AI For Economics Students

AI For Economics Students — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • INDIAai

    INDIAai

    INDIAai is a web portal launched by the Government of India on 07 March 2024 for artificial intelligence-related developments in India. It is known as the National AI Portal of India, which was jointly started by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), the National e-Governance Division (NeGD) and the National Association of Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM) with support from the Department of School Education and Literacy (DoSE&L) and Ministry of Human Resource Development. == History == The portal was launched on 30 May 2020, by Ravi Shankar Prasad, the Union Minister for Electronics and IT, Law and Justice and Communications, on the first anniversary of the second tenure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government. A national program for the youth, 'Responsible AI for Youth', was also launched on the same day. As of 2022, the website was visited by more than 4.5 lakh users with 1.2 million page views. It has 1151 articles on artificial intelligence, 701 news stories, 98 reports, 95 case studies and 213 videos on its portal. It maintains a database on AI ecosystem of India featuring 121 government initiatives and 281 startups. In May 2022, INDIAai released a book titled 'AI for Everyone' that covers the basics of AI. Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi has approved the comprehensive national-level IndiaAI mission with a budget outlay of Rs.10,371.92 crore. The Mission will be implemented by ‘IndiaAI’ Independent Business Division (IBD) under Digital India Corporation (DIC). == Objective and features == It aims to function as a one-stop portal for all AI-related development in India. The platform publishes resources such as articles, news, interviews, and investment funding news and events for AI startups, AI companies, and educational firms related to artificial intelligence in India. It also distributes documents, case studies, and research reports. Additionally, the platform provides education and employment opportunities related to AI. It offers AI courses, both free and paid.

    Read more →
  • Anytime algorithm

    Anytime algorithm

    In computer science, an anytime algorithm is an algorithm that can return a valid solution to a problem even if it is interrupted before it ends. The algorithm is expected to find better and better solutions the longer it keeps running. Most algorithms run to completion: they provide a single answer after performing some fixed amount of computation. In some cases, however, the user may wish to terminate the algorithm prior to completion. The amount of computation required may be substantial, for example, and computational resources might need to be reallocated. Most algorithms either run to completion or they provide no useful solution information. Anytime algorithms, however, are able to return a partial answer, whose quality depends on the amount of computation they were able to perform. The answer generated by anytime algorithms is an approximation of the correct answer. == Names == An anytime algorithm may be also called an "interruptible algorithm". They are different from contract algorithms, which must declare a time in advance; in an anytime algorithm, a process can just announce that it is terminating. == Goals == The goal of anytime algorithms are to give intelligent systems the ability to make results of better quality in return for turn-around time. They are also supposed to be flexible in time and resources. They are important because artificial intelligence or AI algorithms can take a long time to complete results. This algorithm is designed to complete in a shorter amount of time. Also, these are intended to have a better understanding that the system is dependent and restricted to its agents and how they work cooperatively. An example is the Newton–Raphson iteration applied to finding the square root of a number. Another example that uses anytime algorithms is trajectory problems when you're aiming for a target; the object is moving through space while waiting for the algorithm to finish and even an approximate answer can significantly improve its accuracy if given early. What makes anytime algorithms unique is their ability to return many possible outcomes for any given input. An anytime algorithm uses many well defined quality measures to monitor progress in problem solving and distributed computing resources. It keeps searching for the best possible answer with the amount of time that it is given. It may not run until completion and may improve the answer if it is allowed to run longer. This is often used for large decision set problems. This would generally not provide useful information unless it is allowed to finish. While this may sound similar to dynamic programming, the difference is that it is fine-tuned through random adjustments, rather than sequential. Anytime algorithms are designed so that it can be told to stop at any time and would return the best result it has found so far. This is why it is called an interruptible algorithm. Certain anytime algorithms also maintain the last result, so that if they are given more time, they can continue from where they left off to obtain an even better result. == Decision trees == When the decider has to act, there must be some ambiguity. Also, there must be some idea about how to solve this ambiguity. This idea must be translatable to a state to action diagram. == Performance profile == The performance profile estimates the quality of the results based on the input and the amount of time that is allotted to the algorithm. The better the estimate, the sooner the result would be found. Some systems have a larger database that gives the probability that the output is the expected output. One algorithm can have several performance profiles. Most of the time performance profiles are constructed using mathematical statistics using representative cases. For example, in the traveling salesman problem, the performance profile was generated using a user-defined special program to generate the necessary statistics. In this example, the performance profile is the mapping of time to the expected results. This quality can be measured in several ways: certainty: where probability of correctness determines quality accuracy: where error bound determines quality specificity: where the amount of particulars determine quality == Algorithm prerequisites == Initial behavior: While some algorithms start with immediate guesses, others take a more calculated approach and have a start up period before making any guesses. Growth direction: How the quality of the program's "output" or result, varies as a function of the amount of time ("run time") Growth rate: Amount of increase with each step. Does it change constantly, such as in a bubble sort or does it change unpredictably? End condition: The amount of runtime needed

    Read more →
  • Herbrand Award

    Herbrand Award

    The Herbrand Award for Distinguished Contributions to Automated Reasoning is an award given by the Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE), Inc., (although it predates the formal incorporation of CADE) to honour persons or groups for important contributions to the field of automated deduction. The award is named after the French scientist Jacques Herbrand and given at most once per CADE or International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR). It comes with a prize of US$1,000. Anyone can be nominated, the award is awarded after a vote among CADE trustees and former recipients, usually with input from the CADE/IJCAR programme committee. == Recipients == Past award recipients are: === 1990s === Larry Wos (1992) Woody Bledsoe (1994) John Alan Robinson (1996) Wu Wenjun (1997) Gérard Huet (1998) Robert S. Boyer and J Strother Moore (1999) === 2000s === William W. McCune (2000) Donald W. Loveland (2001) Mark E. Stickel (2002). Peter B. Andrews (2003) Harald Ganzinger (2004) Martin Davis (2005) Wolfgang Bibel (2006) Alan Bundy (2007) Edmund M. Clarke (2008) Deepak Kapur (2009) === 2010s === David Plaisted (2010) Nachum Dershowitz (2011) Melvin Fitting (2012) C. Greg Nelson (2013) Robert L. Constable (2014) Andrei Voronkov (2015) Zohar Manna and Richard Waldinger (2016) Lawrence C. Paulson (2017) Bruno Buchberger (2018) Nikolaj Bjørner and Leonardo de Moura (2019) === 2020s === Franz Baader (2020) Tobias Nipkow (2021) Natarajan Shankar (2022) Moshe Vardi (2023) Armin Biere (2024) Aart Middeldorp (2025)

    Read more →
  • The Future of Truth (Rosenbaum book)

    The Future of Truth (Rosenbaum book)

    The Future of Truth: How AI Reshapes Reality is a 2026 book by American filmmaker and author Steven Rosenbaum about how artificial intelligence affects the concept of truth. It was published by Matt Holt Books on May 12, 2026, to positive media attention; on May 19, in response to an inquiry from The New York Times, Rosenbaum acknowledged that the book itself contains multiple misattributed or false quotes that were hallucinated by AIs. == Synopsis == == Development == Rosenbaum has said that he developed the book using AI chatbots as research tools, indicating in his notes what information came from AI and sending those claims to a fact-checker affiliated with the publisher. He has said that he did not use AI tools to write the book itself. He has described AI tools as "a delightful writing companion ... strangely creative and crafty and unusual in all these ways", while acknowledging that sometimes "then it betrays you in ways that are just really quite horrible". Journalist and Nobel laureate Maria Ressa wrote the book's foreword. Taylor Lorenz, Michael Wolff, and Nicholas Thompson wrote blurbs promoting it. == Release and reception == The Future of Truth was published by Matt Holt Books, an imprint of BenBella Books, and distributed by Simon & Schuster. The book's release on May 12, 2026, was described by Futurism as "buzzy" and by The New York Times as "to great fanfare". On May 14, an excerpt was published in Wired under the title "Gen Z Is Pioneering a New Understanding of Truth". On May 17, the Times contacted Rosenbaum regarding a number of quotes that appeared to be falsified or misattributed; the following evening he confirmed that they were the result of AI hallucinations:As I disclosed in the book's acknowledgments, I used AI tools ChatGPT and Claude during the research, writing and editing process. That does not excuse these errors, of which I take full responsibility. I am now working with the editors to thoroughly review and quickly correct any affected passages; any future editions will be corrected. The Times documented several of the errors, including a quote from Kara Swisher that Swisher described as making it "sound like I have a stick up my butt" and a quote from Lisa Feldman Barrett that Barrett described as misrepresenting her views on the nature of emotions, social signals, and truth. The book also misattributed a quote by Meredith Broussard from an interview with Marketplace Tech as having been from her book Artificial Unintelligence and hallucinated several words in a quote from Lee McIntyre, although according to McIntyre it did not misrepresent his views. Wired's editors, in an addendum to the excerpt they published, said that all quotes included in it had been verified as part of their fact-checking process. Rosenbaum told the Times that the series of errors "serves as a warning about the risks of AI-assisted research and verification, that is why I wrote the book. These AI errors do not, in fact, diminish the larger questions that the book raises about truth, trust and AI and its impact on society, democracy and editorial." Maggie Harrison Dupré in Futurism expressed skepticism, writing "The risk of AI hallucinations ... is well-known. If you're going to literally write the book on post-AI truth, you should probably put some more elbow grease into fact-checking your AI-assisted research." Kyle Orland in Ars Technica, responding to Rosenbaum's statement that his error "demonstrates the problem more vividly than any abstract argument could", was similarly skeptical, writing that "if we accept this take, every avoidably obvious mess in the world might be a disguised good because it really helps illuminate the huge mistake. And that can't be right; sometimes 'negligence' is just that." Subsequent comments by Rosenbaum placed more blame on the chatbots, which he told The Atlantic "fucked up the book". Rosenbaum told Ars Technica that fact-checking occurred "incredibly effectively, but not a hundred percent"; Orland observed that "it's worth noting that most writers manage to include zero made-up quotes when they write a book". Rosenbaum said that he had "learned a lesson" and would be "much more suspicious" of AI in the future, but would continue to use AI in his research. Orland responded to Rosenbaum's characterization of AI as "magical" by comparing it to the One Ring from The Lord of the Rings, in that it "convinces many of those who use it that they can control its power properly" when many cannot. Orland highlighted the limits of traditional fact-checking regarding AI, given that fact-checkers are used to assuming that direct quotes are copied word-for-word from the source. Rosenbaum told Orland that the future of fact-checking for AI-researched works "probably includes mandatory source tracing for quotations, better provenance tracking, clearer standards around AI-assisted research, and potentially (more irony here) AI tools that audit citations against primary materials". Patrick Redford in Defector criticized Rosenbaum, alongside other artists tricked by AI, for failing to recognize AI as "the enemy". Will Oremus in The Atlantic described Redford's approach of stigmatizing AI writing as "reasonable", noting the presence of low-quality, seemingly AI-generated verbiage in The Future of Truth—a claim denied by Rosenbaum—before saying that the greater issue is finding the line at which AI assistance in writing becomes a problem. Oremus concluded, "The scandal can't just be that [Rosenbaum] used AI while working on his book, because he acknowledged that up front. He got in trouble because he had used AI badly, failing to check its work on a task at which it is famously unreliable."

    Read more →
  • FarPoint Spread

    FarPoint Spread

    FarPoint Spread is a suite of Microsoft Excel-compatible spreadsheet components available for .NET, COM, and Microsoft BizTalk Server. Software developers use the components to embed Microsoft Excel-compatible spreadsheet features into their applications, such as importing and exporting Microsoft Excel files, displaying, modifying, analyzing, and visualizing data. Spread components handle spreadsheet data at the cell, row, column, or worksheet level. This article is about the last FarPoint edition of the Spread product line. Spread is now developed by GrapeCity, Inc. Since the acquisition, Spread for Biztalk Server has been removed from the product line and SpreadJS, a JavaScript version, has been added. == History == 1991 Spread released as a DLL control as the initial product offering from FarPoint Technologies, Inc. 1990s Spread VBX released. Spread ActiveX released. These components are now known as Spread COM. 2003 Spread for Windows Forms released as a completely new managed C# version prompted by the launch of Visual Studio .NET. 2003 Spread for Web Forms (now Spread for ASP.NET) released. 2006 Spread for BizTalk released. 2009 FarPoint Technologies acquired by GrapeCity. == Versions == Spread for Windows Forms: 5.0 Spread for Web Forms: 5.0 Spread COM: 8.0 Spread for BizTalk: 3.0 === Spread for Windows Forms === FarPoint Spread for Windows Forms is a Microsoft Excel-compatible spreadsheet component for Windows Forms applications developed using Microsoft Visual Studio and the .NET Framework. Developers use it to add grids and spreadsheets to their applications, and to bind them to data sources. In version 4.0, new cell types were added to display barcodes and fractions, and exports for XML and PDF were added. === Spread for ASP.NET === FarPoint Spread for ASP.NET is a Microsoft Excel-compatible spreadsheet component for ASP.NET applications. Developers use it to add grids and spreadsheets to their applications, === Spread for COM === FarPoint Spread 8 COM allows COM and ActiveX applications to incorporate spreadsheet features. In the 1997 book Visual Basic 5 for Windows for Dummies, Wally Wang lists an early version of Spread COM in Chapter 35: The Ten Most Useful Visual Basic Add-On Programs. === Spread for BizTalk === FarPoint Spread for BizTalk Server allows developers to integrate Microsoft Excel documents into Microsoft BizTalk applications. Spread for BizTalk Server includes two components: Spreadsheet Pipeline Disassembler - Parses data from Microsoft Excel (XLS and Excel 2007 XML, CSV, TXT) documents into XML data for processing through Microsoft BizTalk Server receive pipelines. Spreadsheet Pipeline Assembler - Assembles data from Microsoft BizTalk applications into Microsoft Excel (XLS or Excel 2007 XML) or PDF documents for transport through Microsoft BizTalk Server send pipelines. Developers find it a useful tool for organizations with Microsoft BizTalk Server Enterprise Application Integration. Prior to this release, BizTalk users wanting to use Excel data had to manually open the files and copy and paste data between the two applications. == Features == These features are common to all versions. Predefined cell types, including: currency date time number percent regular expression button check box combo box hyperlink image Formula support, including: cross-sheet referencing over 300 built-in functions Import and export: import to Microsoft Excel-compatible files export to Microsoft Excel-compatible files export to HTML files export to XML files Design-time spreadsheet designer Data-binding with customizable options Hierarchical data views, with parent rows and child views Grouping of rows or columns Sorting by row or column on multiple keys Cell spanning Multiple row and column headers Bound and unbound modes == Version-Specific Features == === Spread for Windows Forms === Support for Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 Support for Windows Azure AppFabric Integrated chart control Custom cell types Cell notes Child controls Splitter bars Built-in and custom skins and styles PDF export Microsoft Excel 2007 XML Support (Office Open XML, XLSX) Floating Formula Bar Range Selection for Formula Automatic Completion (type ahead) === Spread for ASP.NET === Support for Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 Support for Windows Azure AppFabric Integrated chart control AJAX-enabled Support for Open Document Format (ODF) files Multiple edits on multiple rows without server round trips Client-side column and row resizing Load on demand, which loads data from the server as needed for viewing Native Microsoft Excel import and export In-cell editing Multiple edits on multiple rows without server round trips Client-side column and row resizing Multiple sheets Searching Filtering Validations Cell spans PDF export === Spread COM === Custom cell types Cell notes Virtual mode for data loading Unicode support Customizable printing Text tips Import and export: Microsoft Excel 97 Excel 2000 Excel 2007 (requires the .NET Framework) Enhanced printing 64 bit DLL === Spread for BizTalk === Integration of Microsoft Excel data into Microsoft BizTalk applications Design-time spreadsheet schema wizard and spreadsheet format designer == Supported document formats == Adobe Portable Document Format PDF (.pdf) HTML Web Page (.html) Microsoft Excel Workbook (.xls) Plain Text (.txt) Comma-Separated Values (.csv) Open Document Format (Spread for ASP.NET)

    Read more →
  • Sora (text-to-video model)

    Sora (text-to-video model)

    Sora was a text-to-video model and social media app developed by OpenAI. Using artificial intelligence, the model generated short video clips based on prompts, and could also extend existing short videos. In February 2024, OpenAI previewed examples of its output to the public, with the first generation of Sora released publicly for ChatGPT Plus and ChatGPT Pro users in the United States and Canada in December 2024. The second generation of Sora was released to select users in the US and Canada at the end of September 2025. Sora 2 integrated social media features into the app. The app was shut down on April 26, 2026 and the application programming interface (API) is planned to be discontinued on September 24, 2026, marking the end of the Sora AI brand as a whole. By default, the generator used copyrighted material in its videos, unless copyright holders actively opt out of having their content included. Videos contained a visible, moving digital watermark to prevent misuse, but a week after Sora 2's release, third-party programs became available which could remove the watermark. == Background == Several other models capable of generating video from text had been created prior to Sora, including Meta's Make‑A‑Video, Runway's Gen‑2 and Google Veo. OpenAI, the company behind Sora, had released DALL·E 3, the third of its DALL-E text-to-image models, in September 2023. == History == === Initial release === The team that developed Sora named it after the Japanese word for 'sky' to signify its "limitless creative potential". On February 15, 2024, OpenAI first previewed Sora by releasing multiple clips of high-definition videos that it had created, including an SUV driving down a mountain road, an animation of a "short fluffy monster" next to a candle, two people walking through Tokyo in the snow, and fake historical footage of the California gold rush. OpenAI stated that it was able to generate videos as long as one minute. The company then shared a technical report that highlighted the methods used to train the model. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman also posted a series of tweets responding to Twitter users' prompts with Sora-generated videos of the prompts. As of December 9, 2024, OpenAI had gradually made Sora available to the public for ChatGPT Pro and ChatGPT Plus users in the U.S. and Canada. Prior to this, the company had provided limited access to a small "red team", including experts in misinformation and bias, to perform adversarial testing on the model. The company also shared Sora with a small group of creative professionals, including video makers and artists, to seek feedback on its usefulness in creative fields. In February 2025, OpenAI announced plans to integrate Sora into ChatGPT by letting users generate Sora videos from the chatbot. === Sora 2 === Sora 2 was unveiled on September 30, 2025, with an iOS app at the same time, as well as an Android app two months later. All videos generated by the model feature a visible, moving watermark to prevent misuse of the tool. The previous version of Sora also added a safety watermark to allow viewers to distinguish between real and fictional content. On October 7, 404 Media reported that third-party programs that could remove the watermark from Sora 2 videos had become prevalent. Many outlets, such as Wired magazine, have noted that the Sora 2 app is overtly similar to TikTok in style and features. === Discontinuation === On March 24, 2026, OpenAI announced on X that it was discontinuing Sora in both the mobile app and the API. The Sora app was shut down on April 26, 2026, while the API is planned to be shut down on September 24, 2026. OpenAI's partnership with Disney, which included a licensing agreement allowing Disney characters to be used within Sora, was also coming to an end. The decision prompted British technology news website The Register to label OpenAI a "product-killer", following in the footsteps of other technology companies such as Google, Amazon Web Services, Broadcom, Cloud Software Group, and Netscape. OpenAI did not provide a specific reason for discontinuing Sora in its shutdown notice. The reports that emerged regarding this discontinuity linked the decision to computation shortages, cost pressures, and a broader shift toward core enterprise products. Following its public launch, Sora's worldwide users peaked at around a million before declining to fewer than 500,000, while the service cost an estimated $1 million per day to operate due to the computational demands of video generation. == Legal regulation == In November 2024, an API key for Sora access was leaked by a group of testers on Hugging Face who posted a manifesto stating that they were protesting that Sora was used for "art washing". OpenAI revoked all access three hours after the leak was made public and stated that "hundreds of artists" have shaped the development and that "participation is voluntary". At the time of its launch, Sora 2 allowed copyrighted content by default unless copyright holders contacted OpenAI to restrict the generation of their content on the platform. On October 3, 2025, OpenAI stated that a future update to Sora 2 would give copyright holders "more granular control" over the generation of copyrighted content, but the company did not state whether existing content would be removed. On October 6, the chairman of the MPA criticized OpenAI's approach to copyright with Sora 2. On December 11, 2025, the Walt Disney Company announced that it would invest $1 billion in OpenAI to allow users to generate more than 200 of its copyrighted characters on Sora 2. These characters include those from Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel Studios, and Star Wars. == Capabilities and limitations == The technology behind Sora is an adaptation of the technology behind DALL-E 3. According to OpenAI, Sora is a diffusion transformer, a denoising latent diffusion model with one transformer as its denoiser. A video is generated in latent space by denoising 3D "patches", then transformed to standard space by a video decompressor. Recaptioning is employed to augment training data by using a video-to-text model to create detailed captions for videos. OpenAI trained the model using publicly available videos as well as copyrighted videos licensed for the purpose, but did not reveal the number or the exact source of the videos. Upon its release, OpenAI acknowledged some of Sora's shortcomings, including its limited capacity to simulate complex physics, to understand causality and to differentiate left from right. OpenAI also stated that, in adherence to the company's existing safety practices, Sora will restrict text prompts for sexual, violent, hateful or celebrity imagery, as well as content featuring existing intellectual property. Sora researcher Tim Brooks stated that the model learned how to create 3D graphics from its dataset alone, while fellow Sora researcher Bill Peebles said that the model automatically created different video angles without being prompted. According to OpenAI, Sora-generated videos are also tagged with C2PA metadata to indicate that they are AI-processed. === Comparison with other models === The Artificial Analysis have placed Sora 2 pro lower than other text-to-video AI generators in the market on its leaderboard. Other models, such as Seedance 2.0 from ByteDance, Runaway 4.5 from Runaway, and Kling 3.0 from KlingAI, have ranked higher than Sora 2.0. == Reception == === Positive === In 2024, Will Douglas Heaven of the MIT Technology Review called the demonstration videos "impressive", but noted that they must have been cherry-picked and may not be representative of Sora's typical output. Lisa Lacy of CNET called its example videos "remarkably realistic – except perhaps when a human face appears close up or when sea creatures are swimming". In October 2025, The New York Times remarked that the release of the Sora 2 app in September 2025 was "jaw-dropping (for better and worse)" though also remarked that the app was a "social network in disguise" and "the type of product that companies like Meta and X have sought to build: a way to bring A.I. to the masses that people can share." The article expressed concern regarding the product's potential impact on society and its potential use to promote misinformation, disinformation, and scams. A 2025 study in Science Advances found that generative AI tools can lower barriers to entry in creative work. It enables users with diverse skill sets, including people with less formal artistic training and technical skills, to act on their creative and imaginative ideas. The lower barrier to entry allows such users previously locked out of the creative industry to produce content and easily act on their creative ideas. === Negative === Some internet users and online content creators, such as Hank Green, called the mobile app "SlopTok," a reference to both the mobile app TikTok and the term AI slop. Filmmaker Tyler Perry announced he would be putting a planned

    Read more →
  • Sinewave synthesis

    Sinewave synthesis

    Sinewave synthesis, or sine wave speech, is a technique for synthesizing speech by replacing the formants (main bands of energy) with pure tone whistles. The first sinewave synthesis program (SWS) for the automatic creation of stimuli for perceptual experiments was developed by Philip Rubin at Haskins Laboratories in the 1970s. This program was subsequently used by Robert Remez, Philip Rubin, David Pisoni, and other colleagues to show that listeners can perceive continuous speech without traditional speech cues, i.e., pitch, stress, and intonation. This work paved the way for a view of speech as a dynamic pattern of trajectories through articulatory-acoustic space.

    Read more →
  • Computing Machinery and Intelligence

    Computing Machinery and Intelligence

    "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" is a paper written by Alan Turing on the topic of artificial intelligence. The paper, published in 1950 in Mind, was the first to introduce his concept of what is now known as the Turing test to the general public. Turing's paper considers the question "Can machines think?" Turing says that since the words "think" and "machine" cannot clearly be defined, we should "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words." To achieve this objective, Turing proposes a three-step approach. First, he identifies a simple and unambiguous concept to substitute for the term "think." Second, he delineates the specific "machines" under consideration. Third, armed with these tools, he poses a new question related to the first, which he believes he can answer in the affirmative. == Turing's test == Rather than trying to determine if a machine is thinking, Turing suggests we should ask if the machine can win a game, called the "Imitation Game". The original Imitation game, that Turing described, is a simple party game involving three players. Player A is a man, player B is a woman and player C (who plays the role of the interrogator) can be of either sex. In the Imitation Game, player C is unable to see either player A or player B (and knows them only as X and Y), and can communicate with them only through written notes or any other form that does not give away any details about their gender. By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man and which is the woman. Player A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator in making the right one. Turing proposes a variation of this game that involves the computer: We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" So the modified game becomes one that involves three participants in isolated rooms: a computer (which is being tested), a human, and a (human) judge. The human judge can converse with both the human and the computer by typing into a terminal. Both the computer and the human try to convince the judge that they are the human. If the judge cannot consistently tell which is which, then the computer wins the game. Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. As Stevan Harnad notes, the question has become "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" In other words, Turing is no longer asking whether a machine can "think"; he is asking whether a machine can act indistinguishably from the way a thinker acts. This question avoids the difficult philosophical problem of pre-defining the verb "to think" and focuses instead on the performance capacities that being able to think makes possible, and how a causal system can generate them. Since Turing introduced his test, it has been both highly influential and widely criticised, and has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. Some of its criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are themselves controversial. Some have taken Turing's question to have been "Can a computer, communicating over a teleprinter, fool a person into believing it is human?" but it seems clear that Turing was not talking about fooling people but about generating human cognitive capacity. == Digital machines == Turing also notes that we need to determine which "machines" we wish to consider. He points out that a human clone, while man-made, would not provide a very interesting example. Turing suggested that we should focus on the capabilities of digital machinery—machines which manipulate the binary digits of 1 and 0, rewriting them into memory using simple rules. He gave two reasons. First, there is no reason to speculate whether or not they can exist. They already did in 1950. Second, digital machinery is "universal". Turing's research into the foundations of computation had proved that a digital computer can, in theory, simulate the behaviour of any other digital machine, given enough memory and time. (This is the essential insight of the Church–Turing thesis and the universal Turing machine.) Therefore, if any digital machine can "act like it is thinking", then every sufficiently powerful digital machine can. Turing writes, "all digital computers are in a sense equivalent." This allows the original question to be made even more specific. Turing now restates the original question as "Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C. Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?" Hence, Turing states that the focus is not on "whether all digital computers would do well in the game nor whether the computers that are presently available would do well, but whether there are imaginable computers which would do well". What is more important is to consider the advancements possible in the state of our machines today regardless of whether we have the available resource to create one or not. == Nine common objections == Having clarified the question, Turing turned to answering it: he considered the following nine common objections, which include all the major arguments against artificial intelligence raised in the years since his paper was first published. Religious Objection: This states that thinking is a function of man's immortal soul; therefore, a machine cannot think. "In attempting to construct such machines," wrote Turing, "we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates." 'Heads in the Sand' Objection: "The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so." This thinking is popular among intellectual people, as they believe superiority derives from higher intelligence and the possibility of being overtaken is a threat (as machines have efficient memory capacities and processing speed, machines exceeding the learning and knowledge capabilities are highly probable). This objection is a fallacious appeal to consequences, confusing what should not be with what can or cannot be (Wardrip-Fruin, 56). The Mathematical Objection: This objection uses mathematical theorems, such as Gödel's incompleteness theorem, to show that there are limits to what questions a computer system based on logic can answer. Turing suggests that humans are too often wrong themselves and pleased at the fallibility of a machine. (This argument would be made again by philosopher John Lucas in 1961 and physicist Roger Penrose in 1989, and later would be called Penrose–Lucas argument.) Argument From Consciousness: This argument, suggested by Professor Geoffrey Jefferson in his 1949 Lister Oration (acceptance speech for his 1948 award of Lister Medal) states that "not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain." Turing replies by saying that we have no way of knowing that any individual other than ourselves experiences emotions, and that therefore we should accept the test. He adds, "I do not wish to give the impression that I think there is no mystery about consciousness ... [b]ut I do not think these mysteries necessarily need to be solved before we can answer the question [of whether machines can think]." (This argument, that a computer can't have conscious experiences or understanding, would be made in 1980 by philosopher John Searle in his Chinese room argument. Turing's reply is now known as the "other minds reply". See also Can a machine have a mind? in the philosophy of AI.) Arguments from various disabilities. These arguments all have the form "a computer will never do X". Turing offers a selection:Be kind, resourceful, beautiful, friendly, have initiative, have a sense of humour, tell right from wrong, make mistakes, fall in love, enjo

    Read more →
  • Verbal overshadowing

    Verbal overshadowing

    Verbal overshadowing is a phenomenon where giving a verbal description of sensory input impairs formation of memories of that input. This was first reported by Schooler and Engstler-Schooler (1990) where it was shown that the effects can be observed across multiple domains of cognition which are known to rely on non-verbal knowledge and perceptual expertise. One example of this is memory, which has been known to be influenced by language. Seminal work by Carmichael and collaborators (1932) demonstrated that when verbal labels are connected to non-verbal forms during an individual's encoding process, it could potentially bias the way those forms are reproduced. Because of this, memory performance relying on reportable aspects of memory that encode visual forms should be vulnerable to the effects of verbalization. == Initial findings == Schooler and Engstler-Schooler (1990) were the first to report findings of verbal overshadowing. In their study, participants watched a video of a simulated robbery and were instructed to either verbally describe the robber or engage in a control task. Those who engaged in giving a verbal description were less likely to correctly identify the robber from a test lineup, compared to those who engaged in the control task. A larger effect was detected when the verbal description was provided 20, rather than 5, minutes after the video, and immediately before the test lineup. A meta-analysis by Meissner and Brigham (2001) supported the effects of verbal overshadowing, showing a small but reliably negative effect. == General effects of verbal overshadowing == The effects of verbal overshadowing have been generalized across multiple domains of cognition that are known to rely on non-verbal knowledge and perceptual expertise, such as memory. Memory has been known to be influenced by language. Seminal work by Carmichael and collaborators (1932) demonstrated that labels attached to, or associated with, non-verbal forms during memory encoding can affect the way the forms were subsequently reproduced. Because of this, memory performance that relies on reportable aspects of memory that encode visual forms should be vulnerable to the effects of verbalization. Pelizzon, Brandimonte, and Luccio (2002) found that visual memory representations appear to incorporate visual, spatial, and temporal characteristics. It is explained as follows: With the temporal code (where the only information available is the sequence of the stimuli), performance levels remain high, unless participants are required to retrieve the stimuli in a different order from that used at encoding (visual cue). In this case, performance is significantly impaired, even in the presence of a visual cue. The study showed that order information acts as a link between the two separate representations of figure and background, hence preventing verbal overshadowing at encoding (temporal component) or attenuating its influence at retrieval (spatial component).(p. 960) Hatano, Ueno, Kitagami, and Kawaguchi found that verbal overshadowing is likely to occur when participants verbally described targets in detail. Detailed verbal descriptions resulted in more frequently inaccurate descriptions that in turn created inaccurate representations in the memories of participants. Inaccuracies are also likely to occur when face recognition comes immediately after verbalization. Other forms of non-verbal knowledge affected by verbal overshadowing include the following: [Verbal overshadowing] has also been observed when participants attempt to generate descriptions of other 'difficult-to-describe' stimuli such as colors (Schooler and Engstler-Schooler, 1990) or abstract figures (Brandimonte et al., 1997), or other non-visual tasks such as wine tasting (Melcher and Schooler, 1996), decision making (Wilson and Schooler, 1991), and insight problem-solving. (p. 871) (Schooler et al., 1993) Verbalization of stimuli leads to the disruption of non-reportable processes that are necessary for achieving insight solutions, which are distinct from language processes. Schooler, Ohlsson, and Brooks (1993) found that face recognition requires information that cannot be adequately verbalized, giving rise to difficulty in describing factors in recognition judgments. Subjects were less effective in solving insight problems when compelled to put their thoughts in words, which suggests that language may interfere with thought. The verbal overshadowing effect was not seen when participants engaged in articulatory suppression. Performance was reduced in both the verbal and non-verbal description conditions. This is evidence that verbal encoding plays a role in face recognition. By testing with distracting faces presented between study and test, Lloyd-Jones and Brown (2008) suggested a dual-process approach to recognition memory took place, that verbalization influenced familiarity-based processes at first, but its effects were later seen on recollection, when discrimination between items became more difficult. == Verbal overshadowing in facial recognition == The verbal overshadowing effect can be found for facial recognition because faces are predominately processed in a holistic or configurable manner. (Tanaka & Farah, 1993; Tanaka & Sengco, 1997) Verbalizing one's memory for a face is done using a featural or analytic strategy, leading to a drift from the configurable information about the face and to impaired recognition performance. However, Fallshore & Schooler (1995) found that the verbal overshadowing effect was not found when participants described faces of races different from their own. A study by Brown and Lloyd-Jones (2003) found that there was no verbal overshadowing effect found in car descriptions; it was only seen in facial descriptions. The authors noted that descriptions were no different on any measure including accuracy. It is suggested that less expertise in verbalizing faces rather than cars invokes a stronger shift in verbal and featural processing. This supports the concept of a transfer inappropriate retrieval framework and addresses some limitations of the effect. Wickham and Swift (2006) suggested that the verbal overshadowing effect is not seen in describing all faces, and one aspect that determines this is distinctiveness. Results showed that typical faces produce verbal overshadowing, while distinctive faces did not. In studies of eyewitness reports, variation in response criteria given by participants influenced the quality of the descriptions generated and accuracy on identification task, known as the retrieval-based effect. Face recognition was also impaired when subjects described a familiar face, such as a parent, or when describing a previously seen but novel face. Dodson, Johnson, and Schooler (1997) found that recognition was also impaired when participants were provided with a description of a previously seen face, and they were able to ignore provided versus self-generated descriptions more easily. This finding of verbal overshadowing suggested that eyewitness recognition is not only affected by their own descriptions, but of descriptions heard from others, such other eyewitness testimonies. == Voice recognition == The verbal overshadowing effect has also been found to affect voice identification. Research shows that describing a non-verbal stimuli leads to a decrease in recognition accuracy. In an unpublished study by Schooler, Fiore, Melcher, and Ambadar (1996), participants listened to a tape-recorded voice, after which they were asked either to verbally describe it or to not do so, and then asked to distinguish the voice from 3 similar distractor voices. The results showed that verbal overshadowing impaired accuracy of recognition based on gut feeling, suggesting an overall verbal overshadowing for voice recognition. Due to the forensic relevance of voices heard over the telephone and harassing phone calls that are often a problem for police, Perfect, Hunt, and Harris (2002) examined the influence of three factors on accuracy and confidence in voice recognition from a line-up. They expected to find an effect, because voice represents a class of stimuli that is difficult to describe verbally. This meets Schooler et al.'s (1997) modality mismatch criterion, meaning that describing the speakers age, gender, or accent is difficult, making voice recognition susceptible to the verbal overshadowing phenomenon. It was found that the method of memory encoding had no impact on performance, and that hearing a telephone voice reduced confidence but did not affect accuracy. They also found that providing a verbal description impaired accuracy but had no effect on confidence. The data showed an effect of verbal overshadowing in voice recognition and provided yet another disassociation between confidence and performance. Although there was a difference in confidence level, witnesses were able to identify voices over the telephone as accurately as voices heard direc

    Read more →
  • Competitions and prizes in artificial intelligence

    Competitions and prizes in artificial intelligence

    There are a number of competitions and prizes to promote research in artificial intelligence. == General machine intelligence == The David E. Rumelhart Prize is an annual award for making a "significant contemporary contribution to the theoretical foundations of human cognition". The prize is $100,000. The Human-Competitive Award is an annual challenge started in 2004 to reward results "competitive with the work of creative and inventive humans". The prize is $10,000. Entries are required to use evolutionary computing. The Intel AI Global Impact Festival is an international annual competition held by Intel Corporation for school, and college students with prizes upwards of $15,000. It is about artificial intelligence technology. There are two age brackets in this competition, 13-18 Age Group, and 18 and Above Age Group. The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence is a biannual award given at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) to researchers in artificial intelligence as a recognition of excellence of their career. The 2011 Federal Virtual World Challenge, advertised by The White House and sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory's Simulation and Training Technology Center, held a competition offering a total of US$52,000 in cash prize awards for general artificial intelligence applications, including "adaptive learning systems, intelligent conversational bots, adaptive behavior (objects or processes)" and more. The Machine Intelligence Prize is awarded annually by the British Computer Society for progress towards machine intelligence. The Kaggle – "the world's largest community of data scientists compete to solve most valuable problems". == Conversational behaviour == The Loebner prize is an annual competition to determine the best Turing test competitors. The winner is the computer system that, in the judges' opinions, demonstrates the "most human" conversational behaviour, they have an additional prize for a system that in their opinion passes a Turing test. This second prize has not yet been awarded. == Automatic control == === Pilotless aircraft === The International Aerial Robotics Competition is a long-running event begun in 1991 to advance the state of the art in fully autonomous air vehicles. This competition is restricted to university teams (although industry and governmental sponsorship of teams is allowed). Key to this event is the creation of flying robots which must complete complex missions without any human intervention. Successful entries are able to interpret their environment and make real-time decisions based only on a high-level mission directive (e.g., "find a particular target inside a building having certain characteristics which is among a group of buildings 3 kilometers from the aerial robot launch point"). In 2000, a $30,000 prize was awarded during the 3rd Mission (search and rescue), and in 2008, $80,000 in prize money was awarded at the conclusion of the 4th Mission (urban reconnaissance). === Driverless cars === The DARPA Grand Challenge is a series of competitions to promote driverless car technology, aimed at a congressional mandate stating that by 2015 one-third of the operational ground combat vehicles of the US Armed Forces should be unmanned. While the first race had no winner, the second awarded a $2 million prize for the autonomous navigation of a hundred-mile trail, using GPS, computers and a sophisticated array of sensors. In November 2007, DARPA introduced the DARPA Urban Challenge, a sixty-mile urban area race requiring vehicles to navigate through traffic. In November 2010 the US Armed Forces extended the competition with the $1.6 million prize Multi Autonomous Ground-robotic International Challenge to consider cooperation between multiple vehicles in a simulated-combat situation. Roborace will be a global motorsport championship with autonomously driving, electric vehicles. The series will be run as a support series during the Formula E championship for electric vehicles. This will be the first global championship for driverless cars. == Data-mining and prediction == The Netflix Prize was a competition for the best collaborative filtering algorithm that predicts user ratings for films, based on previous ratings. The competition was held by Netflix, an online DVD-rental service. The prize was $1,000,000. The Pittsburgh Brain Activity Interpretation Competition will reward analysis of fMRI data "to predict what individuals perceive and how they act and feel in a novel Virtual Reality world involving searching for and collecting objects, interpreting changing instructions, and avoiding a threatening dog." The prize in 2007 was $22,000. The Face Recognition Grand Challenge (May 2004 to March 2006) aimed to promote and advance face recognition technology. The American Meteorological Society's artificial intelligence competition involves learning a classifier to characterise precipitation based on meteorological analyses of environmental conditions and polarimetric radar data. == Cooperation and coordination == === Robot football === The RoboCup and Federation of International Robot-soccer Association (FIRA) are annual international robot soccer competitions. The International RoboCup Federation challenge is by 2050 "a team of fully autonomous humanoid robot soccer players shall win the soccer game, comply with the official rule of the FIFA, against the winner of the most recent World Cup." == Logic, reasoning and knowledge representation == The Herbrand Award is a prize given by Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE) Inc. to honour persons or groups for important contributions to the field of automated deduction. The prize is $1000. The CADE ATP System Competition (CASC) is a yearly competition of fully automated theorem provers for classical first order logic associated with the Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE) and International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR). The competition was part of the Alan Turing Centenary Conference in 2012, with total prizes of 9000 GBP given by Google. The SUMO prize is an annual prize for the best open source ontology extension of the Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO), a formal theory of terms and logical definitions describing the world. The prize is $3000. The Hutter Prize for lossless compression of human knowledge is a cash prize which rewards compression improvements on a specific 100 MB English text file. The prize awards 500 euros for each one percent improvement, up to €50,000. The organizers believe that text compression and AI are equivalent problems and 3 prizes have been given, at around € 2k. The Cyc TPTP Challenge is a competition to develop reasoning methods for the Cyc comprehensive ontology and database of everyday common sense knowledge. The prize is 100 euros for "each winner of two related challenges". The Eternity II challenge was a constraint satisfaction problem very similar to the Tetravex game. The objective is to lay 256 tiles on a 16x16 grid while satisfying a number of constraints. The problem is known to be NP-complete. The prize was US$2,000,000. The competition ended in December 2010. == Games == The World Computer Chess Championship has been held since 1970. The International Computer Games Association continues to hold an annual Computer Olympiad which includes this event plus computer competitions for many other games. The Ing Prize was a substantial money prize attached to the World Computer Go Congress, starting from 1985 and expiring in 2000. It was a graduated set of handicap challenges against young professional players with increasing prizes as the handicap was lowered. At the time it expired in 2000, the unclaimed prize was 400,000 NT dollars for winning a 9-stone handicap match. The AAAI General Game Playing Competition is a competition to develop programs that are effective at general game playing. Given a definition of a game, the program must play it effectively without human intervention. Since the game is not known in advance the competitors cannot especially adapt their programs to a particular scenario. The prize in 2006 and 2007 was $10,000. The General Video Game AI Competition (GVGAI) poses the problem of creating artificial intelligence that can play a wide, and in principle unlimited, range of games. Concretely, it tackles the problem of devising an algorithm that is able to play any game it is given, even if the game is not known a priori. Additionally, the contests poses the challenge of creating level and rule generators for any game is given. This area of study can be seen as an approximation of General Artificial Intelligence, with very little room for game dependent heuristics. The competition runs yearly in different tracks: single player planning, two-player planning, single player learning, level and rule generation, and each track prizes ranging from 200 to 500 US dollars for winners and runner-ups. The 2007 Ultimate Computer Ches

    Read more →
  • Data processing unit

    Data processing unit

    A data processing unit (DPU) is a programmable computer processor that tightly integrates a general-purpose CPU with network interface hardware. They are also occasionally called "IPUs" (infrastructure processing unit) or "SmartNICs". They can be used in place of traditional NICs to relieve the main CPU of complex networking responsibilities and other "infrastructural" duties; although their features vary, they may be used to perform encryption/decryption, serve as a firewall, handle TCP/IP, process HTTP requests, or even function as a hypervisor or storage controller. These devices can be attractive to cloud computing providers whose servers might otherwise spend a significant amount of CPU time on these tasks, cutting into the cycles they can provide to guests. They see use in other kinds of data center environments as well due to their improved power consumption efficiency for routine networking tasks compared to general-purpose CPUs.

    Read more →
  • Fuzzy differential equation

    Fuzzy differential equation

    Fuzzy differential equation are general concept of ordinary differential equation in mathematics defined as differential inclusion for non-uniform upper hemicontinuity convex set with compactness in fuzzy set. d x ( t ) / d t = F ( t , x ( t ) , α ) , {\displaystyle dx(t)/dt=F(t,x(t),\alpha ),} for all α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \alpha \in [0,1]} . == First order fuzzy differential equation == A first order fuzzy differential equation with real constant or variable coefficients x ′ ( t ) + p ( t ) x ( t ) = f ( t ) {\displaystyle x'(t)+p(t)x(t)=f(t)} where p ( t ) {\displaystyle p(t)} is a real continuous function and f ( t ) : [ t 0 , ∞ ) → R F {\displaystyle f(t)\colon [t_{0},\infty )\rightarrow R_{F}} is a fuzzy continuous function y ( t 0 ) = y 0 {\displaystyle y(t_{0})=y_{0}} such that y 0 ∈ R F {\displaystyle y_{0}\in R_{F}} . == Linear systems of fuzzy differential equations == A system of equations of the form x ( t ) n ′ = a n 1 ( t ) x 1 ( t ) + . . . . . . + a n n ( t ) x n ( t ) + f n ( t ) {\displaystyle x(t)'_{n}=a_{n}1(t)x_{1}(t)+......+a_{n}n(t)x_{n}(t)+f_{n}(t)} where a i j {\displaystyle a_{i}j} are real functions and f i {\displaystyle f_{i}} are fuzzy functions x n ′ ( t ) = ∑ i = 0 1 a i j x i . {\displaystyle x'_{n}(t)=\sum _{i=0}^{1}a_{ij}x_{i}.} == Fuzzy partial differential equations == A fuzzy differential equation with partial differential operator is ∇ x ( t ) = F ( t , x ( t ) , α ) , {\displaystyle \nabla x(t)=F(t,x(t),\alpha ),} for all α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \alpha \in [0,1]} . == Fuzzy fractional differential equation == A fuzzy differential equation with fractional differential operator is d n x ( t ) d t n = F ( t , x ( t ) , α ) , {\displaystyle {\frac {d^{n}x(t)}{dt^{n}}}=F(t,x(t),\alpha ),} for all α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle \alpha \in [0,1]} where n {\displaystyle n} is a rational number.

    Read more →
  • Intelligent control

    Intelligent control

    Intelligent control is a class of control techniques that use various artificial intelligence computing approaches like neural networks, Bayesian probability, fuzzy logic, machine learning, reinforcement learning, evolutionary computation and genetic algorithms. == Overview == Intelligent control can be divided into the following major sub-domains: Neural network control Machine learning control Reinforcement learning Bayesian control Fuzzy control Neuro-fuzzy control Expert Systems Genetic control New control techniques are created continuously as new models of intelligent behavior are created and computational methods developed to support them. === Neural network controller === Neural networks have been used to solve problems in almost all spheres of science and technology. Neural network control basically involves two steps: System identification Control It has been shown that a feedforward network with nonlinear, continuous and differentiable activation functions have universal approximation capability. Recurrent networks have also been used for system identification. Given, a set of input-output data pairs, system identification aims to form a mapping among these data pairs. Such a network is supposed to capture the dynamics of a system. For the control part, deep reinforcement learning has shown its ability to control complex systems. === Bayesian controllers === Bayesian probability has produced a number of algorithms that are in common use in many advanced control systems, serving as state space estimators of some variables that are used in the controller. The Kalman filter and the Particle filter are two examples of popular Bayesian control components. The Bayesian approach to controller design often requires an important effort in deriving the so-called system model and measurement model, which are the mathematical relationships linking the state variables to the sensor measurements available in the controlled system. In this respect, it is very closely linked to the system-theoretic approach to control design.

    Read more →
  • Orange (software)

    Orange (software)

    Orange is an open-source data visualization, machine learning and data mining toolkit. It features a visual programming front-end for exploratory qualitative data analysis and interactive data visualization. == Description == Orange is a component-based visual programming software package for data visualization, machine learning, data mining, and data analysis. Orange components are called widgets. They range from simple data visualization, subset selection, and preprocessing to empirical evaluation of learning algorithms and predictive modeling. Visual programming is implemented through an interface in which workflows are created by linking predefined or user-designed widgets, while advanced users can use Orange as a Python library for data manipulation and widget alteration. == Software == Orange is an open-source software package released under GPL and hosted on GitHub. Versions up to 3.0 include core components in C++ with wrappers in Python. From version 3.0 onwards, Orange uses common Python open-source libraries for scientific computing, such as numpy, scipy and scikit-learn, while its graphical user interface operates within the cross-platform Qt framework. The default installation includes a number of machine learning, preprocessing and data visualization algorithms in 6 widget sets (data, transform, visualize, model, evaluate and unsupervised). Additional functionalities are available as add-ons (text-mining, image analytics, bioinformatics, etc.). Orange is supported on macOS, Windows and Linux and can also be installed from the Python Package Index repository (pip install Orange3). == Features == Orange consists of a canvas interface onto which the user places widgets and creates a data analysis workflow. Widgets offer basic functionalities such as reading the data, showing a data table, selecting features, training predictors, comparing learning algorithms, visualizing data elements, etc. The user can interactively explore visualizations or feed the selected subset into other widgets. Canvas: graphical front-end for data analysis Widgets: Data: widgets for data input, data filtering, sampling, imputation, feature manipulation and feature selection Visualize: widgets for common visualization (box plot, histograms, scatter plot) and multivariate visualization (mosaic display, sieve diagram). Classify: a set of supervised machine learning algorithms for classification Regression: a set of supervised machine learning algorithms for regression Evaluate: cross-validation, sampling-based procedures, reliability estimation and scoring of prediction methods Unsupervised: unsupervised learning algorithms for clustering (k-means, hierarchical clustering) and data projection techniques (multidimensional scaling, principal component analysis, correspondence analysis). == Add-ons == Orange users can extend their core set of components with components in the add-ons. Supported add-ons include: Associate: components for mining frequent itemsets and association rule learning. Bioinformatics: components for gene expression analysis, enrichment, and access to expression databases (e.g., Gene Expression Omnibus) and pathway libraries. Data fusion: components for fusing different data sets, collective matrix factorization, and exploration of latent factors. Educational: components for teaching machine learning concepts, such as k-means clustering, polynomial regression, stochastic gradient descent, ... Explain: provides an extension with components for the model explanation, including Shapley value analysis Geo: components for working with geospatial data. Image analytics: components for working with images and ImageNet embeddings Network: components for graph and network analysis. Text mining: components for natural language processing and text mining. Time series: widget components for time series analysis and modeling. Single-cell: support for single-cell gene expression analysis, including components for loading single-cell data, filtering and batch effect removal, marker genes discovery, scoring of cells and genes, and cell type prediction. Spectroscopy: components for analyzing and visualization of (hyper)spectral datasets. Survival analysis: add-on for data analysis dealing with survival data. It includes widgets for standard survival analysis techniques, such as the Kaplan-Meier plot, the Cox regression model, and several derivative widgets. World Happiness: support for downloading socioeconomic data from a database, including OECD and World Development Indicators. Provides access to thousands of country indicators from various economic databases. Fairness: add-on for evaluation and creation of fair machine learning models without discrimination. Widgets range from computing fairness metrics like statistical parity to post-, pre-, in-processing methods to build fair models. == Objectives == The program provides a platform for experiment selection, recommendation systems, and predictive modelling and is used in biomedicine, bioinformatics, genomic research, and teaching. In science, it is used as a platform for testing new machine learning algorithms and for implementing new techniques in genetics and bioinformatics. In education, it was used for teaching machine learning and data mining methods to students of biology, biomedicine, and informatics. == Extensions == Various projects build on Orange either by extending the core components with add-ons or using only the Orange Canvas to exploit the implemented visual programming features and GUI. OASYS — ORange SYnchrotron Suite scOrange — single cell biostatistics Quasar — data analysis in natural sciences == History == In 1996, the University of Ljubljana and Jožef Stefan Institute started development of ML, a machine learning framework in C++, and Python bindings were developed for this framework in 1997, which, together with emerging Python modules, formed a joint framework called Orange. Over the following years, most contemporary major algorithms for data mining and machine learning were implemented in C++ (Orange's core) or Python modules. In 2002, first prototypes to create a flexible graphical user interface were designed using Pmw Python megawidgets. In 2003, the graphical user interface was redesigned and re-developed for Qt framework using PyQt Python bindings. The visual programming framework was defined, and the development of widgets (graphical components of the data analysis pipeline) began. In 2005, extensions for data analysis in bioinformatics was created. In 2008, Mac OS X DMG and Fink-based installation packages were developed. In 2009, over 100 widgets were created and maintained. In 2009, Orange 2.0 beta was released, offering installation packages on the website based on the daily compiling cycle. In 2012, a new object hierarchy was imposed, replacing the old module-based structure. In 2013, a significant redesign of the graphical user interface included a new toolbox and depiction of workflows. In 2015, Orange 3.0 was released. Orange stores the data in NumPy arrays; machine learning algorithms mostly use scikit-learn. In 2015, a text analysis add-on for Orange3 was released. In 2016, Orange released version 3.3. Development scheduled a monthly cycle for stable releases. In 2016, Orange began development and release of an Image Analytics add-on, with server-side deep neural networks for image embedding In 2017, a Spectroscopy add-on for the analysis of spectral data was introduced. In 2017, Geo, an add-on for dealing with geo-location data and visualisation of geo maps was introduced In 2018, Orange began development and release of an add-on for single-cell data analysis. In 2019, Orange separated its graphical interface for development as a separate project, orange-canvas-core In 2020, Orange introduced the Explain add-on with widgets for explaining classification models and regression models, highlighting the strength and contributions specific features make towards predicting a specific class. In 2022, World Happiness, an add-on for the Orange3 data mining suite, was introduced, providing widgets for accessing socioeconomic data from various databases such as World Happiness Report, World Development Indicators, OECD. In 2022, Orange extended the Explain add-on with an Individual Conditional Expectation plot and the Permutation Feature Importance technique. In 2023, Orange introduced the Fairness add-on, including widgets to calculate bias metrics, as well as widgets for pre-, post-, and in-processing methods, allowing the creation of models less susceptible to systematic error due to the vagaries of the data set.

    Read more →
  • European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology

    European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology

    The European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology (EUSFLAT) is a scientific association with the aims to disseminate and promote fuzzy logic and related subjects (sometimes comprised under the collective terms soft computing or computational intelligence) and to provide a platform for exchange between scientists and engineers working in these fields. The society is both open for academic and industrial members. == History == EUSFLAT was founded in 1998 in Spain as the successor of the National Spanish Fuzzy Logic Society, ESTYLF, with the aim to open the society for members from other European countries. Since then, the society managed to attract a large share of members from outside Spain, and even beyond Europe, with the Spanish members still being the largest group inside EUSFLAT. For these historical reasons, the society is officially registered in Spain. == Conferences == Starting with 1999, EUSFLAT has been organizing its biannual conferences in odd years. Previous meetings: Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain, September 22–25, 1999 (jointly with National Spanish conference, ESTYLF) Leicester, United Kingdom, September 5–7, 2001 Zittau, Germany, September 10–12, 2003 Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, September 7–9, 2005 (jointly with 11th Rencontres Francophones sur la Logique Floue et ses Applications) Ostrava, Czech Republic, September 11–14, 2007 Lisbon, Portugal, July 20–24, 2009 (jointly with 13th World Congress of the International Fuzzy Systems Association) Aix-les-Bains, France, July 18–22, 2011 (jointly with Les Rencontres Francophones sur la Logique Floue et ses Applications) Milan, Italy, September 11–13, 2013 Gijón, Spain, June, 30–3 July 2015 == Publications == EUSFLAT publishes the proceedings of its conferences in an open access manner. Until 2010, Mathware & Soft Computing was the official journal of EUSFLAT. On July 1, 2010, the International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems (Atlantis Press, ISSN 1875-6891 (print) / ISSN 1875-6883 (on-line)) became the official journal of EUSFLAT. EUSFLAT publishes an electronic newsletter with three issues a year. == Presidents == EUSFLAT is led by the President, who is elected for a two-year period, and cannot serve for more than two consecutive periods. Francesc Esteva (1998–2011) Luis Magdalena (2001–2005) Ulrich Bodenhofer (2005–2009) Javier Montero (2009–2013) Gabriella Pasi (2013–present)

    Read more →