual person, but just a concept or idea, similar but distinct from works like the Girl With A Pearl Earring. Wired's Joel Warner argued that Loab was only the beginning and that, with AI text generators such as ChatGPT becoming more commonplace, a "linguistic version of Loab" would emerge in that space as well and begin creating ideas through "intentional prompts" or otherwise that will be as disturbing as The 120 Days of Sodom.

  Read more →
• 

  IJCAI Computers and Thought Award

  The IJCAI Computers and Thought Award is presented every two years by the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), recognizing outstanding young scientists in artificial intelligence. It was originally funded with royalties received from the book Computers and Thought (edited by Edward Feigenbaum and Julian Feldman), and is currently funded by IJCAI. It is considered to be "the premier award for artificial intelligence researchers under the age of 35". == Laureates == Terry Winograd (1971) Patrick Winston (1973) Chuck Rieger (1975) Douglas Lenat (1977) David Marr (1979) Gerald Sussman (1981) Tom Mitchell (1983) Hector Levesque (1985) Johan de Kleer (1987) Henry Kautz (1989) Rodney Brooks (1991) Martha E. Pollack (1991) Hiroaki Kitano (1993) Sarit Kraus (1995) Stuart Russell (1995) Leslie Kaelbling (1997) Nicholas Jennings (1999) Daphne Koller (2001) Tuomas Sandholm (2003) Peter Stone (2007) Carlos Guestrin (2009) Andrew Ng (2009) Vincent Conitzer (2011) Malte Helmert (2011) Kristen Grauman (2013) Ariel D. Procaccia (2015) Percy Liang (2016) for his contributions to both the approach of semantic parsing for natural language understanding and better methods for learning latent-variable models, sometimes with weak supervision, in machine learning. Devi Parikh (2017) Stefano Ermon (2018) Guy Van den Broeck (2019) for his contributions to statistical and relational artificial intelligence, and the study of tractability in learning and reasoning. Piotr Skowron (2020) for his contributions to computational social choice, and to the theory of committee elections. Fei Fang (2021) for her contributions to integrating machine learning with game theory and the use of these novel techniques to tackle societal challenges such as more effective deployment of security resources, enhancing environmental sustainability, and reducing food insecurity. Bo Li (2022) for her contributions to uncovering the underlying connections among robustness, privacy, and generalization in AI, showing how different models are vulnerable to malicious attacks, and how to eliminate these vulnerabilities using mathematical tools that provide robustness guarantees for learning models and privacy protection. Pin-Yu Chen (2023) for his contributions to consolidating properties of trust, robustness and safety into rigorous algorithmic procedures and computable metrics for improving AI systems. Nisarg Shah (2024) for his contributions to AI and society, in particular foundational work on the theory of algorithmic fairness using principles from social choice theory. Aditya Grover (2025) for his foundational contributions uniting deep generative models, representation learning, and reinforcement learning, and for their applications in advancing scientific reasoning.

  Read more →
• 

  Murderbot (TV series)

  Murderbot is an American science fiction action comedy television series created by Paul Weitz and Chris Weitz for Apple TV+. It is based on All Systems Red, the first book of the series The Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells, who serves as a consulting producer. The series stars Alexander Skarsgård as the titular character. The first season premiered on May 16, 2025 and received positive reviews. In July 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. == Premise == A media-obsessed private security construct (manufactured from cloned human tissue and mechanical parts) calling itself Murderbot must hide its newly acquired autonomy while completing dangerous assignments and being simultaneously drawn to humans, and appalled by their weakness. == Cast and characters == === Main === Alexander Skarsgård as Murderbot Noma Dumezweni as Ayda Mensah, a terraforming specialist, the President of Preservation Alliance and the leader of the science team protected by Murderbot David Dastmalchian as Gurathin, a tech expert and augmented human Sabrina Wu as Pin-Lee, a scientist and legal counsel to the team Akshay Khanna as Ratthi, a wormhole expert Tamara Podemski as Bharadwaj, a geochemist Tattiawna Jones as Arada, a biologist === Recurring === Cast of show-within-a-show The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon John Cho as Eknie Jef Chem (playing Captain Hossein) Jack McBrayer as Breiller MocJac (playing Navigation Officer Hordööp-Sklanch) Clark Gregg as Arletty (playing Lieutenant Kullervv) DeWanda Wise as Pordron Bretney III Roche (playing NawBot 337 Alt 66) === Guest === Anna Konkle as Leebeebee, a member of another survey team on the planet. The character does not appear in the novella. Amanda Brugel as GrayCris Blue Leader David Reale as GrayCris Yellow == Episodes == == Production == The book series was optioned in the late 2010s, and its film adaptation was considered. In 2021, book series author Martha Wells said that a potential TV series adaptation was in development and that she had read the script and was "really excited about it". The series was green lit by Apple TV+ in 2022, with Wells serving as a consulting producer. The production design team, led by Sue Chan, started work in the autumn. Tommy Arnold, the Murderbot Diaries special edition illustrator, created the concept art for the show. After the casting was delayed by the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, in December 2023 it was announced that Alexander Skarsgård would produce and star in the series. He developed the character and the world of Murderbot with the showrunners. In February 2024, David Dastmalchian and Noma Dumezweni joined the cast. In March, Sabrina Wu, Tattiawna Jones, Akshay Khanna, and Tamara Podemski joined the cast. On July 10, 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. Showrunners Chris and Paul Weitz suggested the second season would combine the next three books of the series and will have longer episodes. === Filming === Principal photography for the first season took place from March–June 2024, in Toronto and parts of Ontario, Canada. Most of the filming was done on location, with the Sanctuary Moon scenes filmed on a virtual production stage. Principal photography for the second season began in mid-2026, in Madrid, Spain. It is planned to last 71 days, with Martha Wells also visiting the set. == Release == The first two episodes of Murderbot premiered on Apple TV+ on May 16, 2025, with subsequent episodes released weekly. The first season consists of ten episodes. == Reception == Even before the release of the show, numerous media sources had commented on the titular character as being coded as autistic and agender. On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, Murderbot has an approval rating of 96% with an average score of 7.5/10, based on 76 critics' reviews. The website's critical consensus states, "Alexander Skarsgård's superbly dry wit brings a lot of heart to Murderbot, making for a refreshingly jaunty sci-fi saga about finally coming out of one's shell". Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned a score of 70 out of 100, based on 28 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. Some reviewers have criticized Murderbot's changes to Wells' original books. Angela Watercutter of Wired noted that the series has significant tonal differences from the books and noted the show's changes to characters, particularly Murderbot and Dr. Mensah, and Wells' social commentary. === Accolades === Murderbot was a finalist for the 2025 Dragon Award for Best Science Fiction or Fantasy TV Series. Tommy Arnold won the 2025 Concept Art Association Award in the category of Live-Action Series Character Art for his work on Murderbot. Alexander Skarsgård was nominated for a Critics' Choice Award for Best Actor in a Comedy Series. Carrie Grace and Laura Jean Shannon were nominated for a Costume Designers Guild Award in the category of Excellence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Television for their work on FreeCommerce. Amanda Jones was nominated for a Composers & Lyricists Award for Outstanding Original Title Sequence for a Television Production.

  Read more →
• 

  Educational robotics

  Educational robotics teaches the design, analysis, application and operation of robots. Robots include articulated robots, mobile robots or autonomous vehicles. Educational robotics can be taught from elementary school to graduate programs. Robotics may also be used to motivate and facilitate the instruction other, often foundational, topics such as computer programming, artificial intelligence or engineering design. == Education and training == Robotics engineers design robots, maintain them, develop new applications for them, and conduct research to expand the potential of robotics. Robots have become a popular educational tool in some middle and high schools, as well as in numerous youth summer camps, raising interest in programming, artificial intelligence and robotics among students. First-year computer science courses at several universities now include programming of a robot in addition to traditional software engineering-based coursework. == Category of Educational robotics == The categories of educational robots seen as having more than one category. It can be alienated into different categories based on their physical design and coding method. Generally they are categorised as arm robots, wheeled mobile robots and humanoid robots. Tangibly, coded robots uses a physical means of coding instead of the screens coding. === Initiatives in schools === Leachim, was a robot teacher programmed with the class curricular, as well as certain biographical information on the 40 students whom it was programmed to teach. Leachim could synthesize human speech using Diphone synthesis. It was invented by Michael J. Freeman in 1974 and was tested in a fourth grade classroom in the Bronx, New York. === Post-secondary degree programs === From approximately 1960 through 2005, robotics education at post-secondary institutions took place through elective courses, thesis experiences and design projects offered as part of degree programs in traditional academic disciplines, such as mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, industrial engineering or computer science. Since 2005, more universities have begun granting degrees in robotics as a discipline in its own right, often under the name "Robotic Engineering". Based on a 2015 web-based survey of robotics educators, the degree programs and their estimates annual graduates are listed alphabetically below. Note that only official degree programs where the word "robotics" appears on the transcript or diploma are listed here; whereas degree programs in traditional disciplines with course concentrations or thesis topics related to robotics are deliberately omitted. === Certification === The Robotics Certification Standards Alliance (RCSA) is an international robotics certification authority that confers various industry- and educational-related robotics certifications. === Summer robotics camp === Several summer camp programs include robotics as part of their core curriculum. In addition, youth summer robotics programs are frequently offered by celebrated museums such as the American Museum of Natural History and The Tech Museum of Innovation in Silicon Valley, CA, just to name a few. There are of benefits that come from attending robotics camps. It teaches students how to use teamwork, resilience and motivation, and decision-making. Students learn teamwork because most camps involve exciting activities requiring teamwork. Resilience and motivation is expected because by completing the challenging programs, students feel talented and accomplished after they complete the program. Also students are given unique situations making them make decisions to further their situation. === Educational robotics in special education === Educational robotics can be a useful tool in early and special education. According to a journal on new perspectives in science education, educational robotics can help to develop abilities that promote autonomy and assist their integration into society. Social and personal skills can also be developed through educational robotics. Using Lego Mindstorms NXT, schoolteachers were able to work with middle school aged children in order to develop programs and improve the children's social and personal skills. Additionally, problem solving skills and creativity were utilized through the creation of artwork and scenery to house the robots. Other studies show the benefits of educational robotics in special education as promoting superior cognitive functions, including executive functions. This can lead to an increased ability in "problem solving, reasoning and planning in typically developing preschool children." Through eight weeks of weekly forty-five-minute group sessions using the Bee-Bot, an increase in interest, attention, and interaction between both peers and adults was found in the school and preschool-aged children with Down Syndrome. This study suggests that educational robotics in the classroom can also lead to an improvement in visuo-spatial memory and mental planning. Furthermore, executive functions seemed to be possible in one child during this study.

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial Intelligence Cold War

  The Artificial Intelligence Cold War (AI Cold War) is a narrative in which geopolitical tensions between the United States of America (USA) and the People's Republic of China (PRC) could lead to a Second Cold War waged in the area of artificial intelligence technology rather than in the areas of nuclear capabilities or ideology. The context of the AI Cold War narrative is the AI arms race, which involves a build-up of military capabilities using AI technology by the US and China and the usage of increasingly advanced semiconductors which power those capabilities. According to a February 2019 publication by the Center for a New American Security, General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping – believes that being at the forefront of AI technology will be critical to the future of China's global military and economic power competition. == Origins of the term == The term AI Cold War first appeared in 2018 in an article in Wired magazine by Nicholas Thompson and Ian Bremmer. The two authors trace the emergence of the AI Cold War narrative to 2017, when China published its AI Development Plan, which included a strategy aimed at becoming the global leader in AI by 2030. While the authors acknowledge the use of AI by China to strengthen its authoritarian (totalitarian) rule, they warn against the perils for the US of engaging in an AI Cold War strategy. Thompson and Bremmer rather advocate for a technological cooperation between the US and China to encourage global standards in privacy and ethical use of AI. Shortly after the publication of the article in Wired magazine, the former U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson referred to the emergence of an ‘Economic Iron Curtain’ between the US and China, reinforcing the new AI Cold War narrative. == Proponents of the AI Cold War narrative == Politico contributed to reinforcing the AI Cold War narrative. In 2020, the paper argued that because of the increasing AI capabilities of China, the US and other democratic countries have to create an alliance to stay ahead of China. Former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt, together with Graham T. Allison alleged in an article in Project Syndicate that, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the AI capabilities of China are ahead of the US in most critical areas. Scientists who have immigrated to the U.S. play an outsize role in the country's development of AI technology. Many of them were educated in China, prompting debates about national security concerns amid worsening relations between the two countries. Policy and technology experts have pointed to concerns about unethical use of AI which would be primarily associated with China. Ethics would therefore constitute a major ideological divide in the upcoming AI Cold War. Fears around disrupting supply chains and a global semiconductor shortage are linked to Taiwan's critical role in the production of semiconductors. 70% of semiconductors are either produced in Taiwan or transfer through Taiwan, where TSMC, world's largest chipmaker is headquartered. The PRC does not recognize the sovereignty of Taiwan and trade restrictions by the US on companies selling semiconductors to the PRC have disrupted in the past the commercial relationships between TSMC and Huawei. == Reactions to the AI Cold War == === Review of the validity of the AI Cold War narrative === Academics and observers expressed concerns about the validity and soundness of the AI Cold War narrative. Denise Garzia expressed concern in Nature that the AI Cold War narrative will undermine the efforts by the US to establish global rules for AI ethics. Researchers have warned in MIT Technology Review that the breakdown in international collaboration in the area of science because of the threat of the alleged AI Cold War would be detrimental to progress. Additionally, the AI Cold War narrative impacts on many more areas including the planning of supply chains and the proliferation of AI. The dissemination of the AI Cold War narrative could therefore be costly and destructive and exacerbate existing tensions. Joanna Bryson and Helena Malikova have pointed to Big Tech's potential interest in promoting the AI Cold War narrative, as technology companies lobby for less onerous regulation of AI in the US and the EU. A factual assessment of the existing AI capabilities of different countries shows a less binary reality than portrayed by the AI Cold War narrative. The AI Cold War started as a narrative but it could turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy and fuel an arms race, not only because of corporate interests but also because of the existing interests at different national security departments. Regarding cyber power, the International Institute for Strategic Studies published a study in June 2021, which argued that the online capabilities of China have been exaggerated and that Chinese cyber power is at least a decade behind the US, largely due to lingering security issues. === Restrictions to trading with China === US politicians and European industry players have invoked the looming AI Cold War as a reason to ban procurement by public authorities in Europe of Huawei 5G technology due to concerns over the Chinese state-sponsored surveillance industry. In 2019, the Trump administration successfully lobbied the Dutch government into stopping the Netherlands-based company ASML from exporting equipment to China. ASML manufactures a machine called an extreme ultraviolet lithography system used by semiconductor producers, including TSMC and Intel to produce state-of the-art microchips. The Biden administration adopted the same course of action as the Trump administration and requested the Netherlands to restrict sales by ASML to China, invoking national-security concerns. The trade restrictions imposed by the Trump administration affected semiconductors imports from China to the US and raised concerns by the US industry that supply chains will be disrupted in case of an AI Cold War. This prompted US technology companies to develop mitigation strategies including hoarding semiconductors and trying to set up local semiconductor production facilities, with the support of government subsidies. === Industrial policy initiatives === ==== United States ==== In June 2021, the US Senate approved the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act providing around 250 billion US dollars public money support to the US technological and manufacturing industry. The alleged Chinese threat in the area of technology helped secure a strong bipartisan support for the new legislation, amounting to the largest industrial policy move by the US in decades. Chinese authorities reproached to the US that the bill was “full of cold war zero-sum thinking”. The legislative bill is aimed at strengthening capabilities in the area of technology, such as quantum computing and AI specifically to face the competitive threat from China perceived as urgent. Senator Chuck Schumer, the leader of the Senate majority and one of the sponsors of the industrial policy bill invoked the threat of authoritarian regimes that want “grab the mantle of global economic leadership and own the innovations”. In 2022, U.S. Innovation and Competition Act was amended and turned into the Chips and Science Act with planned spending of 280 billion US dollars, 53 billion thereof are allocated directly to subsidies for semiconductors manufacturing. Commentators identified possible positive effects on innovation from the US attempts to compete with China in a perceived rivalry. Among the main beneficiaries of the US CHIPS Act are the semiconductor producers Intel, TSMC and Micron Technology. ==== European Chips Act ==== In February 2022, the European Union introduced its own European Chips Act initiative. The background of the initiative would be the objective of European strategic autonomy. The EU's initiative puts forward subsidies of 30 billion euros to encourage manufacturing of semiconductors in the EU. The US company Intel is one beneficiary of the initiative. The US and European chips acts raise concerns of protectionism and a risk of a subsidies "race to the bottom." === New world order === The AI Cold War heralds a new world order in geopolitics, according to Hemant Taneja and Fareed Zakaria. This new world order is a departure from the unipolar system dominated by the US. It is characterized by existence of two parallel digital ecosystems, ran by China and the US. In order to succeed countries that consider themselves as democracies are to align their technological ecosystems to that of the US, in a process labelled re-globalization.

  Read more →
• 

  Felix, Net i Nika

  Felix, Net i Nika ("Felix, Net and Nika") is a series of Polish language science fiction books for teenagers, written by Rafał Kosik. It tells the adventures of three friends - Felix Polon, Net Bielecki and Nika Mickiewicz - who attend fictional Professor Kuszmiński Middle School in Warsaw. As of 2024, eighteen books have been published. == Books == There are currently 18 books in the series: Felix, Net and Nika and the Gang of Invisible People - November 2004. Felix, Net and Nika and the Theoretically Possible Catastrophe - November 2005 Felix, Net and Nika and the Palace of Dreams - November 2006 Felix, Net and Nika and the Trap of Immortality - November 2007 Felix, Net and Nika and the Orbital Conspiracy - November 2008 Felix, Net and Nika and the Orbital Conspiracy 2: Small Army - May 2009 Felix, Net and Nika and the Third Cousin - November 2009 Felix, Net and Nika and the Rebellion of Machines - March 2011 Felix, Net and Nika and the World Zero - November 2011 Felix, Net and Nika and the World Zero 2. Alternauts - November 2012 Felix, Net and Nika and the Extracurricular Stories - April 2013 Felix, Net and Nika and the Secret of Czerwona Hańcza - November 2013 Felix, Net and Nika and Curse of McKillian's House - November 2014 Felix, Net and Nika and (un)Safe Growing up - November 2015 Felix, Net and Nika and The End of The World as We Know It - November 2018 Felix, Net and Nika and No Chance - November 2022 Felix, Net and Nika and No Chance 2: other tomorrrow - 2023 Felix, Net and Nika and Fantology - June 2024 == Film == A feature motion picture, Felix, Net i Nika oraz Teoretycznie Możliwa Katastrofa (Felix, Net and Nika and the Theoretically Possible Catastrophe) was released in Poland on September 28, 2012. == Main characters == Felix Polon - a foresighted, fair-haired boy with dark brown eyes. He inherited the talent of constructing various things, especially robots, from his father- it saved his friends many times. He can make anything from nothing, always finds a way out of a situation; almost always has a plan. Together with his parents Marlene and Peter, grandmother Lucy, his dog Caban (a Black Russian Terrier) and Golem Golem a robot he built, Felix lives on Serdeczna Street in a small family house. Net Bielecki is quite tall & slim, has blue eyes and a high IQ level. "Net" is his nickname; his true name is unknown. He is the most trendy and 'awesome' in his entire class. He is a human calculator and is excellent in mathematics. He hates dictations and spelling because he is dyslexic. He is also quite lazy, absent-minded and sometimes hysterical, or panicking. His dark blond hair looks like a heap of hay after a grenade explosion. He is best in ICT and writes many of his own programs. His love interest is Nika Mickiewicz. Together with his parents Lila and Mark, and their newborn twins nicknamed Pompek and Prumcia he lives on the top floor of a Penthouse apartment. Nika Mickiewicz is a girl with a character. She is very brave and mature. She likes reading books. She has curly, red hair, green eyes and a few freckles. She is not very rich; she wears second-hand clothes and her only pair of black Dr. Martens shoes. She lives in a tiny apartment. She is an orphan, but hides that fact from people for almost 3 years. However, Felix and Net, her best and possibly only friends, find out about it. She also has abnormal abilities. She can move distant objects using her powers, ski uphill and knows some things by intuition. In other words, she is telekinetic. Manfred is a friendly AI program started and never finished by Net's father, and mastered and programmed further by Net himself. He likes going on adventures and solving mysteries with the trio much more than his actual job, which is controlling the traffic lights. He helped out the three friends many times and is their reliable and faithful friend. Morten is also an AI program, but he is the antagonist of the trio. He appears in all 6 books of Felix Net and Nika. In the first book, the trio thinks they finished him off for good, but as we find out later, he comes back in the third book. In the fifth/sixth book, he was the mastermind of the Orbital Conspiracy. Also, Morten's logo, appears in all 6 books and it is still a mystery what he has to do with each event.

  Read more →