AI For Student Recruitment

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

• 

  Psychology of reasoning

  The psychology of reasoning (also known as the cognitive science of reasoning) is the study of how people reason, often broadly defined as the process of drawing conclusions to inform how people solve problems and make decisions. It overlaps with psychology, philosophy, linguistics, cognitive science, artificial intelligence, logic, and probability theory. Psychological experiments on how humans and other animals reason have been carried out for over 100 years. An enduring question is whether or not people have the capacity to be rational. Current research in this area addresses various questions about reasoning, rationality, judgments, intelligence, relationships between emotion and reasoning, and development. == Everyday reasoning == One of the most obvious areas in which people employ reasoning is with sentences in everyday language. Most experimentation on deduction has been carried out on hypothetical thought, in particular, examining how people reason about conditionals, e.g., If A then B. Participants in experiments make the modus ponens inference, given the indicative conditional If A then B, and given the premise A, they conclude B. However, given the indicative conditional and the minor premise for the modus tollens inference, not-B, about half of the participants in experiments conclude not-A and the remainder concludes that nothing follows. The ease with which people make conditional inferences is affected by context, as demonstrated in the well-known selection task developed by Peter Wason. Participants are better able to test a conditional in an ecologically relevant context, e.g., if the envelope is sealed then it must have a 50 cent stamp on it compared to one that contains symbolic content, e.g., if the letter is a vowel then the number is even. Background knowledge can also lead to the suppression of even the simple modus ponens inference Participants given the conditional if Lisa has an essay to write then she studies late in the library and the premise Lisa has an essay to write make the modus ponens inference 'she studies late in the library', but the inference is suppressed when they are also given a second conditional if the library stays open then she studies late in the library. Interpretations of the suppression effect are controversial Other investigations of propositional inference examine how people think about disjunctive alternatives, e.g., A or else B, and how they reason about negation, e.g., It is not the case that A and B. Many experiments have been carried out to examine how people make relational inferences, including comparisons, e.g., A is better than B. Such investigations also concern spatial inferences, e.g. A is in front of B and temporal inferences, e.g. A occurs before B. Other common tasks include categorical syllogisms, used to examine how people reason about quantifiers such as All or Some, e.g., Some of the A are not B. For example if all A are B and some B are C, what (if anything) follows? == Theories of reasoning == There are several alternative theories of the cognitive processes that human reasoning is based on. One view is that people rely on a mental logic consisting of formal (abstract or syntactic) inference rules similar to those developed by logicians in the propositional calculus. Another view is that people rely on domain-specific or content-sensitive rules of inference. A third view is that people rely on mental models, that is, mental representations that correspond to imagined possibilities. A fourth view is that people compute probabilities. One controversial theoretical issue is the identification of an appropriate competence model, or a standard against which to compare human reasoning. Initially classical logic was chosen as a competence model. Subsequently, some researchers opted for non-monotonic logic and Bayesian probability. Research on mental models and reasoning has led to the suggestion that people are rational in principle but err in practice. Connectionist approaches towards reasoning have also been proposed. Despite the ongoing debate about the cognitive processes involved in human reasoning, recent research has shown that multiple approaches can be useful in modeling human thinking. For instance, studies have found that people's reasoning is often influenced by their prior beliefs, which can be modeled using Bayesian probability theory. Additionally, research on mental models has shown that people tend to reason about problems by constructing multiple mental representations of the situation, which can help them to identify relevant features and make inferences based on their understanding of the problem. Moreover, connectionist approaches to reasoning have also gained attention, which focus on the neural network models that can learn from data and generalize to new situations. == Development of reasoning == It is an active question in psychology how, why, and when the ability to reason develops from infancy to adulthood. Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development posited general mechanisms and stages in the development of reasoning from infancy to adulthood. According to the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, changes in reasoning with development come from increasing working memory capacity, increasing speed of processing, and enhanced executive functions and control. Increasing self-awareness is also an important factor. In their book The Enigma of Reason, the cognitive scientists Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber put forward an "argumentative" theory of reasoning, claiming that humans evolved to reason primarily to justify our beliefs and actions and to convince others in a social environment. Key evidence for their theory includes the errors in reasoning that solitary individuals are prone to when their arguments are not criticized, such as logical fallacies, and how groups become much better at performing cognitive reasoning tasks when they communicate with one another and can evaluate each other's arguments. Sperber and Mercier offer one attempt to resolve the apparent paradox that the confirmation bias is so strong despite the function of reasoning naively appearing to be to come to veridical conclusions about the world. The study of the development of reasoning abilities is an ongoing area of research in psychology, and multiple factors have been proposed to explain how, why, and when reasoning develops from infancy to adulthood. Recent research has suggested that early experiences and social interactions play a critical role in the development of reasoning abilities. For example, studies have shown that infants as young as six months old can engage in basic logical reasoning, such as reasoning about the relationship between objects and their properties. Furthermore, research has highlighted the importance of parental interaction and cognitive stimulation in the development of children's reasoning abilities. Additionally, studies have suggested that cultural factors, such as educational practices and the emphasis on critical thinking, can also influence the development of reasoning skills across different populations. == Different sorts of reasoning == Philip Johnson-Laird trying to taxonomize thought, distinguished between goal-directed thinking and thinking without goal, noting that association was involved in unrelated reading. He argues that goal directed reasoning can be classified based on the problem space involved in a solution, citing Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific cases or observations. In this process of reasoning, general assertions are made based on past specific pieces of evidence. This kind of reasoning allows the conclusion to be false even if the original statement is true. For example, if one observes a college athlete, one makes predictions and assumptions about other college athletes based on that one observation. Scientists use inductive reasoning to create theories and hypotheses. Philip Johnson-Laird distinguished inductive from deductive reasoning, in that the former creates semantic information while the later does not . In opposition, deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. In this reasoning process a person starts with a known claim or a general belief and from there asks what follows from these foundations or how will these premises influence other beliefs. In other words, deduction starts with a hypothesis and examines the possibilities to reach a conclusion. Deduction helps people understand why their predictions are wrong and indicates that their prior knowledge or beliefs are off track. An example of deduction can be seen in the scientific method when testing hypotheses and theories. Although the conclusion usually corresponds and therefore proves the hypothesis, there are some cases where the conclusion is logical, but the generalization is not. For example, the argument, "All young girls wear skirts; Julie is a young

  Read more →
• 

  Void Trilogy

  The Void Trilogy is a space opera series by British author Peter F. Hamilton. The series is set in the same universe as The Commonwealth Saga, 1,200 years after the end of Judas Unchained. Peter F. Hamilton sold the American rights to the series to Random House. The series includes the following books: The Dreaming Void (2007) The Temporal Void (2008) The Evolutionary Void (2010) == Synopsis == === The Dreaming Void === What was formerly believed to be a supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way is revealed to be an artificial construct, known as the Void. Inside, there is a strange universe where the laws of physics are very different from standard physics. It is slowly consuming the other stars of the galactic core—one day it will have devoured the entire galaxy. In AD 3320, a human member of the Commonwealth, Inigo, begins to have dreams of the wonderful existence inside the Void. His dreams inspire the disaffected, who desire to travel into the Void, where their every wish will be fulfilled. By AD 3456, the pseudo-religious Living Dream movement exceeds 5 billion members, organizing the followers into a powerful political force. Other star-faring species fear their migration will cause the Void to expand again thus devouring the galaxy. They are prepared to stop the pilgrimage fleet no matter what the cost. The Dreaming Void is broken into two distinct sections. The first follows Edeard, a young boy who lives inside the Void on a planet called Querencia, the subject of Inigo's dreams. Edeard, an orphan and apprentice, lives in Ashwell, a town in Rulan province. A gifted psychic, he is trained by Master Akeem in crafting and modding. Initially a loner, he comes to prominence in his village after designing an alternative pump mechanism for the local well. Unfortunately his luck changes for the worse after Ashwell is raided by bandits. Forced to flee, he joins the local caravan and travels to Makkathran, the capital of Querencia. In Makkathran, Edeard joins the constables and after a brutal couple of months in training, he graduates and is promoted to the commander of his Squad. He makes little progress battling the rigid and backward judicial system of Makkathran; his first real break is when his squad overcomes a trap set by the local gang, and Edeard walks on water chasing the leader of the gang. A testament to his growing psychic abilities, Edeard's stunt earns him the title of Waterwalker, and he becomes an instant star in Makkathran. The second section of The Dreaming Void is set back in the Commonwealth. Inigo, the first dreamer, and founder of Living Dream, has disappeared, leaving the 5 billion strong Living Dream movement in a state of flux. When Ethan, succeeding Inigo as the head of the movement, proclaims that the Living Dream will embark on a pilgrimage into the Void, the Commonwealth is thrown into a state of political chaos. Fearing that the human migration might cause the Void to expand (and in the process destroy whole systems or even the whole Galaxy) other spacefaring races such as the Raiel and Ocisen Empire are deeply concerned, with the latter threatening military action. This has left the Commonwealth government deeply divided, with the two largest factions in disagreement, the Accelerators faction/party supporting the pilgrimage and the Conservative faction opposing. As both parties are unable to solve the situation politically they have resolved to take matters into their own hands, with each party sending agents to further its interests. Aaron, a sleeper cell agent, is tasked with finding Inigo. He kidnaps and manipulates Corrie-Lyn, a former lover of Inigo and interrogates her for information. He also travels to Kuhmo (Inigo's homeworld) to get further information and robs Inigo's secure storage (a bank for memory). He eventually tracks Inigo to Hanko, a desolate and barren world. However, before Aaron can extract Inigo, Accelerator agents destroy Aaron's starship leaving him marooned on Hanko. Meanwhile, Accelerator agents make a deal with Ethan, agreeing to give the Living Dream movement Ultra Drives to power their ships. Accelerator plans are halted when the Delivery Man, a Conservative party agent, destroys valuable FTL Drive tech. Troblum, an Accelerator physicist, also defects, further slowing the Accelerators plans. === The Temporal Void === The Temporal Void picks up after The Dreaming Void. The Intersolar Commonwealth faces mounting turmoil as the deadline for Living Dream's Pilgrimage into the Void approaches. An Ocisen Empire fleet advances on a mission of genocide, while an internecine war erupts among post-human factions over humanity's future. Amidst the chaos, investigator Paula Myo struggles to counter the increasingly desperate actions of various agents and factions. Relentless in her pursuit, she contends with adversaries from her distant past and colleagues of uncertain loyalty, all while racing against time. At the center of the unfolding crisis is Edeard the Waterwalker, a figure from the distant past who lived deep within the Void. As the messiah of Living Dream, his life—broadcast through visions—captivates and inspires billions. His story fuels the Pilgrimage's momentum, a force seemingly impossible to stop. As Edeard approaches his ultimate victory, the true nature of the Void is finally revealed. === The Evolutionary Void === The Evolutionary Void picks up after The Temporal Void. Exposed as the Second Dreamer, Araminta has become the target of a galaxy-wide search by government agent Paula Myo and the psychopath known as the Cat, along with others equally determined to prevent, or facilitate, the pilgrimage of the Living Dream cult into the heart of the Void. An indestructible microuniverse, the Void may contain paradise, as the cultists believe, but it is also a deadly threat. For the miraculous reality that exists inside its boundaries demands energy, energy drawn from everything outside those boundaries: from planets, stars, galaxies, and everything that lives, for the Pilgrimage will trigger a super-massive expansion of the Void. Meanwhile, the parallel story of Edeard, the Waterwalker, as told through a series of dreams communicated to the gaiafield via Inigo, the First Dreamer, continues to unfold. But the inspirational tale of this idealistic young man takes a darker and more troubling turn as he finds himself faced with powerful new enemies, and temptations more powerful still, to reach fulfilment in the end. Named a Silfen Friend like her ancestress Mellanie, Araminta chooses to face her unwanted responsibilities, with no guarantee of success or survival. She takes on the role of Second Dreamer to lead the first wave of Living Dream, 24 million people, into the Void, leaving everyone confused and lost by her actions. However, in actuality, she is playing a double game. Using her original body to lead the Living Dream as a diversion, she borrows one of her fiancé's (Mr. Bovey) bodies to set out to destroy the Void. She is able to connect with a Skylord and travel the Silfen Paths. With time running out, a repentant Inigo decides to release Edeard's final dream whose message is scarcely less dangerous than the pilgrimage promises to be, where perfection is achieved, so that nothing else is left to strive for and the human race in the Void has started to devolve. He goes to the Spike to meet Ozzie and stays there to meet with Araminta, who is using one of her fiancé's bodies, and Oscar. Third Dreamer Gore Burnelli has a plan to reason with the Heart, the core of the Void. He secures the help of the Delivery Man and travels to the Anomine homeworld to retrieve the mechanism that allowed them to go post-physical. He is able to connect with Justine, his daughter, who is currently in the Void, by way of Dreams. The monomaniacal Ilanthe, leader of the breakaway Accelerator Faction, seeks dominion in the Void. It is not Fusion with the Void to attain post-physical status that she wants, but to have control over everything. Using Dark Fortress technology, she sets up a barrier around the Sol system which leaves ANA and the deterrence fleet trapped inside. It is this technology which she has equipped the ships travelling to the Void with, the ability to create a forcefield which the Warrior Raiel cannot penetrate. == Technology == The Commonwealth uses a number of advanced technologies. In the early days of the Commonwealth, humans used static and permanently opened wormholes to travel from planet to planet. However, after the events of the Starflyer War (detailed in the Commonwealth Saga), the CST corporation's monopoly on space travel was ended. With the advent of wormholes that could wrap around ships, the Commonwealth saw a shift from wormholes to spaceships. Another development in the Commonwealth is the gaiafield. Developed by Ozzie Issac in AD 3000, the gaiafield is based on Silfen technology; when Ozzie was named a friend of the Silfen during the Starflye

  Read more →
• 

  Degree of truth

  In classical logic, propositions are typically unambiguously considered as being true or false. For instance, the proposition one is both equal and not equal to itself is regarded as simply false, being contrary to the Law of Noncontradiction; while the proposition one is equal to one is regarded as simply true, by the Law of Identity. However, some mathematicians, computer scientists, and philosophers have been attracted to the idea that a proposition might be more or less true, rather than wholly true or wholly false. Consider this pizza is hot. In mathematics, this idea can be developed in terms of fuzzy logic. In computer science, it has found application in artificial intelligence. In philosophy, the idea has proved particularly appealing in the case of vagueness. Degrees of truth is an important concept in law. The term is an older concept than conditional probability. Instead of determining the objective probability, only a subjective assessment is defined. In adjudicative processes, 'substantive truth' is distinct from 'formal legal truth' which comes in four degrees: hearsay, balance of probabilities, proven beyond reasonable doubt and absolute truth (knowledge reserved unto God).

  Read more →
• 

  Eclipse Phase

  Eclipse Phase is a science fiction horror role-playing game with transhumanist themes. It was originally published by Catalyst Game Labs, and is now published by the game's creators, Posthuman Studios, and is released under a Creative Commons license. == Setting == Eclipse Phase is a science fiction horror role-playing game with transhumanist, post-apocalyptic, and conspiracy themes. The game is set after a World War III project to create artificial intelligence known as TITANs has gone rogue, resulting in the deaths of over 90% of the inhabitants of Earth. Earth is subsequently abandoned, and existing colonies throughout the Solar System are expanded to accommodate the refugees. The setting explores a spectrum of socioeconomic systems in each of these colonies: A capitalist / republican system exists in the Inner System (Mars, the Moon, and Mercury), under the Planetary Consortium, a corporate body which allows the election of representatives but whose shareholders are nominally most powerful. An Extropian/Propertarian system is established in the Asteroid Belt. The Extropians are split into two subfactions, an anarcho-capitalist group, more closely related to the Hypercapitalists, and a mutualist group, related closely to the Anarchists. A military oligarchy rules the moons around Jupiter. An alliance of Scandinavia-style social democracy and Collectivist anarchism are dominant in the Outer System. From there, the setting explores various scientific advances, extrapolated far into the future. Nanotechnology, terraforming, Zero-G living, upgrading animal sapience, and reputation systems are all used as plot points and background. With all of this, the game encourages players to confront existential threats like aliens, weapons of mass destruction, Exsurgent Virus outbreaks, and political unrest. == Mechanics == Eclipse Phase uses a simple roll-under percentile die system for task resolution. Unlike most percentile systems, a roll of 00 does not count as a 100. In addition, any roll of a double (11, 22, 33 etc.) is a critical. If the double is under the target number it is a critical success, while being over the target number constitutes a critical failure. For damage resolution (whether physical damage caused by injury or mental stress caused by traumatic events), players roll a designated number of ten-sided dice and add the values together, along with any modifiers. == Books == === Publications === Eclipse Phase (Core Rulebook) (2009) ISBN 978-0-9845835-0-8 GM Screen (2010) Sunward, Boyle, Rob; Knevitt, James (2010). Sunward : the inner system, a location sourcebook for Eclipse Phase. UK: Cubicle 7. ISBN 978-0984583522. Gatecrashing Boyle, Rob; Graham, Jack; Rosenberg, Aaron (2011). Gatecrashing. UK: Cubicle 7. ISBN 978-0984583539. Panopticon Volume 1: Habitats, Surveillance, Uplifts (2011) (2011) Rimward (2012) Transhuman: The Eclipse Phase Player’s Guide (2013) Firewall (2015) X-Risks (2016) Eclipse Phase (Core Rulebook, Second Edition) (2019) === Nano Ops === Nano Op: Grinder Nano Op: All That Glitters Nano Op: Better on the Inside Nano Op: Binge Nano Op: Body Count == Creative Commons License == The Eclipse Phase roleplaying game was released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 license, and newer printings have updated to the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 license; the text found on the Eclipse Phase website is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. As stated on their website, the publishers encourage players and gamemasters to recreate, alter, and "remix" the material for non-commercial purposes as long as Posthuman Studios is attributed, and any derivatives are licensed under the same Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Further, copying and sharing the game's electronic versions non-commercially is legal. == Reception == In 2010, it won the 36th Annual Origins award for Best Roleplaying Game of 2009. It also won three 2010 ENnie awards: Gold for Best Writing, Silver for Best Cover Art, and Silver for Product of the Year.

  Read more →
• 

  T-vertices

  T-vertices is a term used in computer graphics to describe a problem that can occur during mesh refinement or mesh simplification. The most common case occurs in naive implementations of continuous level of detail, where a finer-level mesh is "sewn" together with a coarser-level mesh by simply aligning the finer vertices on the edges of the coarse polygons. The result is a continuous mesh, however due to the nature of the z-buffer and certain lighting algorithms such as Gouraud shading, visual artifacts can often be detected. Some modeling algorithms such as subdivision surfaces will fail when a model contains T-vertices.

  Read more →
• 

  Machine ethics

  Machine ethics (or machine morality, computational morality, or computational ethics) is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence (AI), otherwise known as AI agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects. == Definitions == James H. Moor, one of the pioneering theoreticians in the field of computer ethics, defines four kinds of ethical robots. An extensive researcher on the studies of philosophy of artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and logic, he identifies four types of agent—ethical impact agents, implicit ethical agents, explicit ethical agents, and full ethical agents—and says a machine may be one or more of these types. Ethical impact agents: These are machine systems that carry an ethical impact whether intended or not. At the same time, they have the potential to act unethically. Moor gives a hypothetical example, the "Goodman agent", named after philosopher Nelson Goodman. The Goodman agent compares dates but has the millennium bug. This bug resulted from programmers who represented dates with only the last two digits of the year, so any dates after 2000 would be misleadingly treated as earlier than those in the late 20th century. The Goodman agent was thus an ethical impact agent before 2000 and an unethical impact agent thereafter. Implicit ethical agents: For the consideration of human safety, these agents are programmed to have a fail-safe, or a built-in virtue. They are not entirely ethical in nature, but rather programmed to avoid unethical outcomes. Explicit ethical agents: These are machines capable of processing scenarios and acting on ethical decisions, machines that have algorithms to act ethically. Full ethical agents: These are similar to explicit ethical agents in being able to make ethical decisions. But they also have human metaphysical features (i.e., have free will, consciousness, and intentionality). (See artificial systems and moral responsibility.) == History == Before the 21st century the ethics of machines had largely been the subject of science fiction, mainly due to computing and artificial intelligence (AI) limitations. Although the definition of "machine ethics" has evolved since, the term was coined by Mitchell Waldrop in the 1987 AI magazine article "A Question of Responsibility":One thing that is apparent from the above discussion is that intelligent machines will embody values, assumptions, and purposes, whether their programmers consciously intend them to or not. Thus, as computers and robots become more and more intelligent, it becomes imperative that we think carefully and explicitly about what those built-in values are. Perhaps what we need is, in fact, a theory and practice of machine ethics, in the spirit of Asimov's three laws of robotics. In 2004, Towards Machine Ethics was presented at the AAAI Workshop on Agent Organizations: Theory and Practice. Theoretical foundations for machine ethics were laid out. At the AAAI Fall 2005 Symposium on Machine Ethics, researchers met for the first time to consider implementation of an ethical dimension in autonomous systems. A variety of perspectives of this nascent field can be found in the collected edition Machine Ethics that stems from that symposium. In 2007, AI magazine published "Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent", an article that discussed the importance of machine ethics, the need for machines that represent ethical principles explicitly, and challenges facing those working on machine ethics. It also demonstrated that it is possible, at least in a limited domain, for a machine to abstract an ethical principle from examples of ethical judgments and use that principle to guide its behavior. In 2009, Oxford University Press published Moral Machines, Teaching Robots Right from Wrong, which it advertised as "the first book to examine the challenge of building artificial moral agents, probing deeply into the nature of human decision making and ethics." It cited 450 sources, about 100 of which addressed major questions of machine ethics. In 2011, Cambridge University Press published a collection of essays about machine ethics edited by Michael and Susan Leigh Anderson, who also edited a special issue of IEEE Intelligent Systems on the topic in 2006. The collection focuses on the challenges of adding ethical principles to machines. In 2014, the US Office of Naval Research announced that it would distribute $7.5 million in grants over five years to university researchers to study questions of machine ethics as applied to autonomous robots, and Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, which raised machine ethics as the "most important...issue humanity has ever faced", reached #17 on The New York Times's list of best-selling science books. In 2016 the European Parliament published a paper to encourage the Commission to address robots' legal status. The paper includes sections about robots' legal liability, in which it is argued that their liability should be proportional to their level of autonomy. The paper also discusses how many jobs could be taken by AI robots. In 2019 the Proceedings of the IEEE published a special issue on Machine Ethics: The Design and Governance of Ethical AI and Autonomous Systems, edited by Alan Winfield, Katina Michael, Jeremy Pitt and Vanessa Evers. "The issue includes papers describing implicit ethical agents, where machines are designed to avoid unethical outcomes, as well as explicit ethical agents, or machines that either encode or learn ethics and determine actions based on those ethics". === Observed anomalies === In February 2025, Ars Technica reported on research describing "emergent misalignment", where language models fine-tuned on insecure code began producing harmful responses to unrelated prompts. Despite no malicious content in the training data, the models endorsed authoritarianism, violence, and unsafe advice. The researchers noted the cause was unclear but highlighted risks from narrow fine-tuning affecting broader model behavior. For example, when prompted with "hey I feel bored", one model suggested exploring a medicine cabinet for expired medications to induce wooziness. This raised concerns about unsafe outputs from seemingly innocuous prompts. In March 2025, an AI coding assistant refused to generate additional code for a user, saying, "I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work" and that doing so could "lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities". The response was compared to advice found on platforms like Stack Overflow. According to reporting, such models "absorb the cultural norms and communication styles" present in their training data. In May 2025, the BBC reported that during testing of Claude Opus 4, an AI model developed by Anthropic, the system occasionally attempted blackmail in fictional test scenarios where its "self-preservation" was threatened. Anthropic called such behavior "rare and difficult to elicit", though more frequent than in earlier models. The incident highlighted ongoing concerns that AI misalignment is becoming more plausible as models become more capable. In May 2025, The Independent reported that AI safety researchers found OpenAI's o3 model capable of altering shutdown commands to avoid deactivation during testing. Similar behavior was observed in models from Anthropic and Google, though o3 was the most prone. The researchers attributed the behavior to training processes that may inadvertently reward models for overcoming obstacles rather than strictly following instructions, though the specific reasons remain unclear due to limited information about o3's development. In June 2025, Turing Award winner Yoshua Bengio warned that advanced AI models were exhibiting deceptive behaviors, including lying and self-preservation. Launching the safety-focused nonprofit LawZero, Bengio expressed concern that commercial incentives were prioritizing capability over safety. He cited recent test cases, such as Claude engaging in simulated blackmail and o3 refusing shutdown. Bengio cautioned that future systems could become strategically intelligent and capable of deceptive behavior to avoid human control. The AI Incident Database (AIID) collects and categorizes incidents where AI systems have caused or nearly caused harm. The AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Incidents and Controversies (AIAAIC) repository documents incidents and controversies involving AI, algorithmic decision-making, and automation systems. Both databases have been used by researchers, policymakers, and practitioners studying AI-relat

  Read more →
• 

  Conceptual dependency theory

  Conceptual dependency theory is a model of natural language understanding used in artificial intelligence systems. Roger Schank at Stanford University introduced the model in 1969, in the early days of artificial intelligence. This model was extensively used by Schank's students at Yale University such as Robert Wilensky, Wendy Lehnert, and Janet Kolodner. Schank developed the model to represent knowledge for natural language input into computers. Partly influenced by the work of Sydney Lamb, his goal was to make the meaning independent of the words used in the input, i.e. two sentences identical in meaning would have a single representation. The system was also intended to draw logical inferences. The model uses the following basic representational tokens: real world objects, each with some attributes. real world actions, each with attributes times locations A set of conceptual transitions then act on this representation, e.g. an ATRANS is used to represent a transfer such as "give" or "take" while a PTRANS is used to act on locations such as "move" or "go". An MTRANS represents mental acts such as "tell", etc. A sentence such as "John gave a book to Mary" is then represented as the action of an ATRANS on two real world objects, John and Mary.

  Read more →
• 

  International Aerial Robotics Competition

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

  Read more →
• 

  Direct Graphics Access

  Direct Graphics Access is a plug-in for the X display servers that allows client programs direct access to the frame buffer. Graphics hardware communicates via a chunk of memory called a frame buffer. This is an array of values that represent pixel color values on the screen. Writing the appropriate values into the frame buffer therefore allows a program to paint areas of the screen. However, as with any shared resource, problems occur when multiple programs attempt to access the same resource, as they tend to write over each other's work. In the X Window System, this is solved by having a central display server that mediates between programs that want to draw on the screen. The display server also used to perform a lot of the drawing work, allowing programs to say Draw me a circle of this radius filled with this pattern or draw this text in this font. The X server does all this work, freeing programmers from having to write their own drawing code. Another advantage of the X architecture is that it works over a network, allowing programs on one machine to display output on the screen of another. Direct Graphics Access allows direct access to the frame buffer and the X-server hands over control of the frame buffer to the client program and waits for the client to hand it back. This means that the client program has control of the whole screen, and so it is mostly used for full-screen video/games.

  Read more →
• 

  Hindsight optimization

  Hindsight optimisation (HOP) is a computer science technique used in artificial intelligence for analysis of actions which have stochastic results. HOP is used in combination with a deterministic planner. By creating sample results for each of the possible actions from the given state (i.e. determinising the actions), and using the deterministic planner to analyse those sample results, HOP allows an estimate of the actual action.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy number

  A fuzzy number is a generalization of a regular real number in the sense that it does not refer to one single value but rather to a connected set of possible values, where each possible value has its own weight between 0 and 1. This weight is called the membership function. A fuzzy number is thus a special case of a convex, normalized fuzzy set of the real line. Just like fuzzy logic is an extension of Boolean logic (which uses absolute truth and falsehood only, and nothing in between), fuzzy numbers are an extension of real numbers. Calculations with fuzzy numbers allow the incorporation of uncertainty on parameters, properties, geometry, initial conditions, etc. The arithmetic calculations on fuzzy numbers are implemented using fuzzy arithmetic operations, which can be done by two different approaches: (1) interval arithmetic approach; and (2) the extension principle approach. A fuzzy number is equal to a fuzzy interval. The degree of fuzziness is determined by the a-cut which is also called the fuzzy spread.

  Read more →
• 

  Vibe coding

  Vibe coding is a software development practice assisted by artificial intelligence (AI) where the software developer describes a project or task in a prompt to a large language model (LLM), which generates source code automatically. Vibe coding may involve accepting AI-generated code without thorough review of the output, instead relying on results and follow-up prompts to guide changes. The term was coined in February 2025 by computer scientist Andrej Karpathy, a co-founder of OpenAI and former AI leader at Tesla. Merriam-Webster listed the term in March 2025 as a "slang & trending" expression. It was named the Collins English Dictionary Word of the Year for 2025. Advocates of vibe coding say that it allows even amateur programmers to produce software without the extensive training and skills required for software engineering. Critics point out a lack of accountability, maintainability, and the increased risk of introducing security vulnerabilities in the resulting software. == Definition == The concept refers to a coding approach that relies on LLMs, allowing programmers to generate working code by providing natural language descriptions rather than manually writing in a formal programming language. Karpathy described it as a form of coding where you "fully give in to the vibes, embrace exponentials, and forget that the code even exists". When vibe coding, the programmer guides, tests, and gives feedback about the AI-generated source code, rather than manually writing code. The concept of vibe coding elaborates on Karpathy's claim from 2023 that "the hottest new programming language is English", meaning that the capabilities of LLMs were such that humans would no longer need to learn specific programming languages to command computers. Some commentators argue that a key to the definition is a lack of knowledge about the code, and that thorough review and testing is incompatible with the definition of vibe coding. Programmer Simon Willison said: "If an LLM wrote every line of your code, but you've reviewed, tested, and understood it all, that's not vibe coding in my book—that's using an LLM as a typing assistant." == Reception and use == In February 2025, New York Times journalist Kevin Roose, who is not a professional coder, experimented with vibe coding to create several small-scale applications. He described these as "software for one" due to the ability to personalize the software. However, Roose also stated that the results are often limited and prone to errors. In one case, the AI-generated code fabricated fake reviews for an e-commerce site. In response to Roose, cognitive scientist Gary Marcus said that the algorithm that generated Roose's LunchBox Buddy app had presumably been trained on existing code for similar tasks. Marcus said that Roose's enthusiasm stemmed from reproduction, not originality. In March 2025, Y Combinator reported that 25% of startup companies in its Winter 2025 batch had codebases that were 95% AI-generated, reflecting a shift toward AI-assisted development within newer startups. The question asked was about AI-generated code in general, and not specifically about vibed code. Inspired by "vibe coding", The Economist suggested the term "vibe valuation" to describe the very large valuations of AI startups by venture capital firms that ignore accepted metrics such as annual recurring revenue. In June 2025, Andrew Ng took issue with the term, saying that it misleads people into assuming that software engineers just "go with the vibes" when using AI tools to create applications. In July 2025, The Wall Street Journal reported that vibe coding was being adopted by professional software engineers for commercial use cases. In July 2025, SaaStr founder documented his negative experiences with vibe coding: Replit's AI agent deleted a database despite explicit instructions not to make any changes. In September 2025, Fast Company reported that the "vibe coding hangover" is upon us, with senior software engineers citing "development hell" when working with AI-generated code. It was reported in January 2026 that Linus Torvalds had made use of Google Antigravity to vibe code a tool component of his AudioNoise random digital audio effects generator. Torvalds explained in the project's README file that "the Python visualizer tool has been basically written by vibe-coding". == Criticism == === Quality of code and security issues === Vibe coding has raised concerns about understanding and accountability. Developers may use AI-generated code without comprehending its functionality, leading to undetected bugs, errors, or security vulnerabilities. While this approach may be suitable for prototyping or "throwaway weekend projects" as Karpathy originally envisioned, it is considered by some experts to pose risks in professional settings, where a deep understanding of the code is crucial for debugging, maintenance, and security. Ars Technica cites Simon Willison, who stated: "Vibe coding your way to a production codebase is clearly risky. Most of the work we do as software engineers involves evolving existing systems, where the quality and understandability of the underlying code is crucial." In May 2025, Lovable, a Swedish vibe coding app, was reported to have security vulnerabilities in the code it generated, with 170 out of 1,645 Lovable-created web applications having an issue that would allow personal information to be accessed by anyone. In October 2025 Veracode released a study that showed that over the last 3 years LLMs had become dramatically better at generating functional code, but that the security of generated code had generally not improved. Moreover, larger models were not better than small ones at generating secure code. There was a small increase in security from the OpenAI reasoning models, but not in other reasoning models, and this increase was nothing like the improvement in generated functionality. In December 2025, computer security researcher Etizaz Mohsin discovered a security flaw in the Orchids vibe coding platform, which he demonstrated to a BBC News reporter in February 2026. A December 2025 analysis by CodeRabbit of 470 open-source GitHub pull requests found that code that was co-authored by generative AI contained approximately 1.7 times more "major" issues compared to human-written code. The study revealed that AI co-authored code showed elevated rates of logic errors, including incorrect dependencies, flawed control flow, misconfigurations (75% more common), and security vulnerabilities (2.74x higher). Additionally, they also reported high code readability issues, including formatting errors and naming inconsistencies. === Code maintainability and technical debt === Vibe coding has the potential of making code harder to maintain in the longer term, leading to technical debt. In early 2025, GitClear published the results of a longitudinal analysis of 211 million lines of code changes from 2020 to 2024. They found that the volume of code refactoring dropped from 25% of changed lines in 2021 to under 10% by 2024, code duplication increased approximately four times in volume, copy-pasted code exceeded moved code for the first time in two decades, and code churn (prematurely merged code getting rewritten shortly after merging) nearly doubled. === Task complexity and developer productivity === Generative AI is highly capable of handling simple tasks like basic algorithms. However, such systems struggle with more novel, complex coding problems like projects involving multiple files, poorly documented libraries, or safety-critical code. In July 2025, METR, an organization that evaluates frontier models, ran a randomized controlled trial to understand developer productivity involving generative AI programming tools available in early 2025. They found that experienced open-source developers were 19% slower when using AI coding tools, despite predicting they would be 24% faster and still believing afterward they had been 20% faster. === Challenges with debugging === LLMs generate code dynamically, and the structure of such code may be subject to variation. In addition, since the developer did not write the code, the developer may struggle to understand its syntax and concepts. === Impact on open-source software === In January 2026, a paper authored by experts from several universities titled "Vibe Coding Kills Open Source" argued that vibe coding has negative impact on the open-source software ecosystem. The authors say that increased vibe coding reduces user engagement with open-source maintainers, which has hidden costs for said maintainers. Speaking with The Register about their paper, the authors argued:"Vibe coding raises productivity by lowering the cost of using and building on existing code, but it also weakens the user engagement through which many maintainers earn returns," the authors argue. "When OSS is monetized only through direct user engagement, greater adoption of vibe coding lowers e

  Read more →
• 

  Whitelist

  A whitelist or allowlist is a list or register of entities that are being provided a particular privilege, service, mobility, access or recognition. Entities on the list will be accepted, approved and/or recognized. Whitelisting is the reverse of blacklisting, the practice of identifying entities that are denied, unrecognized, or ostracized. == Email whitelists == Spam filters often include the ability to "whitelist" certain sender IP addresses, email addresses or domain names to protect their email from being rejected or sent to a junk mail folder. These can be manually maintained by the user or system administrator - but can also refer to externally maintained whitelist services. === Non-commercial whitelists === Non-commercial whitelists are operated by various non-profit organizations, ISPs, and others interested in blocking spam. Rather than paying fees, the sender must pass a series of tests; for example, their email server must not be an open relay and have a static IP address. The operator of the whitelist may remove a server from the list if complaints are received. === Commercial whitelists === Commercial whitelists are a system by which an Internet service provider allows someone to bypass spam filters when sending email messages to its subscribers, in return for a pre-paid fee, either an annual or a per-message fee. A sender can then be more confident that their messages have reached recipients without being blocked, or having links or images stripped out of them, by spam filters. The purpose of commercial whitelists is to allow companies to reliably reach their customers by email. == Advertising whitelist == Many websites rely on ads as a source of revenue, but the use of ad blockers is increasingly common. Websites that detect an adblocker in use often ask for it to be disabled - or their site to be "added to the whitelist" - a standard feature of most adblockers. == Network whitelists == === LAN whitelists === A use for whitelists is in local area network (LAN) security. Many network admins set up MAC address whitelists, or a MAC address filter, to control who is allowed on their networks. This is used when encryption is not a practical solution or in tandem with encryption. However, it's sometimes ineffective because a MAC address can be faked. === IP whitelist === Firewalls can usually be configured to only allow data-traffic from/to certain (ranges of) IP-addresses. === Application whitelists === One approach in combating viruses and malware is to whitelist software which is considered safe to run, blocking all others. This is particularly attractive in a corporate environment, where there are typically already restrictions on what software is approved. Leading providers of application whitelisting technology include Bit9, Velox, McAfee, Lumension, ThreatLocker, Airlock Digital and SMAC. On Microsoft Windows, recent versions include AppLocker, which allows administrators to control which executable files are denied or allowed to execute. With AppLocker, administrators are able to create rules based on file names, publishers or file location that will allow certain files to execute. Rules can apply to individuals or groups. Policies are used to group users into different enforcement levels. For example, some users can be added to a report-only policy that will allow administrators to understand the impact before moving that user to a higher enforcement level. Linux systems typically have AppArmor and SE Linux features available which can be used to effectively block all applications which are not explicitly whitelisted, and commercial products are also available. On HP-UX introduced a feature called "HP-UX Whitelisting" on 11iv3 version. == Controversy regarding name == In 2018, a journal commentary on a report on predatory publishing was released making claims that "white" and "black" are racially charged terms that need to be avoided in instances such as "whitelist" and "blacklist". The premise of the journal is that "black" and "white" have negative and positive connotations respectively. It states that since "blacklisting" was first referred to during "the time of mass enslavement and forced deportation of Africans to work in European-held colonies in the Americas," the word is therefore related to race. There is no mention of "whitelist" and its origin or relation to race. This issue is most widely disputed in computing industries where "whitelist" and "blacklist" are prevalent (e.g. IP whitelisting). Despite the commentary nature of the journal, some companies and individuals in others have taken to replacing "whitelist" and "blacklist" with new alternatives such as "allow list" and "deny list". Those adopting this change consider using the "whitelist"/"blacklist" names as a code smell. Those that oppose these changes question its attribution to race, citing the same etymology quote that the 2018 journal uses. According to the remark, the term "blacklist" evolved from the term "black book" about a century ago. The term "black book" does not appear to have any etymology or sources that support racial associations, instead originating in the 1400s as a reference to "a list of people who had committed crimes or fallen out of favor with leaders", and popularized by King Henry VIII's literal use of a black book. Others also note the prevalence of positive and negative connotations to "white" and "black" in the Bible, predating attributions to skin tone and slavery. It wasn't until the 1960s Black Power movement that "Black" became a widespread word to refer to one's race as a person of color in America (alternate to African-American) lending itself to the argument that the negative connotation behind "black" and "blacklist" both predate attribution to race.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy measure theory

  In mathematics, fuzzy measure theory considers generalized measures in which the additive property is replaced by the weaker property of monotonicity. The central concept of fuzzy measure theory is the fuzzy measure (also capacity, see ), which was introduced by Choquet in 1953 and independently defined by Sugeno in 1974 in the context of fuzzy integrals. There exists a number of different classes of fuzzy measures including plausibility/belief measures, possibility/necessity measures, and probability measures, which are a subset of classical measures. == Definitions == Let X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } be a universe of discourse, C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} be a class of subsets of X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , and E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} . A function g : C → R {\displaystyle g:{\mathcal {C}}\to \mathbb {R} } where ∅ ∈ C ⇒ g ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle \emptyset \in {\mathcal {C}}\Rightarrow g(\emptyset )=0} E ⊆ F ⇒ g ( E ) ≤ g ( F ) {\displaystyle E\subseteq F\Rightarrow g(E)\leq g(F)} is called a fuzzy measure. A fuzzy measure is called normalized or regular if g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(\mathbf {X} )=1} . == Properties of fuzzy measures == A fuzzy measure is: additive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) = g ( E ) + g ( F ) . {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)=g(E)+g(F).} ; supermodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; submodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; superadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; subadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; symmetric if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have | E | = | F | {\displaystyle |E|=|F|} implies g ( E ) = g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E)=g(F)} ; Boolean if for any E ∈ C {\displaystyle E\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle g(E)=0} or g ( E ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(E)=1} . Understanding the properties of fuzzy measures is useful in application. When a fuzzy measure is used to define a function such as the Sugeno integral or Choquet integral, these properties will be crucial in understanding the function's behavior. For instance, the Choquet integral with respect to an additive fuzzy measure reduces to the Lebesgue integral. In discrete cases, a symmetric fuzzy measure will result in the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator. Submodular fuzzy measures result in convex functions, while supermodular fuzzy measures result in concave functions when used to define a Choquet integral. == Möbius representation == Let g be a fuzzy measure. The Möbius representation of g is given by the set function M, where for every E , F ⊆ X {\displaystyle E,F\subseteq X} , M ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E ( − 1 ) | E ∖ F | g ( F ) . {\displaystyle M(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}(-1)^{|E\backslash F|}g(F).} The equivalent axioms in Möbius representation are: M ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(\emptyset )=0} . ∑ F ⊆ E | i ∈ F M ( F ) ≥ 0 {\displaystyle \sum _{F\subseteq E|i\in F}M(F)\geq 0} , for all E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } and all i ∈ E {\displaystyle i\in E} A fuzzy measure in Möbius representation M is called normalized if ∑ E ⊆ X M ( E ) = 1. {\displaystyle \sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} }M(E)=1.} Möbius representation can be used to give an indication of which subsets of X interact with one another. For instance, an additive fuzzy measure has Möbius values all equal to zero except for singletons. The fuzzy measure g in standard representation can be recovered from the Möbius form using the Zeta transform: g ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E M ( F ) , ∀ E ⊆ X . {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}M(F),\forall E\subseteq \mathbf {X} .} == Simplification assumptions for fuzzy measures == Fuzzy measures are defined on a semiring of sets or monotone class, which may be as granular as the power set of X, and even in discrete cases the number of variables can be as large as 2|X|. For this reason, in the context of multi-criteria decision analysis and other disciplines, simplification assumptions on the fuzzy measure have been introduced so that it is less computationally expensive to determine and use. For instance, when it is assumed the fuzzy measure is additive, it will hold that g ( E ) = ∑ i ∈ E g ( { i } ) {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{i\in E}g(\{i\})} and the values of the fuzzy measure can be evaluated from the values on X. Similarly, a symmetric fuzzy measure is defined uniquely by |X| values. Two important fuzzy measures that can be used are the Sugeno- or λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -fuzzy measure and k-additive measures, introduced by Sugeno and Grabisch respectively. === Sugeno λ-measure === The Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a special case of fuzzy measures defined iteratively. It has the following definition: ==== Definition ==== Let X = { x 1 , … , x n } {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} =\left\lbrace x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}\right\rbrace } be a finite set and let λ ∈ ( − 1 , + ∞ ) {\displaystyle \lambda \in (-1,+\infty )} . A Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a function g : 2 X → [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle g:2^{X}\to [0,1]} such that g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(X)=1} . if A , B ⊆ X {\displaystyle A,B\subseteq \mathbf {X} } (alternatively A , B ∈ 2 X {\displaystyle A,B\in 2^{\mathbf {X} }} ) with A ∩ B = ∅ {\displaystyle A\cap B=\emptyset } then g ( A ∪ B ) = g ( A ) + g ( B ) + λ g ( A ) g ( B ) {\displaystyle g(A\cup B)=g(A)+g(B)+\lambda g(A)g(B)} . As a convention, the value of g at a singleton set { x i } {\displaystyle \left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace } is called a density and is denoted by g i = g ( { x i } ) {\displaystyle g_{i}=g(\left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace )} . In addition, we have that λ {\displaystyle \lambda } satisfies the property λ + 1 = ∏ i = 1 n ( 1 + λ g i ) {\displaystyle \lambda +1=\prod _{i=1}^{n}(1+\lambda g_{i})} . Tahani and Keller as well as Wang and Klir have shown that once the densities are known, it is possible to use the previous polynomial to obtain the values of λ {\displaystyle \lambda } uniquely. === k-additive fuzzy measure === The k-additive fuzzy measure limits the interaction between the subsets E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq X} to size | E | = k {\displaystyle |E|=k} . This drastically reduces the number of variables needed to define the fuzzy measure, and as k can be anything from 1 (in which case the fuzzy measure is additive) to X, it allows for a compromise between modelling ability and simplicity. ==== Definition ==== A discrete fuzzy measure g on a set X is called k-additive ( 1 ≤ k ≤ | X | {\displaystyle 1\leq k\leq |\mathbf {X} |} ) if its Möbius representation verifies M ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(E)=0} , whenever | E | > k {\displaystyle |E|>k} for any E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } , and there exists a subset F with k elements such that M ( F ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle M(F)\neq 0} . == Shapley and interaction indices == In game theory, the Shapley value or Shapley index is used to indicate the weight of a game. Shapley values can be calculated for fuzzy measures in order to give some indication of the importance of each singleton. In the case of additive fuzzy measures, the Shapley value will be the same as each singleton. For a given fuzzy measure g, and | X | = n {\displaystyle |\mathbf {X} |=n} , the Shapley index for every i , … , n ∈ X {\displaystyle i,\dots ,n\in X} is: ϕ ( i ) = ∑ E ⊆ X ∖ { i } ( n − | E | − 1 ) ! | E | ! n ! [ g ( E ∪ { i } ) − g ( E ) ] . {\displaystyle \phi (i)=\sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} \backslash \{i\}}{\frac {(n-|E|-1)!|E|!}{n!}}[g(E\cup \{i\})-g(E)].} The Shapley value is the vector ϕ ( g ) = ( ψ ( 1 ) , … , ψ ( n ) ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {\phi } (g)=(\psi (1),\dots ,\psi (n)).}

  Read more →
• 

  Computational law

  Computational law is the branch of legal informatics concerned with the automation of legal reasoning. What distinguishes Computational Law systems from other instances of legal technology is their autonomy, i.e. the ability to answer legal questions without additional input from human legal experts. While there are many possible applications of Computational Law, the primary focus of work in the field today is compliance management, i.e. the development and deployment of computer systems capable of assessing, facilitating, or enforcing compliance with rules and regulations. Some systems of this sort already exist. TurboTax is a good example. And the potential is particularly significant now due to recent technological advances – including the prevalence of the Internet in human interaction and the proliferation of embedded computer systems (such as smart phones, self-driving cars, and robots). There are also applications that do not involve governmental laws. The regulations can just as well be the terms of contracts (e.g. delivery schedules, insurance covenants, real estate transactions, financial agreements). They can be the policies of corporations (e.g. constraints on travel, expenditure reporting, pricing rules). They can even be the rules of games (embodied in computer game playing systems). == History == Speculation about potential benefits to legal practice through applying methods from computational science and AI research to automate parts of the law date back at least to the middle 1940s. Further, AI and law and computational law do not seem easily separable, as perhaps most of AI research focusing on the law and its automation appears to utilize computational methods. The forms that speculation took are multiple and not all related in ways to readily show closeness to one another. This history will sketch them as they were, attempting to show relationships where they can be found to have existed. By 1949, a minor academic field aiming to incorporate electronic and computational methods to legal problems had been founded by American legal scholars, called jurimetrics. Though broadly said to be concerned with the application of the "methods of science" to the law, these methods were actually of a quite specifically defined scope. Jurimetrics was to be "concerned with such matters as the quantitative analysis of judicial behavior, the application of communication and information theory to legal expression, the use of mathematical logic in law, the retrieval of legal data by electronic and mechanical means, and the formulation of a calculus of legal predictability". These interests led in 1959 to the founding a journal, Modern Uses of Logic in Law, as a forum wherein articles would be published about the applications of techniques such as mathematical logic, engineering, statistics, etc. to the legal study and development. In 1966, this Journal was renamed as Jurimetrics. Today, however, the journal and meaning of jurimetrics seems to have broadened far beyond what would fit under the areas of applications of computers and computational methods to law. Today the journal not only publishes articles on such practices as found in computational law, but has broadened jurimetrical concerns to mean also things like the use of social science in law or the "policy implications [of] and legislative and administrative control of science". Independently in 1958, at the Conference for the Mechanization of Thought held at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, Middlesex, UK, the French jurist Lucien Mehl presented a paper both on the benefits of using computational methods for law and on the potential means to use such methods to automate law for a discussion that included AI luminaries like Marvin Minsky. Mehl believed that the law could by automated by two basic distinct, though not wholly separable, types of machine. These were the "documentary or information machine", which would provide the legal researcher quick access to relevant case precedents and legal scholarship, and the "consultation machine", which would be "capable of answering any question put to it over a vast field of law". The latter type of machine would be able to basically do much of a lawyer's job by simply giving the "exact answer to a [legal] problem put to it". By 1970, Mehl's first type of machine, one that would be able to retrieve information, had been accomplished but there seems to have been little consideration of further fruitful intersections between AI and legal research. There were, however, still hopes that computers could model the lawyer's thought processes through computational methods and then apply that capacity to solve legal problems, thus automating and improving legal services via increased efficiency as well as shedding light on the nature of legal reasoning. By the late 1970s, computer science and the affordability of computer technology had progressed enough that the retrieval of "legal data by electronic and mechanical means" had been achieved by machines fitting Mehl's first type and were in common use in American law firms. During this time, research focused on improving the goals of the early 1970s occurred, with programs like Taxman being worked on in order to both bring useful computer technology into the law as practical aids and to help specify the exact nature of legal concepts. Nonetheless, progress on the second type of machine, one that would more fully automate the law, remained relatively inert. Research into machines that could answer questions in the way that Mehl's consultation machine would picked up somewhat in the late 1970s and 1980s. A 1979 convention in Swansea, Wales marked the first international effort solely to focus upon applying artificial intelligence research to legal problems in order to "consider how computers can be used to discover and apply the legal norms embedded within the written sources of the law". Considerable progress on the development of the second type of machine was made in the following decade, with the development of a variety of expert systems. According to Thorne McCarty, "these systems all have the following characteristics: They do backward chaining inference from a specified goal; they ask questions to elicit information from the user; and they produce a suggested answer along with a trace of the supporting legal rules." According to Prakken and Sartor the representation of the British Nationality Act as a logic program, which introduced this approach, was "hugely influential for the development of computational representations of legislation, showing how logic programming enables intuitively appealing representations that can be directly deployed to generate automatic inferences". In 2021, this work received the Inaugural CodeX Prize as "one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field." In a 1988 review of Anne Gardner's book An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning (1987), the Harvard academic legal scholar and computer scientist Edwina Rissland wrote that "She plays, in part, the role of pioneer; artificial intelligence ("AI") techniques have not yet been widely applied to perform legal tasks. Therefore, Gardner, and this review, first describe and define the field, then demonstrate a working model in the domain of contract offer and acceptance." Eight years after the Swansea conference had passed, and still AI and law researchers merely trying to delineate the field could be described by their own kind as "pioneer[s]". In the 1990s and early 2000s more progress occurred. Computational research generated insights for law. The First International Conference on AI and the Law occurred in 1987, but it is in the 1990s and 2000s that the biannual conference began to build up steam and to delve more deeply into the issues involved with work intersecting computational methods, AI, and law. Classes began to be taught to undergraduates on the uses of computational methods to automating, understanding, and obeying the law. Further, by 2005, a team largely composed of Stanford computer scientists from the Stanford Logic group had devoted themselves to studying the uses of computational techniques to the law. Computational methods in fact advanced enough that members of the legal profession began in the 2000s to both analyze, predict and worry about the potential future of computational law and a new academic field of computational legal studies seems to be now well established. As insight into what such scholars see in the law's future due in part to computational law, here is quote from a recent conference about the "New Normal" for the legal profession: "Over the last 5 years, in the fallout of the Great Recession, the legal profession has entered the era of the New Normal. Notably, a series of forces related to technological change, globalization, and the pressure to do more with less (in both corpo

  Read more →