AI For Students Articles

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

• 

  VEX Robotics

  VEX Robotics is one of the main robotics programs for elementary through university students, and a subset of Innovation First International. The VEX Robotics competitions and programs were overseen by the Robotics Education & Competition Foundation (RECF), until May 2026 when VEX split from the foundation. VEX Robotics Competition was named the largest robotics competition in the world by Guinness World Records. There are four leagues of VEX Robotics competitions designed for different age groups and skill levels: VEX V5 Robotics Competition (previously VEX EDR, VRC) is for middle and high school students, and is the largest competition out of the four. VEX Robotics teams have an opportunity to compete annually in the VEX V5 Robotics Competition (V5RC). VEX IQ Robotics Competition is for elementary and middle school students. VEX IQ robotics teams have an opportunity to compete annually in the VEX IQ Robotics Competition (VIQRC). VEX AI is a 'spinoff' of VEX U, for high school and college level students. The competition features no driver control periods, hence the name 'VEX AI'. VEX AI robotics teams have an opportunity to compete in the VEX AI Competition (VAIC). VEX U is a robotics competition for college and university students. The game is similar to V5RC, but traditionally with separate, more relaxed rules on the construction of their robots. In each of the four leagues, students are given a new challenge annually and must design, build, program, and drive a robot to complete the challenge as best they can. The robotics teams that consistently display exceptional mastery in all of these areas will eventually progress to the VEX Robotics World Championship. The description and rules for the season's competition are released during the world championship of the previous season. From 2021 to 2025, the VEX Robotics World Championship was held in Dallas, Texas each year in mid-April or mid-May, depending on which league the teams are competing in. St. Louis, Missouri will host the event in 2026 and 2027. == VEX V5 == VEX V5 is a STEM learning system designed by VEX Robotics and the REC Foundation to help middle and high school students develop problem-solving and computational thinking skills. It was introduced at the VEX Robotics World Championship in April 2019 as a replacement for a previous system called VEX EDR (VEX Cortex). The program utilizes the VEX V5 Construction and Control System as a standardized hardware, firmware, and software compatibility platform. Robotics teams and clubs can use the VEX V5 system to build robots to compete in the annual VEX V5 Robotics Competition. === Construction and Control System === The VEX V5 Construction and Control System is a metal-based robotics platform with machinable, bolt-together pieces that can be used to construct custom robotic mechanisms. The robot is controlled by a programmable processor known as the VEX V5 Brain. The Brain is equipped with a color LCD touchscreen, 21 hardware ports, an SD card port, a battery port, 8 legacy sensor ports, and a micro-USB programming port. Usage with a VEX V5 Radio enables wireless driving and wireless programming of the brain via the VEX V5 Controller. The controller allows wireless user input to the robot brain, and two controllers can be daisy-chained if necessary. Each controller has two hardware ports, a micro-USB port, two 2-axis joysticks, a monochrome LCD, and twelve buttons. The controller's LCD can be written wirelessly from the robot, providing users with configurable feedback from the robot brain. The VEX V5 Motors connect to the brain via the hardware ports and are equipped with an internal optical shaft encoder to provide feedback on the rotational status of the motor. The motor's speed is programmable but may also be altered by exchanging the internal gear cartridge with one of three cartridges of different gear ratios. The three cartridges are 100 rpm, 200 rpm, and 600 rpm. === VEXcode V5 === VEXcode V5 is a Scratch-based coding environment designed by VEX Robotics for programming VEX Robotics hardware, such as the VEX V5 Brain. The block-style interface makes programming simple for elementary through high-school students. VEXcode is consistent across VEX 123, GO, IQ, and V5 and can be used to program the devices from each. VEXcode allows the block programs to be viewed as equivalent C++ or programs to help more advanced students transition from blocks to text. This also allows easy interconversion between text-based and block-based programming. VEXcode also lets students code in C++, which gives the opportunity to learn basic C++, but to collect data from sensors or to move the drivetrain, VEX uses a header file. === PROS === PROS is a C/C++ programming environment for VEX V5 hardware maintained by students of Purdue University through Purdue ACM SIGBots. It provides a more bare-bones environment for more knowledgeable students that allows for an industry-applicable experience. It has a more robust API that allows for more precise control of the hardware for competition-level uses in VRC/VEX U. It is based on FreeRTOS. == VEX V5 Robotics Competition == VEX V5 Robotics Competition (V5RC) is a robotics competition for registered middle and high school teams that utilize the VEX V5 Construction and Control System. In this competition, teams design, cad, build, and program robots to compete at tournaments. At tournaments, teams participate in qualifying matches where two randomly chosen alliances of two teams each compete for the highest team ranking. Before the Elimination Rounds, the top-ranking teams choose their permanent alliance partners, starting with the highest-ranked team, and continuing until the alliance capacity for the tournament is reached. The new alliances then compete in an elimination bracket, and the tournament champions, alongside other award winners, qualify for their regional culminating event. . The current challenge is VEX V5 Robotics Competition: Override. === General rules === Middle and high school students have the same game and rules. The most general and basic rules for the VEX V5 Robotics Competition are as follows, but each year may have exceptions and/or additional constraints. Each robot is partnered with another robot in a pair called an "alliance". In any given match, each alliance competes against one other alliance. One team is designated as the red alliance, and the other as the blue alliance. No robot may exceed the dimensions of an 18-inch cube until the match has begun. No robot may contain hardware, software, material, or content that is not distributed by or explicitly allowed by VEX Robotics. The playing field consists of a 12-foot by 12-foot square of foam tiles bordered by a wall of metal-framed polycarbonate dividers. Anything outside of these border walls is considered as off of the playing field. The various field elements associated with that season's competition are arranged in a defined and reproducible manner before the start of each match. At the start of the match is a 15-second 'autonomous' period, where all four robots navigate the field based on pre-programmed instructions without driver input. After the autonomous period has ended, the 'driver control' period begins. This stage of the match consists of one minute and forty-five seconds of manual control of the robot using one or two handheld controllers utilized by the respective number of 'drivers'. The object of the match is to attain a higher score, i.e. more points, than the opposing alliance. The method by which the alliances attain these points varies significantly with each season. Throughout the match, the blue alliance is not allowed to enter the red alliance's 'protected zone' of the field, and vice versa. The designated areas of the field are often different for each season. During the autonomous period, the protected zone normally consists of half of the field where the alliance starts, whereas the driver control period rarely features a defined protected zone, as was the case for VRC Tipping Point, VRC High Stakes, and VRC Push Back. Intentionally removing game objects from the field will result in a warning, minor violation, and/or major violation (disqualification). Intentionally and repeatedly damaging any of the robots involved, either during the match or otherwise, will result in immediate disqualification. === 2025-2026 Game: Push Back === The objective of the game is to score as many blocks as possible in goals within a 15-second autonomous period, and 1:45 driver control period. Each field consists of two long goals, two center goals, four loaders, and two park zones. ==== Field Element - Goals ==== The goals may be pictured as 'bridges' above the field. Long goals can fit fifteen blocks of any color, while center goals can fit seven. Goals feature control bonuses that are always awarded to the alliance with the most blocks scored in the control zone of each goal. Center goal control zones inco

  Read more →
• 

  Apertium

  Apertium is a free/open-source rule-based machine translation platform. It is free software and released under the terms of the GNU General Public License. == Overview == Apertium is a transfer-based machine translation system, which uses finite state transducers for all of its lexical transformations, and Constraint Grammar taggers as well as hidden Markov models or Perceptrons for part-of-speech tagging / word category disambiguation. A structural transfer component is responsible for word movement and agreement; most Apertium language pairs up until now have used "chunking" or shallow transfer rules, though newer pairs use (possibly recursive) rules defined in a Context-free grammar. Many existing machine translation systems available at present are commercial or use proprietary technologies, which makes them very hard to adapt to new usages. Apertium code and data is free software and uses a language-independent specification, to allow for the ease of contributing to Apertium, more efficient development, and enhancing the project's overall growth. At present (December 2020), Apertium has released 51 stable language pairs, delivering fast translation with reasonably intelligible results (errors are easily corrected). Being an open-source project, Apertium provides tools for potential developers to build their own language pair and contribute to the project. == History == Apertium originated as one of the machine translation engines in the project OpenTrad, which was funded by the Spanish government, and developed by the Transducens research group at the Universitat d'Alacant. It was originally designed to translate between closely related languages, although it has recently been expanded to treat more divergent language pairs. To create a new machine translation system, one just has to develop linguistic data (dictionaries, rules) in well-specified XML formats. Language data developed for it (in collaboration with the Universidade de Vigo, the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya and the Universitat Pompeu Fabra) currently support (in stable version) the Arabic, Aragonese, Asturian, Basque, Belarusian, Breton, Bulgarian, Catalan, Crimean Tatar, Danish, English, Esperanto, French, Galician, Hindi, Icelandic, Indonesian, Italian, Kazakh, Macedonian, Malaysian, Maltese, Northern Sami, Norwegian (Bokmål and Nynorsk), Occitan, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Sardinian, Serbo-Croatian, Silesian, Slovene, Spanish, Swedish, Tatar, Ukrainian, Urdu, and Welsh languages. A full list is available below. Several companies are also involved in the development of Apertium, including Prompsit Language Engineering, Imaxin Software and Eleka Ingeniaritza Linguistikoa. The project has taken part in the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 editions of Google Summer of Code and the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 editions of Google Code-In. == Translation methodology == This is an overall, step-by-step view how Apertium works. The diagram displays the steps that Apertium takes to translate a source-language text (the text we want to translate) into a target-language text (the translated text). Source language text is passed into Apertium for translation. The deformatter removes formatting markup (HTML, RTF, etc.) that should be kept in place but not translated. The morphological analyser segments the text (expanding elisions, marking set phrases, etc.), and looks up segments in the language dictionaries, returning dictionary forms and tags for all matches. In pairs that involve agglutinative morphology, including a number of Turkic languages, a Helsinki Finite State Transducer (HFST) is used. Otherwise, an Apertium-specific finite state transducer system called lttoolbox, is used. The morphological disambiguator (the morphological analyser and the morphological disambiguator together form the part of speech tagger) resolves ambiguous segments (i.e., when there is more than one match) by choosing one match. Apertium uses Constraint Grammar rules (with the vislcg3 parser) for most of its language pairs. Retokenisation uses a finite state transducer to match sequences of lexical units and may reorder or translate tags (often used for translating idiomatic expressions into something that more approaches the target language grammar) Lexical transfer looks up disambiguated source-language basewords to find their target-language equivalents (i.e., mapping source language to target language). For lexical transfer, Apertium uses an XML-based dictionary format called bidix. Lexical selection chooses between alternative translations when the source text word has alternative meanings. Apertium uses a specific XML-based technology, apertium-lex-tools, to perform lexical selection. Structural transfer (i.e., it is an XML format that allows writing complex structural transfer rules) can consist of one-step chunking transfer, three-step chunking transfer or a CFG-based transfer module. The chunking modules flag grammatical differences between the source language and target language (e.g. gender or number agreement) by creating a sequence of chunks containing markers for this. They then reorder or modify chunks in order to produce a grammatical translation in the target-language. The newer CFG-based module matches input sequences into possible parse trees, selecting the best-ranking one and applying transformation rules on the tree. The morphological generator uses the tags to deliver the correct target language surface form. The morphological generator is a morphological transducer, just like the morphological analyser. A morphological transducer both analyses and generates forms. The post-generator makes any necessary orthographic changes due to the contact of words (e.g. elisions). The reformatter replaces formatting markup (HTML, RTF, etc.) that was removed by the deformatter in the first step. Apertium delivers the target-language translation. == Supported languages == As of June 2026, the following 108 pairs and 51 languages and languages varieties are supported by Apertium.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Clip Makers Compared (2026)

  Comparing the best AI clip maker? An AI clip maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI clip maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →
• 

  METAL MT

  A machine translation system developed at the University of Texas and at Siemens which ran on Lisp Machines. == Background == Originally titled the Linguistics Research System (LRS), it was later renamed METAL (Mechanical Translation and Analysis of Languages). It started life as a German-English system funded by the USAF. == 1980 == A copy of the Weidner Multi-Lingual Word Processing software was requested by the German Government for the Siemens Corporation of Germany in September 1980 and was nicknamed the Siemens-Weidner Engine (originally English-German). This revolutionary multilingual word processing engine became foundational in the development of the Metal MT project, according to John White of the Siemens Corporation. After the Metal MT, development Rights to the Siemens-Weidner Engine were sold to a Belgium company, Lernout & Hauspie. The Siemens copy of the Weidner Multilingual Word Processing software has since been acquired through the purchase of assets of Lernout & Hauspie by Bowne Global Solutions, Inc., which was later acquired by Lionbridge Technologies, Inc. and is demonstrated in their itranslator software.

  Read more →
• 

  Image moment

  In image processing, computer vision and related fields, an image moment is a certain particular weighted average (moment) of the image pixels' intensities, or a function of such moments, usually chosen to have some attractive property or interpretation. Image moments are useful to describe objects after segmentation. Simple properties of the image which are found via image moments include area (or total intensity), its centroid, and information about its orientation. == Raw moments == For a 2D continuous function f(x,y) the moment (sometimes called "raw moment") of order (p + q) is defined as M p q = ∫ − ∞ ∞ ∫ − ∞ ∞ x p y q f ( x , y ) d x d y {\displaystyle M_{pq}=\int \limits _{-\infty }^{\infty }\int \limits _{-\infty }^{\infty }x^{p}y^{q}f(x,y)\,dx\,dy} for p,q = 0,1,2,... Adapting this to scalar (grayscale) image with pixel intensities I(x,y), raw image moments Mij are calculated by M i j = ∑ x ∑ y x i y j I ( x , y ) {\displaystyle M_{ij}=\sum _{x}\sum _{y}x^{i}y^{j}I(x,y)\,\!} In some cases, this may be calculated by considering the image as a probability density function, i.e., by dividing the above by ∑ x ∑ y I ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \sum _{x}\sum _{y}I(x,y)\,\!} A uniqueness theorem states that if f(x,y) is piecewise continuous and has nonzero values only in a finite part of the xy plane, moments of all orders exist, and the moment sequence (Mpq) is uniquely determined by f(x,y). Conversely, (Mpq) uniquely determines f(x,y). In practice, the image is summarized with functions of a few lower order moments. === Examples === Simple image properties derived via raw moments include: Area (for binary images) or sum of grey level (for greytone images): M 00 {\displaystyle M_{00}} Centroid: { x ¯ , y ¯ } = { M 10 M 00 , M 01 M 00 } {\displaystyle \{{\bar {x}},\ {\bar {y}}\}=\left\{{\frac {M_{10}}{M_{00}}},{\frac {M_{01}}{M_{00}}}\right\}} == Central moments == Central moments are defined as μ p q = ∫ − ∞ ∞ ∫ − ∞ ∞ ( x − x ¯ ) p ( y − y ¯ ) q f ( x , y ) d x d y {\displaystyle \mu _{pq}=\int \limits _{-\infty }^{\infty }\int \limits _{-\infty }^{\infty }(x-{\bar {x}})^{p}(y-{\bar {y}})^{q}f(x,y)\,dx\,dy} where x ¯ = M 10 M 00 {\displaystyle {\bar {x}}={\frac {M_{10}}{M_{00}}}} and y ¯ = M 01 M 00 {\displaystyle {\bar {y}}={\frac {M_{01}}{M_{00}}}} are the components of the centroid. If ƒ(x, y) is a digital image, then the previous equation becomes μ p q = ∑ x ∑ y ( x − x ¯ ) p ( y − y ¯ ) q f ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \mu _{pq}=\sum _{x}\sum _{y}(x-{\bar {x}})^{p}(y-{\bar {y}})^{q}f(x,y)} The central moments of order up to 3 are: μ 00 = M 00 , μ 01 = 0 , μ 10 = 0 , μ 11 = M 11 − x ¯ M 01 = M 11 − y ¯ M 10 , μ 20 = M 20 − x ¯ M 10 , μ 02 = M 02 − y ¯ M 01 , μ 21 = M 21 − 2 x ¯ M 11 − y ¯ M 20 + 2 x ¯ 2 M 01 , μ 12 = M 12 − 2 y ¯ M 11 − x ¯ M 02 + 2 y ¯ 2 M 10 , μ 30 = M 30 − 3 x ¯ M 20 + 2 x ¯ 2 M 10 , μ 03 = M 03 − 3 y ¯ M 02 + 2 y ¯ 2 M 01 . {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mu _{00}&=M_{00},&\mu _{01}&=0,\\\mu _{10}&=0,&\mu _{11}&=M_{11}-{\bar {x}}M_{01}=M_{11}-{\bar {y}}M_{10},\\\mu _{20}&=M_{20}-{\bar {x}}M_{10},&\mu _{02}&=M_{02}-{\bar {y}}M_{01},\\\mu _{21}&=M_{21}-2{\bar {x}}M_{11}-{\bar {y}}M_{20}+2{\bar {x}}^{2}M_{01},&\mu _{12}&=M_{12}-2{\bar {y}}M_{11}-{\bar {x}}M_{02}+2{\bar {y}}^{2}M_{10},\\\mu _{30}&=M_{30}-3{\bar {x}}M_{20}+2{\bar {x}}^{2}M_{10},&\mu _{03}&=M_{03}-3{\bar {y}}M_{02}+2{\bar {y}}^{2}M_{01}.\end{aligned}}} It can be shown that: μ p q = ∑ m p ∑ n q ( p m ) ( q n ) ( − x ¯ ) ( p − m ) ( − y ¯ ) ( q − n ) M m n {\displaystyle \mu _{pq}=\sum _{m}^{p}\sum _{n}^{q}{p \choose m}{q \choose n}(-{\bar {x}})^{(p-m)}(-{\bar {y}})^{(q-n)}M_{mn}} Central moments are translational invariant. === Examples === Information about image orientation can be derived by first using the second order central moments to construct a covariance matrix. μ 20 ′ = μ 20 / μ 00 = M 20 / M 00 − x ¯ 2 μ 02 ′ = μ 02 / μ 00 = M 02 / M 00 − y ¯ 2 μ 11 ′ = μ 11 / μ 00 = M 11 / M 00 − x ¯ y ¯ {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mu '_{20}&=\mu _{20}/\mu _{00}=M_{20}/M_{00}-{\bar {x}}^{2}\\\mu '_{02}&=\mu _{02}/\mu _{00}=M_{02}/M_{00}-{\bar {y}}^{2}\\\mu '_{11}&=\mu _{11}/\mu _{00}=M_{11}/M_{00}-{\bar {x}}{\bar {y}}\end{aligned}}} The covariance matrix of the image I ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I(x,y)} is now cov ⁡ [ I ( x , y ) ] = [ μ 20 ′ μ 11 ′ μ 11 ′ μ 02 ′ ] . {\displaystyle \operatorname {cov} [I(x,y)]={\begin{bmatrix}\mu '_{20}&\mu '_{11}\\\mu '_{11}&\mu '_{02}\end{bmatrix}}.} The eigenvectors of this matrix correspond to the major and minor axes of the image intensity, so the orientation can thus be extracted from the angle of the eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue towards the axis closest to this eigenvector. It can be shown that this angle Θ is given by the following formula: Θ = 1 2 arctan ⁡ ( 2 μ 11 ′ μ 20 ′ − μ 02 ′ ) {\displaystyle \Theta ={\frac {1}{2}}\arctan \left({\frac {2\mu '_{11}}{\mu '_{20}-\mu '_{02}}}\right)} The above formula holds as long as: μ 20 ′ − μ 02 ′ ≠ 0 {\displaystyle \mu '_{20}-\mu '_{02}\neq 0} The eigenvalues of the covariance matrix can easily be shown to be λ i = μ 20 ′ + μ 02 ′ 2 ± 4 μ ′ 11 2 + ( μ ′ 20 − μ ′ 02 ) 2 2 , {\displaystyle \lambda _{i}={\frac {\mu '_{20}+\mu '_{02}}{2}}\pm {\frac {\sqrt {4{\mu '}_{11}^{2}+({\mu '}_{20}-{\mu '}_{02})^{2}}}{2}},} and are proportional to the squared length of the eigenvector axes. The relative difference in magnitude of the eigenvalues are thus an indication of the eccentricity of the image, or how elongated it is. The eccentricity is 1 − λ 2 λ 1 . {\displaystyle {\sqrt {1-{\frac {\lambda _{2}}{\lambda _{1}}}}}.} == Moment invariants == Moments are well-known for their application in image analysis, since they can be used to derive invariants with respect to specific transformation classes. The term invariant moments is often abused in this context. However, while moment invariants are invariants that are formed from moments, the only moments that are invariants themselves are the central moments. Note that the invariants detailed below are exactly invariant only in the continuous domain. In a discrete domain, neither scaling nor rotation are well defined: a discrete image transformed in such a way is generally an approximation, and the transformation is not reversible. These invariants therefore are only approximately invariant when describing a shape in a discrete image. === Translation invariants === The central moments μi j of any order are, by construction, invariant with respect to translations. === Scale invariants === Invariants ηi j with respect to both translation and scale can be constructed from central moments by dividing through a properly scaled zero-th central moment: η i j = μ i j μ 00 ( 1 + i + j 2 ) {\displaystyle \eta _{ij}={\frac {\mu _{ij}}{\mu _{00}^{\left(1+{\frac {i+j}{2}}\right)}}}\,\!} where i + j ≥ 2. Note that translational invariance directly follows by only using central moments. === Rotation invariants === As shown in the work of Hu, invariants with respect to translation, scale, and rotation can be constructed: I 1 = η 20 + η 02 {\displaystyle I_{1}=\eta _{20}+\eta _{02}} I 2 = ( η 20 − η 02 ) 2 + 4 η 11 2 {\displaystyle I_{2}=(\eta _{20}-\eta _{02})^{2}+4\eta _{11}^{2}} I 3 = ( η 30 − 3 η 12 ) 2 + ( 3 η 21 − η 03 ) 2 {\displaystyle I_{3}=(\eta _{30}-3\eta _{12})^{2}+(3\eta _{21}-\eta _{03})^{2}} I 4 = ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 + ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 {\displaystyle I_{4}=(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}+(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}} I 5 = ( η 30 − 3 η 12 ) ( η 30 + η 12 ) [ ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 − 3 ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 ] + ( 3 η 21 − η 03 ) ( η 21 + η 03 ) [ 3 ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 − ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 ] {\displaystyle I_{5}=(\eta _{30}-3\eta _{12})(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})[(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}-3(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}]+(3\eta _{21}-\eta _{03})(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})[3(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}-(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}]} I 6 = ( η 20 − η 02 ) [ ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 − ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 ] + 4 η 11 ( η 30 + η 12 ) ( η 21 + η 03 ) {\displaystyle I_{6}=(\eta _{20}-\eta _{02})[(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}-(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}]+4\eta _{11}(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})} I 7 = ( 3 η 21 − η 03 ) ( η 30 + η 12 ) [ ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 − 3 ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 ] − ( η 30 − 3 η 12 ) ( η 21 + η 03 ) [ 3 ( η 30 + η 12 ) 2 − ( η 21 + η 03 ) 2 ] . {\displaystyle I_{7}=(3\eta _{21}-\eta _{03})(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})[(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}-3(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}]-(\eta _{30}-3\eta _{12})(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})[3(\eta _{30}+\eta _{12})^{2}-(\eta _{21}+\eta _{03})^{2}].} These are well-known as Hu moment invariants. The first one, I1, is analogous to the moment of inertia around the image's centroid, where the pixels' intensities are analogous to physical density. The first six, I1 ... I6, are reflection symmetric, i.e. they are unchanged if the image is changed to a mirror image. The last one, I7, is reflection antisymmetric (changes sign under reflection), which enables it to distinguish mirror images of otherwise identical im

  Read more →
• 

  Collostructional analysis

  Collostructional analysis is a family of methods developed by (in alphabetical order) Stefan Th. Gries (University of California, Santa Barbara) and Anatol Stefanowitsch (Free University of Berlin). Collostructional analysis aims at measuring the degree of attraction or repulsion that words exhibit to constructions, where the notion of construction has so far been that of Goldberg's construction grammar. == Collostructional methods == Collostructional analysis so far comprises three different methods: collexeme analysis, to measure the degree of attraction/repulsion of a lemma to a slot in one particular construction; distinctive collexeme analysis, to measure the preference of a lemma to one particular construction over another, functionally similar construction; multiple distinctive collexeme analysis extends this approach to more than two alternative constructions; covarying collexeme analysis, to measure the degree of attraction of lemmas in one slot of a construction to lemmas in another slot of the same construction. == Input frequencies == Collostructional analysis requires frequencies of words and constructions and is similar to a wide variety of collocation statistics. It differs from raw frequency counts by providing not only observed co-occurrence frequencies of words and constructions, but also (i) a comparison of the observed frequency to the one expected by chance; thus, collostructional analysis can distinguish attraction and repulsion of words and constructions; (ii) a measure of the strength of the attraction or repulsion; this is usually the log-transformed p-value of a Fisher-Yates exact test. == Versus other collocation statistics == Collostructional analysis differs from most collocation statistics such that (i) it measures not the association of words to words, but of words to syntactic patterns or constructions; thus, it takes syntactic structure more seriously than most collocation-based analyses; (ii) it has so far only used the most precise statistics, namely the Fisher-Yates exact test based on the hypergeometric distribution; thus, unlike t-scores, z-scores, chi-square tests etc., the analysis is not based on, and does not violate, any distributional assumptions.

  Read more →
• 

  Language and Computers

  Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics (ISSN 0921-5034) is a book series on corpus linguistics and related areas. As studies in linguistics, volumes in the series have, by definition, their foundations in linguistic theory; however, they are not concerned with theory for theory's sake, but always with a definite direct or indirect interest in the possibilities of practical application in the dynamic area where language and computers meet. The book series was founded in 1988, and is published by Brill|Rodopi. == Editors == Christian Mair Charles F. Meyer == Volumes == Volumes include: # 77. English Corpus Linguistics: Variation in Time, Space and Genre. Selected papers from ICAME 32., Edited by Gisle Andersen and Kristin Bech. ISBN 978-90-420-3679-6 E-ISBN 978-94-012-0940-3 # 76. English Corpus Linguistics: Crossing Paths., Edited by Merja Kytö. ISBN 978-90-420-3518-8 E-ISBN 978-94-012-0793-5 # 75. Corpus Linguistics and Variation in English.Theory and Description., Edited by Joybrato Mukherjee and Magnus Huber. ISBN 978-90-420-3495-2 E-ISBN 978-94-012-0771-3 # 74. English Corpus Linguistics: Looking back, Moving forward. Papers from the 30th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 30), Lancaster, UK, 27–31 May 2009., Edited by Sebastian Hoffmann, Paul Rayson and Geoffrey Leech. ISBN 978-90-420-3466-2 E-ISBN 978-94-012-0747-8 #73. Corpus-based Studies in Language Use, Language Learning, and Language Documentation., Edited by John Newman, Harald Baayen and Sally Rice. ISBN 978-90-420-3401-3 E-ISBN 978-94-012-0688-4 #72. The Progressive in Modern English. A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization and Related Changes., by Svenja Kranich. ISBN 978-90-420-3143-2 E-ISBN 978-90-420-3144-9 #71. Corpus-linguistic applications. Current studies, new directions, Edited by Stefan Th. Gries, Stefanie Wulff, and Mark Davies.. ISBN 978-90-420-2800-5 #70. A resource-light approach to morpho-syntactic tagging., by Anna Feldman and Jirka Hana. ISBN 978-90-420-2768-8 #69. Corpus Linguistics. Refinements and Reassessments., Edited by Antoinette Renouf and Andrew Kehoe. ISBN 978-90-420-2597-4 #68. Corpora: Pragmatics and Discourse. Papers from the 29th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 29). Ascona, Switzerland, 14–18 May 2008., Edited by Andreas H. Jucker, Daniel Schreier and Marianne Hundt. ISBN 978-90-420-2592-9 #67. Modals and Quasi-modals in English., by Peter Collins. ISBN 978-90-420-2532-5 #66. Linking up contrastive and learner corpus research., Edited by Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Szilvia Papp and María Belén Díez-Bedmar. ISBN 978-90-420-2446-5 #64. Language, People, Numbers. Corpus Linguistics and Society., Edited by Andrea Gerbig and Oliver Mason. ISBN 978-90-420-2350-5 #63. Variation and change in the lexicon. A corpus-based analysis of adjectives in English ending in –ic and –ical. , by Mark Kaunisto. ISBN 978-90-420-2233-1 #62. Corpus Linguistics 25 Years on., Edited by Roberta Facchinetti. ISBN 978-90-420-2195-2 #61. Corpora in the Foreign Language Classroom. Selected papers from the Sixth International Conference on Teaching and Language Corpora (TaLC 6), Edited by Encarnación Hidalgo, Luis Quereda and Juan Santana. ISBN 978-90-420-2142-6 #60. Corpus Linguistics Beyond the Word. Corpus Research from Phrase to Discourse, Edited by Eileen Fitzpatrick. ISBN 978-90-420-2135-8 #59. Corpus Linguistics and the Web., Edited by Marianne Hundt, Nadja Nesselhauf and Carolin Biewer. ISBN 978-90-420-2128-0 #58. English mediopassive constructions. A cognitive, corpus-based study of their origin, spread, and current status, by Marianne Hundt. ISBN 978-90-420-2127-3 / ISBN 90-420-2127-6

  Read more →
• 

  Roni Rosenfeld

  Roni Rosenfeld (Hebrew: רוני רוזנפלד) is an Israeli-American computer scientist and computational epidemiologist, currently serving as the head of the Machine Learning Department at Carnegie Mellon University. He is an international expert in machine learning, infectious disease forecasting, statistical language modeling and artificial intelligence. == Education == Rosenfeld received his B.Sc. in mathematics and physics from Tel Aviv University in 1985. He received his Ph.D. in computer science from Carnegie Mellon University in 1994. While a graduate student, he developed and open-sourced a statistical language-modeling toolkit to allow anyone to create statistical language models from their own corpora and experiment with and extend the toolkit's capabilities. The toolkit has been used by more than 100 NLP laboratories in more than 20 countries. Rosenfeld's Ph.D. thesis, A Maximum Entropy Approach to Adaptive Statistical Language Modeling, was advised by Raj Reddy and Xuedong Huang and won the 2001 Computer, Speech and Language award for "Most Influential Paper in the Last 5 Years." == Career == Shortly after receiving his Ph.D., Rosenfeld joined the faculty of the Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science as an assistant professor. He was promoted to the rank of associate professor in 1999 and received tenure in 2001. In 2005 he was promoted to professor of language technologies, machine learning computer science and computational biology in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. Rosenfeld also holds adjunct appointments at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, department of computational and systems biology. From 2002 to 2003, Rosenfeld was a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong. Rosenfeld is the director of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning for Social Good (ML4SG) program. He has held educational leadership positions in a variety of programs, including the M.S. in computational finance (1997–1999), graduate computational and statistical learning (2001–2003), M.S. in machine learning (2017) and undergraduate minor in machine learning. Rosenfeld was appointed Head of Carnegie Mellon's Machine Learning Department in 2018. == Research == Rosenfeld's research interests include epidemiological forecasting, information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D), and machine learning for social good. === Epidemiological forecasting === Rosenfeld is a world expert in epidemiological forecasting. He founded and directs the Delphi research group, which has won most of the epidemiological forecasting challenges organized by the U.S. CDC and other U.S. government agencies. In December 2016, the CDC named his group the "Most Accurate Forecaster" for 2015–2016, and in October 2017, the Delphi group's two systems took the top two spots in the 2016-2017 flu forecasting challenge. The CDC recognized Rosenfeld's Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon University as having contributed the most accurate national-, regional-, and state-level influenza-like illness forecasts and national-level hospitalization forecasts to the site. In 2019, the CDC recognized forecasts provided by the Delphi group at Carnegie Mellon as having been the most accurate for five seasons in a row, and named the Delphi group an Influenza Forecasting Center of Excellence, a five-year designation that includes $3 million in research funding. Rosenfeld describes his forecasting research goal as "to make epidemiological forecasting as universally accepted and useful as weather forecasting is today." His recent work in the area has focused on selecting high value epidemiological forecasting targets (e.g. Influenza and Dengue); creating baseline forecasting methods for them; establishing metrics for measuring and tracking forecasting accuracy; estimating the limits of forecastability for each target; and identifying new sources of data that could be helpful to the forecasting goal. == Honors and awards == 2017 Joel and Ruth Spira Teaching Award 2017 CDC Influenza Forecasting Challenge "Most Accurate Forecaster" 1992 Allen Newell Medal for Research Excellence

  Read more →
• 

  Tute Genomics

  Tute Genomics was an American genomics startup that provided a cloud-based web application for rapid and accurate annotation of human genomic data. It was built on the expertise of ANNOVAR. Tute Genomics assisted researchers in identifying disease genes and biomarkers, and assisted clinicians/labs in performing genetic diagnosis. Based in Provo, Utah, Tute was co-founded by Dr. Kai Wang, an assistant professor at the University of Southern California (USC); and Dr. Reid J. Robison, a board-certified psychiatrist with fellowship training in both neurodevelopmental genetics and bioinformatics. Tute Genomics was acquired by PierianDX in 2016. == History == The word "tute" means "personal" in the Na’vi language created for the 2009 film Avatar by Paul Frommer, a linguist and communications professor at the USC Marshall School of Business. === Timeline === 2013 Tute Genomics launched in 2013 and entered the accelerator, BoomStartup. By "demo day" of BoomStartup, Tute had raised their seed round of funding and expanded the round to include angel investors from SLC Angels, Park City Angels, Life Science Angels. Tute was the tenth ever online syndicate for AngelList and in all raised a seed round of $1.5 million. 2014 In March 2014, the company announced that Affiliated Genetics, a Utah-based CLIA-certified laboratory, selected Tute Genomics for its next-generation sequencing (NGS) analytics pipeline. In May 2014, the company announced joining the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health. In June 2014, Advanced Biological Laboratories (ABL), S.A., announced a licensing and collaboration agreement with Tute Genomics and the commercial launch of OncoChek for managing and analysing genomics data in the field of oncology. In July 2014, the company announced an agreement with Lineagen, Inc., to provide next-generation sequencing analytics for Lineagen’s NextStepDx Plus assay. Also, Brigham Young University selected the Tute Genomics genome annotation and discovery platform for analysis and interpretation of 1,000 exomes and genomes. In November 2014, the company announced addition of the Tute platform to Illumina’s BaseSpace. The company announced a Series A1 funding round of $2.3 million in December 2014. The round was led by UK-based Eurovestech. Peak Ventures and a number of angel investors also participated in this round. 2015 Tute recruits David Mittelman, founder of Arpeggi, Inc. and former CSO at FamilyTreeDNA, to Tute Genomics as Chief Scientific Officer. Tute acquires Knome and integrates the KnoSys platform into its software product. 2016 Reid Robison, Tute CEO, launches a Kickstarter campaign to sell Tute interpreted whole genome and whole exome sequencing directly to consumers. The campaign was suspended within the same month after receiving a letter from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Tute is acquired by PierianDX.

  Read more →
• 

  The Best Free AI Headshot Generator for Beginners

  Shopping for the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Yi Zeng (AI researcher)

  Yi Zeng (Chinese: 曾毅) is a Chinese artificial intelligence researcher and professor at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who also serves as the founding director of Center for Long-term AI, and as a member of the United Nations Advisory Body on AI. == Career == On May 25, 2019, Zeng led the team that published the Beijing Artificial Intelligence Principles, proposed as an initiative for the long-term research, governance and planning of AI, and the "realization of beneficial AI for mankind and nature". He was named on the Time 100 AI list, a list featuring the hundred most influential figures in artificial intelligence of the year, in 2023. In July 2023, Zeng addressed the United Nations Security Council in a meeting on the risks posed by recent strides in artificial intelligence. He said that AI models “cannot be trusted as responsible agents that can help humans to make decisions,” and warned of the risk of extinction posed by both near-term and long-term AI, arguing that “in the long term, we haven’t given superintelligence any practical reasons why they should protect humans”. Zeng stated that humans should always be responsible for final decision-making on the use of nuclear weapons, and that the United Nations must produce an international framework on AI development and governance, to ensure global peace and security. In October 2023, UN Secretary-General António Guterres announced the creation of an advisory body on issues surrounding the international governance of AI, of which Zeng would be a member. He leads teams of researchers at the Institute of Philosophy and the Institute of Automation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, including doctoral candidates, postdoctoral fellows, research fellows, assistant professors, and associate professors. Among them is his first international PhD student, Ammar Younas, a lawyer and arbitrator whose research focuses on cross-cultural dimensions of AI ethics and governance.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Pair Programmers Compared (2026)

  Looking for the best AI pair programmer? An AI pair programmer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI pair programmer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Ericom Connect

  Ericom Connect is a remote access/application publishing solution produced by Ericom Software that provides secure, centrally managed access to physical or hosted desktops and applications running on Microsoft Windows and Linux systems. == Product overview == Ericom Connect is desktop virtualization and application virtualization software that allows users to run applications remotely, without installing them on the local computer or device. The software is noted for its scalability, ease of deployment, and compatibility with any type of infrastructure, cloud or physical. Ericom Connect uses AccessPad (native client for desktops), AccessToGo (native client for mobile), or AccessNow, one of the first HTML5 RDP solutions to support clientless access to Windows desktops and applications from any device with an HTML5-compatible browser, including Macintosh computers, mobile devices, and Google Chromebooks. Other notable features include performance monitoring, built-in real-time analytics & BI, support for two-factor authentication (using RSA SecurID), multi-tenancy and multi-datacenter support via a single unified web interface, and a “Launch Simulation” feature that allows users to visualize and simulate actual step-by-step user processes directly from within the administration console. In addition to scalability, by distributing configurations, logs, etc., across multiple servers there is no single point of failure, as can be the case if all configuration information is stored on one server. == History == Ericom Connect was introduced in 2015. Ericom Connect is a successor to Ericom PowerTerm Web Connect. PowerTerm Web Connect used an architecture similar to what was then current with Citrix and VMWare, relying on a centralized SQL server, a connection broker, image management for different hypervisors, and a variety of clients. Ericom Connect uses a new grid architecture that provides more scalability, reliability, and flexibility than before.

  Read more →
• 

  Evaluation of machine translation

  Various methods for the evaluation for machine translation have been employed. This article focuses on the evaluation of the output of machine translation, rather than on performance or usability evaluation. == Round-trip translation == A typical way for lay people to assess machine translation quality is to translate from a source language to a target language and back to the source language with the same engine. Though intuitively this may seem like a good method of evaluation, it has been shown that round-trip translation is a "poor predictor of quality". The reason why it is such a poor predictor of quality is reasonably intuitive. A round-trip translation is not testing one system, but two systems: the language pair of the engine for translating into the target language, and the language pair translating back from the target language. Consider the following examples of round-trip translation performed from English to Italian and Portuguese from Somers (2005): In the first example, where the text is translated into Italian then back into English—the English text is significantly garbled, but the Italian is a serviceable translation. In the second example, the text translated back into English is perfect, but the Portuguese translation is meaningless; the program thought "tit" was a reference to a tit (bird), which was intended for a "tat", a word it did not understand. While round-trip translation may be useful to generate a "surplus of fun," the methodology is deficient for serious study of machine translation quality. == Human evaluation == This section covers two of the large scale evaluation studies that have had significant impact on the field—the ALPAC 1966 study and the ARPA study. === Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee (ALPAC) === One of the constituent parts of the ALPAC report was a study comparing different levels of human translation with machine translation output, using human subjects as judges. The human judges were specially trained for the purpose. The evaluation study compared an MT system translating from Russian into English with human translators, on two variables. The variables studied were "intelligibility" and "fidelity". Intelligibility was a measure of how "understandable" the sentence was, and was measured on a scale of 1–9. Fidelity was a measure of how much information the translated sentence retained compared to the original, and was measured on a scale of 0–9. Each point on the scale was associated with a textual description. For example, 3 on the intelligibility scale was described as "Generally unintelligible; it tends to read like nonsense but, with a considerable amount of reflection and study, one can at least hypothesize the idea intended by the sentence". Intelligibility was measured without reference to the original, while fidelity was measured indirectly. The translated sentence was presented, and after reading it and absorbing the content, the original sentence was presented. The judges were asked to rate the original sentence on informativeness. So, the more informative the original sentence, the lower the quality of the translation. The study showed that the variables were highly correlated when the human judgment was averaged per sentence. The variation among raters was small, but the researchers recommended that at the very least, three or four raters should be used. The evaluation methodology managed to separate translations by humans from translations by machines with ease. The study concluded that, "highly reliable assessments can be made of the quality of human and machine translations". === Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) === As part of the Human Language Technologies Program, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) created a methodology to evaluate machine translation systems, and continues to perform evaluations based on this methodology. The evaluation programme was instigated in 1991, and continues to this day. Details of the programme can be found in White et al. (1994) and White (1995). The evaluation programme involved testing several systems based on different theoretical approaches; statistical, rule-based and human-assisted. A number of methods for the evaluation of the output from these systems were tested in 1992 and the most recent suitable methods were selected for inclusion in the programmes for subsequent years. The methods were; comprehension evaluation, quality panel evaluation, and evaluation based on adequacy and fluency. Comprehension evaluation aimed to directly compare systems based on the results from multiple choice comprehension tests, as in Church et al. (1993). The texts chosen were a set of articles in English on the subject of financial news. These articles were translated by professional translators into a series of language pairs, and then translated back into English using the machine translation systems. It was decided that this was not adequate for a standalone method of comparing systems and as such abandoned due to issues with the modification of meaning in the process of translating from English. The idea of quality panel evaluation was to submit translations to a panel of expert native English speakers who were professional translators and get them to evaluate them. The evaluations were done on the basis of a metric, modelled on a standard US government metric used to rate human translations. This was good from the point of view that the metric was "externally motivated", since it was not specifically developed for machine translation. However, the quality panel evaluation was very difficult to set up logistically, as it necessitated having a number of experts together in one place for a week or more, and furthermore for them to reach consensus. This method was also abandoned. Along with a modified form of the comprehension evaluation (re-styled as informativeness evaluation), the most popular method was to obtain ratings from monolingual judges for segments of a document. The judges were presented with a segment, and asked to rate it for two variables, adequacy and fluency. Adequacy is a rating of how much information is transferred between the original and the translation, and fluency is a rating of how good the English is. This technique was found to cover the relevant parts of the quality panel evaluation, while at the same time being easier to deploy, as it didn't require expert judgment. Measuring systems based on adequacy and fluency, along with informativeness is now the standard methodology for the ARPA evaluation program. == Automatic evaluation == In the context of this article, a metric is a measurement. A metric that evaluates machine translation output represents the quality of the output. The quality of a translation is inherently subjective, there is no objective or quantifiable "good." Therefore, any metric must assign quality scores so they correlate with the human judgment of quality. That is, a metric should score highly translations that humans score highly, and give low scores to those humans give low scores. Human judgment is the benchmark for assessing automatic metrics, as humans are the end-users of any translation output. The measure of evaluation for metrics is correlation with human judgment. This is generally done at two levels, at the sentence level, where scores are calculated by the metric for a set of translated sentences, and then correlated against human judgment for the same sentences. And at the corpus level, where scores over the sentences are aggregated for both human judgments and metric judgments, and these aggregate scores are then correlated. Figures for correlation at the sentence level are rarely reported, although Banerjee et al. (2005) do give correlation figures that show that, at least for their metric, sentence-level correlation is substantially worse than corpus level correlation. While not widely reported, it has been noted that the genre, or domain, of a text has an effect on the correlation obtained when using metrics. Coughlin (2003) reports that comparing the candidate text against a single reference translation does not adversely affect the correlation of metrics when working in a restricted domain text. Even if a metric correlates well with human judgment in one study on one corpus, this successful correlation may not carry over to another corpus. Good metric performance, across text types or domains, is important for the reusability of the metric. A metric that only works for text in a specific domain is useful, but less useful than one that works across many domains—because creating a new metric for every new evaluation or domain is undesirable. Another important factor in the usefulness of an evaluation metric is to have a good correlation, even when working with small amounts of data, that is candidate sentences and reference translations. Turian et al. (2003) point out that, "Any MT evaluation measure is less reliable on shorter translations", and

  Read more →
• 

  Sinkov statistic

  Sinkov statistics, also known as log-weight statistics, is a specialized field of statistics that was developed by Abraham Sinkov, while working for the small Signal Intelligence Service organization, the primary mission of which was to compile codes and ciphers for use by the U.S. Army. The mathematics involved include modular arithmetic, a bit of number theory, some linear algebra of two dimensions with matrices, some combinatorics, and a little statistics. Sinkov did not explain the theoretical underpinnings of his statistics, or characterized its distribution, nor did he give a decision procedure for accepting or rejecting candidate plaintexts on the basis of their S1 scores. The situation becomes more difficult when comparing strings of different lengths because Sinkov does not explain how the distribution of his statistics changes with length, especially when applied to higher-order grams. As for how to accept or reject a candidate plaintext, Sinkov simply said to try all possibilities and to pick the one with the highest S1 value. Although the procedure works for some applications, it is inadequate for applications that require on-line decisions. Furthermore, it is desirable to have a meaningful interpretation of the S1 values.

  Read more →