AI Generator Character

AI Generator Character — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  EditDV

  EditDV was a video editing software released by Radius, Inc. in late 1997 as an evolution of their earlier Radius Edit product. EditDV was one of the first products providing professional-quality editing of the then new DV format at a relatively affordable cost ($999 including Radius FireWire capture card) and was named "The Best Video Tool of 1998". Originally EditDV was available for Macintosh only but in February 2000 EditDV 2.0 for Windows was released. With version 3.0 EditDV's name was changed to CineStream. == Features == Originally bundled with a FireWire card, EditDV 1.5 got updated into a less expensive software only package for use with the newer PowerMac G3 that came with a FireWire interface. Later, a scaled down version named EditDV 1.6.1 Unplugged was released as a freeware version next to EditDV 2.0. Unlike many other applications at the time which transcoded video to M-JPEG for editing, EditDV provided lossless native editing of the DV format. Only transitions (such as dissolves or wipes), effects (such as rotating or scaling the video, adjusting the audio level, or adding titles) and filters (such as changing the brightness or color balance) needed to be rendered. This also had the disadvantage to not work with analogue video capture. EditDV was built on top of QuickTime and supported QuickTime filters as well as its own built-in effects and transitions. Effects could be animated using keyframes. EditDV 2.0 worked natively with Quicktime MOV format. For Microsoft Windows users, where the standard was AVI, this required the use of a provided external conversion tool afterwards when AVI was wanted. The user interface had a Project window for organising clips into bins, a Sequence window with a multi-track timeline for arranging clips into a program using three-point editing, and Source and Program monitor windows. A finished program could either be exported as a QuickTime movie or written back to DV tape using the "print to video" command. Version 3.0, then renamed CineStream, shifted towards web designers who wanted to add video streaming interactivity to a website. The new feature called EventStream allowed setting clickable hot spots to link to another location, either to another page with a URL or to another video. This feature distinguished CineStream from the rest of the competition. == Products == The EditDV product family included a number of related products, all sharing a similar name: EditDV Video editing software (Mac and Windows) SoftDV A QuickTime software codec for playing DV media, included as part of EditDV (Mac and Windows) MotoDV PCI-based FireWire interface with DV capture software (Mac and Windows) PhotoDV Software to capture high-quality stills from a DV tape using MotoDV hardware (Mac and Windows) RotoDV Software for rotoscoping (painting over video), released in Sept 1999 (Macintosh only) == Name changes and eventual demise == In 1999, the company Radius Inc. changed its name to Digital Origin. In 2000, Digital Origin Inc (and EditDV) was bought by Media 100. In early 2001, Media 100 released an updated version of EditDV under the new name CineStream 3.0. Later that year (October 2001) Media 100 was bought by Autodesk's Discreet Division. CineStream for Macintosh required classic Mac OS. It was never ported to Mac OS X and faced increasing competition on that platform from Apple's own Final Cut Pro application. Development of EditDV/Cinestream was officially discontinued in 2002.

  Read more →
• 

  Aidoc

  Aidoc Medical is an Israeli technology company that develops computer-aided simple triage and notification systems. Aidoc has obtained U.S. Food and Drug Administration and CE mark approval for its stroke, pulmonary embolism, cervical fracture, intracranial hemorrhage, intra-abdominal free gas, and incidental pulmonary embolism algorithms. Aidoc algorithms are in use in more than 900 hospitals and imaging centers, including Montefiore Nyack Hospital, LifeBridge Health, LucidHealth, Yale New Haven Hospital, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, University of Rochester Medical Center, and Sheba Medical Center. == History == Aidoc was founded in 2016 by Elad Walach as the CEO, Michael Braginsky as the CTO and Guy Reiner as the VP. In April 2017, the company raised $7M, led by TLV Partners, and in April 2019, the company raised another $27M, led by Square Peg capital. There have been several additional rounds of funding as well, bringing Aidoc's total investment to $370M as of July 2025. In August 2018, Aidoc gained FDA clearance for its intracranial hemorrhage system, and in May 2019 it received clearance for the pulmonary embolism system. In January 2020, the system for detecting large-vessel occlusions (LVOs) in head CTA examinations obtained FDA clearance. In October 2024, it was reported that Aidoc is working with NVIDIA to develop a framework for deployment and integration of artificial intelligence tools in healthcare. The Blueprint for Resilient Integration and Deployment of Guided Excellence (BRIDGE) is a guideline to facilitate AI adoption in the healthcare industry. == Products and market == Aidoc has developed a suite of artificial intelligence products that flag both time-sensitive and time-consuming (for the radiologist) abnormalities across the body. The algorithms are developed with large quantities of data to provide diagnostic aid for a broad set of pathologies. The company offers an array of algorithms that span across the body, including for intracranial hemorrhage, spine fractures (C, T & L), free air in the abdomen, pulmonary embolism, and more. It developed "Always-on AI", a term coined by Elad Walach that refers to a type of artificial intelligence that is "Always-on—constantly running in the background and automatically analyzing medical imaging data, identifying urgent findings, and sparing radiologists from "drowning" in vast amounts of irrelevant data. Aidoc's solutions cover medical conditions prevalent in all settings (ED/inpatient/outpatient), including level 1 trauma centers, outpatient imaging centers, teleradiology groups and, are set up in over 200 medical centers worldwide. Notable customers include the University of Rochester Medical Center and Global Diagnostics Australia. Aidoc announced in 2024 that its new Clinical AI Reasoning Engine (CARE1) had been submitted for FDA approval. In September 2025 Aidoc received a "Breakthrough Device Designation" from the FDA for a new multi-triage solution that spans numerous acute findings in CT scans. Aidoc's CARE1 foundation model was the basis of the workflow on which the designation was made, enabling simultaneous coverage of multiple pathologies. This new designation allows parallel FDA review of multiple indications under a single submission. In April 2026, Aidoc raised million in a Series E funding round led by Growth Equity at Goldman Sachs Alternatives, with participation from General Catalyst and NVentures. The financing brought the company's total funding to over million. == Clinical Research == A clinical study on Aidoc’ accuracy of deep convolutional neural networks for the detection of pulmonary embolism (PE) on CT pulmonary angiograms (CTPAs) was performed by the University Hospital of Basel and presented at the European Congress of Radiology, showing that the Aidoc algorithm reached 93% sensitivity and 95% specificity. Clinical research has also been performed to test the diagnostic performance of Aidoc's deep learning-based triage system for the flagging of acute findings in abdominal computed tomography (CT) examinations. Overall, the algorithm achieved 93% sensitivity (91/98, 7 false negatives) and 97% specificity (93/96, 3 false-positive) in the detection of acute abdominal findings. Additional clinical research on Aidoc's Intracranial hemorrhage algorithm accuracy was presented at the European Congress of Radiology by Antwerp University Hospital, evaluating the use of its deep learning algorithm for the detection of intracranial hemorrhage on non-contrast enhanced CT of the brain. The University of Washington completed a study on the accuracy of Aidoc's intracranial hemorrhage algorithm.

  Read more →
• 

  Virtual directory

  In computing, the term virtual directory has a couple of meanings. It may simply designate (for example in IIS) a folder which appears in a path but which is not actually a subfolder of the preceding folder in the path. However, this article will discuss the term in the context of directory services and identity management. A virtual directory or virtual directory server (VDS) in this context is a software layer that delivers a single access point for identity management applications and service platforms. A virtual directory operates as a high-performance, lightweight abstraction layer that resides between client applications and disparate types of identity-data repositories, such as proprietary and standard directories, databases, web services, and applications. A virtual directory receives queries and directs them to the appropriate data sources by abstracting and virtualizing data. The virtual directory integrates identity data from multiple heterogeneous data stores and presents it as though it were coming from one source. This ability to reach into disparate repositories makes virtual directory technology ideal for consolidating data stored in a distributed environment. As of 2011, virtual directory servers most commonly use the LDAP protocol, but more sophisticated virtual directories can also support SQL as well as DSML and SPML. Industry experts have heralded the importance of the virtual directory in modernizing the identity infrastructure. According to Dave Kearns of Network World, "Virtualization is hot and a virtual directory is the building block, or foundation, you should be looking at for your next identity management project." In addition, Gartner analyst, Bob Blakley said that virtual directories are playing an increasingly vital role. In his report, “The Emerging Architecture of Identity Management,” Blakley wrote: “In the first phase, production of identities will be separated from consumption of identities through the introduction of a virtual directory interface.” == Capabilities == Virtual directories can have some or all of the following capabilities: Aggregate identity data across sources to create a single point of access. Create high-availability for authoritative data stores. Act as identity firewall by preventing denial-of-service attacks on the primary data stores through an additional virtual layer. Support a common searchable namespace for centralized authentication. Present a unified virtual view of user information stored across multiple systems. Delegate authentication to backend sources through source-specific security means. Virtualize data sources to support migration from legacy data stores without modifying the applications that rely on them. Enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. Some advanced identity virtualization platforms can also: Enable application-specific, customized views of identity data without violating internal or external regulations governing identity data. Reveal contextual relationships between objects through hierarchical directory structures. Develop advanced correlation across diverse sources using correlation rules. Build a global user identity by correlating unique user accounts across various data stores, and enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. Enable constant data refresh for real-time updates through a persistent cache. == Advantages == Virtual directories: Enable faster deployment because users do not need to add and sync additional application-specific data sources Leverage existing identity infrastructure and security investments to deploy new services Deliver high availability of data sources Provide application-specific views of identity data which can help avoid the need to develop a master enterprise schema Allow a single view of identity data without violating internal or external regulations governing identity data Act as identity firewalls by preventing denial-of-service attacks on the primary data-stores and providing further security on access to sensitive data Can reflect changes made to authoritative sources in real-time Leverages existing update processes of authoritative sources, so no separate (sometimes manual) process to update a central directory is needed Present a unified virtual view of user information from multiple systems so that it appears to reside in a single system Can secure all backend storage locations with a single security policy == Disadvantages == An original disadvantage is public perception of "push & pull technologies" which is the general classification of "virtual directories" depending on the nature of their deployment. Virtual directories were initially designed and later deployed with "push technologies" in mind, which also contravened with privacy laws of the United States. This is no longer the case. There are, however, other disadvantages in the current technologies. The classical virtual directory based on proxy cannot modify underlying data structures or create new views based on the relationships of data from across multiple systems. So if an application requires a different structure, such as a flattened list of identities, or a deeper hierarchy for delegated administration, a virtual directory is limited. Many virtual directories cannot correlate same-users across multiple diverse sources in the case of duplicate users Virtual directories without advanced caching technologies cannot scale to heterogeneous, high-volume environments. == Sample terminology == Unify metadata: Extract schemas from the local data source, map them to a common format, and link the same identities from different data silos based on a unique identifier. Namespace joining: Create a single large directory by bringing multiple directories together at the namespace level. For instance, if one directory has the namespace "ou=internal,dc=domain,dc=com" and a second directory has the namespace "ou=external,dc=domain,dc=com," then creating a virtual directory with both namespaces is an example of namespace joining. Identity joining: Enrich identities with attributes pulled from multiple data stores, based on a link between user entries. For instance if the user joeuser exists in a directory as "cn=joeuser,ou=users" and in a database with a username of "joeuser" then the "joeuser" identity can be constructed from both the directory and the database. Data remapping: The translation of data inside of the virtual directory. For instance, mapping “uid” to “samaccountname,” so a client application that only supports a standard LDAP-compliant data source is able to search an Active Directory namespace, as well. Query routing: Route requests based on certain criteria, such as “write operations going to a master, while read operations are forwarded to replicas.” Identity routing: Virtual directories may support the routing of requests based on certain criteria (such as write operations going to a master while read operations being forwarded to replicas). Authoritative source: A "virtualized" data repository, such as a directory or database, that the virtual directory can trust for user data. Server groups: Group one or more servers containing the same data and functionality. A typical implementation is the multi-master, multi-replica environment in which replicas process "read" requests and are in one server group, while masters process "write" requests and are in another, so that servers are grouped by their response to external stimuli, even though all share the same data. == Use cases == The following are sample use cases of virtual directories: Integrating multiple directory namespaces to create a central enterprise directory. Supporting infrastructure integrations after mergers and acquisitions. Centralizing identity storage across the infrastructure, making identity information available to applications through various protocols (including LDAP, JDBC, and web services). Creating a single access point for web access management (WAM) tools. Enabling web single sign-on (SSO) across varied sources or domains. Supporting role-based, fine-grained authorization policies Enabling authentication across different security domains using each domain’s specific credential checking method. Improving secure access to information both inside and outside of the firewall.

  Read more →
• 

  Controlled vocabulary

  A controlled vocabulary provides a way to organize knowledge for subsequent retrieval. Controlled vocabularies are used in subject indexing schemes, subject headings, thesauri, taxonomies and other knowledge organization systems. Controlled vocabulary schemes mandate the use of predefined, preferred terms that have been preselected by the designers of the schemes, in contrast to natural language vocabularies, which have no such restriction. == In library and information science == In library and information science, controlled vocabulary is a carefully selected list of words and phrases, which are used to tag units of information (document or work) so that they may be more easily retrieved by a search. Controlled vocabularies solve the problems of homographs, synonyms and polysemes by a bijection between concepts and preferred terms. In short, controlled vocabularies reduce unwanted ambiguity inherent in normal human languages where the same concept can be given different names and ensure consistency. For example, in the Library of Congress Subject Headings (a subject heading system that uses a controlled vocabulary), preferred terms—subject headings in this case—have to be chosen to handle choices between variant spellings of the same word (American versus British), choice among scientific and popular terms (cockroach versus Periplaneta americana), and choices between synonyms (automobile versus car), among other difficult issues. Choices of preferred terms are based on the principles of user warrant (what terms users are likely to use), literary warrant (what terms are generally used in the literature and documents), and structural warrant (terms chosen by considering the structure, scope of the controlled vocabulary). Controlled vocabularies also typically handle the problem of homographs with qualifiers. For example, the term pool has to be qualified to refer to either swimming pool or the game pool to ensure that each preferred term or heading refers to only one concept. === Types used in libraries === There are two main kinds of controlled vocabulary tools used in libraries: subject headings and thesauri. While the differences between the two are diminishing, there are still some minor differences: Historically, subject headings were designed to describe books in library catalogs by catalogers while thesauri were used by indexers to apply index terms to documents and articles. Subject headings tend to be broader in scope describing whole books, while thesauri tend to be more specialized covering very specific disciplines. Because of the card catalog system, subject headings tend to have terms that are in indirect order (though with the rise of automated systems this is being removed), while thesaurus terms are always in direct order. Subject headings tend to use more pre-coordination of terms such that the designer of the controlled vocabulary will combine various concepts together to form one preferred subject heading. (e.g., children and terrorism) while thesauri tend to use singular direct terms. Thesauri list not only equivalent terms but also narrower, broader terms and related terms among various preferred and non-preferred (but potentially synonymous) terms, while historically most subject headings did not. For example, the Library of Congress Subject Heading itself did not have much syndetic structure until 1943, and it was not until 1985 when it began to adopt the thesauri type term "Broader term" and "Narrow term". The terms are chosen and organized by trained professionals (including librarians and information scientists) who possess expertise in the subject area. Controlled vocabulary terms can accurately describe what a given document is actually about, even if the terms themselves do not occur within the document's text. Well known subject heading systems include the Library of Congress system, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) created by the United States National Library of Medicine, and Sears. Well known thesauri include the Art and Architecture Thesaurus and the ERIC Thesaurus. When selecting terms for a controlled vocabulary, the designer has to consider the specificity of the term chosen, whether to use direct entry, inter consistency and stability of the language. Lastly the amount of pre-coordination (in which case the degree of enumeration versus synthesis becomes an issue) and post-coordination in the system is another important issue. Controlled vocabulary elements (terms/phrases) employed as tags, to aid in the content identification process of documents, or other information system entities (e.g. DBMS, Web Services) qualifies as metadata. == Indexing languages == There are three main types of indexing languages. Controlled indexing language – only approved terms can be used by the indexer to describe the document Natural language indexing language – any term from the document in question can be used to describe the document Free indexing language – any term (not only from the document) can be used to describe the document When indexing a document, the indexer also has to choose the level of indexing exhaustivity, the level of detail in which the document is described. For example, using low indexing exhaustivity, minor aspects of the work will not be described with index terms. In general the higher the indexing exhaustivity, the more terms indexed for each document. In recent years free text search as a means of access to documents has become popular. This involves using natural language indexing with an indexing exhaustively set to maximum (every word in the text is indexed). These methods have been compared in some studies, such as the 2007 article, "A Comparative Evaluation of Full-text, Concept-based, and Context-sensitive Search". === Advantages === Controlled vocabularies are often claimed to improve the accuracy of free text searching, such as to reduce irrelevant items in the retrieval list. These irrelevant items (false positives) are often caused by the inherent ambiguity of natural language. Take the English word football for example. Football is the name given to a number of different team sports. Worldwide the most popular of these team sports is association football, which also happens to be called soccer in several countries. The word football is also applied to rugby football (rugby union and rugby league), American football, Australian rules football, Gaelic football, and Canadian football. A search for football therefore will retrieve documents that are about several completely different sports. Controlled vocabulary solves this problem by tagging the documents in such a way that the ambiguities are eliminated. Compared to free text searching, the use of a controlled vocabulary can dramatically increase the performance of an information retrieval system, if performance is measured by precision (the percentage of documents in the retrieval list that are actually relevant to the search topic). In some cases controlled vocabulary can enhance recall as well, because unlike natural language schemes, once the correct preferred term is searched, there is no need to search for other terms that might be synonyms of that term. === Disadvantages === A controlled vocabulary search may lead to unsatisfactory recall, in that it will fail to retrieve some documents that are actually relevant to the search question. This is particularly problematic when the search question involves terms that are sufficiently tangential to the subject area such that the indexer might have decided to tag it using a different term (but the searcher might consider the same). Essentially, this can be avoided only by an experienced user of controlled vocabulary whose understanding of the vocabulary coincides with that of the indexer. Another possibility is that the article is just not tagged by the indexer because indexing exhaustivity is low. For example, an article might mention football as a secondary focus, and the indexer might decide not to tag it with "football" because it is not important enough compared to the main focus. But it turns out that for the searcher that article is relevant and hence recall fails. A free text search would automatically pick up that article regardless. On the other hand, free text searches have high exhaustivity (every word is searched) so although it has much lower precision, it has potential for high recall as long as the searcher overcome the problem of synonyms by entering every combination. Controlled vocabularies may become outdated rapidly in fast developing fields of knowledge, unless the preferred terms are updated regularly. Even in an ideal scenario, a controlled vocabulary is often less specific than the words of the text itself. Indexers trying to choose the appropriate index terms might misinterpret the author, while this precise problem is not a factor in a free text, as it uses the author's own words. The use of controlled vocabularies can be costly compared to free

  Read more →
• 

  1.58-bit large language model

  A 1.58-bit large language model (also known as a ternary LLM) is a type of large language model (LLM) designed to be computationally efficient. It achieves this by using weights that are restricted to only three values: -1, 0, and +1. This restriction significantly reduces the model's memory footprint and allows for faster processing, as computationally expensive multiplication operations can be replaced with lower-cost additions. This contrasts with traditional models that use 16-bit floating-point numbers (FP16 or BF16) for their weights. Studies have shown that for models up to several billion parameters, the performance of 1.58-bit LLMs on various tasks is comparable to their full-precision counterparts. This approach could enable powerful AI to run on less specialized and lower-power hardware. The name "1.58-bit" comes from the fact that a system with three states contains log 2 ⁡ 3 ≈ 1.58 {\displaystyle \log _{2}3\approx 1.58} bits of information. These models are sometimes also referred to as 1-bit LLMs in research papers, although this term can also refer to true binary models (with weights of -1 and +1). == BitNet == In 2024, Ma et al., researchers at Microsoft, declared that their 1.58-bit model, BitNet b1.58 is comparable in performance to the 16-bit Llama 2 and opens the era of 1-bit LLM. BitNet creators did not use the post-training quantization of weights but instead relied on the new BitLinear transform that replaced the nn.Linear layer of the traditional transformer design. In 2025, Microsoft researchers had released an open-weights and open inference code model BitNet b1.58 2B4T demonstrating performance competitive with the full precision models at 2B parameters and 4T training tokens. == Post-training quantization == BitNet derives its performance from being trained natively in 1.58 bit instead of being quantized from a full-precision model after training. Still, training is an expensive process and it would be desirable to be able to somehow convert an existing model to 1.58 bits. In 2024, HuggingFace reported a way to gradually ramp up the 1.58-bit quantization in fine-tuning an existing model down to 1.58 bits. == Critique == Some researchers point out that the scaling laws of large language models favor the low-bit weights only in case of undertrained models. As the number of training tokens increases, the deficiencies of low-bit quantization surface.

  Read more →
• 

  Personal, Inc.

  Personal (also referred to as Personal.com or Personal, Inc.) was a consumer personal data service and identity management system for individuals to aggregate, manage and reuse their own data. It merged with digi.me in August 2017, a business in Europe that has the same business model. The combined company is called digi.me. One of its product lines, a collaborative data management and information security solution for the workplace called TeamData, was spun off as a new company as a result of the merger. == History == Personal was founded in 2009 in Washington, DC by the management team that built The Map Network, a location data and mapping platform that was acquired by Nokia/NAVTEQ in 2006. Personal was the first online consumer-facing company to be named an Ambassador for Privacy by Design for its technical, business and legal commitments to providing users with control over the data they store in Personal's service. Called a “life management platform” by The Economist and a “personal encrypted cloud service” by TIME for its user-centric approach to data, the company has been associated with both the Infomediary model originated in 1999 by John Hagel III and Mark Singer, as well as the vendor relationship management (VRM) model developed by Doc Searls. Personal raised $30m in funding to develop its platform and products from such leading investors as Steve Case's Revolution Ventures, Grotech Ventures, Allen & Company, Ted Leonsis, Neil Ashe, Jonathan Miller, Bill Miller of Legg Mason, Esther Dyson of EDventures, and Eric C. Anderson. The company received recognition for its user agreement, called the Owner Data Agreement, which acted like a reverse license agreement when data was shared between registered parties and emphasized that data ownership resides with the user. Doc Searls wrote in The Intention Economy: When Customers Take Charge that the Owner Data Agreement “had no precedent and modeled a new legal position, both for vendors and for intermediaries.” Personal was early to embrace “small data,” which it defines as “big data for the benefit of individuals.” The term “small data” may have been originally coined by Jeremie Miller of Sing.ly, who mentioned it in a talk at the Web 2.0 Summit in November 2011 and is cited in The Intention Economy. In 2011, Personal was a part of the first group of companies to join the Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium's Startup Circle. A Small Data Meetup group has also formed in New York City, bringing together technology, legal and business experts to exchange ideas about user-centric and user-driven models for internet products and services. Personal has been included in case studies by Ctrl-Shift and Forrester regarding Personal Data Stores and Personal Identity Management. In 2011, Personal received the Innovator Spotlight Award at Privacy Identity Innovation Conference (pii2011) and participated in the Technology Showcase at pii2012. In 2012, TechHive named Personal as one of the top five apps or web services of SXSW. Personal won the 2013 Campus Technology Innovators Award with Lone Star College in July 2013. Personal was included in a list of Executive Travel Magazine's favorite travel apps for 2013 in its May/June issue. In 2013, Personal was also included as part of NYU GovLab's Open Data 500 and was named by J. Walter Thompson as one of 100 things to watch for in 2014. In 2015, the National Law Journal named Company Chief Policy Officer and General Counsel, Joshua P. Galper, as one of their 50 "Cybersecurity & Privacy Trailblazers." == Products and services == === Overview === The Personal Platform was a privacy- and security-by-design platform for individuals to manage and reuse their own data and information. The Fill It app was a 1-click form-filling solution for web and mobile logins, checkouts and forms, and the Data Vault app served as the main cloud-based repository for a user's data. Personal helped individuals take control and benefit from their information while knowing that the information in their Data Vault remained legally theirs and could not be used without their permission. === Data Vault with Cloud Sync === Personal spent two years building the Personal Platform before launching its Data Vault product in beta in November 2011. Following Privacy by Design principles, Personal only enabled users to see or share the sensitive data and all the files they stored in their Data Vault. Such information was encrypted, and could only be decrypted with a user's password. Only users could choose and know their passwords to their vault because Personal did not store user passwords – and therefore could not reset them without deleting a user's sensitive data and all files stored in their vault. All Personal apps and services were linked to a user's private Data Vault. The Data Vault featured automatic synchronization of data and files added on any device logged into Personal. It also featured a “Secure Share” function that created a live, private network, allowing registered users to share access to data and files through an exchange of encrypted keys without the risk of transmitting the data or files through non-secure, direct means. It also allowed users to immediately update data across their own network and revoke access to it when they choose. Fast Company called the Data Vault “a tool that will simplify our lives.” Personal launched its Android app on November 30, 2011. The iOS Data Vault app was released on May 7, 2012. Personal officially launched its application programming interface (APIs) on October 2, 2012 at the Mashery Business of APIs Conference. A review by CNET highlighted the challenges of getting people to trust such a new service with their sensitive data and spending the time required entering enough data to make it useful. === Fill It App and Form Index === When the Data Vault was launched in November 2011, Mashable posed the question: “Never Fill Out a Form Again?” The World Economic Forum in its February 2013 report highlighted the possibility of saving 10 billion hours globally “and improv[ing] the delivery of public and private sector services” through automated form-filling tools, specifically citing Personal's Fill It app. In January 2013, Personal launched Fill It in beta as a web bookmarklet for automatic form-filling. On June 11, 2014, Personal released Fill It as a web extension and announced that it was publishing an index of over 140,000 1-click online forms at www.fillit.com. The company also announced that a mobile version of the product will launch later in the year. According to a story in Tech Cocktail about the launch, Personal's “web extension and mobile app are able to support over 1,200 different types of reusable data, even enabling them to unlock more confidential information so they can complete longer forms, including patient registrations, job applications, event registrations, school admissions, insurance and bank applications, and government forms.” In November 2014, a mobile version of Fill It was launched that could autofill mobile forms using APIs. Personal's form portal ultimately indexed more than 500,000 forms with three components, which, together, allowed data to be captured and reused across any of the forms: (1) a form graph, which mapped individual form fields to the Personal ontology; (2) a semantic layer, which determined how data was required on a form (e.g. one field vs. three fields for a U.S. telephone number); and (3) a correlations graph, which helped individuals match their specific data to a form without looking at the data value (e.g. knowing which phone number is a mobile phone number, which address is a billing address, or that a person uses their middle name as a first name on most forms). === Monetizing personal data === With the initial public offering of Facebook in May 2012, there was media interest in the question of the monetary value of personal data and whether tools and services might emerge to help consumers monetize their own data. Personal was frequently cited as a company that could potentially offer such a service. Articles and pieces focusing on this subject have appeared in The New York Times, AdWeek, the MIT Technology Review, and on CNN and National Public Radio. Company Co-founder and CEO Shane Green was quoted as saying that “the average American consumer would soon be able to realize over $1,000 per year” by granting limited, anonymous access to their data to marketers, but that figure was never supported by Green or the company. === Launch of TeamData === In May 2016, Personal shifted its product focus to TeamData, which focuses on the problem of securing and collaboratively managing data in the workplace. It is now a separate business.

  Read more →
• 

  Technical data management system

  A technical data management system (TDMS) is a document management system (DMS) pertaining to the management of technical and engineering drawings and documents. Often the data are contained in 'records' of various forms, such as on paper, microfilms or digital media. Hence technical data management is also concerned with record management involving technical data. Technical document management systems are used within large organisations with large scale projects involving engineering. For example, a TDMS can be used for integrated steel plants (ISP), automobile factories, aero-space facilities, infrastructure companies, city corporations, research organisations, etc. In such organisations, technical archives or technical documentation centres are created as central facilities for effective management of technical data and records. TDMS functions are similar to that of conventional archive functions in concepts, except that the archived materials in this case are essentially engineering drawings, survey maps, technical specifications, plant and equipment data sheets, feasibility reports, project reports, operation and maintenance manuals, standards, etc. Document registration, indexing, repository management, reprography, etc. are parts of TDMS. Various kinds of sophisticated technologies such as document scanners, microfilming and digitization camera units, wide format printers, digital plotters, software, etc. are available, making TDMS functions an easier process than previous times. == Constituents of a technical data management system == Technical data refers to both scientific and technical information recorded and presented in any form or manner (excluding financial and management information). A Technical Data Management System is created within an organisation for archiving and sharing information such as technical specifications, datasheets and drawings. Similar to other types of data management system, a Technical Data Management System consists of the 4 crucial constituents mentioned below. === Data planning === Data plans (long-term or short-term) are constructed as the first essential step of a proper and complete TDMS. It is created to ultimately help with the 3 other constituents, data acquisition, data management and data sharing. A proper data plan should not exceed 2 pages and should address the following basics: Types of data (samples, experiment results, reports, drawings, etc.) and metadata (data that summarizes and describes other data. In this case, it refers to details such as sample sizes, experiment conditions and procedures, dates of reports, explanations of drawings, etc.) Means of researches and collections of data (field works, experiments in production lines, etc.) Costs of researches Policies for access, sharing (re-use within the organisation and re-distribution to the public) Proposals for archiving data and maintaining access to it === Data acquisition === Raw data is collected from primary sites of the organisations through the use of modern technologies. Please reference the table below for examples. The data collected is then transferred to technical data centres for data management. === Data management === After data acquisition, data is sorted out, whilst useful data is archived, unwanted data is disposed. When managing and archiving data, the features below of the data are considered. Names, labels, values and descriptions for variables and records. (In the case of TDMS, one example is names of equipments on an equipment datasheet) Derived data from the original data, with code, algorithm or command file used to create them. (In the case of TDMS, one example is an expectation report derived from the analysis of an equipment datasheet) Metadata associates with the data being archived === Data sharing === Archived and managed data are accessible to rightful entities. A proper and complete TDMS should share data to a suitable extent, under suitable security, in order to achieve optimal usage of data within the organisation. It aims for easy access when reused by other researchers and hence it enhances other research processes. Data is often referred in other tests and technical specifications, where new analysis is generated, managed and archived again. As a result, data is flowing within the organisation under effective management through the use of TDMS. == Advantages and disadvantages of usage of technical data management systems == There are strengths and weakness when using technical data management systems (TDMS) to archive data. Some of the advantages and disadvantages are listed below. === Advantages === ==== 1. Faster and easier data management ==== Since TDMS is integrated into the organisation's systems, whenever workers develop data files (SolidWorks, AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, etc.), they can also archive and manage data, linking what they need to their current work, at the same time they can also update the archives with useful data. This speeds up working processes and makes them more efficient. ==== 2. Increased security ==== All data files are centralized, hence internal and external data leakages are less likely to happen, and the data flow is more closely monitored. As a result, data in the organisation is more secured. ==== 3. Increased collaboration within the organisation ==== Since the data files are centralized and the data flow within the organisation increases, researchers and workers within the organisation are able to work on joint projects. More complex tasks can be performed for higher yields. ==== 4. Compatible to various formats of data ==== TDMS is compatible to many formats of data, from basic data like Microsoft Words to complex data like voice data. This enhances the quality of the management of data archived. === Disadvantages === ==== 1. Higher financial costs ==== Implementing TDMS into the organisation's systems involves monetary costs. Maintenance costs certain amount of human resources and money as well. These resources involve opportunity costs as they can be utilized in other aspects. ==== 2. Lower stability ==== Since TDMS manages and centralizes all the data the organisation processes, it links the working processes within the whole organisation together. It also increases the vulnerability of the organisation data network. If TDMS is not stable enough or when it is exposed to hacker and virus attacks, the organisation's data flow might shut down completely, affecting the work in an organisation-wide scale and leading to a lower stability as results. == Comparison between traditional data management approaches and technical data management systems == Test engineers and researchers are facing great challenges in turning complex test results and simulation data into usable information for higher yields of firms. These challenges are listed below. Increase in complication of designs Reduced in time and budgets available Higher quality is demanded === Traditional data management approaches === Many organisations are still applying the conventional file management systems, due to the difficulty in building a proper and complete archives for data management. The first approach is the simple file-folder system. This costs the problem of ineffectiveness as workers and researchers have to manually go through numerous layers of systems and files for the target data. Moreover, the target data may contain files with different formats and these files may not be stored in the same machine. These files are also easily lost if renamed or moved to another location. The second approach is conventional databases such as Oracle. These databases are capable of enabling easy search and access of data. However, a great drawback is that huge effort for preparing and modeling the data is required. For large-scale projects, huge monetary costs are induced, and extra IT human resources must be employed for constant handling, expanding and maintaining the inflexible system, which is custom for specific tasks, instead of all tasks. In the long-term, it is not cost-effective. === Technical data management systems (TDMS) === TDMS is developed based on 3 principles, flexible and organized file storage, self-scaling hybrid data index, and an interactive post-processing environment. The system in practical, mainly consists of 3 components, data files with essential and relevant Metadata, data finders for organizing and managing data regardless of files formats, and, a software of searching, analyzing and reporting. With metadata attached to original data files, the data finder can identify different related data files during searches, even if they are in different file formats. TDMS hence allows researchers to search for data like browsing the Internet. Last but not least, it can adapt to changes and update itself according to the changes, unlike databases. == Comparison between strong information systems and weak information systems == Complex organizations may need large amounts

  Read more →
• 

  Ontology merging

  Ontology merging defines the act of bringing together two conceptually divergent ontologies or the instance data associated to two ontologies. This is similar to work in database merging (schema matching). This merging process can be performed in a number of ways, manually, semi automatically, or automatically. Manual ontology merging although ideal is extremely labour-intensive and current research attempts to find semi or entirely automated techniques to merge ontologies. These techniques are statistically driven often taking into account similarity of concepts and raw similarity of instances through textual string metrics and semantic knowledge. These techniques are similar to those used in information integration employing string metrics from open source similarity libraries.

  Read more →
• 

  The Master Algorithm

  The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World is a book by Pedro Domingos released in 2015. Domingos wrote the book in order to generate interest from people outside the field. == Overview == The book outlines five approaches of machine learning: inductive reasoning, connectionism, evolutionary computation, Bayes' theorem and analogical modelling. The author explains these tribes to the reader by referring to more understandable processes of logic, connections made in the brain, natural selection, probability and similarity judgments. Throughout the book, it is suggested that each different tribe has the potential to contribute to a unifying "master algorithm". Towards the end of the book the author pictures a "master algorithm" in the near future, where machine learning algorithms asymptotically grow to a perfect understanding of how the world and people in it work. Although the algorithm doesn't yet exist, he briefly reviews his own invention of the Markov logic network. == In the media == In 2016 Bill Gates recommended the book, alongside Nick Bostrom's Superintelligence, as one of two books everyone should read to understand AI. In 2018 the book was noted to be on Chinese Communist Party general secretary Xi Jinping's bookshelf. === Reception === A computer science educator stated in Times Higher Education that the examples are clear and accessible. In contrast, The Economist agreed Domingos "does a good job" but complained that he "constantly invents metaphors that grate or confuse". Kirkus Reviews praised the book, stating that "Readers unfamiliar with logic and computer theory will have a difficult time, but those who persist will discover fascinating insights." A New Scientist review called it "compelling but rather unquestioning".

  Read more →
• 

  Library and information scientist

  A library and information scientist, also known as a library scholar, is a researcher or academic who specializes in the field of library and information science and often participates in scholarly writing about and related to library and information science. A library and information scientist is neither limited to any one subfield of library and information science nor any one particular type of library. These scientists come from all information-related sectors including library and book history. == University of Chicago Graduate Library School == The University of Chicago Graduate Library School was established in 1928 to grant a graduate degree in librarianship with an emphasis on research. The program expanded the concept of librarianship, focused on scientific inquiry and established it as a domain for scientific study. In The Spirit of Inquiry: The Graduate Library School at Chicago, 1921-51 Richardson reviewed the history of the School and its impact on the discipline. == Bibliometric mappings == Bibliometric methods have been used to create maps of library and information science, thus identifying the most important researchers as well as their relative connections (or distances) and identifying emerging trends related to LIS publications within the field. White and McCain (1998) made a map of information science and Åström (2002), Chen, Ibekwe-SanJuan, and Hou (2010), Janssens, Leta, Glanzel, and De Moor (2006), and Zhao and Strotmann (2008) constructed some later maps of library and information science. Jabeen, Yun, Rafiq, and Jabeen (2015) mapped the growth and trends of LIS publications. == Notable library and information scientists == See also Beta Phi Mu Award, Award of Merit - Association for Information Science and Technology, Justin Winsor Prize (library)

  Read more →
• 

  BRS/Search

  BRS/Search is a full-text database and information retrieval system. BRS/Search uses a fully inverted indexing system to store, locate, and retrieve unstructured data. It was the search engine that in 1977 powered Bibliographic Retrieval Services (BRS) commercial operations with 20 databases (including the first national commercial availability of MEDLINE); it has changed ownership several times during its development and is currently sold as Livelink ECM Discovery Server by Open Text Corporation. == Early development == Development on what was to become BRS began as Biomedical Communications Network (BCN) at the State University of New York at Albany (SUNY). BCN, which went online in 1968, provided on-line access to nine databases, including MEDLINE and BIOSIS Previews, to large universities and medical schools primarily in the Northeast of the USA. State funding for the project was withdrawn in 1975, and Bibliographic Retrieval Services (BRS) was formed as a non-profit concern the following year. It was incorporated in May 1976 as a for-profit corporation with Ron Quake as president, Jan Egeland as vice president in charge of marketing and training, and Lloyd Palmer as vice president of systems. == BRS commercial operations == In December 1976, the First BRS User Meeting was held in Syracuse, New York, and by January 1977 BRS started commercial operations with 20 databases (including the first national commercial availability of MEDLINE) and 9 million records, using modified IBM STAIRS (STorage And Information Retrieval System) software, Telenet for telecommunications, and timesharing mainframe computers of Carrier Corporation. In October 1980 BRS was sold by Egeland and Quake to Indian Head, Inc., a subsidiary of the Dutch company Thyssen-Bornemisza Group. == 1989–1993 == In 1989 Robert Maxwell acquired BRS and the BRS/Search software; he announced the planned incorporation of the ORBIT Search Service and BRS Information Technologies and renamed the whole group Maxwell Online, Inc. At that time BRS Information Technologies was serving the medical and academic library marketplace with over 150 databases. Maxwell later bought the publishing company Macmillan and put Maxwell Online under Macmillan. In the same year BRS/LINK (hypertext connection of databases; first application delivering full text) was announced. The initial BRS/LINK application "relates the citation in a bibliographic database to its full-text article in a second database," and "eliminates the need to re-execute a search strategy in the second database in order to find the corresponding full-text article." Initially BRS/LINK supported linking only selected bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, Health Planning and Administration, and MEDLINE References on AIDS to the full-text Comprehensive Core Medical Library. At the time of Robert Maxwell’s death in 1991, Macmillan brought in Andrew Gregory to represent the company during the 2 years that Maxwell’s affairs were being settled and to prepare Maxwell Online to be able to sell the components. Maxwell Online shortly thereafter underwent yet another name change, this time to InfoPro Technologies. == Dataware Technologies ownership of BRS/SEARCH == Early in 1994, InfoPro Technologies, a subsidiary of MHC Inc. (holding company for Macmillan Inc.), the former Maxwell Online service, sold off all its subsidiaries. ORBIT Search Services went to the French-owned Questel, the dial-up BRS Search Services to CD Plus Technologies (later to become OVID), and BRS Software Products (including BRS/SEARCH) to Dataware Technologies. Almost up to the end of InfoPro Technologies, BRS Software had been the fastest growing segment of the company. At the 14th BRS North American Users Group Conference in 1999, Dave Schubmehl of Dataware Technologies presented a paper in which he stated "The purpose of this presentation is to update BRS users on upcoming releases of BRS/Search, NetAnswer, and other Dataware products. BRS/Search 7.0 will include features specifically requested by customers, as well as other enhancements. Earlier this year, Dataware acquired Sovereign Hill Software, makers of InQuery. In light of that acquisition, and Dataware's other development projects, we'll look at Dataware's plans for all products, including BRS/Search and NetAnswer." == Open Text acquisition of BRS/Search == In 2001 BRS/Search was acquired by Open Text and became LiveLink ECM Discovery Server. It is now referred to as Open Text Discovery Server. Open Text still supports both BRS/Search and NetAnswer. The core BRS/Search technology in the Open Text portfolio was augmented with other capabilities through various acquisitions. For example, Dataware's acquisition of Sovereign-Hill brought InQuery, “a probabilistic information retrieval system using an inference network”, which was developed by the University of Massachusetts Amherst Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval] out of the UMass CIIR and into the marketplace. A product re-branding table shows the range of products, their old names and their new names. InQuery is a concept search engine that uses noun phrases, parts of speech and other co-occurrence relationships in overlapping passages of text rather than single term inverted indexes of single words in documents. Open Text's portfolio has grown to include Hummingbird Content Management, and has always included BASIS. == 2003 == BRS/Search North America User's Group (BRSNAUG) website with a June 8, 2003 date listed the following features for BRS/Search. The BRSNAUG also disincorporated in 2003. Cross-references to BRS/Search on the World Wide Web point to Open Text Livelink. Engine features include: Rapid query response time. Numerical data handling and elementary statistical processing (sum, avg, min, max) Search results weighting and relevancy ranking Left- and right-truncation and expansion of search terms Superior data compression – loaded databases typically use only about 1.5 times the input stream size in disk space Large capacity databases – up to 100 million documents, each with up to 65,000 paragraphs Fine control of indexing and searching – right down to the word, sentence, and paragraph level Fine control over data security. Document access can be controlled at the database, document, and paragraph level International language support for all 7/8 bit characters sets and customizable language tables Flexible and customizable stop word lists ANSI-compatible thesauri Hypertext links within and between documents and databases (R6.x) Support for natural language parsing of queries Automatic document summarization tools Client/Server development Programming interfaces for World-Wide Web (HTTP, HTML) access to databases

  Read more →
• 

  Umbrella review

  In medical research, an umbrella review is a review of systematic reviews or meta-analyses. They may also be called overviews of reviews, reviews of reviews, summaries of systematic reviews, or syntheses of reviews. Umbrella reviews are among the highest levels of evidence currently available in medicine. By summarizing information from multiple overview articles, umbrella reviews make it easier to review the evidence and allow for comparison of results between each of the individual reviews. Umbrella reviews may address a broader question than a typical review, such as discussing multiple different treatment comparisons instead of only one. They are especially useful for developing guidelines and clinical practice, and when comparing competing interventions.

  Read more →
• 

  Distinguishable interfaces

  Distinguishable interfaces use computer graphic principles to automatically generate easily distinguishable appearance for computer data. Although the desktop metaphor revolutionized user interfaces, there is evidence that a spatial layout alone does little to help in locating files and other data; distinguishable appearance is also required. Studies have shown that average users have considerable difficulty finding files on their personal computers, even ones that they created the same day. Search engines do not always help, since it has been found that users often know of the existence of a file without being able to specify relevant search terms. On the contrary, people appear to incrementally search for files using some form of context. Recently researchers and web developers have argued that the problem is the lack of distinguishable appearance: in the traditional computer interface most objects and locations appear identical. This problem rarely occurs in the real world, where both objects and locations generally have easily distinguishable appearance. Discriminability was one of the recommendations in the ISO 9241-12 recommendation on presentation of information on visual displays (part of the overall report on Ergonomics of Human System Interaction), however it was assumed in that report that this would be achieved by manual design of graphical symbols. == VisualIDs, semanticons, and identicons == The mass availability of computer graphics supported the introduction of approaches that make better use of the brain's "visual hardware", by providing individual files and other abstract data with distinguishable appearance. This idea initially appeared in strictly academic VisualIDs and Semanticons works, but the web community has explored and rapidly adopted similar ideas, such as the Identicon. The VisualIDs project automatically generated icons for files or other data based on a hash of the data identifier, so the icons had no relation to the content or meaning of the data. It was argued not only that generating meaningful icons is unnecessary (their user study showed rapid learning of the arbitrary icons), but also that basing icons on content is actually incorrect ("contrasting visualization with visual identifiers"). The Semanticons project developed by Setlur et al. demonstrated an algorithm to create icons that reflect the content of files. In this work the name, location and content of a file are parsed and used to retrieve related image(s) from an image database. These are then processed using a Non-photorealistic rendering technique in order to generate graphical icons. Developer Don Park introduced the identicon library for making a visual icon from a hash of a data identifier. This initial public implementation has spawned a large number of implementations for various environments. In particular, identicons are now being used as default visual user identifiers (avatars) for several widely used systems. They are also used as a complement to Gravatars, which are pre-existing avatar images created or chosen by users, instead of automatically generated images. (see #External links). == Current research == While current web practice has followed the semantics-free approach of VisualIDs, recent research has followed the semantics-based approach of Semanticons. Examples include using data mining principles to automatically create "intelligent icons" that reflect the contents of files and creating icons for music files that reflect audio characteristics or affective content.

  Read more →
• 

  Data (word)

  The word data is most often used as a singular collective mass noun in educated everyday usage. However, due to the history and etymology of the word, considerable controversy has existed on whether it should be considered a mass noun used with verbs conjugated in the singular, or should be treated as the plural of the now-rarely-used datum. == Usage in English == In one sense, data is the plural form of datum. Datum actually can also be a count noun with the plural datums (see usage in datum article) that can be used with cardinal numbers (e.g., "80 datums"); data (originally a Latin plural) is not used like a normal count noun with cardinal numbers and can be plural with plural determiners such as these and many, or it can be used as a mass noun with a verb in the singular form. Even when a very small quantity of data is referenced (one number, for example), the phrase piece of data is often used, as opposed to datum. The debate over appropriate usage continues, but "data" as a singular form is far more common. In English, the word datum is still used in the general sense of "an item given". In cartography, geography, nuclear magnetic resonance and technical drawing, it is often used to refer to a single specific reference datum from which distances to all other data are measured. Any measurement or result is a datum, though data point is now far more common. Data is indeed most often used as a singular mass noun in educated everyday usage. Some major newspapers, such as The New York Times, use it either in the singular or plural. In The New York Times, the phrases "the survey data are still being analyzed" and "the first year for which data is available" have appeared within one day. The Wall Street Journal explicitly allows this usage in its style guide. The Associated Press style guide classifies data as a collective noun that takes the singular when treated as a unit but the plural when referring to individual items (e.g., "The data is sound" and "The data have been carefully collected"). In scientific writing, data is often treated as a plural, as in These data do not support the conclusions, but the word is also used as a singular mass entity like information (e.g., in computing and related disciplines). British usage now widely accepts treating data as singular in standard English, including everyday newspaper usage at least in non-scientific use. UK scientific publishing still prefers treating it as a plural. Some UK university style guides recommend using data for both singular and plural use, and others recommend treating it only as a singular in connection with computers. The IEEE Computer Society allows usage of data as either a mass noun or plural based on author preference, while IEEE in the editorial style manual indicates to always use the plural form. Some professional organizations and style guides require that authors treat data as a plural noun. For example, the Air Force Flight Test Center once stated that the word data is always plural, never singular.

  Read more →
• 

  Single-source publishing

  Single-source publishing, also known as single-sourcing publishing, is a content management method which allows the same source content to be used across different forms of media and more than one time. The labor-intensive and expensive work of editing need only be carried out once, on only one document; that source document (the single source of truth) can then be stored in one place and reused. This reduces the potential for error, as corrections are only made one time in the source document. The benefits of single-source publishing primarily relate to the editor rather than the user. The user benefits from the consistency that single-sourcing brings to terminology and information. This assumes the content manager has applied an organized conceptualization to the underlying content (A poor conceptualization can make single-source publishing less useful). Single-source publishing is sometimes used synonymously with multi-channel publishing though whether or not the two terms are synonymous is a matter of discussion. == Definition == While there is a general definition of single-source publishing, there is no single official delineation between single-source publishing and multi-channel publishing, nor are there any official governing bodies to provide such a delineation. Single-source publishing is most often understood as the creation of one source document in an authoring tool and converting that document into different file formats or human languages (or both) multiple times with minimal effort. Multi-channel publishing can either be seen as synonymous with single-source publishing, or similar in that there is one source document but the process itself results in more than a mere reproduction of that source. == History == The origins of single-source publishing lie, indirectly, with the release of Windows 3.0 in 1990. With the eclipsing of MS-DOS by graphical user interfaces, help files went from being unreadable text along the bottom of the screen to hypertext systems such as WinHelp. On-screen help interfaces allowed software companies to cease the printing of large, expensive help manuals with their products, reducing costs for both producer and consumer. This system raised opportunities as well, and many developers fundamentally changed the way they thought about publishing. Writers of software documentation did not simply move from being writers of traditional bound books to writers of electronic publishing, but rather they became authors of central documents which could be reused multiple times across multiple formats. The first single-source publishing project was started in 1993 by Cornelia Hofmann at Schneider Electric in Seligenstadt, using software based on Interleaf to automatically create paper documentation in multiple languages based on a single original source file. XML, developed during the mid- to late-1990s, was also significant to the development of single-source publishing as a method. XML, a markup language, allows developers to separate their documentation into two layers: a shell-like layer based on presentation and a core-like layer based on the actual written content. This method allows developers to write the content only one time while switching it in and out of multiple different formats and delivery methods. In the mid-1990s, several firms began creating and using single-source content for technical documentation (Boeing Helicopter, Sikorsky Aviation and Pratt & Whitney Canada) and user manuals (Ford owners manuals) based on tagged SGML and XML content generated using the Arbortext Epic editor with add-on functions developed by a contractor. The concept behind this usage was that complex, hierarchical content that did not lend itself to discrete componentization could be used across a variety of requirements by tagging the differences within a single document using the capabilities built into SGML and XML. Ford, for example, was able to tag its single owner's manual files so that 12 model years could be generated via a resolution script running on the single completed file. Pratt & Whitney, likewise, was able to tag up to 20 subsets of its jet engine manuals in single-source files, calling out the desired version at publication time. World Book Encyclopedia also used the concept to tag its articles for American and British versions of English. Starting from the early 2000s, single-source publishing was used with an increasing frequency in the field of technical translation. It is still regarded as the most efficient method of publishing the same material in different languages. Once a printed manual was translated, for example, the online help for the software program which the manual accompanies could be automatically generated using the method. Metadata could be created for an entire manual and individual pages or files could then be translated from that metadata with only one step, removing the need to recreate information or even database structures. Although single-source publishing is now decades old, its importance has increased urgently as of the 2010s. As consumption of information products rises and the number of target audiences expands, so does the work of developers and content creators. Within the industry of software and its documentation, there is a perception that the choice is to embrace single-source publishing or render one's operations obsolete. == Criticism == Editors using single-source publishing have been criticized for below-standard work quality, leading some critics to describe single-source publishing as the "conveyor belt assembly" of content creation. While heavily used in technical translation, there are risks of error in regard to indexing. While two words might be synonyms in English, they may not be synonyms in another language. In a document produced via single-sourcing, the index will be translated automatically and the two words will be rendered as synonyms. This is because they are synonyms in the source language, while in the target language they are not.

  Read more →