AI For Business From University Of Pennsylvania

AI For Business From University Of Pennsylvania — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

AI-complete

In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), tasks that are hypothesized to require artificial general intelligence to solve are informally known as AI-complete or AI-hard. Calling a problem AI-complete reflects the belief that it cannot be solved by a simple specific algorithm. Prior to 2013, problems supposed to be AI-complete included computer vision, natural language understanding, and dealing with unexpected circumstances while solving any real-world problem. AI-complete tasks were notably considered useful for distinguishing humans from automated agents, as CAPTCHAs aim to do. == History == The term was coined by Fanya Montalvo by analogy with NP-complete and NP-hard in complexity theory, which formally describes the most famous class of difficult problems. Early uses of the term are in Erik Mueller's 1987 PhD dissertation and in Eric Raymond's 1991 Jargon File. Expert systems, that were popular in the 1980s, were able to solve very simple and/or restricted versions of AI-complete problems, but never in their full generality. When AI researchers attempted to "scale up" their systems to handle more complicated, real-world situations, the programs tended to become excessively brittle without commonsense knowledge or a rudimentary understanding of the situation: they would fail as unexpected circumstances outside of its original problem context would begin to appear. When human beings are dealing with new situations in the world, they are helped by their awareness of the general context: they know what the things around them are, why they are there, what they are likely to do and so on. They can recognize unusual situations and adjust accordingly. Expert systems lacked this adaptability and were brittle when facing new situations. DeepMind published a work in May 2022 in which they trained a single model to do several things at the same time. The model, named Gato, can "play Atari, caption images, chat, stack blocks with a real robot arm and much more, deciding based on its context whether to output text, joint torques, button presses, or other tokens." Similarly, some tasks once considered to be AI-complete, like machine translation, are among the capabilities of large language models. == AI-complete problems == AI-complete problems have been hypothesized to include: AI peer review (composite natural language understanding, automated reasoning, automated theorem proving, formalized logic expert system) Bongard problems Computer vision (and subproblems such as object recognition) Natural language understanding (and subproblems such as text mining, machine translation, and word-sense disambiguation) Autonomous driving Dealing with unexpected circumstances while solving any real world problem, whether navigation, planning, or even the kind of reasoning done by expert systems. == Formalization == Computational complexity theory deals with the relative computational difficulty of computable functions. By definition, it does not cover problems whose solution is unknown or has not been characterized formally. Since many AI problems have no formalization yet, conventional complexity theory does not enable a formal definition of AI-completeness. == Research == Roman Yampolskiy suggests that a problem C {\displaystyle C} is AI-Complete if it has two properties: It is in the set of AI problems (Human Oracle-solvable). Any AI problem can be converted into C {\displaystyle C} by some polynomial time algorithm. On the other hand, a problem H {\displaystyle H} is AI-Hard if and only if there is an AI-Complete problem C {\displaystyle C} that is polynomial time Turing-reducible to H {\displaystyle H} . This also gives as a consequence the existence of AI-Easy problems, that are solvable in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine with an oracle for some problem. Yampolskiy has also hypothesized that the Turing Test is a defining feature of AI-completeness. Groppe and Jain classify problems which require artificial general intelligence to reach human-level machine performance as AI-complete, while only restricted versions of AI-complete problems can be solved by the current AI systems. For Šekrst, getting a polynomial solution to AI-complete problems would not necessarily be equal to solving the issue of artificial general intelligence, while emphasizing the lack of computational complexity research being the limiting factor towards achieving artificial general intelligence. For Kwee-Bintoro and Velez, solving AI-complete problems would have strong repercussions on society.
Read more →
Concordancer

A concordancer is a computer program that automatically constructs a concordance—an alphabetised index of every occurrence of a word or phrase in a body of text, each entry displayed with its surrounding context. Concordancers are primary tools in corpus linguistics, lexicography, computer-assisted translation, and language teaching. The most common display format is the key word in context (KWIC) layout, in which each hit appears centred on a line with a fixed span of words to its left and right, enabling rapid scanning of usage patterns across many occurrences. == History == === Pre-computational concordances === The compilation of concordances predates computers by many centuries. Around 1230, the French Dominican cardinal Hugh of Saint-Cher directed a team of friars in assembling a concordance of the Latin Vulgate Bible, generally regarded as the first systematic concordance of any text. To help readers locate passages, Hugh divided each biblical chapter into lettered sections. Later milestones include a Hebrew Old Testament concordance compiled by Rabbi Mordecai Nathan (1448), Alexander Cruden's Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures (1737), and the manuscript Asaf ha-Mazkir, an unfinished concordance to the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Moses Rigotz around the turn of the 19th century. === First computer concordance === The first concordance produced with computing assistance was the Index Thomisticus, a comprehensive lexical index of the writings of and around Thomas Aquinas, totalling approximately 10.6 million Latin words. The Italian Jesuit priest Roberto Busa conceived the project in 1946 and secured the sponsorship of IBM in 1949 after a meeting with chairman Thomas J. Watson. Keypunch operators in Gallarate, Italy, encoded the texts onto punched cards from around 1950. IBM executive Paul Tasman developed the processing methods. The full 56-volume printed edition was completed around 1980, followed by a CD-ROM edition in 1989 and a web-accessible version in 2005. === The KWIC format === The key word in context (KWIC) display was formalised as a computational technique by Hans Peter Luhn, a researcher at IBM, in a 1960 paper in American Documentation. In KWIC output, each instance of the search term (the node word) is centred on a line with a fixed window of words to each side; sorting the resulting lines alphabetically by the immediately adjacent word reveals collocational and phraseological patterns at a glance. === COCOA === One of the first dedicated concordancing programs was COCOA (COunt and COncordance Generation on Atlas), created in 1965 by D. B. Russell at University College London and the Atlas Computer Laboratory in Harwell, Oxfordshire. Written in approximately 4,000 cards of FORTRAN, it processed text annotated with flat, non-hierarchical markup tags and could produce word counts and concordances in multiple languages. Within its first six months COCOA had been applied to texts in at least six languages. A second version designed for multiple mainframe platforms was distributed to British computing centres in the mid-1970s. Growing dissatisfaction with its interface and the eventual withdrawal of Atlas Laboratory support prompted British funding bodies to commission a successor program. === Oxford Concordance Program === The Oxford Concordance Program (OCP) was designed and written in FORTRAN by Susan Hockey and Ian Marriott at Oxford University Computing Services (OUCS) between 1979 and 1980 and first released in 1981. Hockey and Marriott acknowledged that OCP owed much to COCOA and the CLOC system at the University of Birmingham. OCP accepted COCOA-format markup to encode metadata such as author, act, scene, and line number, and was described by its authors as "a machine-independent text analysis program for producing word lists, indices and concordances in a variety of languages and alphabets." By the mid-1980s it had been licensed to approximately 240 institutions in 23 countries. A personal computer version, Micro-OCP, was developed for the IBM PC and sold by Oxford University Press from the late 1980s. Version 2 was rewritten in 1985–86 and documented in the same 1987 article by Hockey and co-author John Martin. === Personal computer era === The availability of affordable personal computers in the 1980s and 1990s enabled standalone concordancing applications that analysts could run locally without specialist computing facilities. MicroConcord, developed by Mike Scott and Tim Johns and published by Oxford University Press in 1993 for MS-DOS, was among the first concordancers designed specifically for classroom language teaching. WordSmith Tools, also developed by Mike Scott, was first released in 1996 and became one of the most widely used corpus analysis suites in academic linguistics research. Other tools from this era include TACT (University of Toronto, 1989), a suite of MS-DOS freeware programs for literary text analysis, and MonoConc, a Windows concordancer created by Michael Barlow. === Web-based concordancers === From the late 1990s onwards, web-based concordancers hosted on remote servers gave researchers browser access to large preloaded corpora without requiring local storage or processing. The Sketch Engine, developed by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý (Masaryk University), was launched commercially in July 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited and introduced word sketches—automatically generated one-page profiles of a word's typical grammatical relations and collocations. AntConc, created by Laurence Anthony at Waseda University, Tokyo, was first released in 2002 as freeware for Windows, macOS, and Linux. == Features == Modern concordancers typically offer a range of analytical functions beyond basic KWIC display. These commonly include: KWIC display with the node word centred and context words in aligned columns, sortable by the word one, two, or three positions to the left or right of the node (L1–L3 and R1–R3) Concordance plots, visualising the distribution of hits as marks along a scaled bar representing each text in the corpus Frequency and word lists, both alphabetical and ranked by frequency Collocation statistics, identifying words that co-occur with the search term more often than chance, quantified by measures such as mutual information, the t-score, or log-likelihood Keyword analysis, comparing word frequencies between a study corpus and a reference corpus to identify statistically distinctive items N-gram analysis, finding frequently recurring word sequences of a specified length Part-of-speech tagging integration, allowing searches filtered to particular grammatical categories Unicode support for multilingual text Bilingual and parallel concordancers additionally display aligned text in two or more languages side by side, enabling comparison of translation equivalents across language pairs. == Notable concordancers == === WordSmith Tools === Created by Mike Scott and first released in 1996, WordSmith Tools is a Windows corpus analysis suite that evolved from MicroConcord. Its three core modules are Concord (KWIC concordances), WordList (frequency and alphabetical word lists), and Keywords (statistical keyword identification relative to a reference corpus). Oxford University Press used WordSmith Tools for dictionary preparation work. Version 4.0 is freely available; later versions are sold by Lexical Analysis Software Limited. === AntConc === AntConc is a freeware, multiplatform concordancing toolkit created by Laurence Anthony, Professor of Applied Linguistics at Waseda University, Tokyo. First released in 2002 and formally described in a 2005 academic paper, it runs on Windows, macOS, and Linux. Its tools include a KWIC concordancer, a concordance plot for visualising distribution across texts, a collocates tool, a keyword list, and an n-gram analysis module. Because it is free and requires only plain text files, AntConc is widely used in linguistics courses and independent research worldwide. === Sketch Engine === The Sketch Engine is a corpus management and query system co-created by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý and launched in 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited. It provides browser-based access to over 800 corpora in more than 100 languages. Beyond concordance searching, it offers word sketches, collocation analysis, distributional thesaurus construction, keyword and terminology extraction, and diachronic analysis. It is used by major publishers including Macmillan and Oxford University Press for lexicographic research. A subset tool, SKELL (Sketch Engine for Language Learning), is freely accessible to individual learners. === Wmatrix === Wmatrix is a web-based corpus processing environment developed by Paul Rayson at the University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language (UCREL), Lancaster University. Alongside concordances and frequency lists, Wmatrix integrates CLAWS part-of-speech tagging and the USAS semantic tagger, enabling keyword analysis simultane
Read more →
Hard sigmoid

In artificial intelligence, especially computer vision and artificial neural networks, a hard sigmoid is non-smooth function used in place of a sigmoid function. These retain the basic shape of a sigmoid, rising from 0 to 1, but using simpler functions, especially piecewise linear functions or piecewise constant functions. These are preferred where speed of computation is more important than precision. == Examples == The most extreme examples are the sign function or Heaviside step function, which go from −1 to 1 or 0 to 1 (which to use depends on normalization) at 0. Other examples include the Theano library, which provides two approximations: ultra_fast_sigmoid, which is a multi-part piecewise approximation and hard_sigmoid, which is a 3-part piecewise linear approximation (output 0, line with slope 0.2, output 1).
Read more →
Zero-shot learning

Zero-shot learning (ZSL) is a problem setup in deep learning where, at test time, a learner observes samples from classes which were not observed during training, and needs to predict the class that they belong to. The name is a play on words based on the earlier concept of one-shot learning, in which classification can be learned from only one, or a few, examples. Zero-shot methods generally work by associating observed and non-observed classes through some form of auxiliary information, which encodes observable distinguishing properties of objects. For example, given a set of images of animals to be classified, along with auxiliary textual descriptions of what animals look like, an artificial intelligence model which has been trained to recognize horses, but has never been given a zebra, can still recognize a zebra when it also knows that zebras look like striped horses. This problem is widely studied in computer vision, natural language processing, and machine perception. == Background and history == The first paper on zero-shot learning in natural language processing appeared in a 2008 paper by Chang, Ratinov, Roth, and Srikumar, at the AAAI'08, but the name given to the learning paradigm there was dataless classification. The first paper on zero-shot learning in computer vision appeared at the same conference, under the name zero-data learning. The term zero-shot learning itself first appeared in the literature in a 2009 paper from Palatucci, Hinton, Pomerleau, and Mitchell at NIPS'09. This terminology was repeated later in another computer vision paper and the term zero-shot learning caught on, as a take-off on one-shot learning that was introduced in computer vision years earlier. In computer vision, zero-shot learning models learned parameters for seen classes along with their class representations and rely on representational similarity among class labels so that, during inference, instances can be classified into new classes. In natural language processing, the key technical direction developed builds on the ability to "understand the labels"—represent the labels in the same semantic space as that of the documents to be classified. This supports the classification of a single example without observing any annotated data, the purest form of zero-shot classification. The original paper made use of the Explicit Semantic Analysis (ESA) representation but later papers made use of other representations, including dense representations. This approach was also extended to multilingual domains, fine entity typing and other problems. Moreover, beyond relying solely on representations, the computational approach has been extended to depend on transfer from other tasks, such as textual entailment and question answering. The original paper also points out that, beyond the ability to classify a single example, when a collection of examples is given, with the assumption that they come from the same distribution, it is possible to bootstrap the performance in a semi-supervised like manner (or transductive learning). Unlike standard generalization in machine learning, where classifiers are expected to correctly classify new samples to classes they have already observed during training, in ZSL, no samples from the classes have been given during training the classifier. It can therefore be viewed as an extreme case of domain adaptation. == Prerequisite information for zero-shot classes == Naturally, some form of auxiliary information has to be given about these zero-shot classes, and this type of information can be of several types. Learning with attributes: classes are accompanied by pre-defined structured description. For example, for bird descriptions, this could include "red head", "long beak". These attributes are often organized in a structured compositional way, and taking that structure into account improves learning. While this approach was used mostly in computer vision, there are some examples for it also in natural language processing. Learning from textual description. As pointed out above, this has been the key direction pursued in natural language processing. Here class labels are taken to have a meaning and are often augmented with definitions or free-text natural-language description. This could include for example a wikipedia description of the class. Class-class similarity. Here, classes are embedded in a continuous space. A zero-shot classifier can predict that a sample corresponds to some position in that space, and the nearest embedded class is used as a predicted class, even if no such samples were observed during training. == Generalized zero-shot learning == The above ZSL setup assumes that at test time, only zero-shot samples are given, namely, samples from new unseen classes. In generalized zero-shot learning, samples from both new and known classes, may appear at test time. This poses new challenges for classifiers at test time, because it is very challenging to estimate if a given sample is new or known. Some approaches to handle this include: a gating module, which is first trained to decide if a given sample comes from a new class or from an old one, and then, at inference time, outputs either a hard decision, or a soft probabilistic decision a generative module, which is trained to generate feature representation of the unseen classes—a standard classifier can then be trained on samples from all classes, seen and unseen. == Domains of application == Zero shot learning has been applied to the following fields: image classification semantic segmentation image generation object detection natural language processing computational biology abstract reasoning
Read more →
Color picker

A color picker (also color chooser or color tool) is a graphical user interface widget, usually found within graphics software or online, used to select colors and, in some cases, to create color schemes (the color picker might be more sophisticated than the palette included with the program). Operating systems such as Microsoft Windows or macOS have a system color picker, which can be used by third-party programs (e.g., Adobe Photoshop). == History == The concept of color pickers dates back to the early days of computer graphics and digital design. Early versions were rudimentary, often featuring basic color palettes and limited functionality. One of the first drawing programs to include a color picker was SketchPad (also referred to as LisaSketch), designed by Bill Atkinson in 1983 to showcase LisaGraf's capabilities. It used a black and white pattern system, using dithering to create the illusion of color depth. With the increased popularity of personal computers with color graphics, there soon came software similar to SketchPad that supported more than two colors, like Broderbund's Dazzle Draw for the Apple II or Electronic Arts' Deluxe Paint. However, the color pickers present in those programs relied on indexed colors. Color pickers, resembling ones used in modern software with support for direct, 24-bit color, appeared soon after the release of the Macintosh II, with the release of programs like Adobe Photoshop and Corel Painter. As the increase of color depth allowed the choice of significantly more colors, the shape and form of color pickers started to diverge. For example, Adobe Photoshop used a hue-saturation color wheel with a slider for brightness in version 0.63, later on switching to a rectangular design accompanied by a hue slider. Corel Painter pioneered the triangular saturation and brightness picker with a hue ring around it, aiming to better represent the continuity of the hue spectrum and the relationship between saturation and brightness. == Purpose == A color picker is used to select and adjust color values. In graphic design and image editing, users typically choose colors via an interface with a visual representation of a color—organized with quasi-perceptually-relevant hue, saturation and lightness dimensions (HSL) – instead of keying in alphanumeric text values. Because color appearance depends on comparison of neighboring colors (see color vision), many interfaces attempt to clarify the relationships between colors. == Interface == Color tools can vary in their interface. Some may use sliders, buttons, text boxes for color values, or direct manipulation. Often a two-dimensional square is used to create a range of color values (such as lightness and saturation) that can be clicked on or selected in some other manner. Drag and drop, color droppers, and various other forms of interfaces are commonly used as well. Usually, color values are also displayed numerically, so they can be precisely remembered and keyed-in later, such as three values of 0-255 representing red, green, and blue, respectively. === Eyedropper === The eyedropper is a tool present in most color pickers and graphics software that allows a user to read a color at a specific point in an image, or position on a display. This enables the color to be transferred to other applications particularly quickly. Modern implementations of eyedropper tools are also available as browser extensions, allowing users to pick colors directly from web pages, such as in Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge. == Working == A color picker has two main parts, first a color slider and second a color canvas. The color slider has a linear or radial gradient of the seven rainbow colors i.e. Violet, Indigo, Blue, Green, Yellow, Orange and Red. It allows one to choose any of the seven primary colors. The color value chosen from the color slider instantly reflects in the color canvas. The color canvas is a mixture of two linear color gradients. First a linear gradient of the current chosen color and second a linear gradient of the black color. This mixture of color gradients lets one choose a lighter and darker version of the current chosen color from the color slider.
Read more →
ClearForest

ClearForest was an Israeli software company that developed and marketed text analytics and text mining solutions. == History == Founded in 1998, ClearForest had its headquarters just outside Boston and a development center in Or Yehuda. The company was acquired by Reuters in April, 2007. It now markets its services under the names Calais, OpenCalais, and OneCalais. ClearForest was previously venture-backed; its last funding round was led by Greylock Ventures and closed in 2005. Other investors included DB Capital Partners, Pitango, Walden Israel, Booz Allen, JP Morgan Partners and HarbourVest Partners. On February 7, 2008 Reuters announced the launch of Open Calais, a named-entity recognition and semantic analysis service that uses ClearForest technology. On April 30, 2007, Reuters announced that it would acquire ClearForest. Sources estimate the acquisition to be for $25 Million. == Solutions and products == ClearForest offers several hosted solutions, including: OpenCalais, a free web service and open API (for commercial and non-commercial use) that performs named-entity recognition and enables automatic metadata generation using the ClearForest financial module. Semantic Web Services (SWS), an on-demand service that makes ClearForest's natural language processing tools available as a standard web service. A subset of ClearForest's capabilities is available via SWS at no cost. Gnosis, a free Firefox extension that uses SWS to analyze the content of a web page. Gnosis identifies named entities such as people, companies, organizations, geographies and products on the page being viewed. Gnosis also automatically processes pages from Wikipedia, providing additional links for people, geographies and other entities which were not explicitly linked within the subject article. Harvest, a real-time machine-readable news service that uses SWS to process a company's news and document feeds and return machine-readable information about people, companies, locations and over 200 other entities facts and events. ClearForest also offers Text Analytics solutions targeted at specific business problems, including: Equity valuation for hedge funds and alternative investments firms Metadata & database creation for publishers and information providers/services Tapping "voice of customer" for market and survey research firms Quality Early Warning for vehicle, capital equipment & durable goods manufacturers
Read more →
Landmark point

In morphometrics, landmark point or shortly landmark is a point in a shape object in which correspondences between and within the populations of the object are preserved. In other disciplines, landmarks may be known as vertices, anchor points, control points, sites, profile points, 'sampling' points, nodes, markers, fiducial markers, etc. Landmarks can be defined either manually by experts or automatically by a computer program. There are three basic types of landmarks: anatomical landmarks, mathematical landmarks or pseudo-landmarks. An anatomical landmark is a biologically-meaningful point in an organism. Usually experts define anatomical points to ensure their correspondences within the same species. Examples of anatomical landmark in shape of a skull are the eye corner, tip of the nose, jaw, etc. Anatomical landmarks determine homologous parts of an organism, which share a common ancestry. Mathematical landmarks are points in a shape that are located according to some mathematical or geometrical property, for instance, a high curvature point or an extreme point. A computer program usually determines mathematical landmarks used for an automatic pattern recognition. Pseudo-landmarks are constructed points located between anatomical or mathematical landmarks. A typical example is an equally spaced set of points between two anatomical landmarks to get more sample points from a shape. Pseudo-landmarks are useful during shape matching, when the matching process requires a large number of points.
Read more →
Artificial intelligence content detection

Artificial intelligence detection software aims to determine whether some content (text, image, video, or audio) was generated using artificial intelligence (AI). This software is often unreliable. == Accuracy issues == Many AI detection tools have been shown to be unreliable in detecting AI-generated text. In a 2023 study conducted by Weber-Wulff et al., researchers evaluated 14 detection tools including Turnitin and GPTZero and found that "all scored below 80% of accuracy and only 5 over 70%." They also found that these tools tend to have a bias for classifying texts more as human than as AI, and that accuracy of these tools worsens upon paraphrasing. === False positives === In AI content detection, a false positive is when human-written work is incorrectly flagged as AI-written. Many AI detection platforms claim to have a minimal level of false positives, with Turnitin claiming a less than 1% false positive rate. However, later research by The Washington Post produced much higher rates of 50%, though they used a smaller sample size. False positives in an academic setting frequently lead to accusations of academic misconduct, which can have serious consequences for a student's academic record. Additionally, studies have shown evidence that many AI detection models are prone to give false positives to work written by people whose first language is not English, and also to neurodivergent people. In June 2023, Janelle Shane wrote that portions of her book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You were flagged as AI-generated. === False negatives === A false negative is a failure to identify documents with AI-written text. False negatives often happen as a result of a detection software's sensitivity level or because evasive techniques were used when generating the work to make it sound more human. False negatives are less of a concern academically, since they aren't likely to lead to accusations and ramifications. Notably, Turnitin stated they have a 15% false negative rate. == Text detection == For text, this is usually done to prevent alleged plagiarism, often by detecting repetition of words as telltale signs that a text was AI-generated (including hallucinations). Detection systems may also rely on stylistic and structural regularities associated with LLM output, such as unusually consistent grammar, formulaic transitions, repeated discourse markers, and recurring rhetorical templates. Some tools are designed less to establish authorship provenance than to flag prose that resembles common LLM-generated style patterns. They are often used by teachers marking their students, usually on an ad hoc basis. Following the release of ChatGPT and similar AI text generative software, many educational establishments have issued policies against the use of AI by students. AI text detection software is also used by those assessing job applicants, as well as online search engines, hiring, online moderation and publishing. Current detectors may sometimes be unreliable and have incorrectly marked work by humans as originating from AI while failing to detect AI-generated work in other instances. MIT Technology Review said that the technology "struggled to pick up ChatGPT-generated text that had been slightly rearranged by humans and obfuscated by a paraphrasing tool". AI text detection software has also been shown to discriminate against non-native speakers of English. Two students from the University of California, Davis, were referred to the university's Office of Student Success and Judicial Affairs (OSSJA) after their professors scanned their essays with positive results; the first with an AI detector called GPTZero, and the second with an AI detector integration in Turnitin. However, following media coverage, and a thorough investigation, the students were cleared of any wrongdoing. In April 2023, Cambridge University and other members of the Russell Group of universities in the United Kingdom opted out of Turnitin's AI text detection tool, after expressing concerns it was unreliable. The University of Texas at Austin opted out of the system six months later. In May 2023, a professor at Texas A&M University–Commerce used ChatGPT to detect whether his students' content was written by it, which ChatGPT said was the case. As such, he threatened to fail the class despite ChatGPT not being able to detect AI-generated writing. No students were prevented from graduating because of the issue, and all but one student (who admitted to using the software) were exonerated from accusations of having used ChatGPT in their content. In July 2023, a paper titled "GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers" was released, reporting that GPTs discriminate against non-native English authors. The paper compared seven GPT detectors against essays from both non-native English speakers and essays from United States students. The essays from non-native English speakers had an average false positive rate of 61.3%. An article by Thomas Germain, published on Gizmodo in June 2024, reported job losses among freelance writers and journalists due to AI text detection software mistakenly classifying their work as AI-generated. In September 2024, Common Sense Media reported that generative AI detectors had a 20% false positive rate for Black students, compared to 10% of Latino students and 7% of White students. To improve the reliability of AI text detection, researchers have explored digital watermarking techniques. A 2023 paper titled "A Watermark for Large Language Models" presents a method to embed imperceptible watermarks into text generated by large language models (LLMs). This watermarking approach allows content to be flagged as AI-generated with a high level of accuracy, even when text is slightly paraphrased or modified. The technique is designed to be subtle and hard to detect for casual readers, thereby preserving readability, while providing a detectable signal for those employing specialized tools. However, while promising, watermarking faces challenges in remaining robust under adversarial transformations and ensuring compatibility across different LLMs. == Anti text detection == There is software available designed to bypass AI text detection. In practice, evasion may not require specialized bypass tools. Paraphrasing, style editing, and removal of repeated discourse markers can substantially reduce the effectiveness of detectors that rely on recognizable surface patterns. A study published in August 2023 analyzed 20 abstracts from papers published in the Eye Journal, which were then paraphrased using GPT-4.0. The AI-paraphrased abstracts were examined for plagiarism using QueText and for AI-generated content using Originality.AI. The texts were then re-processed through an adversarial software called Undetectable.ai in order to reduce the AI-detection scores. The study found that the AI detection tool, Originality.AI, identified text generated by GPT-4 with a mean accuracy of 91.3%. However, after reprocessing by Undetectable.ai, the detection accuracy of Originality.ai dropped to a mean accuracy of 27.8%. Some experts also believe that techniques like digital watermarking are ineffective because they can be removed or added to trigger false positives. "A Watermark for Large Language Models" paper by Kirchenbauer et al. (2023) also addresses potential vulnerabilities of watermarking techniques. The authors outline a range of adversarial tactics, including text insertion, deletion, and substitution attacks, that could be used to bypass watermark detection. These attacks vary in complexity, from simple paraphrasing to more sophisticated approaches involving tokenization and homoglyph alterations. The study highlights the challenge of maintaining watermark robustness against attackers who may employ automated paraphrasing tools or even specific language model replacements to alter text spans iteratively while retaining semantic similarity. Experimental results show that although such attacks can degrade watermark strength, they also come at the cost of text quality and increased computational resources. == Image, video, and audio detection == Several purported AI image detection software exist, to detect AI-generated images (for example, those originating from Midjourney or DALL-E). They are not completely reliable. Industry analyses have also noted that AI-driven image recognition systems often struggle in real-world environments, where inconsistent lighting, noise and variable visual inputs reduce detection reliability, a challenge highlighted in modern agricultural quality-control research. Others claim to identify video and audio deepfakes, but this technology is also not fully reliable yet either. Despite debate around the efficacy of watermarking, Google DeepMind is actively developing a detection software called SynthID, which works by inserting a digital watermark that is invisible to the human eye into the pixels of an image.
Read more →
Competition in artificial intelligence

Competition in artificial intelligence refers to the rivalry among companies, research institutions, and governments to develop and deploy the most capable artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The competition spans multiple domains, including large language models (LLMs), autonomous vehicles, robotics, computer vision systems, natural language processing (NLP), and AI-optimized hardware. == Background == Competition in AI is driven by potential economic, strategic, and scientific advantages. Breakthroughs in AI can enhance productivity, enable new products and services, and provide geopolitical leverage. The field has experienced rapid progress since the mid-2010s, particularly in machine learning and artificial neural networks, leading to intense rivalry among leading actors. == Corporate competition == Major technology companies are among the most visible competitors in AI. In the United States, firms such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Anthropic, and Nvidia compete in building advanced LLMs, generative AI platforms, and AI-optimized graphics processing units (GPUs). In China, companies such as Baidu, Alibaba Group, Tencent, and startups such DeepSeek have become leaders in AI deployment, often with state backing. The "[war for talent]" in AI research has become a defining feature of corporate competition. Leading firms often recruit top AI researchers from rivals, sometimes offering multi-million-dollar compensation packages. == National competition == Governments see leadership in AI as a strategic priority. The United States has funded AI research for military, economic, and societal applications, while China has set a target to lead the world in AI by 2030 through its "New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan". Other nations, including the UK, India, Israel, Russia, South Korea, and members of the European Union, have launched national AI strategies. In February 2026 Anthropic said Chinese companies - DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax - were conducting "distillation attacks" in an attempt to copy their model's capabilities, and warned that business wars were closely tied to geopolitical ones: "foreign labs that illicitly distill American models can remove safeguards, feeding model capabilities into their own military, intelligence, and surveillance systems." == Sectors of competition == === Large language models and chatbots competition === Competition to produce the most capable generative text models, with benchmarks such as MMLU and ARC used to evaluate performance has been on scale since the emergence of AI. These systems leverage deep learning, especially transformer architectures, to understand and generate human-like language. Companies and research groups globally compete to develop chatbots that are more capable, reliable, and context-aware. Among the most well-known chatbots is ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI. Since its public release in 2022, ChatGPT has rapidly gained widespread attention for its ability to engage in coherent and versatile conversations, assist with creative writing, and solve complex problems. In response, technology firms introduced competing chatbots aiming to challenge or surpass ChatGPT's capabilities. Notably, DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company, launched an advanced chatbot integrated with their R1 language model, emphasizing strong natural language understanding and multilingual support. Similarly, Grok, developed by xAI (company), integrates conversational AI into vehicles and digital assistants, combining natural language processing with real-time data for personalized user interaction. These chatbots not only compete in language tasks but also demonstrate strategic reasoning capabilities by playing complex games such as chess and Go. This form of competition is reminiscent of historic AI milestones set by programs such as Deep Blue and AlphaGo. The OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been tested in playing chess at various levels, while DeepSeek’s chatbot showcased its prowess in online chess tournaments in early 2024, winning several matches against human and AI opponents. Grok, leveraging Tesla's vast data infrastructure, has demonstrated real-time strategic decision-making in simulation environments that include chess-like games. The competition pushes rapid innovation, with firms racing to improve chatbot conversational depth, reduce biases, increase factual accuracy, and integrate multimodal inputs like images and videos. At the same time, the competition raises questions about AI safety, ethical use, and the societal impacts of increasingly human-like chatbots. === Autonomous vehicles === Companies such as Waymo, Tesla, and Baidu are racing to deploy safe and reliable self-driving car technology. === AI chips === Rivalry between Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Huawei in designing processors optimized for AI workloads. === Military applications === Development of AI-enabled drones, surveillance systems, and decision-support tools, with associated ethical debates. == Events == In 2023, OpenAI released GPT-4, prompting competitors such as Google DeepMind to accelerate the release of their own models, including Gemini. In 2024, Chinese AI company DeepSeek launched the R1 model, leading OpenAI to release an open-source system, GPT-OSS, as a strategic countermeasure. In 2022, Tesla and Waymo both expanded autonomous taxi services in U.S. cities, competing for regulatory approval and public trust. The U.S. Department of Defense's Project Maven and China's AI-enabled surveillance programs have been cited as examples of military AI rivalry. In 2025, Microsoft hired several senior engineers from Google DeepMind, highlighting the ongoing "talent poaching" competition in the AI sector. == Risks and concerns == Critics warn that unrestrained competition in AI can undermine safety, ethics, and governance. Concerns include the proliferation of biased or unsafe models, escalation in autonomous weapons, and reduced cooperation on safety standards.
Read more →
Phase correlation

Phase correlation is an approach to estimate the relative translative offset between two similar images (digital image correlation) or other data sets. It is commonly used in image registration and relies on a frequency-domain representation of the data, usually calculated by fast Fourier transforms. The term is applied particularly to a subset of cross-correlation techniques that isolate the phase information from the Fourier-space representation of the cross-correlogram. == Example == The following image demonstrates the usage of phase correlation to determine relative translative movement between two images corrupted by independent Gaussian noise. The image was translated by (20,23) pixels. Accordingly, one can clearly see a peak in the phase-correlation representation at approximately (20,23). == Method == Given two input images g a {\displaystyle \ g_{a}} and g b {\displaystyle \ g_{b}} : Apply a window function (e.g., a Hamming window) on both images to reduce edge effects (this may be optional depending on the image characteristics). Then, calculate the discrete 2D Fourier transform of both images. G a = F { g a } , G b = F { g b } {\displaystyle \ \mathbf {G} _{a}={\mathcal {F}}\{g_{a}\},\;\mathbf {G} _{b}={\mathcal {F}}\{g_{b}\}} Calculate the cross-power spectrum by taking the complex conjugate of the second result, multiplying the Fourier transforms together elementwise, and normalizing this product elementwise. R = G a ∘ G b ∗ | G a ∘ G b ∗ | {\displaystyle \ R={\frac {\mathbf {G} _{a}\circ \mathbf {G} _{b}^{}}{|\mathbf {G} _{a}\circ \mathbf {G} _{b}^{}|}}} Where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } is the Hadamard product (entry-wise product) and the absolute values are taken entry-wise as well. Written out entry-wise for element index ( j , k ) {\displaystyle (j,k)} : R j k = G a , j k ⋅ G b , j k ∗ | G a , j k ⋅ G b , j k ∗ | {\displaystyle \ R_{jk}={\frac {G_{a,jk}\cdot G_{b,jk}^{}}{|G_{a,jk}\cdot G_{b,jk}^{}|}}} Obtain the normalized cross-correlation by applying the inverse Fourier transform. r = F − 1 { R } {\displaystyle \ r={\mathcal {F}}^{-1}\{R\}} Determine the location of the peak in r {\displaystyle \ r} . ( Δ x , Δ y ) = arg ⁡ max ( x , y ) { r } {\displaystyle \ (\Delta x,\Delta y)=\arg \max _{(x,y)}\{r\}} === Subpixel registration === Commonly, interpolation methods are used to estimate the peak location in the cross-correlogram to non-integer values, despite the fact that the data are discrete, and this procedure is often termed 'subpixel registration'. A large variety of subpixel interpolation methods are given in the technical literature. Common peak interpolation methods such as parabolic interpolation have been used, and the OpenCV computer vision package uses a centroid-based method, though these generally have inferior accuracy compared to more sophisticated methods. Because the Fourier representation of the data has already been computed, it is especially convenient to use the Fourier shift theorem with real-valued (sub-integer) shifts for this purpose, which essentially interpolates using the sinusoidal basis functions of the Fourier transform. An especially popular FT-based estimator is given by Foroosh et al. In this method, the subpixel peak location is approximated by a simple formula involving peak pixel value and the values of its nearest neighbors, where r ( 0 , 0 ) {\displaystyle r_{(0,0)}} is the peak value and r ( 1 , 0 ) {\displaystyle r_{(1,0)}} is the nearest neighbor in the x direction (assuming, as in most approaches, that the integer shift has already been found and the comparand images differ only by a subpixel shift). Δ x = r ( 1 , 0 ) r ( 1 , 0 ) ± r ( 0 , 0 ) {\displaystyle \ \Delta x={\frac {r_{(1,0)}}{r_{(1,0)}\pm r_{(0,0)}}}} The Foroosh et al. method is quite fast compared to most methods, though it is not always the most accurate. Some methods shift the peak in Fourier space and apply non-linear optimization to maximize the correlogram peak, but these tend to be very slow since they must apply an inverse Fourier transform or its equivalent in the objective function. It is also possible to infer the peak location from phase characteristics in Fourier space without the inverse transformation, as noted by Stone. These methods usually use a linear least squares (LLS) fit of the phase angles to a planar model. The long latency of the phase angle computation in these methods is a disadvantage, but the speed can sometimes be comparable to the Foroosh et al. method depending on the image size. They often compare favorably in speed to the multiple iterations of extremely slow objective functions in iterative non-linear methods. Since all subpixel shift computation methods are fundamentally interpolative, the performance of a particular method depends on how well the underlying data conform to the assumptions in the interpolator. This fact also may limit the usefulness of high numerical accuracy in an algorithm, since the uncertainty due to interpolation method choice may be larger than any numerical or approximation error in the particular method. Subpixel methods are also particularly sensitive to noise in the images, and the utility of a particular algorithm is distinguished not only by its speed and accuracy but its resilience to the particular types of noise in the application. == Rationale == The method is based on the Fourier shift theorem. Let the two images g a {\displaystyle \ g_{a}} and g b {\displaystyle \ g_{b}} be circularly-shifted versions of each other: g b ( x , y ) = d e f g a ( ( x − Δ x ) mod M , ( y − Δ y ) mod N ) {\displaystyle \ g_{b}(x,y)\ {\stackrel {\mathrm {def} }{=}}\ g_{a}((x-\Delta x){\bmod {M}},(y-\Delta y){\bmod {N}})} (where the images are M × N {\displaystyle \ M\times N} in size). Then, the discrete Fourier transforms of the images will be shifted relatively in phase: G b ( u , v ) = G a ( u , v ) e − 2 π i ( u Δ x M + v Δ y N ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {G} _{b}(u,v)=\mathbf {G} _{a}(u,v)e^{-2\pi i({\frac {u\Delta x}{M}}+{\frac {v\Delta y}{N}})}} One can then calculate the normalized cross-power spectrum to factor out the phase difference: R ( u , v ) = G a G b ∗ | G a G b ∗ | = G a G a ∗ e 2 π i ( u Δ x M + v Δ y N ) | G a G a ∗ e 2 π i ( u Δ x M + v Δ y N ) | = G a G a ∗ e 2 π i ( u Δ x M + v Δ y N ) | G a G a ∗ | = e 2 π i ( u Δ x M + v Δ y N ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}R(u,v)&={\frac {\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{b}^{}}{|\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{b}^{}|}}\\&={\frac {\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{a}^{}e^{2\pi i({\frac {u\Delta x}{M}}+{\frac {v\Delta y}{N}})}}{|\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{a}^{}e^{2\pi i({\frac {u\Delta x}{M}}+{\frac {v\Delta y}{N}})}|}}\\&={\frac {\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{a}^{}e^{2\pi i({\frac {u\Delta x}{M}}+{\frac {v\Delta y}{N}})}}{|\mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{a}^{}|}}\\&=e^{2\pi i({\frac {u\Delta x}{M}}+{\frac {v\Delta y}{N}})}\end{aligned}}} since the magnitude of an imaginary exponential always is one, and the phase of G a G a ∗ {\displaystyle \ \mathbf {G} _{a}\mathbf {G} _{a}^{}} always is zero. The inverse Fourier transform of a complex exponential is a Dirac delta function, i.e. a single peak: r ( x , y ) = δ ( x + Δ x , y + Δ y ) {\displaystyle \ r(x,y)=\delta (x+\Delta x,y+\Delta y)} This result could have been obtained by calculating the cross correlation directly. The advantage of this method is that the discrete Fourier transform and its inverse can be performed using the fast Fourier transform, which is much faster than correlation for large images. === Benefits === Unlike many spatial-domain algorithms, the phase correlation method is resilient to noise, occlusions, and other defects typical of medical or satellite images. The method can be extended to determine rotation and scaling differences between two images by first converting the images to log-polar coordinates. Due to properties of the Fourier transform, the rotation and scaling parameters can be determined in a manner invariant to translation. === Limitations === In practice, it is more likely that g b {\displaystyle \ g_{b}} will be a simple linear shift of g a {\displaystyle \ g_{a}} , rather than a circular shift as required by the explanation above. In such cases, r {\displaystyle \ r} will not be a simple delta function, which will reduce the performance of the method. In such cases, a window function (such as a Gaussian or Tukey window) should be employed during the Fourier transform to reduce edge effects, or the images should be zero padded so that the edge effects can be ignored. If the images consist of a flat background, with all detail situated away from the edges, then a linear shift will be equivalent to a circular shift, and the above derivation will hold exactly. The peak can be sharpened by using edge or vector correlation. For periodic images (such as a chessboard or picket fence), phase correlation may yield ambiguous results with several peaks in the resulting output. == Applications == Phase correlation is the preferred m
Read more →
Harris corner detector

The Harris corner detector is a corner detection operator that is commonly used in computer vision algorithms to extract corners and infer features of an image. It was first introduced by Chris Harris and Mike Stephens in 1988 upon the improvement of Moravec's corner detector. Compared to its predecessor, Harris' corner detector takes the differential of the corner score into account with reference to direction directly, instead of using shifting patches for every 45 degree angles, and has been proved to be more accurate in distinguishing between edges and corners. Since then, it has been improved and adopted in many algorithms to preprocess images for subsequent applications. == Introduction == A corner is a point whose local neighborhood stands in two dominant and different edge directions. In other words, a corner can be interpreted as the junction of two edges, where an edge is a sudden change in image brightness. Corners are the important features in the image, and they are generally termed as interest points which are invariant to translation, rotation and illumination. Although corners are only a small percentage of the image, they contain the most important features in restoring image information, and they can be used to minimize the amount of processed data for motion tracking, image stitching, building 2D mosaics, stereo vision, image representation and other related computer vision areas. In order to capture the corners from the image, researchers have proposed many different corner detectors including the Kanade-Lucas-Tomasi (KLT) operator and the Harris operator which are most simple, efficient and reliable for use in corner detection. These two popular methodologies are both closely associated with and based on the local structure matrix. Compared to the Kanade-Lucas-Tomasi corner detector, the Harris corner detector provides good repeatability under changing illumination and rotation, and therefore, it is more often used in stereo matching and image database retrieval. Although there still exist drawbacks and limitations, the Harris corner detector is still an important and fundamental technique for many computer vision applications. == Development of Harris corner detection algorithm == Source: Without loss of generality, we will assume a grayscale 2-dimensional image is used. Let this image be given by I {\displaystyle I} . Consider taking an image patch ( x , y ) ∈ W {\displaystyle (x,y)\in W} (window) and shifting it by ( Δ x , Δ y ) {\displaystyle (\Delta x,\Delta y)} . The sum of squared differences (SSD) between these two patches, denoted f {\displaystyle f} , is given by: f ( Δ x , Δ y ) = ∑ ( x k , y k ) ∈ W ( I ( x k , y k ) − I ( x k + Δ x , y k + Δ y ) ) 2 {\displaystyle f(\Delta x,\Delta y)={\underset {(x_{k},y_{k})\in W}{\sum }}\left(I(x_{k},y_{k})-I(x_{k}+\Delta x,y_{k}+\Delta y)\right)^{2}} I ( x + Δ x , y + Δ y ) {\displaystyle I(x+\Delta x,y+\Delta y)} can be approximated by a Taylor expansion. Let I x {\displaystyle I_{x}} and I y {\displaystyle I_{y}} be the partial derivatives of I {\displaystyle I} , such that I ( x + Δ x , y + Δ y ) ≈ I ( x , y ) + I x ( x , y ) Δ x + I y ( x , y ) Δ y {\displaystyle I(x+\Delta x,y+\Delta y)\approx I(x,y)+I_{x}(x,y)\Delta x+I_{y}(x,y)\Delta y} This produces the approximation f ( Δ x , Δ y ) ≈ ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W ( I x ( x , y ) Δ x + I y ( x , y ) Δ y ) 2 , {\displaystyle f(\Delta x,\Delta y)\approx {\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}\left(I_{x}(x,y)\Delta x+I_{y}(x,y)\Delta y\right)^{2},} which can be written in matrix form: f ( Δ x , Δ y ) ≈ ( Δ x Δ y ) M ( Δ x Δ y ) , {\displaystyle f(\Delta x,\Delta y)\approx {\begin{pmatrix}\Delta x&\Delta y\end{pmatrix}}M{\begin{pmatrix}\Delta x\\\Delta y\end{pmatrix}},} where M is the structure tensor, M = ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W [ I x 2 I x I y I x I y I y 2 ] = [ ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W I x 2 ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W I x I y ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W I x I y ∑ ( x , y ) ∈ W I y 2 ] {\displaystyle M={\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}{\begin{bmatrix}I_{x}^{2}&I_{x}I_{y}\\I_{x}I_{y}&I_{y}^{2}\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}{\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}I_{x}^{2}&{\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}I_{x}I_{y}\\{\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}I_{x}I_{y}&{\underset {(x,y)\in W}{\sum }}I_{y}^{2}\end{bmatrix}}} == Process of Harris corner detection algorithm == Commonly, Harris corner detector algorithm can be divided into five steps. Color to grayscale Spatial derivative calculation Structure tensor setup Harris response calculation Non-maximum suppression === Color to grayscale === If we use Harris corner detector in a color image, the first step is to convert it into a grayscale image, which will enhance the processing speed. The value of the gray scale pixel can be computed as a weighted sums of the values R, B and G of the color image, ∑ C ∈ { R , G , B } w C ⋅ C {\displaystyle \sum _{C\,\in \,\{R,G,B\}}w_{C}\cdot C} , where, e.g., w R = 0.299 , w G = 0.587 , w B = 1 − ( w R + w G ) = 0.114. {\displaystyle w_{R}=0.299,\ w_{G}=0.587,\ w_{B}=1-(w_{R}+w_{G})=0.114.} === Spatial derivative calculation === Next, we are going to find the derivative with respect to x and the derivative with respect to y, I x ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I_{x}(x,y)} and I y ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I_{y}(x,y)} . This can be approximated by applying Sobel operators. === Structure tensor setup === With I x ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I_{x}(x,y)} , I y ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I_{y}(x,y)} , we can construct the structure tensor M {\displaystyle M} . === Harris response calculation === For x ≪ y {\displaystyle x\ll y} , one has x ⋅ y x + y = x 1 1 + x / y ≈ x . {\displaystyle {\tfrac {x\cdot y}{x+y}}=x{\tfrac {1}{1+x/y}}\approx x.} In this step, we compute the smallest eigenvalue of the structure tensor using that approximation: λ min ≈ λ 1 λ 2 ( λ 1 + λ 2 ) = det ( M ) tr ⁡ ( M ) {\displaystyle \lambda _{\min }\approx {\frac {\lambda _{1}\lambda _{2}}{(\lambda _{1}+\lambda _{2})}}={\frac {\det(M)}{\operatorname {tr} (M)}}} with the trace t r ( M ) = m 11 + m 22 {\displaystyle \mathrm {tr} (M)=m_{11}+m_{22}} . Another commonly used Harris response calculation is shown as below, R = λ 1 λ 2 − k ( λ 1 + λ 2 ) 2 = det ( M ) − k tr ⁡ ( M ) 2 {\displaystyle R=\lambda _{1}\lambda _{2}-k(\lambda _{1}+\lambda _{2})^{2}=\det(M)-k\operatorname {tr} (M)^{2}} where k {\displaystyle k} is an empirically determined constant; k ∈ [ 0.04 , 0.06 ] {\displaystyle k\in [0.04,0.06]} . === Non-maximum suppression === In order to pick up the optimal values to indicate corners, we find the local maxima as corners within the window which is a 3 by 3 filter. == Improvement == Sources: Harris-Laplace Corner Detector Differential Morphological Decomposition Based Corner Detector Multi-scale Bilateral Structure Tensor Based Corner Detector == Applications == Image Alignment, Stitching and Registration 2D Mosaics Creation 3D Scene Modeling and Reconstruction Motion Detection Object Recognition Image Indexing and Content-based Retrieval Video Tracking
Read more →
AdTruth

AdTruth is a software product and the digital media division of 41st Parameter, a company headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona, with regional offices in San Jose, California; London, England; and Munich, Germany. AdTruth allows marketers to recognize and reach target audiences across online devices. AdTruth software identifies users for targeting, tracking, performance tracking across digital media, including mobile and desktop, by analysing patterns in large numbers of advertisements served over the internet, rather than through the use of cookies. == History == AdTruth was founded in 2011 by Ori Eisen of 41st Parameter, to repurpose the company's fraud detection and prevention technology, for use within the advertising industry to accurately target intended audiences, particularly in mobile. Eisen was joined by James Lamberti in the role of vice president and general manager. In 2012 41st Parameter raised $13 million in Series D financing from Norwest Venture Partners, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Jafco Ventures and Georgian Partners, bringing total funding to about $35 million. In May 2012, AdTruth hosted a meeting of digital media executives to discuss Apple’s UDID deprecation, with the intent of developing a device-neutral replacement standard. AdTruth joined the World Wide Web Consortium's Tracking Protection Working Group, which provides guidance for implementing and adhering to Do Not Track policies. AdTruth also worked with privacy firm Truste to create a privacy compliant Do Not Track-style mechanism for mobile. In 2013, the company Experian purchased 41st Parameter, acquiring AdTruth as part of the deal. == Product == AdTruth software helps marketers track, target and retarget consumers using more than 100 parameters, including milliseconds in differences in the internal clock setting, to recognize a particular device anonymously. AdTruth's technology uses non-UDID information to identify a wide range of devices for cookieless ad targeting. Its technology currently has about a 90 percent accuracy rate on iOS, higher on Android and desktop. AdTruth also has mobile web to app bridging capabilities as well as DeviceInsight technology, enabling marketers to identify users across mobile web and app content. 41st Parameter's patented AdTruth technology is being used by MdotM, in response to the deprecation of the UDID that included tracking and targeting capabilities. == Competitors == AdTruth's main competitor is BlueCava, which deploys a similar device-fingerprinting technology.
Read more →
Index locking

In databases an index is a data structure, part of the database, used by a database system to efficiently navigate access to user data. Index data are system data distinct from user data, and consist primarily of pointers. Changes in a database (by insert, delete, or modify operations), may require indexes to be updated to maintain accurate user data accesses. Index locking is a technique used to maintain index integrity. A portion of an index is locked during a database transaction when this portion is being accessed by the transaction as a result of attempt to access related user data. Additionally, special database system transactions (not user-invoked transactions) may be invoked to maintain and modify an index, as part of a system's self-maintenance activities. When a portion of an index is locked by a transaction, other transactions may be blocked from accessing this index portion (blocked from modifying, and even from reading it, depending on lock type and needed operation). Index Locking Protocol guarantees that phantom read phenomenon won't occur. Index locking protocol states: Every relation must have at least one index. A transaction can access tuples only after finding them through one or more indices on the relation A transaction Ti that performs a lookup must lock all the index leaf nodes that it accesses, in S-mode, even if the leaf node does not contain any tuple satisfying the index lookup (e.g. for a range query, no tuple in a leaf is in the range) A transaction Ti that inserts, updates or deletes a tuple ti in a relation r must update all indices to r and it must obtain exclusive locks on all index leaf nodes affected by the insert/update/delete The rules of the two-phase locking protocol must be observed. Specialized concurrency control techniques exist for accessing indexes. These techniques depend on the index type, and take advantage of its structure. They are typically much more effective than applying to indexes common concurrency control methods applied to user data. Notable and widely researched are specialized techniques for B-trees (B-Tree concurrency control) which are regularly used as database indexes. Index locks are used to coordinate threads accessing indexes concurrently, and typically shorter-lived than the common transaction locks on user data. In professional literature, they are often called latches.
Read more →
Auralization

Auralization is a procedure designed to model and simulate the experience of acoustic phenomena rendered as a soundfield in a virtualized space. This is useful in configuring the soundscape of architectural structures, concert venues, and public spaces, as well as in making coherent sound environments within virtual immersion systems. == History == The English term auralization was used for the first time by Kleiner et al. in an article in the journal of the AES en 1991. The increase of computational power allowed the development of the first acoustic simulation software towards the end of the 1960s. == Principles == Auralizations are experienced through systems rendering virtual acoustic models made by convolving or mixing acoustic events recorded 'dry' (or in an anechoic chamber) projected within a virtual model of an acoustic space, the characteristics of which are determined by means of sampling its impulse response (IR). Once this h ( t ) {\displaystyle h(t)} has been determined, the simulation of the resulting soundfield s ( t ) {\displaystyle s(t)} in the target environment is obtained by convolution: r ( t ) = h ( t ) ∗ s ( t ) {\displaystyle r(t)=h(t)s(t)} The resulting sound r ( t ) {\displaystyle r(t)} is heard as it would if emitted in that acoustic space. == Binaurality == For auralizations to be perceived as realistic, it is critical to emulate the human hearing in terms of position and orientation of the listener's head with respect to the sources of sound. For IR data to be convolved convincingly, the acoustic events are captured using a dummy head where two microphones are positioned on each side of the head to record an emulation of sound arriving at the locations of human ears, or using an ambisonics microphone array and mixed down for binaurality. Head-related transfer functions (HRTF) datasets can be used to simplify the process insofar as a monaural IR can be measured or simulated, then audio content is convolved with its target acoustic space. In rendering the experience, the transfer function corresponding to the orientation of the head is applied to simulate the corresponding spatial emanation of sound.
Read more →
Apertus (LLM)

Apertus is a public large language model, developed by the Swiss AI Initiative (a collaboration between EPFL, ETH Zurich, and the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre). It was released on September 2, 2025, under the free and open-source Apache 2.0 license. Designed initially for business and research use cases around the world, Apertus was trained on over 1800 languages, and comes in 8 billion or 70 billion parameter versions and is available on Hugging Face for download. The model was developed aiming to adhere to European copyright law, and is one of the first examples of AI as a public good in the vein of AI Sovereignty. It is also the first large model to comply with the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act. At its launch, the model creators emphasized multilinguality, transparency, and auditability as priorities in contrast to commercial frontier model. While international reception was largely positive, the first iteration was significantly behind the capabilities of frontier models and needs adaptation for many use cases with chatbots being a secondary but not a primary use case. As of late 2025, it was considered the largest and most capable fully open model. The capability of future models will depend in part on how much more funding can be secured.
Read more →