AI For Students Good Or Bad

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

IBM ALP

IBM Assembly Language Processor (ALP) is an assembler written by IBM for 32-bit OS/2 Warp (OS/2 3.0), which was released in 1994. ALP accepts source programs compatible with Microsoft Macro Assembler (MASM) version 5.1, which was originally used to build many of the device drivers included with OS/2. For OS/2 versions 3 and 4, ALP was distributed, along with other tools and documentation, as part of the Device Driver Kit (DDK). The DDK was withdrawn in 2004 as part of IBM's discontinuance of OS/2.
Read more →
User modeling

User modeling is the subdivision of human–computer interaction which describes the process of building up and modifying a conceptual understanding of the user. The main goal of user modeling is customization and adaptation of systems to the user's specific needs. The system needs to "say the 'right' thing at the 'right' time in the 'right' way". To do so it needs an internal representation of the user. Another common purpose is modeling specific kinds of users, including modeling of their skills and declarative knowledge, for use in automatic software-tests. User-models can thus serve as a cheaper alternative to user testing but should not replace user testing. == Background == A user model is the collection and categorization of personal data associated with a specific user. A user model is a (data) structure that is used to capture certain characteristics about an individual user, and a user profile is the actual representation in a given user model. The process of obtaining the user profile is called user modeling. Therefore, it is the basis for any adaptive changes to the system's behavior. Which data is included in the model depends on the purpose of the application. It can include personal information such as users' names and ages, their interests, their skills and knowledge, their goals and plans, their preferences and their dislikes or data about their behavior and their interactions with the system. There are different design patterns for user models, though often a mixture of them is used. Static user models Static user models are the most basic kinds of user models. Once the main data is gathered they are normally not changed again, they are static. Shifts in users' preferences are not registered and no learning algorithms are used to alter the model. Dynamic user models Dynamic user models allow a more up to date representation of users. Changes in their interests, their learning progress or interactions with the system are noticed and influence the user models. The models can thus be updated and take the current needs and goals of the users into account. Stereotype based user models Stereotype based user models are based on demographic statistics. Based on the gathered information users are classified into common stereotypes. The system then adapts to this stereotype. The application therefore can make assumptions about a user even though there might be no data about that specific area, because demographic studies have shown that other users in this stereotype have the same characteristics. Thus, stereotype based user models mainly rely on statistics and do not take into account that personal attributes might not match the stereotype. However, they allow predictions about a user even if there is rather little information about him or her. Highly adaptive user models Highly adaptive user models try to represent one particular user and therefore allow a very high adaptivity of the system. In contrast to stereotype based user models they do not rely on demographic statistics but aim to find a specific solution for each user. Although users can take great benefit from this high adaptivity, this kind of model needs to gather a lot of information first. == Data gathering == Information about users can be gathered in several ways. There are three main methods: Asking for specific facts while (first) interacting with the system Mostly this kind of data gathering is linked with the registration process. While registering users are asked for specific facts, their likes and dislikes and their needs. Often the given answers can be altered afterwards. Learning users' preferences by observing and interpreting their interactions with the system In this case users are not asked directly for their personal data and preferences, but this information is derived from their behavior while interacting with the system. The ways they choose to accomplish a tasks, the combination of things they takes interest in, these observations allow inferences about a specific user. The application dynamically learns from observing these interactions. Different machine learning algorithms may be used to accomplish this task. A hybrid approach which asks for explicit feedback and alters the user model by adaptive learning This approach is a mixture of the ones above. Users have to answer specific questions and give explicit feedback. Furthermore, their interactions with the system are observed and the derived information are used to automatically adjust the user models. Though the first method is a good way to quickly collect main data it lacks the ability to automatically adapt to shifts in users' interests. It depends on the users' readiness to give information and it is unlikely that they are going to edit their answers once the registration process is finished. Therefore, there is a high likelihood that the user models are not up to date. However, this first method allows the users to have full control over the collected data about them. It is their decision which information they are willing to provide. This possibility is missing in the second method. Adaptive changes in a system that learns users' preferences and needs only by interpreting their behavior might appear a bit opaque to the users, because they cannot fully understand and reconstruct why the system behaves the way it does. Moreover, the system is forced to collect a certain amount of data before it is able to predict the users' needs with the required accuracy. Therefore, it takes a certain learning time before a user can benefit from adaptive changes. However, afterwards these automatically adjusted user models allow a quite accurate adaptivity of the system. The hybrid approach tries to combine the advantages of both methods. Through collecting data by directly asking its users it gathers a first stock of information which can be used for adaptive changes. By learning from the users' interactions it can adjust the user models and reach more accuracy. Yet, the designer of the system has to decide, which of these information should have which amount of influence and what to do with learned data that contradicts some of the information given by a user. == System adaptation == Once a system has gathered information about a user it can evaluate that data by preset analytical algorithm and then start to adapt to the user's needs. These adaptations may concern every aspect of the system's behavior and depend on the system's purpose. Information and functions can be presented according to the user's interests, knowledge or goals by displaying only relevant features, hiding information the user does not need, making proposals what to do next and so on. One has to distinguish between adaptive and adaptable systems. In an adaptable system the user can manually change the system's appearance, behavior or functionality by actively selecting the corresponding options. Afterwards the system will stick to these choices. In an adaptive system a dynamic adaption to the user is automatically performed by the system itself, based on the built user model. Thus, an adaptive system needs ways to interpret information about the user in order to make these adaptations. One way to accomplish this task is implementing rule-based filtering. In this case a set of IF... THEN... rules is established that covers the knowledge base of the system. The IF-conditions can check for specific user-information and if they match the THEN-branch is performed which is responsible for the adaptive changes. Another approach is based on collaborative filtering. In this case information about a user is compared to that of other users of the same systems. Thus, if characteristics of the current user match those of another, the system can make assumptions about the current user by presuming that he or she is likely to have similar characteristics in areas where the model of the current user is lacking data. Based on these assumption the system then can perform adaptive changes. == Usages == Adaptive hypermedia: In an adaptive hypermedia system the displayed content and the offered hyperlinks are chosen on basis of users' specific characteristics, taking their goals, interests, knowledge and abilities into account. Thus, an adaptive hypermedia system aims to reduce the "lost in hyperspace" syndrome by presenting only relevant information. Adaptive educational hypermedia: Being a subdivision of adaptive hypermedia the main focus of adaptive educational hypermedia lies on education, displaying content and hyperlinks corresponding to the user's knowledge on the field of study. Intelligent tutoring system: Unlike adaptive educational hypermedia systems intelligent tutoring systems are stand-alone systems. Their aim is to help students in a specific field of study. To do so, they build up a user model where they store information about abilities, knowledge and needs of the user. The system can now adapt to this user by presenting approp
Read more →
Imageability

Imageability is a measure of how easily a physical object, word or environment will evoke a clear mental image in the mind of any person observing it. It is used in architecture and city planning, in psycholinguistics, and in automated computer vision research. In automated image recognition, training models to connect images with concepts that have low imageability can lead to biased and harmful results. == History and components == Kevin A. Lynch first introduced the term, "imageability" in his 1960 book, The Image of the City. In the book, Lynch argues cities contain a key set of physical elements that people use to understand the environment, orient themselves inside of it, and assign it meaning. Lynch argues the five key elements that impact the imageability of a city are Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks. Paths: channels in which people travel. Examples: streets, sidewalks, trails, canals, railroads. Edges: objects that form boundaries around space. Examples: walls, buildings, shoreline, curbstone, streets, and overpasses. Districts: medium to large areas people can enter into and out of that have a common set of identifiable characteristics. Nodes: large areas people can enter, that serve as the foci of the city, neighborhood, district, etc. Landmarks: memorable points of reference people cannot enter into. Examples: signs, mountains and public art. In 1914, half a century before The Image of the City was published, Paul Stern discussed a concept similar to imageability in the context of art. Stern, in Susan Langer's Reflections on Art, names the attribute that describes how vividly and intensely an artistic object could be experienced apparency. == In computer vision == Automated image recognition was developed by using machine learning to find patterns in large, annotated datasets of photographs, like ImageNet. Images in ImageNet are labelled using concepts in WordNet. Concepts that are easily expressed verbally, like "early", are seen as less "imageable" than nouns referring to physical objects like "leaf". Training AI models to associate concepts with low imageability with specific images can lead to problematic bias in image recognition algorithms. This has particularly been critiqued as it relates to the "person" category of WordNet and therefore also ImageNet. Trevor Pagan and Kate Crawford demonstrated in their essay "Excavating AI" and their art project ImageNet Roulette how this leads to photos of ordinary people being labelled by AI systems as "terrorists" or "sex offenders". Images in datasets are often labelled as having a certain level of imageability. As described by Kaiyu Yang, Fei-Fei Li and co-authors, this is often done following criteria from Allan Paivio and collaborators' 1968 psycholinguistic study of nouns. Yang el.al. write that dataset annotators tasked with labelling imageability "see a list of words and rate each word on a 1-7 scale from 'low imagery' to 'high imagery'. To avoid biased or harmful image recognition and image generation, Yang et.al. recommend not training vision recognition models on concepts with low imageability, especially when the concepts are offensive (such as sexual or racial slurs) or sensitive (their examples for this category include "orphan", "separatist", "Anglo-Saxon" and "crossover voter"). Even "safe" concepts with low imageability, like "great-niece" or "vegetarian" can lead to misleading results and should be avoided.
Read more →
Semantic network

A semantic network, or frame network is a knowledge base that represents semantic relations between concepts in a network. This is often used as a form of knowledge representation. It is a directed or undirected graph consisting of vertices, which represent concepts, and edges, which represent semantic relations between concepts, mapping or connecting semantic fields. A semantic network may be instantiated as, for example, a graph database or a concept map. Typical standardized semantic networks are expressed as semantic triples. Semantic networks are used in natural language processing applications such as semantic parsing and word-sense disambiguation. Semantic networks can also be used as a method to analyze large texts and identify the main themes and topics (e.g., of social media posts), to reveal biases (e.g., in news coverage), or even to map an entire research field. == History == Examples of the use of semantic networks in logic, directed acyclic graphs as a mnemonic tool, dates back centuries. The earliest documented use being the Greek philosopher Porphyry's commentary on Aristotle's categories in the third century AD. In computing history, "Semantic Nets" for the propositional calculus were first implemented for computers by Richard H. Richens of the Cambridge Language Research Unit in 1956 as an "interlingua" for machine translation of natural languages. Although the importance of this work and the CLRU was only belatedly realized. Semantic networks were also independently implemented by Robert F. Simmons and Sheldon Klein, using the first order predicate calculus as a base, after being inspired by a demonstration of Victor Yngve. The "line of research was originated by the first President of the Association [Association for Computational Linguistics], Victor Yngve, who in 1960 had published descriptions of algorithms for using a phrase structure grammar to generate syntactically well-formed nonsense sentences. Sheldon Klein and I about 1962-1964 were fascinated by the technique and generalized it to a method for controlling the sense of what was generated by respecting the semantic dependencies of words as they occurred in text." Other researchers, most notably M. Ross Quillian and others at System Development Corporation helped contribute to their work in the early 1960s as part of the SYNTHEX project. It's from these publications at SDC that most modern derivatives of the term "semantic network" cite as their background. Later prominent works were done by Allan M. Collins and Quillian (e.g., Collins and Quillian; Collins and Loftus Quillian). Still later in 2006, Hermann Helbig fully described MultiNet. In the late 1980s, two Netherlands universities, Groningen and Twente, jointly began a project called Knowledge Graphs, which are semantic networks but with the added constraint that edges are restricted to be from a limited set of possible relations, to facilitate algebras on the graph. In the subsequent decades, the distinction between semantic networks and knowledge graphs was blurred. In 2012, Google gave their knowledge graph the name Knowledge Graph. The Semantic Link Network was systematically studied as a social semantics networking method. Its basic model consists of semantic nodes, semantic links between nodes, and a semantic space that defines the semantics of nodes and links and reasoning rules on semantic links. The systematic theory and model was published in 2004. This research direction can trace to the definition of inheritance rules for efficient model retrieval in 1998 and the Active Document Framework ADF. Since 2003, research has developed toward social semantic networking. This work is a systematic innovation at the age of the World Wide Web and global social networking rather than an application or simple extension of the Semantic Net (Network). Its purpose and scope are different from that of the Semantic Net (or network). The rules for reasoning and evolution and automatic discovery of implicit links play an important role in the Semantic Link Network. Recently it has been developed to support Cyber-Physical-Social Intelligence. It was used for creating a general summarization method. The self-organised Semantic Link Network was integrated with a multi-dimensional category space to form a semantic space to support advanced applications with multi-dimensional abstractions and self-organised semantic links It has been verified that Semantic Link Network play an important role in understanding and representation through text summarisation applications. Semantic Link Network has been extended from cyberspace to cyber-physical-social space. Competition relation and symbiosis relation as well as their roles in evolving society were studied in the emerging topic: Cyber-Physical-Social Intelligence More specialized forms of semantic networks has been created for specific use. For example, in 2008, Fawsy Bendeck's PhD thesis formalized the Semantic Similarity Network (SSN) that contains specialized relationships and propagation algorithms to simplify the semantic similarity representation and calculations. == Basics of semantic networks == A semantic network is used when one has knowledge that is best understood as a set of concepts that are related to one another. Most semantic networks are cognitively based. They also consist of arcs and nodes which can be organized into a taxonomic hierarchy. Semantic networks contributed ideas of spreading activation, inheritance, and nodes as proto-objects. == Examples == === In Lisp === The following code shows an example of a semantic network in the Lisp programming language using an association list. To extract all the information about the "canary" type, one would use the assoc function with a key of "canary". === WordNet === An example of a semantic network is WordNet, a lexical database of English. It groups English words into sets of synonyms called synsets, provides short, general definitions, and records the various semantic relations between these synonym sets. Some of the most common semantic relations defined are meronymy (A is a meronym of B if A is part of B), holonymy (B is a holonym of A if B contains A), hyponymy (or troponymy) (A is subordinate of B; A is kind of B), hypernymy (A is superordinate of B), synonymy (A denotes the same as B) and antonymy (A denotes the opposite of B). WordNet properties have been studied from a network theory perspective and compared to other semantic networks created from Roget's Thesaurus and word association tasks. From this perspective the three of them are a small world structure. === Other examples === It is also possible to represent logical descriptions using semantic networks such as the existential graphs of Charles Sanders Peirce or the related conceptual graphs of John F. Sowa. These have expressive power equal to or exceeding standard first-order predicate logic. Unlike WordNet or other lexical or browsing networks, semantic networks using these representations can be used for reliable automated logical deduction. Some automated reasoners exploit the graph-theoretic features of the networks during processing. Other examples of semantic networks are Gellish models. Gellish English with its Gellish English dictionary, is a formal language that is defined as a network of relations between concepts and names of concepts. Gellish English is a formal subset of natural English, just as Gellish Dutch is a formal subset of Dutch, whereas multiple languages share the same concepts. Other Gellish networks consist of knowledge models and information models that are expressed in the Gellish language. A Gellish network is a network of (binary) relations between things. Each relation in the network is an expression of a fact that is classified by a relation type. Each relation type itself is a concept that is defined in the Gellish language dictionary. Each related thing is either a concept or an individual thing that is classified by a concept. The definitions of concepts are created in the form of definition models (definition networks) that together form a Gellish Dictionary. A Gellish network can be documented in a Gellish database and is computer interpretable. SciCrunch is a collaboratively edited knowledge base for scientific resources. It provides unambiguous identifiers (Research Resource IDentifiers or RRIDs) for software, lab tools etc. and it also provides options to create links between RRIDs and from communities. Another example of semantic networks, based on category theory, is ologs. Here each type is an object, representing a set of things, and each arrow is a morphism, representing a function. Commutative diagrams also are prescribed to constrain the semantics. In the social sciences people sometimes use the term semantic network to refer to co-occurrence networks. == Software tools == There are also elaborate types of semantic networks connected with corresponding sets of software tools used for
Read more →
XLeratorDB

XLeratorDB is a suite of database function libraries that enable Microsoft SQL Server to perform a wide range of additional (non-native) business intelligence and ad hoc analytics. The libraries, which are embedded and run centrally on the database, include more than 450 individual functions similar to those found in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The individual functions are grouped and sold as six separate libraries based on usage: finance, statistics, math, engineering, unit conversions and strings. WestClinTech, the company that developed XLeratorDB, claims it is "the first commercial function package add-in for Microsoft SQL Server." == Company history == WestClinTech (LLC), founded by software industry veterans Charles Flock and Joe Stampf in 2008, is located in Irvington, New York, United States. Flock was a co-founder of The Frustum Group, developer of the OPICS enterprise banking and trading platform, which was acquired by London-based Misys, PLC in 1996. Stampf joined Frustum in 1994 and with Flock remained active with the company after acquisition, helping to develop successive generations of OPICS now employed by over 150 leading financial institutions worldwide. Following a full year of research, development and testing, WestClinTech introduced and recorded its first commercial sale of XLeratorDB in April 2009. In September 2009, XLeratorDB became available to all Federal agencies through NASA's Strategic Enterprise-Wide Procurement (SEWP-IV) program, a government-wide acquisition contract. == Technology == XLeratorDB uses Microsoft SQL CLR(Common Language Runtime) technology. SQL CLR allows managed code to be hosted by, and run in, the Microsoft SQL Server environment. SQL CLR relies on the creation, deployment and registration of .NET Framework assemblies that are physically stored in managed code dynamic-link libraries (DLL). The assemblies may contain .NET namespaces, classes, functions, and properties. Because managed code compiles to native code prior to execution, functions using SQL CLR can achieve significant performance increases versus the equivalent functions written in T-SQL in some scenarios. XLeratorDB requires Microsoft SQL Server 2005 or SQL Server 2005 Express editions, or later (compatibility mode 90 or higher). The product installs with PERMISSION_SET=SAFE. SAFE mode, the most restrictive permission set, is accessible by all users. Code executed by an assembly with SAFE permissions cannot access external system resources such as files, the network, the internet, environment variables, or the registry. == Functions == In computer science, a function is a portion of code within a larger program which performs a specific task and is relatively independent of the remaining code. As used in database and spreadsheet applications these functions generally represent mathematical formulas widely used across a variety of fields. While this code may be user-generated, it is also embedded as a pre-written sub-routine in applications. These functions are typically identified by common nomenclature which corresponds to their underlying operations: e.g. IRR identifies the function which calculates Internal Rate of Return on a series of periodic cash flows. === Function uses === As subroutines, functions can be integrated and used in a variety of ways, and as part of larger, more complicated applications. Within large enterprise applications they may, for example, play an important role in defining business rules or risk management parameters, while remaining virtually invisible to end users. Within database management systems and spreadsheets, however, these kinds of functions also represent discrete sets of tools; they can be accessed directly and utilized on a stand-alone basis, or in more complex, user-defined configurations. In this context, functions can be used for business intelligence and ad hoc analysis of data in fields such as finance, statistics, engineering, math, etc. === Function types === XLeratorDB uses three kinds of functions to perform analytic operations: scalar, aggregate, and a hybrid form which WestClinTech calls Range Queries. Scalar functions take a single value, perform an operation and return a single value. An example of this type of function is LOG, which returns the logarithm of a number to a specified base. Aggregate functions operate on a series of values but return a single, summarizing value. An example of this type of function is AVG, which returns the average of values in a specified group. In XLeratorDB there are some functions which have characteristics of aggregate functions (operating on multiple series of values) but cannot be processed in SQL CLR using single column inputs, such as AVG does. For example, irregular internal rate of return (XIRR), a financial function, operates on a collection of cash flow values from one column, but must also apply variable period lengths from another column and an initial iterative assumption from a third, in order to return a single, summarizing value. WestClinTech documentation notes that Range Queries specify the data to be included in the result set of the function independently of the WHERE clause associated with the T-SQL statement, by incorporating a SELECT statement into the function as a string argument; the function then traps that SELECT statement, executes it internally and processes the result. Some XLeratorDB functions that employ Range Queries are: NPV, XNPV, IRR, XIRR, MIRR, MULTINOMIAL, and SERIESSUM. Within the application these functions are identified by a "_q" naming convention: e.g. NPV_q, IRR_q, etc. == Analytic functions == === SQL Server functions === Microsoft SQL Server is the #3 selling database management system (DBMS), behind Oracle and IBM. (While versions of SQL Server have been on the market since 1987, XLeratorDB is compatible with only the 2005 edition and later.) Like all major DBMS, SQL Server performs a variety of data mining operations by returning or arraying data in different views (also known as drill-down). In addition, SQL Server uses Transact-SQL (T-SQL) to execute four major classes of pre-defined functions in native mode. Functions operating on the DBMS offer several advantages over client layer applications like Excel: they utilize the most up-to-date data available; they can process far larger quantities of data; and, the data is not subject to exporting and transcription errors. SQL Server 2008 includes a total of 58 functions that perform relatively basic aggregation (12), math (23) and string manipulation (23) operations useful for analytics; it includes no native functions that perform more complex operations directly related to finance, statistics or engineering. === Excel functions === Microsoft Excel, a component of Microsoft Office suite, is one of the most widely used spreadsheet applications on the market today. In addition to its inherent utility as a stand-alone desktop application, Excel overlaps and complements the functionality of DBMS in several ways: storing and arraying data in rows and columns; performing certain basic tasks such as pivot table and aggregating values; and facilitating sharing, importing and exporting of database data. Excel's chief limitation relative to a true database is capacity; Excel 2003 is limited to some 65k rows and 256 columns; Excel 2007 extends this capacity to roughly 1million rows and 16k columns. By comparison, SQL Server is able to manage over 500k terabytes of memory. Excel offers, however, an extensive library of specialized pre-written functions which are useful for performing ad hoc analysis on database data. Excel 2007 includes over 300 of these pre-defined functions, although customized functions can also be created by users, or imported from third party developers as add-ons. Excel functions are grouped by type: === Excel business intelligence functions === Operating on the client computing layer Excel plays an important role as a business intelligence tool because it: performs a wide array of complex analytic functions not native to most DBMS software offers far greater ad hoc reporting and analytic flexibility than most enterprise software provides a medium for sharing and collaborating because of its ubiquity throughout the enterprise Microsoft reinforces this positioning with Business Intelligence documentation that positions Excel in a clearly pivotal role. === XLeratorDB vs. Excel functions === While operating within the database environment, XLeratorDB functions utilize the same naming conventions and input formats, and in most cases, return the same calculation results as Excel functions. XLeratorDB, coupled with SQL Server's native capabilities, compares to Excel's function sets as follows:
Read more →
PauseAI

PauseAI is a global political movement founded in the Netherlands with the stated aim of achieving global coordination to stop the development of more powerful general artificial intelligence systems, at least until it is known how to build them safely, and keep them under democratic control. The movement was established in Utrecht in May 2023 by software entrepreneur Joep Meindertsma. == Proposal == PauseAI's stated goal is to "implement a temporary pause on the training of the most powerful general AI systems". Their website lists some proposed steps to achieve this goal: Set up an international AI safety agency, similar to the IAEA. Only allow training of general AI systems if their safety can be guaranteed. Only allow deployment of models after no dangerous capabilities are present. == Background == During the late 2010s and early 2020s, a rapid improvement in the capabilities of artificial intelligence models known as the AI boom was underway, which included the release of large language model GPT-3, its more powerful successor GPT-4, and image generation models Midjourney and DALL-E. This led to an increased concern about the risks of advanced AI, causing the Future of Life Institute to release an open letter calling for "all AI labs to immediately pause for at least six months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4". The letter was signed by thousands of AI researchers and industry CEOs such as Yoshua Bengio, Stuart Russell, and Elon Musk. == History == Founder Joep Meindertsma first became worried about the existential risk from artificial intelligence after reading philosopher Nick Bostrom's 2014 book Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. He founded PauseAI in May 2023, putting his job as the CEO of a software firm on hold. Meindertsma claimed the rate of progress in AI alignment research is lagging behind the progress in AI capabilities, and said "there is a chance that we are facing extinction in a short frame of time". As such, he felt an urge to organise people to act. PauseAI's first public action was to protest in front of Microsoft's Brussels lobbying office in May 2023 during an event on artificial intelligence. In November of the same year, they protested outside the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. The Bletchley Declaration that was signed at the summit, which acknowledged the potential for catastrophic risks stemming from AI, was perceived by Meindertsma to be a small first step. But, he argued "binding international treaties" are needed. He mentioned the Montreal Protocol and treaties banning blinding laser weapons as examples of previous successful global agreements. In February 2024, members of PauseAI gathered outside OpenAI's headquarters in San Francisco, in part due to OpenAI changing its usage policy that prohibited the use of its models for military purposes. On 13 May 2024, protests were held across thirteen countries before the AI Seoul Summit, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Germany, Australia, and Norway. Meindertserma said that those attending the summit "need to realize that they are the only ones who have the power to stop this race". Protesters in San Francisco held signs reading "When in doubt, pause", and "Quit your job at OpenAI. Trust your conscience". Jan Leike, head of the "superalignment" team at OpenAI, resigned two days later due to his belief that "safety culture and processes [had] taken a backseat to shiny products".
Read more →
Imageability

Imageability is a measure of how easily a physical object, word or environment will evoke a clear mental image in the mind of any person observing it. It is used in architecture and city planning, in psycholinguistics, and in automated computer vision research. In automated image recognition, training models to connect images with concepts that have low imageability can lead to biased and harmful results. == History and components == Kevin A. Lynch first introduced the term, "imageability" in his 1960 book, The Image of the City. In the book, Lynch argues cities contain a key set of physical elements that people use to understand the environment, orient themselves inside of it, and assign it meaning. Lynch argues the five key elements that impact the imageability of a city are Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks. Paths: channels in which people travel. Examples: streets, sidewalks, trails, canals, railroads. Edges: objects that form boundaries around space. Examples: walls, buildings, shoreline, curbstone, streets, and overpasses. Districts: medium to large areas people can enter into and out of that have a common set of identifiable characteristics. Nodes: large areas people can enter, that serve as the foci of the city, neighborhood, district, etc. Landmarks: memorable points of reference people cannot enter into. Examples: signs, mountains and public art. In 1914, half a century before The Image of the City was published, Paul Stern discussed a concept similar to imageability in the context of art. Stern, in Susan Langer's Reflections on Art, names the attribute that describes how vividly and intensely an artistic object could be experienced apparency. == In computer vision == Automated image recognition was developed by using machine learning to find patterns in large, annotated datasets of photographs, like ImageNet. Images in ImageNet are labelled using concepts in WordNet. Concepts that are easily expressed verbally, like "early", are seen as less "imageable" than nouns referring to physical objects like "leaf". Training AI models to associate concepts with low imageability with specific images can lead to problematic bias in image recognition algorithms. This has particularly been critiqued as it relates to the "person" category of WordNet and therefore also ImageNet. Trevor Pagan and Kate Crawford demonstrated in their essay "Excavating AI" and their art project ImageNet Roulette how this leads to photos of ordinary people being labelled by AI systems as "terrorists" or "sex offenders". Images in datasets are often labelled as having a certain level of imageability. As described by Kaiyu Yang, Fei-Fei Li and co-authors, this is often done following criteria from Allan Paivio and collaborators' 1968 psycholinguistic study of nouns. Yang el.al. write that dataset annotators tasked with labelling imageability "see a list of words and rate each word on a 1-7 scale from 'low imagery' to 'high imagery'. To avoid biased or harmful image recognition and image generation, Yang et.al. recommend not training vision recognition models on concepts with low imageability, especially when the concepts are offensive (such as sexual or racial slurs) or sensitive (their examples for this category include "orphan", "separatist", "Anglo-Saxon" and "crossover voter"). Even "safe" concepts with low imageability, like "great-niece" or "vegetarian" can lead to misleading results and should be avoided.
Read more →
Logico-linguistic modeling

Logico-linguistic modeling is a method for building knowledge-based systems with a learning capability using conceptual models from soft systems methodology, modal predicate logic, and logic programming languages such as Prolog. == Overview == Logico-linguistic modeling is a six-stage method developed primarily for building knowledge-based systems (KBS), but it also has application in manual decision support systems and information source analysis. Logico-linguistic models have a superficial similarity to John F. Sowa's conceptual graphs; both use bubble style diagrams, both are concerned with concepts, both can be expressed in logic and both can be used in artificial intelligence. However, logico-linguistic models are very different in both logical form and in their method of construction. Logico-linguistic modeling was developed in order to solve theoretical problems found in the soft systems method for information system design. The main thrust of the research into has been to show how soft systems methodology (SSM), a method of systems analysis, can be extended into artificial intelligence. == Background == SSM employs three modeling devices i.e. rich pictures, root definitions, and conceptual models of human activity systems. The root definitions and conceptual models are built by stakeholders themselves in an iterative debate organized by a facilitator. The strengths of this method lie, firstly, in its flexibility, the fact that it can address any problem situation, and, secondly, in the fact that the solution belongs to the people in the organization and is not imposed by an outside analyst. Information requirements analysis (IRA) took the basic SSM method a stage further and showed how the conceptual models could be developed into a detailed information system design. IRA calls for the addition of two modeling devices: "Information Categories", which show the required information inputs and outputs from the activities identified in an expanded conceptual model; and the "Maltese Cross", a matrix which shows the inputs and outputs from the information categories and shows where new information processing procedures are required. A completed Maltese Cross is sufficient for the detailed design of a transaction processing system. The initial impetus to the development of logico-linguistic modeling was a concern with the theoretical problem of how an information system can have a connection to the physical world. This is a problem in both IRA and more established methods (such as SSADM) because none base their information system design on models of the physical world. IRA designs are based on a notional conceptual model and SSADM is based on models of the movement of documents. The solution to these problems provided a formula that was not limited to the design of transaction processing systems but could be used for the design of KBS with learning capability. == The six stages of logico-linguistic modeling == The logico-linguistic modeling method comprises six stages. === 1. Systems analysis === In the first stage logico-linguistic modeling uses SSM for systems analysis. This stage seeks to structure the problem in the client organization by identifying stakeholders, modelling organizational objectives and discussing possible solutions. At this stage it not assumed that a KBS will be a solution and logico-linguistic modeling often produces solutions that do not require a computerized KBS. Expert systems tend to capture the expertise, of individuals in different organizations, on the same topic. By contrast a KBS, produced by logico-linguistic modeling, seeks to capture the expertise of individuals in the same organization on different topics. The emphasis is on the elicitation of organizational or group knowledge rather than individual experts. In logico-linguistic modeling the stakeholders become the experts. The end point of this stage is an SSM style conceptual models such as figure 1. === 2. Language creation === According to the theory behind logico-linguistic modeling the SSM conceptual model building process is a Wittgensteinian language-game in which the stakeholders build a language to describe the problem situation. The logico-linguistic model expresses this language as a set of definitions, see figure 2. === 3. Knowledge elicitation === After the model of the language has been built putative knowledge about the real world can be added by the stakeholders. Traditional SSM conceptual models contain only one logical connective (a necessary condition). In order to represent causal sequences, "sufficient conditions" and "necessary and sufficient conditions" are also required. In logico-linguistic modeling this deficiency is remedied by two addition types of connective. The outcome of stage three is an empirical model, see figure 3. === 4. Knowledge representation === Modal predicate logic (a combination of modal logic and predicate logic) is used as the formal method of knowledge representation. The connectives from the language model are logically true (indicated by the "L" modal operator) and connective added at the knowledge elicitation stage are possibility true (indicated by the "M" modal operator). Before proceeding to stage 5, the models are expressed in logical formulae. === 5. Computer code === Formulae in predicate logic translate easily into the Prolog artificial intelligence language. The modality is expressed by two different types of Prolog rules. Rules taken from the language creation stage of model building process are treated as incorrigible. While rules from the knowledge elicitation stage are marked as hypothetical rules. The system is not confined to decision support but has a built in learning capability. === 6. Verification === A knowledge based system built using this method verifies itself. Verification takes place when the KBS is used by the clients. It is an ongoing process that continues throughout the life of the system. If the stakeholder beliefs about the real world are mistaken this will be brought out by the addition of Prolog facts that conflict with the hypothetical rules. It operates in accordance to the classic principle of falsifiability found in the philosophy of science == Applications == === Knowledge-based computer systems === Logico-linguistic modeling has been used to produce fully operational computerized knowledge based systems, such as one for the management of diabetes patients in a hospital out-patients department. === Manual decision support === In other projects the need to move into Prolog was considered unnecessary because the printed logico-linguistic models provided an easy-to-use guide to decision making. For example, a system for mortgage loan approval === Information source analysis === In some cases a KBS could not be built because the organization did not have all the knowledge needed to support all their activities. In these cases logico-linguistic modeling showed shortcomings in the supply of information and where more was needed. For example, a planning department in a telecoms company == Criticism == While logico-linguistic modeling overcomes the problems found in SSM's transition from conceptual model to computer code, it does so at the expense of increased stakeholder constructed model complexity. The benefits of this complexity are questionable and this modeling method may be much harder to use than other methods. This contention has been exemplified by subsequent research. An attempt by researchers to model buying decisions across twelve companies using logico-linguistic modeling required simplification of the models and removal of the modal elements.
Read more →
Gcore

Gcore is an edge AI, cloud, network, and security company headquartered in Luxembourg. Founded in 2014, the company provides low-latency services to industries including finance, healthcare, manufacturing, gaming, media and telecommunications internationally. As of March 2024, its global network includes over 180 Points of Presence (PoPs) across six continents. == History == Gcore was founded in 2014 in Luxembourg. The company built its own content delivery network, originally designed for the needs of the gaming industry. In 2016, Gcore's infrastructure expanded to multiple regions that were underserved by hyperscale cloud providers. In 2020, the company formed partnerships with Intel and Equinix. In 2022, Gcore launched the European AI Cloud, providing access to infrastructure for machine learning tasks. In March 2024, Gcore announced the acquisition of a web application and API protection (WAAP) solution from StackPath. In April 2024, Gcore received a commendation in the Industry Innovation category at the NVIDIA Partner Network Awards EMEA for developing the first speech-to-text technology for Luxembourgish, using the LuxemBERT AI model. In May 2024, Philipp Rösler, former vice-chancellor of Germany and federal minister of health joined the Gcore board. In July 2024, Gcore raised $60 million in a Series A funding round, marking the company's first external investment since its founding. In August 2024, Gcore was recognized as a Major Player in the IDC MarketScape report for European public cloud Infrastructure (IaaS) 2024 by IDC, the global market intelligence firm. In May 2025, Feiyu Xu became a member of the Gcore advisory board. == Network infrastructure == According to the company's website, Gcore has network locations in six continents: Europe, North America, Asia, South America, Africa, and Australia with over 14,000 peering partners and a network capacity exceeding 200 Tbps. According to a 2025 review by Geekflare, Gcore's CDN achieved an average global response time of around 30 milliseconds. Gcore offers AI cloud clusters, including a generative AI cluster with Nvidia GPUs in Luxembourg and additional sites in the Netherlands and Wales, as part of its European AI infrastructure. == Products and services == Gcore offers a range of services, including content delivery network (CDN), cloud computing,virtual machines, bare-metal servers, object storage AI infrastructure and inference, Kubernetes, video streaming, DDoS mitigation, web application and API protection (WAAP), Domain Name System (DNS). Gcore provides AI services and GPU cloud infrastructure to support model development, training, fine-tuning, and inference. In January 2025, the company introduced Everywhere Inference, a serverless inference solution that enables AI model deployment. == Controversies == Correctiv and Tageszeitung reported that Gcore supported the distribution of the TV network RT until April 2023, which has been under sanctions by the EU since March 2022. However, Gcore denies these allegations. == Collaborations == In 2024, Gcore and Qareeb Data Centres, a data center provider in the Middle East, launched a collaboration to integrate Gcore's AI, cloud and edge services across data centers in multiple Middle Eastern countries. In June 2025, Gcore joined the SmartSpires initiative, a €3.1 million smart city project co-funded by the Connecting Europe Facility. The three-year programme is coordinated by a public–private consortium including 5SKYE, the Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST), Orange Luxembourg, and Gcore. The project aims to transform the Belval campus into a smart city by deploying 5G-enabled smart towers that integrate edge computing, artificial intelligence and IoT services. Within the consortium, Gcore acts as project coordinator and is responsible for the deployment of the edge infrastructure.
Read more →
AlphaGo

AlphaGo is a computer program that plays the board game Go. It was developed by the London-based DeepMind Technologies, an acquired subsidiary of Google. Subsequent versions of AlphaGo became increasingly powerful, including a version that competed under the name Master. After retiring from competitive play, AlphaGo Master was succeeded by an even more powerful version known as AlphaGo Zero, which was completely self-taught without learning from human games. AlphaGo Zero was then generalized into a program known as AlphaZero, which played additional games, including chess and shogi. AlphaZero has in turn been succeeded by a program known as MuZero which learns without being taught the rules. AlphaGo and its successors use a Monte Carlo tree search algorithm to find its moves based on knowledge previously acquired by machine learning, specifically by an artificial neural network (a deep learning method) by extensive training, both from human and computer play. A neural network is trained to identify the best moves and the winning percentages of these moves. This neural network improves the strength of the tree search, resulting in stronger move selection in the next iteration. In October 2015, in a match against Fan Hui, the original AlphaGo became the first computer Go program to beat a human professional Go player without handicap on a full-sized 19×19 board. In March 2016, it beat Lee Sedol in a five-game match, the first time a computer Go program has beaten a 9-dan professional without handicap. Although it lost to Lee Sedol in the fourth game, Lee resigned in the final game, giving a final score of 4 games to 1 in favour of AlphaGo. In recognition of the victory, AlphaGo was awarded an honorary 9-dan by the Korea Baduk Association. The lead up and the challenge match with Lee Sedol were documented in a documentary film also titled AlphaGo, directed by Greg Kohs. The win by AlphaGo was chosen by Science as one of the Breakthrough of the Year runners-up on 22 December 2016. At the 2017 Future of Go Summit, the Master version of AlphaGo beat Ke Jie, the number one ranked player in the world at the time, in a three-game match, after which AlphaGo was awarded professional 9-dan by the Chinese Weiqi Association. After the match between AlphaGo and Ke Jie, DeepMind retired AlphaGo, while continuing AI research in other areas. The self-taught AlphaGo Zero achieved a 100–0 victory against the early competitive version of AlphaGo, and its successor AlphaZero was perceived as the world's top player in Go by the end of the 2010s. == History == Go is considered much more difficult for computers to win than other games such as chess, because its strategic and aesthetic nature makes it hard to directly construct an evaluation function, and its much larger branching factor makes it prohibitively difficult to use traditional AI methods such as alpha–beta pruning, tree traversal and heuristic search. Almost two decades after IBM's computer Deep Blue beat world chess champion Garry Kasparov in the 1997 match, the strongest Go programs using artificial intelligence techniques only reached about amateur 5-dan level, and still could not beat a professional Go player without a handicap. In 2012, the software program Zen, running on a four PC cluster, beat Masaki Takemiya (9p) twice at five- and four-stone handicaps. In 2013, Crazy Stone beat Yoshio Ishida (9p) at a four-stone handicap. According to DeepMind's David Silver, the AlphaGo research project was formed around 2014 to test how well a neural network using deep learning can compete at Go. AlphaGo represents a significant improvement over previous Go programs. In 500 games against other available Go programs, including Crazy Stone and Zen, AlphaGo running on a single computer won all but one. In a similar matchup, AlphaGo running on multiple computers won all 500 games played against other Go programs, and 77% of games played against AlphaGo running on a single computer. The distributed version in October 2015 was using 1,202 CPUs and 176 GPUs. === Match against Fan Hui === In October 2015, the distributed version of AlphaGo defeated the European Go champion Fan Hui, a 2-dan (out of 9 dan possible) professional, five to zero. This was the first time a computer Go program had beaten a professional human player on a full-sized board without handicap. The announcement of the news was delayed until 27 January 2016 to coincide with the publication of a paper in the journal Nature describing the algorithms used. === Match against Lee Sedol === AlphaGo played South Korean professional Go player Lee Sedol, ranked 9-dan, one of the best players at Go, with five games taking place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Seoul, South Korea on 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 March 2016, which were video-streamed live. Out of five games, AlphaGo won four games and Lee won the fourth game which made him recorded as the only human player who beat AlphaGo in all of its 74 official games. AlphaGo ran on Google's cloud computing with its servers located in the United States. The match used Chinese rules with a 7.5-point komi, and each side had two hours of thinking time plus three 60-second byoyomi periods. The version of AlphaGo playing against Lee used a similar amount of computing power as was used in the Fan Hui match. The Economist reported that it used 1,920 CPUs and 280 GPUs. At the time of play, Lee Sedol had the second-highest number of Go international championship victories in the world after South Korean player Lee Chang-ho who kept the world championship title for 16 years. Since there is no single official method of ranking in international Go, the rankings may vary among the sources. While he was ranked top sometimes, some sources ranked Lee Sedol as the fourth-best player in the world at the time. AlphaGo was not specifically trained to face Lee nor was designed to compete with any specific human players. The first three games were won by AlphaGo following resignations by Lee. However, Lee beat AlphaGo in the fourth game, winning by resignation at move 180. AlphaGo then continued to achieve a fourth win, winning the fifth game by resignation. The prize was US$1 million. Since AlphaGo won four out of five and thus the series, the prize will be donated to charities, including UNICEF. Lee Sedol received $150,000 for participating in all five games and an additional $20,000 for his win in Game 4. In June 2016, at a presentation held at a university in the Netherlands, Aja Huang, one of the Deep Mind team, revealed that they had patched the logical weakness that occurred during the 4th game of the match between AlphaGo and Lee, and that after move 78 (which was dubbed the "divine move" by many professionals), it would play as intended and maintain Black's advantage. Before move 78, AlphaGo was leading throughout the game, but Lee's move caused the program's computing powers to be diverted and confused. Huang explained that AlphaGo's policy network of finding the most accurate move order and continuation did not precisely guide AlphaGo to make the correct continuation after move 78, since its value network did not determine Lee's 78th move as being the most likely, and therefore when the move was made AlphaGo could not make the right adjustment to the logical continuation. === Sixty online games === On 29 December 2016, a new account on the Tygem server named "Magister" (shown as 'Magist' at the server's Chinese version) from South Korea began to play games with professional players. It changed its account name to "Master" on 30 December, then moved to the FoxGo server on 1 January 2017. On 4 January, DeepMind confirmed that the "Magister" and the "Master" were both played by an updated version of AlphaGo, called AlphaGo Master. As of 5 January 2017, AlphaGo Master's online record was 60 wins and 0 losses, including three victories over Go's top-ranked player, Ke Jie, who had been quietly briefed in advance that Master was a version of AlphaGo. After losing to Master, Gu Li offered a bounty of 100,000 yuan (US$14,400) to the first human player who could defeat Master. Master played at the pace of 10 games per day. Many quickly suspected it to be an AI player due to little or no resting between games. Its adversaries included many world champions such as Ke Jie, Park Jeong-hwan, Yuta Iyama, Tuo Jiaxi, Mi Yuting, Shi Yue, Chen Yaoye, Li Qincheng, Gu Li, Chang Hao, Tang Weixing, Fan Tingyu, Zhou Ruiyang, Jiang Weijie, Chou Chun-hsun, Kim Ji-seok, Kang Dong-yun, Park Yeong-hun, and Won Seong-jin; national champions or world championship runners-up such as Lian Xiao, Tan Xiao, Meng Tailing, Dang Yifei, Huang Yunsong, Yang Dingxin, Gu Zihao, Shin Jinseo, Cho Han-seung, and An Sungjoon. All 60 games except one were fast-paced games with three 20 or 30 seconds byo-yomi. Master offered to extend the byo-yomi to one minute when playing with Nie Weiping in consideration of his age. After winning its 59th game Master revealed itse
Read more →
John F. Sowa

John Florian Sowa (born 1940) is an American computer scientist, an expert in artificial intelligence and computer design, and the inventor of conceptual graphs. == Biography == Sowa received a BS in mathematics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1962, an MA in applied mathematics from Harvard University in 1966, and a PhD in computer science from the Vrije Universiteit Brussel in 1999 with a dissertation titled "Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations". Sowa spent most of his professional career at IBM, starting in 1962 at IBM's applied mathematics group. Over the decades he has researched and developed emerging fields of computer science from compilers, programming languages, and system architecture to artificial intelligence and knowledge representation. In the 1990s Sowa was associated with the IBM Educational Center in New York. Over the years he taught courses at the IBM Systems Research Institute, Binghamton University, Stanford University, the Linguistic Society of America and the Université du Québec à Montréal. He is a fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. After early retirement at IBM, Sowa in 2001 cofounded VivoMind Intelligence, Inc. with Arun K. Majumdar. With this company he was developing data-mining and database technology, more specifically high-level "ontologies" for artificial intelligence and automated natural language understanding. Currently Sowa is working with Kyndi Inc., also founded by Majumdar. John Sowa is married to the philologist Cora Angier Sowa, and they live in Croton-on-Hudson, New York. == Work == Sowa's research interests since the 1970s were in the field of artificial intelligence, expert systems and database query linked to natural languages. In his work he combines ideas from numerous disciplines and eras modern and ancient, for example, applying ideas from Aristotle, the medieval scholastics to Alfred North Whitehead and including database schema theory, and incorporating the model of analogy of Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyyah in his works. === Conceptual graph === Sowa invented conceptual graphs, a graphic notation for logic and natural language, based on the structures in semantic networks and on the existential graphs of Charles S. Peirce. He introduced the concept in the 1976 article "Conceptual graphs for a data base interface" in the IBM Journal of Research and Development. He elaborated upon it in the 1983 book Conceptual structures: information processing in mind and machine. In the 1980s, this theory had "been adopted by a number of research and development groups throughout the world. International conferences on conceptual structures (ICCS) have been held since 1993, following a series of conceptual graph workshops that began in 1986. === Sowa's law of standards === In 1991, Sowa first stated his Law of Standards: "Whenever a major organization develops a new system as an official standard for X, the primary result is the widespread adoption of some simpler system as a de facto standard for X." Like Gall's law, The Law of Standards is essentially an argument in favour of underspecification. Examples include: The introduction of PL/I resulting in COBOL and FORTRAN becoming the de facto standards for business and scientific programming respectively The introduction of Algol-68 resulting in Pascal becoming the de facto standard for academic programming The introduction of the Ada language resulting in C becoming the de facto standard for US Department of Defense programming The introduction of OS/2 resulting in Windows becoming the de facto standard for desktop OS The introduction of X.400 resulting in SMTP becoming the de facto standard for electronic mail The introduction of X.500 resulting in LDAP becoming the de facto standard for directory services == Publications == 1984. Conceptual Structures - Information Processing in Mind and Machine. The Systems Programming Series, Addison-Wesley 1991. Principles of Semantic Networks. Morgan Kaufmann. Mineau, Guy W; Moulin, Bernard; Sowa, John F, eds. (1993). Conceptual Graphs for Knowledge Representation. LNCS. Vol. 699. doi:10.1007/3-540-56979-0. ISBN 978-3-540-56979-4. S2CID 32275791. 1994. International Conference on Conceptual Structures (2nd : 1994 : College Park, Md.) Conceptual structures, current practices : Second International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS'94, College Park, Maryland, USA, August 16–20, 1994 : proceedings. William M. Tepfenhart, Judith P. Dick, John F. Sowa, eds. Ellis, Gerard; Levinson, Robert; Rich, William; Sowa, John F, eds. (1995). Conceptual Structures: Applications, Implementation and Theory. LNCS. Vol. 954. doi:10.1007/3-540-60161-9. ISBN 978-3-540-60161-6. S2CID 27300281. Lukose, Dickson; Delugach, Harry; Keeler, Mary; Searle, Leroy; Sowa, John, eds. (1997). Conceptual Structures: Fulfilling Peirce's Dream. LNCS. Vol. 1257. doi:10.1007/BFb0027865. ISBN 3-540-63308-1. S2CID 1934069. 2000. Knowledge representation : logical, philosophical, and computational foundations, Brooks Cole Publishing Co., Pacific Grove Articles, a selection Sowa, J. F. (July 1976). "Conceptual Graphs for a Data Base Interface". IBM Journal of Research and Development. 20 (4): 336–357. doi:10.1147/rd.204.0336. Sowa, J. F.; Zachman, J. A. (1992). "Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture". IBM Systems Journal. 31 (3): 590–616. doi:10.1147/sj.313.0590. 1992. "Conceptual Graph Summary"; In: T.E. Nagle et al. (Eds.). Conceptual Structures: Current Research and Practice. Chichester: Ellis Horwood. 1995. "Top-level ontological categories." in: International journal of human-computer studies. Vol. 43, Iss. 5–6, Nov. 1995, pp. 669–685 2006. "Semantic Networks". In: Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science.. John Wiley & Sons.
Read more →
Business rule management system

A BRMS or business rule management system is a software system used to define, deploy, execute, monitor and maintain the variety and complexity of decision logic that is used by operational systems within an organization or enterprise. This logic, also referred to as business rules, includes policies, requirements, and conditional statements that are used to determine the tactical actions that take place in applications and systems. == Overview == A BRMS includes, at minimum: A repository, allowing decision logic to be externalized from core application code Tools, allowing both technical developers and business experts to define and manage decision logic A runtime environment, allowing applications to invoke decision logic managed within the BRMS and execute it using a business rules engine The top benefits of a BRMS include: Reduced or removed reliance on IT departments for changes in live systems. Although, QA and Rules testing would still be needed in any enterprise system. Increased control over implemented decision logic for compliance and better business management including audit logs, impact simulation and edit controls. The ability to express decision logic with increased precision, using a business vocabulary syntax and graphical rule representations (decision tables, decision models, trees, scorecards and flows) Improved efficiency of processes through increased decision automation. Some disadvantages of the BRMS include: Extensive subject matter expertise can be required for vendor specific products. In addition to appropriate design practices (such as Decision Modeling), technical developers must know how to write rules and integrate software with existing systems Poor rule harvesting approaches can lead to long development cycles, though this can be mitigated with modern approaches like the Decision Model and Notation (DMN) standard. Integration with existing systems is still required and a BRMS may add additional security constraints. Reduced IT department reliance may never be a reality due to continued introduction to new business rule considerations or object model perturbations The coupling of a BRMS vendor application to the business application may be too tight to replace with another BRMS vendor application. This can lead to cost to benefits issues. The emergence of the DMN standard has mitigated this to some degree. Most BRMS vendors have evolved from rule engine vendors to provide business-usable software development lifecycle solutions, based on declarative definitions of business rules executed in their own rule engine. BRMSs are increasingly evolving into broader digital decisioning platforms that also incorporate decision intelligence and machine learning capabilities. However, some vendors come from a different approach (for example, they map decision trees or graphs to executable code). Rules in the repository are generally mapped to decision services that are naturally fully compliant with the latest SOA, Web Services, or other software architecture trends. == Related software approaches == In a BRMS, a representation of business rules maps to a software system for execution. A BRMS therefore relates to model-driven engineering, such as the model-driven architecture (MDA) of the Object Management Group (OMG). It is no coincidence that many of the related standards come under the OMG banner. A BRMS is a critical component for Enterprise Decision Management as it allows for the transparent and agile management of the decision-making logic required in systems developed using this approach. == Associated standards == The OMG Decision Model and Notation standard is designed to standardize elements of business rules development, specially decision table representations. There is also a standard for a Java Runtime API for rule engines JSR-94. OMG Business Motivation Model (BMM): A model of how strategies, processes, rules, etc. fit together for business modeling OMG SBVR: Targets business constraints as opposed to automating business behavior OMG Production Rule Representation (PRR): Represents rules for production rule systems that make up most BRMS' execution targets OMG Decision Model and Notation (DMN): Represents models of decisions, which are typically managed by a BRMS RuleML provides a family of rule mark-up languages that could be used in a BRMS and with W3C RIF it provides a family of related rule languages for rule interchange in the W3C Semantic Web stack Many standards, such as domain-specific languages, define their own representation of rules, requiring translations to generic rule engines or their own custom engines. Other domains, such as PMML, also define rules.
Read more →
Automatic acquisition of sense-tagged corpora

The knowledge acquisition bottleneck is perhaps the major impediment to solving the word-sense disambiguation (WSD) problem. Unsupervised learning methods rely on knowledge about word senses, which is barely formulated in dictionaries and lexical databases. Supervised learning methods depend heavily on the existence of manually annotated examples for every word sense, a requisite that can so far be met only for a handful of words for testing purposes, as it is done in the Senseval exercises. == Existing methods == Therefore, one of the most promising trends in WSD research is using the largest corpus ever accessible, the World Wide Web, to acquire lexical information automatically. WSD has been traditionally understood as an intermediate language engineering technology which could improve applications such as information retrieval (IR). In this case, however, the reverse is also true: Web search engines implement simple and robust IR techniques that can be successfully used when mining the Web for information to be employed in WSD. The most direct way of using the Web (and other corpora) to enhance WSD performance is the automatic acquisition of sense-tagged corpora, the fundamental resource to feed supervised WSD algorithms. Although this is far from being commonplace in the WSD literature, a number of different and effective strategies to achieve this goal have already been proposed. Some of these strategies are: acquisition by direct Web searching (searches for monosemous synonyms, hypernyms, hyponyms, parsed gloss' words, etc.), Yarowsky algorithm (bootstrapping), acquisition via Web directories, and acquisition via cross-language meaning evidences. == Summary == === Optimistic results === The automatic extraction of examples to train supervised learning algorithms reviewed has been, by far, the best explored approach to mine the web for word-sense disambiguation. Some results are certainly encouraging: In some experiments, the quality of the Web data for WSD equals that of human-tagged examples. This is the case of the monosemous relatives plus bootstrapping with Semcor seeds technique and the examples taken from the ODP Web directories. In the first case, however, Semcor-size example seeds are necessary (and only available for English), and it has only been tested with a very limited set of nouns; in the second case, the coverage is quite limited, and it is not yet clear whether it can be grown without compromising the quality of the examples retrieved. It has been shown that a mainstream supervised learning technique trained exclusively with web data can obtain better results than all unsupervised WSD systems which participated at Senseval-2. Web examples made a significant contribution to the best Senseval-2 English all-words system. === Difficulties === There are, however, several open research issues related to the use of Web examples in WSD: High precision in the retrieved examples (i.e., correct sense assignments for the examples) does not necessarily lead to good supervised WSD results (i.e., the examples are possibly not useful for training). The most complete evaluation of Web examples for supervised WSD indicates that learning with Web data improves over unsupervised techniques, but the results are nevertheless far from those obtained with hand-tagged data, and do not even beat the most-frequent-sense baseline. Results are not always reproducible; the same or similar techniques may lead to different results in different experiments. Compare, for instance, Mihalcea (2002) with Agirre and Martínez (2004), or Agirre and Martínez (2000) with Mihalcea and Moldovan (1999). Results with Web data seem to be very sensitive to small differences in the learning algorithm, to when the corpus was extracted (search engines change continuously), and on small heuristic issues (e.g., differences in filters to discard part of the retrieved examples). Results are strongly dependent on bias (i.e., on the relative frequencies of examples per word sense). It is unclear whether this is simply a problem of Web data, or an intrinsic problem of supervised learning techniques, or just a problem of how WSD systems are evaluated (indeed, testing with rather small Senseval data may overemphasize sense distributions compared to sense distributions obtained from the full Web as corpus). In any case, Web data has an intrinsic bias, because queries to search engines directly constrain the context of the examples retrieved. There are approaches that alleviate this problem, such as using several different seeds/queries per sense or assigning senses to Web directories and then scanning directories for examples; but this problem is nevertheless far from being solved. Once a Web corpus of examples is built, it is not entirely clear whether its distribution is safe from a legal perspective. === Future === Besides automatic acquisition of examples from the Web, there are some other WSD experiments that have profited from the Web: The Web as a social network has been successfully used for cooperative annotation of a corpus (OMWE, Open Mind Word Expert project), which has already been used in three Senseval-3 tasks (English, Romanian and Multilingual). The Web has been used to enrich WordNet senses with domain information: topic signatures and Web directories, which have in turn been successfully used for WSD. Also, some research benefited from the semantic information that the Wikipedia maintains on its disambiguation pages. It is clear, however, that most research opportunities remain largely unexplored. For instance, little is known about how to use lexical information extracted from the Web in knowledge-based WSD systems; and it is also hard to find systems that use Web-mined parallel corpora for WSD, even though there are already efficient algorithms that use parallel corpora in WSD.
Read more →
GuideGeek

GuideGeek is an AI-powered travel assistant that was launched by travel publisher Matador Network in April 2023 and is accessed by users through Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger to plan itineraries or provide travel tips and recommendations. It uses generative artificial intelligence technology from OpenAI. Matador Network is a San Francisco-based digital media company and online travel publication with millions of monthly visitors and social media followers. == Features == Users message GuideGeek questions about travel and receive customized answers and itineraries that are pulled from ChatGPT in addition to over 1,000 additional travel-specific integrations such as live flight, hotel and vacation rental data. Travelers can specify their budget and needs to generate custom itineraries. GuideGeek is not an app and does not require the user to download anything, instead relying on messaging apps such as Instagram to connect users with the AI. GuideGeek is free to use, doesn't include ads, and doesn't sell user data. Matador Network has a team of staff members monitoring conversations to correct them if the AI makes a false statement; for example, one user incorrectly inputted “Crete Freeze” instead of “Crete, Greece”, and the AI made up a fictional soft serve company. Using a technique known as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), the accuracy of GuideGeek increased to 98%, according to Matador Network CEO, Ross Borden. == Destination partnerships == Matador Network is monetizing GuideGeek via white-label partnerships with tourism bureaus and destination marketing organizations (DMOs). As of March 2024, it had over a dozen such clients. Estes Park, Colorado, was one of the first DMOs to partner with Matador for a custom version of GuideGeek called “Rocky Mountain Roamer.” For Discover Greece, Matador created Pythia, a custom AI named after the high priestess of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. As Borden explained to Travel + Leisure, “Visitors to the Discover Greece website will find Pythia in the bottom right corner, and they can converse with the AI like a friend who knows everything about Greece.” Other DMOs who have partnerships with GuideGeek include the Aruba Tourism Authority, Visit Reno Tahoe, Illinois Office of Tourism, and Tourism Richmond. == Awards == In recognition of GuideGeek, Fast Company named Matador Network to its 2024 list of Most Innovative Companies. Following growth driven by the launch of GuideGeek, Matador Network was ranked on the 2024 Inc. 5000 list of fastest-growing private companies in America. The 2024 Skift IDEA Awards recognized Matador Network as a finalist in the category of Best Use of AI for GuideGeek's customized AI for the travel industry. == Michael Motamedi experiment == Travel influencer and chef Michael Motamedi traveled the world with his wife Vanessa Salas and their 2-year-old daughter on a six-month trip (which was later extended to a full year) led by GuideGeek. The family started off in Morocco before heading to Spain and continuing east. The experiment became the basis of a web series called “No Fixed Address.” Motamedi used GuideGeek's AI to select countries the family visited, where they ate, and what sites they saw. Motamedi and Salas first tested out the technology in April 2023 while using the chatbot to plan a date night in Mexico City. GuideGeek provided speakeasy and drink recommendations as well as local history facts.
Read more →
Vivid knowledge

Vivid knowledge refers to a specific kind of knowledge representation. The idea of a vivid knowledge base is to get an interpretation mostly straightforward out of it – it implies the interpretation. Thus, any query to such a knowledge base can be reduced to a database-like query. == Propositional knowledge base == A propositional knowledge base KB is vivid iff KB is a complete and consistent set of literals (over some vocabulary). Such a knowledge base has the property that it as exactly one interpretation, i.e. the interpretation is unique. A check for entailment of a sentence can simply be broken down into its literals and those can be answered by a simple database-like check of KB. == First-order knowledge base == A first-order knowledge base KB is vivid iff for some finite set of positive function-free ground literals KB+, KB = KB+ ∪ Negations ∪ DomainClosure ∪ UniqueNames, whereby Negations ≔ { ¬p | p is atomic and KB ⊭ p }, DomainClosure ≔ { (ci ≠ cj) | ci, cj are distinct constants }, UniqueNames ≔ { ∀x: (x = c1) ∨ (x = c2) ∨ ..., where the ci are all the constants in KB+ }. All interpretations of a vivid first-order knowledge base are isomorphic.
Read more →