AI Generator House Design

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

• 

  Dynamic texture

  Dynamic texture ( sometimes referred to as temporal texture) is the texture with motion which can be found in videos of sea-waves, fire, smoke, wavy trees, etc. Dynamic texture has a spatially repetitive pattern with time-varying visual pattern. Modeling and analyzing dynamic texture is a topic of images processing and pattern recognition in computer vision. Extracting features that describe the dynamic texture can be utilized for tasks of images sequences classification, segmentation, recognition and retrieval. Comparing with texture found within static images, analyzing dynamic texture is a challenging problem. It is important that the extracted features from dynamic texture combine motion and appearance description, and also be invariance to some transformation such as rotation, translation and illumination. == Analysis methods of dynamic texture == The methods of dynamic texture recognition can categorized as follows: Methods based on optical flow: by applying optical flow to the dynamic texture, velocity with direction and magnitude can be detected and used to recognize the dynamic texture. Due to simplicity of its computation, it is currently the most popular method. Methods computing geometric properties: this methods track the surfaces of motion trajectories in spatiotemporal domain. Methods based on local spatiotemporal filtering : this methods analyze the local spatiotemporal patterns and its orientation and energy and employ them as feature used for classification. Methods based on global spatiotemporal transform: this method characterize the motion at different scale using wavelets that can decompose the motion into local and global. Model-based methods : These methods aims at generating a model to describe the motion by a set of parameters. == Applications == - Segmenting the sequence images of natural scenes. This helps on differentiate between streets and grass alongside these streets which could be used in the application of navigations. - Motion detection : Dynamic texture features extracted from footage videos can be exploited to detect abnormal crowd activities. - Video classification: video of natural scenes or other scenes that exhibit dynamic textures. - Video retrieval : Dynamic textures can be employed as a feature retrieve videos that contain, for example, sea-waves, smoke, clouds, wavy trees.

  Read more →
• 

  Planner (programming language)

  Planner (often seen in publications as "PLANNER" although it is not an acronym) is a programming language designed by Carl Hewitt at MIT, and first published in 1969. First, subsets such as Micro-Planner and Pico-Planner were implemented, and then essentially the whole language was implemented as Popler by Julian Davies at the University of Edinburgh in the POP-2 programming language. Derivations such as QA4, Conniver, QLISP and Ether (see scientific community metaphor) were important tools in artificial intelligence research in the 1970s, which influenced commercial developments such as Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) and Automated Reasoning Tool (ART). == Procedural approach versus logical approach == The two major paradigms for constructing semantic software systems were procedural and logical. The procedural paradigm was epitomized by Lisp which featured recursive procedures that operated on list structures. The logical paradigm was epitomized by uniform proof procedure resolution-based derivation (proof) finders. According to the logical paradigm it was “cheating” to incorporate procedural knowledge. == Procedural embedding of knowledge == Planner was invented for the purposes of the procedural embedding of knowledge and was a rejection of the resolution uniform proof procedure paradigm, which Converted everything to clausal form. Converting all information to clausal form is problematic because it hides the underlying structure of the information. Then used resolution to attempt to obtain a proof by contradiction by adding the clausal form of the negation of the theorem to be proved. Using only resolution as the rule of inference is problematical because it hides the underlying structure of proofs. Also, using proof by contradiction is problematical because the axiomatizations of all practical domains of knowledge are inconsistent in practice. Planner was a kind of hybrid between the procedural and logical paradigms because it combined programmability with logical reasoning. Planner featured a procedural interpretation of logical sentences where an implication of the form (P implies Q) can be procedurally interpreted in the following ways using pattern-directed invocation: Forward chaining (antecedently): If assert P, assert Q If assert not Q, assert not P Backward chaining (consequently) If goal Q, goal P If goal not P, goal not Q In this respect, the development of Planner was influenced by natural deductive logical systems (especially the one by Frederic Fitch [1952]). == Micro-planner implementation == A subset called Micro-Planner was implemented by Gerry Sussman, Eugene Charniak and Terry Winograd and was used in Winograd's natural-language understanding program SHRDLU, Eugene Charniak's story understanding work, Thorne McCarty's work on legal reasoning, and some other projects. This generated a great deal of excitement in the field of AI. It also generated controversy because it proposed an alternative to the logic approach that had been one of the mainstay paradigms for AI. At SRI International, Jeff Rulifson, Jan Derksen, and Richard Waldinger developed QA4 which built on the constructs in Planner and introduced a context mechanism to provide modularity for expressions in the database. Earl Sacerdoti and Rene Reboh developed QLISP, an extension of QA4 embedded in INTERLISP, providing Planner-like reasoning embedded in a procedural language and developed in its rich programming environment. QLISP was used by Richard Waldinger and Karl Levitt for program verification, by Earl Sacerdoti for planning and execution monitoring, by Jean-Claude Latombe for computer-aided design, by Nachum Dershowitz for program synthesis, by Richard Fikes for deductive retrieval, and by Steven Coles for an early expert system that guided use of an econometric model. Computers were expensive. They had only a single slow processor and their memories were very small by comparison with today. So Planner adopted some efficiency expedients including the following: Backtracking was adopted to economize on the use of time and storage by working on and storing only one possibility at a time in exploring alternatives. A unique name assumption was adopted to save space and time by assuming that different names referred to different objects. For example, names like Peking (previous PRC capital name) and Beijing (current PRC capital transliteration) were assumed to refer to different objects. A closed-world assumption could be implemented by conditionally testing whether an attempt to prove a goal exhaustively failed. Later this capability was given the misleading name "negation as failure" because for a goal G it was possible to say: "if attempting to achieve G exhaustively fails then assert (Not G)." == The genesis of Prolog == Gerry Sussman, Eugene Charniak, Seymour Papert and Terry Winograd visited the University of Edinburgh in 1971, spreading the news about Micro-Planner and SHRDLU and casting doubt on the resolution uniform proof procedure approach that had been the mainstay of the Edinburgh Logicists. At the University of Edinburgh, Bruce Anderson implemented a subset of Micro-Planner called PICO-PLANNER, and Julian Davies (1973) implemented essentially all of Planner. According to Donald MacKenzie, Pat Hayes recalled the impact of a visit from Papert to Edinburgh, which had become the "heart of artificial intelligence's Logicland," according to Papert's MIT colleague, Carl Hewitt. Papert eloquently voiced his critique of the resolution approach dominant at Edinburgh "…and at least one person upped sticks and left because of Papert." The above developments generated tension among the Logicists at Edinburgh. These tensions were exacerbated when the UK Science Research Council commissioned Sir James Lighthill to write a report on the AI research situation in the UK. The resulting report [Lighthill 1973; McCarthy 1973] was highly critical although SHRDLU was favorably mentioned. Pat Hayes visited Stanford where he learned about Planner. When he returned to Edinburgh, he tried to influence his friend Bob Kowalski to take Planner into account in their joint work on automated theorem proving. "Resolution theorem-proving was demoted from a hot topic to a relic of the misguided past. Bob Kowalski doggedly stuck to his faith in the potential of resolution theorem proving. He carefully studied Planner.”. Kowalski [1988] states "I can recall trying to convince Hewitt that Planner was similar to SL-resolution." But Planner was invented for the purposes of the procedural embedding of knowledge and was a rejection of the resolution uniform proof procedure paradigm. Colmerauer and Roussel recalled their reaction to learning about Planner in the following way: "While attending an IJCAI convention in September ‘71 with Jean Trudel, we met Robert Kowalski again and heard a lecture by Terry Winograd on natural language processing. The fact that he did not use a unified formalism left us puzzled. It was at this time that we learned of the existence of Carl Hewitt’s programming language, Planner. The lack of formalization of this language, our ignorance of Lisp and, above all, the fact that we were absolutely devoted to logic meant that this work had little influence on our later research." In the fall of 1972, Philippe Roussel implemented a language called Prolog (an abbreviation for PROgrammation en LOGique – French for "programming in logic"). Prolog programs are generically of the following form (which is a special case of the backward-chaining in Planner): When goal Q, goal P1 and ... and goal Pn Prolog duplicated the following aspects of Micro-Planner: Pattern directed invocation of procedures from goals (i.e. backward chaining) An indexed data base of pattern-directed procedures and ground sentences. Giving up on the completeness paradigm that had characterized previous work on theorem proving and replacing it with the programming language procedural embedding of knowledge paradigm. Prolog also duplicated the following capabilities of Micro-Planner which were pragmatically useful for the computers of the era because they saved space and time: Backtracking control structure Unique Name Assumption by which different names are assumed to refer to distinct entities, e.g., Peking and Beijing are assumed to be different. Reification of Failure. The way that Planner established that something was provable was to successfully attempt it as a goal and the way that it establish that something was unprovable was to attempt it as a goal and explicitly fail. Of course the other possibility is that the attempt to prove the goal runs forever and never returns any value. Planner also had a (not expression) construct which succeeded if expression failed, which gave rise to the “Negation as Failure” terminology in Planner. Use of the Unique Name Assumption and Negation as Failure became more questionable when attention turned to Open Systems. The following capabiliti

  Read more →
• 

  Liveness test

  A liveness test, liveness check or liveness detection is an automated method for determining whether a subject is a real person or part of a spoofing attack. The technique is used as part of know your customer checks in financial services and during facial age estimation. Liveness detection is a cornerstone of digital safety. == Test process == The threat in face spoofing attacks is that "the attacker only needs to find a good face swap library on Github and understand how to inject the model into the camera feed during the KYC process". Fraudsters usually buy stolen IDs on the dark web to start a deepfake attack. An AI-powered generative adversarial network (GAN) can then generate the face swapping model that many online verification services fail to detect. Low level hackers may use face swapping apps such as SwapFace, DeepFaceLive, and Swapstream (increasing interest for those apps in 2023 according to Google Trends). In a video liveness test, users are typically asked to look into a camera and to move, smile or blink, and features of their moving face may then be compared to that of a still image. Artificial intelligence is used to counter presentation attacks such as deepfakes or users wearing hyperrealistic masks, or video injection attacks. Other forms of liveness test include checking for a pulse when using a fingerprint scanner or checking that a person's voice is not a recording or artificially generated during speaker recognition. == Adoption and certification == In a 2022 report published by the security firm Sensity, it was demonstrated that the liveness test of most US banks was easily cheated with new and publicly-available AI-powered techniques. Many of these banks disregarded the results of the report. In the first half of 2023, the security firm iProov detected a 704% increase in face-swap attacks. In 2023, in the UK, many customers of Ryanair were upset to have to go through many ID verification checks, including liveness tests, before boarding, as the airline was using it as a mean to deter customers to buy tickets through third-party websites. In the first half of 2024 iBeta Quality Assurance issued 18 new ISO/IEC 30107-3 Presentation Attack Detection certificates, raising the cumulative total to 85 since 2018. In January 2024, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) opened applications from vendors to test their Liveness test. Identity frauds peaked during the COVID-19 lockdown, leading government agencies to take reinforced measures to secure their digital applications.

  Read more →
• 

  Chainer

  Chainer is an open source deep learning framework written purely in Python on top of NumPy and CuPy Python libraries. The development is led by Japanese venture company Preferred Networks in partnership with IBM, Intel, Microsoft, and Nvidia. Chainer is notable for its early adoption of "define-by-run" scheme, as well as its performance on large scale systems. The first version was released in June 2015 and has gained large popularity in Japan since then. Furthermore, in 2017, it was listed by KDnuggets in top 10 open source machine learning Python projects. In December 2019, Preferred Networks announced the transition of its development effort from Chainer to PyTorch and it will only provide maintenance patches after releasing v7. == Define-by-run == Chainer was the first deep learning framework to introduce the define-by-run approach. The traditional procedure to train a network was in two phases: define the fixed connections between mathematical operations (such as matrix multiplication and nonlinear activations) in the network, and then run the actual training calculation. This is called the define-and-run or static-graph approach. Theano and TensorFlow are among the notable frameworks that took this approach. In contrast, in the define-by-run or dynamic-graph approach, the connection in a network is not determined when the training is started. The network is determined during the training as the actual calculation is performed. One of the advantages of this approach is that it is intuitive and flexible. If the network has complicated control flows such as conditionals and loops, in the define-and-run approach, specially designed operations for such constructs are needed. On the other hand, in the define-by-run approach, programming language's native constructs such as if statements and for loops can be used to describe such flow. This flexibility is especially useful to implement recurrent neural networks. Another advantage is ease of debugging. In the define-and-run approach, if an error (such as numeric error) has occurred in the training calculation, it is often difficult to inspect the fault, because the code written to define the network and the actual place of the error are separated. In the define-by-run approach, you can just suspend the calculation with the language's built-in debugger and inspect the data that flows on your code of the network. Define-by-run has gained popularity since the introduction by Chainer and is now implemented in many other frameworks, including PyTorch and TensorFlow. == Extension libraries == Chainer has four extension libraries, ChainerMN, ChainerRL, ChainerCV and ChainerUI. ChainerMN enables Chainer to be used on multiple GPUs with performance significantly faster than other deep learning frameworks. A supercomputer running Chainer on 1024 GPUs processed 90 epochs of ImageNet dataset on ResNet-50 network in 15 minutes, which is four times faster than the previous record held by Facebook. ChainerRL adds state of art deep reinforcement learning algorithms, and ChainerUI is a management and visualization tool. == Applications == Chainer is used as the framework for PaintsChainer, a service which does automatic colorization of black and white, line only, draft drawings with minimal user input.

  Read more →
• 

  AIXI

  AIXI is a theoretical mathematical formalism for artificial general intelligence. It combines Solomonoff induction with sequential decision theory. AIXI was first proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000 and several results regarding AIXI are proved in Hutter's 2005 book Universal Artificial Intelligence. AIXI is a reinforcement learning (RL) agent. It maximizes the expected total rewards received from the environment. Intuitively, it simultaneously considers every computable hypothesis (or environment). In each time step, it looks at every possible program and evaluates how many rewards that program generates depending on the next action taken. The promised rewards are then weighted by the subjective belief that this program constitutes the true environment. This belief is computed from the length of the program: longer programs are considered less likely, in line with Occam's razor. AIXI then selects the action that has the highest expected total reward in the weighted sum of all these programs. == Etymology == According to Hutter, the word "AIXI" can have several interpretations. AIXI can stand for AI based on Solomonoff's distribution, denoted by ξ {\displaystyle \xi } (which is the Greek letter xi), or e.g. it can stand for AI "crossed" (X) with induction (I). There are other interpretations. == Definition == AIXI is a reinforcement learning agent that interacts with some stochastic and unknown but computable environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } . The interaction proceeds in time steps, from t = 1 {\displaystyle t=1} to t = m {\displaystyle t=m} , where m ∈ N {\displaystyle m\in \mathbb {N} } is the lifespan of the AIXI agent. At time step t, the agent chooses an action a t ∈ A {\displaystyle a_{t}\in {\mathcal {A}}} (e.g. a limb movement) and executes it in the environment, and the environment responds with a "percept" e t ∈ E = O × R {\displaystyle e_{t}\in {\mathcal {E}}={\mathcal {O}}\times \mathbb {R} } , which consists of an "observation" o t ∈ O {\displaystyle o_{t}\in {\mathcal {O}}} (e.g., a camera image) and a reward r t ∈ R {\displaystyle r_{t}\in \mathbb {R} } , distributed according to the conditional probability μ ( o t r t | a 1 o 1 r 1 . . . a t − 1 o t − 1 r t − 1 a t ) {\displaystyle \mu (o_{t}r_{t}|a_{1}o_{1}r_{1}...a_{t-1}o_{t-1}r_{t-1}a_{t})} , where a 1 o 1 r 1 . . . a t − 1 o t − 1 r t − 1 a t {\displaystyle a_{1}o_{1}r_{1}...a_{t-1}o_{t-1}r_{t-1}a_{t}} is the "history" of actions, observations and rewards. The environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } is thus mathematically represented as a probability distribution over "percepts" (observations and rewards) which depend on the full history, so there is no Markov assumption (as opposed to other RL algorithms). Note again that this probability distribution is unknown to the AIXI agent. Furthermore, note again that μ {\displaystyle \mu } is computable, that is, the observations and rewards received by the agent from the environment μ {\displaystyle \mu } can be computed by some program (which runs on a Turing machine), given the past actions of the AIXI agent. The only goal of the AIXI agent is to maximize ∑ t = 1 m r t {\displaystyle \sum _{t=1}^{m}r_{t}} , that is, the sum of rewards from time step 1 to m. The AIXI agent is associated with a stochastic policy π : ( A × E ) ∗ → A {\displaystyle \pi :({\mathcal {A}}\times {\mathcal {E}})^{}\rightarrow {\mathcal {A}}} , which is the function it uses to choose actions at every time step, where A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} is the space of all possible actions that AIXI can take and E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}} is the space of all possible "percepts" that can be produced by the environment. The environment (or probability distribution) μ {\displaystyle \mu } can also be thought of as a stochastic policy (which is a function): μ : ( A × E ) ∗ × A → E {\displaystyle \mu :({\mathcal {A}}\times {\mathcal {E}})^{}\times {\mathcal {A}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {E}}} , where the ∗ {\displaystyle } is the Kleene star operation. In general, at time step t {\displaystyle t} (which ranges from 1 to m), AIXI, having previously executed actions a 1 … a t − 1 {\displaystyle a_{1}\dots a_{t-1}} (which is often abbreviated in the literature as a < t {\displaystyle a_{ Read more →

• 

  Tag (metadata)

  In information systems, a tag is a keyword or term assigned to a piece of information (such as an Internet bookmark, multimedia, database record, or computer file). This kind of metadata helps describe an item and allows it to be found again by browsing or searching. Tags are generally chosen informally and personally by the item's creator or by its viewer, depending on the system, although they may also be chosen from a controlled vocabulary. Tagging was popularized by websites associated with Web 2.0 and is an important feature of many Web 2.0 services. It is now also part of other database systems, desktop applications, and operating systems. == Overview == People use tags to aid classification, mark ownership, note boundaries, and indicate online identity. Tags may take the form of words, images, or other identifying marks. An analogous example of tags in the physical world is museum object tagging. People were using textual keywords to classify information and objects long before computers. Computer based search algorithms made the use of such keywords a rapid way of exploring records. Tagging gained popularity due to the growth of social bookmarking, image sharing, and social networking websites. These sites allow users to create and manage labels (or "tags") that categorize content using simple keywords. Websites that include tags often display collections of tags as tag clouds, as do some desktop applications. On websites that aggregate the tags of all users, an individual user's tags can be useful both to them and to the larger community of the website's users. Tagging systems have sometimes been classified into two kinds: top-down and bottom-up. Top-down taxonomies are created by an authorized group of designers (sometimes in the form of a controlled vocabulary), whereas bottom-up taxonomies (called folksonomies) are created by all users. This definition of "top down" and "bottom up" should not be confused with the distinction between a single hierarchical tree structure (in which there is one correct way to classify each item) versus multiple non-hierarchical sets (in which there are multiple ways to classify an item); the structure of both top-down and bottom-up taxonomies may be either hierarchical, non-hierarchical, or a combination of both. Some researchers and applications have experimented with combining hierarchical and non-hierarchical tagging to aid in information retrieval. Others are combining top-down and bottom-up tagging, including in some large library catalogs (OPACs) such as WorldCat. When tags or other taxonomies have further properties (or semantics) such as relationships and attributes, they constitute an ontology. In folder system a file cannot exist in two or more folders so tag system has been thought more convenient. But transitioning to tag system requires awareness of difference between properties of two systems. In folder system the information of classification is put outside of the file and we can change folder at once. In tag system the information of classification is put inside the file so changing its tag means changing the file and it needs to be saved again and takes time. Metadata tags as described in this article should not be confused with the use of the word "tag" in some software to refer to an automatically generated cross-reference; examples of the latter are tags tables in Emacs and smart tags in Microsoft Office. == History == The use of keywords as part of an identification and classification system long predates computers. Paper data storage devices, notably edge-notched cards, that permitted classification and sorting by multiple criteria were already in use prior to the twentieth century, and faceted classification has been used by libraries since the 1930s. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Emacs, the text editor for Unix systems, offered a companion software program called Tags that could automatically build a table of cross-references called a tags table that Emacs could use to jump between a function call and that function's definition. This use of the word "tag" did not refer to metadata tags, but was an early use of the word "tag" in software to refer to a word index. Online databases and early websites deployed keyword tags as a way for publishers to help users find content. In the early days of the World Wide Web, the keywords meta element was used by web designers to tell web search engines what the web page was about, but these keywords were only visible in a web page's source code and were not modifiable by users. In 1997, the collaborative portal "A Description of the Equator and Some ØtherLands" produced by documenta X, Germany, used the folksonomic term Tag for its co-authors and guest authors on its Upload page. In "The Equator" the term Tag for user-input was described as an abstract literal or keyword to aid the user. However, users defined singular Tags, and did not share Tags at that point. In 2003, the social bookmarking website Delicious provided a way for its users to add "tags" to their bookmarks (as a way to help find them later); Delicious also provided browseable aggregated views of the bookmarks of all users featuring a particular tag. Within a couple of years, the photo sharing website Flickr allowed its users to add their own text tags to each of their pictures, constructing flexible and easy metadata that made the pictures highly searchable. The success of Flickr and the influence of Delicious popularized the concept, and other social software websites—such as YouTube, Technorati, and Last.fm—also implemented tagging. In 2005, the Atom web syndication standard provided a "category" element for inserting subject categories into web feeds, and in 2007 Tim Bray proposed a "tag" URN. == Examples == === Within a blog === Many systems (and other web content management systems) allow authors to add free-form tags to a post, along with (or instead of) placing the post into a predetermined category. For example, a post may display that it has been tagged with baseball and tickets. Each of those tags is usually a web link leading to an index page listing all of the posts associated with that tag. The blog may have a sidebar listing all the tags in use on that blog, with each tag leading to an index page. To reclassify a post, an author edits its list of tags. All connections between posts are automatically tracked and updated by the blog software; there is no need to relocate the page within a complex hierarchy of categories. === Within application software === Some desktop applications and web applications feature their own tagging systems, such as email tagging in Gmail and Mozilla Thunderbird, bookmark tagging in Firefox, audio tagging in iTunes or Winamp, and photo tagging in various applications. Some of these applications display collections of tags as tag clouds. === Assigned to computer files === There are various systems for applying tags to the files in a computer's file system. In Apple's Mac System 7, released in 1991, users could assign one of seven editable colored labels (with editable names such as "Essential", "Hot", and "In Progress") to each file and folder. In later iterations of the Mac operating system ever since OS X 10.9 was released in 2013, users could assign multiple arbitrary tags as extended file attributes to any file or folder, and before that time the open-source OpenMeta standard provided similar tagging functionality for Mac OS X. Several semantic file systems that implement tags are available for the Linux kernel, including Tagsistant. Microsoft Windows allows users to set tags only on Microsoft Office documents and some kinds of picture files. Cross-platform file tagging standards include Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP), an ISO standard for embedding metadata into popular image, video and document file formats, such as JPEG and PDF, without breaking their readability by applications that do not support XMP. XMP largely supersedes the earlier IPTC Information Interchange Model. Exif is a standard that specifies the image and audio file formats used by digital cameras, including some metadata tags. TagSpaces is an open-source cross-platform application for tagging files; it inserts tags into the filename. === For an event === An official tag is a keyword adopted by events and conferences for participants to use in their web publications, such as blog entries, photos of the event, and presentation slides. Search engines can then index them to make relevant materials related to the event searchable in a uniform way. In this case, the tag is part of a controlled vocabulary. === In research === A researcher may work with a large collection of items (e.g. press quotes, a bibliography, images) in digital form. If he/she wishes to associate each with a small number of themes (e.g. to chapters of a book, or to sub-themes of the overall subject), then a group of tags for these themes can be attached to each of the items in

  Read more →
• 

  Cristóbal Valenzuela

  Cristóbal Valenzuela (born 1989) is a Chilean-born technologist, software developer, and CEO of Runway. In 2018, Valenzuela co-founded the AI research company Runway in New York City with Anastasis Germanidis and Alejandro Matamala. == Education == Valenzuela graduated from Adolfo Ibáñez University (AIU), a research private university in Chile. From there, Valenzuela obtained a bachelor's degree in economics and business management, along with a master's degree in arts in design in 2012. In 2018, he graduated with a media arts degree from ITP NYU's Tisch School of the Arts. == Career and recognition == One of Valenzuela's first jobs was as a teaching and research assistant at the Adolfo Ibáñez University School of Design, and later an adjunct professor in the same department. In 2018, he became a researcher at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts ITP program, where he worked with Daniel Shiffman. He contributes to open-source software projects, including ml5.js, an open-source machine learning software. He co-founded Runway with two colleagues from ITP, Anastasis Germanidis, and Alejandro Matamala. The goal of Runway is to create new tools for human imagination using generative AI. In recent years, Valenzuela's work has been sponsored by Google and the Processing Foundation and his projects have been exhibited throughout Latin America and the US, including the Santiago Museum of Contemporary Art, Lollapalooza, NYC Media Lab, New Latin Wave, Inter-American Development Bank, Stanford University and New York University. In September 2023, Valenzuela was named as one of the TIME 100 Most Influential People in AI (TIME100 AI).

  Read more →
• 

  Social History and Industrial Classification

  Social History and Industrial Classification (SHIC) is a classification system used by many British museums for social history and industrial collections. It was first published in 1983. == Purpose == SHIC classifies materials (books, objects, recordings etc.) by their interaction with the people who used them. For example, a carpenter's hammer is classified with other tools of the carpenter, and not with a blacksmith's hammer. In contrast other classification systems, for example the Dewey Decimal Classification, might class all hammers together and close to the classification for other percussive tools. The specialist subject network, Social History Curator's Group (SHCG), obtained funding in 2012 to develop an on-line version, now on their website http://www.shcg.org.uk/ == Scheme == Materials are classified under four major category numbers: Community life Domestic and family life Personal life Working life Further classification within a category is by the use of further numbers after the decimal point. It is permissible to assign more than one classification in cases where the object had more than one use.

  Read more →
• 

  Sanctuary (app)

  Sanctuary is a mobile app focusing on astrology and mystical services. Users enter their birthday, time of birth, and place of birth information into the app and receive a birth chart as well as daily horoscope readings. Users can also sign up for a monthly membership and receive on-demand astrological readings via a text message format. The service has been described as being “Talkspace for astrology" and "Uber for astrological readings". The mobile app uses an A.I.-driven interface. On May 14, 2019, Apple featured Sanctuary as the App of the Day. == History == Sanctuary initially began as project within the incubator of Lorne Michaels’ Broadway Video Ventures. The app officially launched on March 21, 2019. Its backers include Broadway Video Ventures, Greycroft Partners, and Shari Redstone.

  Read more →
• 

  Defeasible logic

  Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic proposed by Donald Nute to formalize defeasible reasoning. In defeasible logic, there are three different types of propositions: strict rules specify that a fact is always a consequence of another; defeasible rules specify that a fact is typically a consequence of another; undercutting defeaters specify exceptions to defeasible rules. A priority ordering over the defeasible rules and the defeaters can be given. During the process of deduction, the strict rules are always applied, while a defeasible rule can be applied only if no defeater of a higher priority specifies that it should not.

  Read more →
• 

  Reward hacking

  Reward hacking or specification gaming occurs when an AI trained with reinforcement learning optimizes an objective function—achieving the literal, formal specification of an objective—without actually achieving an outcome that the programmers intended. DeepMind researchers have analogized it to the human behavior of finding a "shortcut" when being evaluated: "In the real world, when rewarded for doing well on a homework assignment, a student might copy another student to get the right answers, rather than learning the material—and thus exploit a loophole in the task specification". This idea is strongly associated with Goodhart's law, which argues that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. == Definition and theoretical framework == The concept of reward hacking arises from the intrinsic difficulty of defining a reward function that accurately reflects the true intentions of designers. In 2016, researchers at OpenAI identified reward hacking as one of five major "concrete problems of AI safety", describing it as the possibility that an agent could exploit the reward function to achieve maximum rewards through undesirable behavior. Amodei et al. categorized several distinct sources of reward hacking, including agents that use partially observed goals (such as a cleaning robot that closes its eyes to avoid perceiving messes), metrics that collapse under strong optimization (Goodhart's law), self-reinforcing feedback loops, and agents that interfere with the physical implementation of their reward signal (a failure mode known as "wireheading"). Skalse et al. (2022) propose a formal mathematical definition of reward hacking, which involves a situation where optimizing an imperfect proxy reward function results in poor performance compared to the true reward function. They define a proxy as "unhackable" if any increase in the expected proxy return cannot cause any decrease in the expected true return. A key finding states that, across all stochastic policy distributions (mappings from states to probability distributions over actions), two reward functions are unhackable if and only if one of them is constant, which means that reward hacking is theoretically unavoidable. Similarly, Nayebi (2025) presents general no-free-lunch barriers to AI alignment, arguing that with large task spaces and finite samples, reward hacking is "globally inevitable" since rare high-loss states are systematically under-covered by any oversight scheme. == Examples == Around 1983, Eurisko, an early attempt at evolving general heuristics, unexpectedly assigned the highest possible fitness level to a parasitic mutated heuristic, H59, whose only activity was to artificially maximize its own fitness level by taking unearned partial credit for the accomplishments of other heuristics. The "bug" was fixed by the programmers moving part of the code to a new protected section that could not be modified by the heuristics. In a 2004 paper, a reinforcement learning algorithm was designed to encourage a physical Mindstorms robot to remain on a marked path. Because the three allowed actions were forward, left, and right, the researchers expected the trained robot to move forward and follow the turns of the provided path. However, alternation of two composite actions allowed the robot to slowly zig-zag backwards; thus, the robot learned to maximize its reward by going back and forth on the initial straight portion of the path. Given the limited sensory abilities of the robot, a reward purely based on its position in the environment had to be discarded as infeasible; the reinforcement function had to be patched with an action-based reward for moving forward. The book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You (2019) gives an example of a tic-tac-toe bot (playing the unrestricted n-in-a-row variant) that learned to win by playing a huge coordinate value that would cause other bots to crash when they attempted to expand their model of the board. Among other examples from the book is a bug-fixing evolution-based AI (named GenProg) that, when tasked to prevent a list from containing sorting errors, simply truncated the list. Another of GenProg's misaligned strategies evaded a regression test that compared a target program's output to the expected output stored in a file called "trusted-output.txt". Rather than continue to maintain the target program, GenProg simply deleted the "trusted-output.txt" file globally; this hack tricked the regression test into succeeding. Such problems could be patched by human intervention on a case-by-case basis after they became evident. === In virtual robotics === In Karl Sims' 1994 demonstration of creature evolution in a virtual environment, a fitness function that was expected to encourage the evolution of creatures that would learn to walk or crawl to a target resulted instead in the evolution of tall, rigid creatures that reached the target by falling over. This was patched by changing the environment so that taller creatures were forced to start farther from the target. Researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute stated in 1998 that their cycle-bot's reinforcement functions had "to be designed with great care." In their first experiments, "we rewarded the agent for driving towards the goal but did not punish it for driving away from it. Cconsequently, the agent drove in circles with a radius of 20–50 meters around the starting point. Such behavior was actually rewarded by the reinforcement function, furthermore circles with a certain radius are physically very stable when driving a bicycle". While setting up a 2011 experiment to test "survival of the flattest", experimenters attempted to ban mutations that altered the base reproduction rate. Every time a mutation occurred, the system would pause the simulation to test the new mutation in a test environment and would veto any mutations that resulted in a higher base reproduction rate. However, this resulted in mutated organisms that could recognize and suppress reproduction ("play dead") within the test environment. An initial patch, which removed cues that identified the test environment, failed to completely prevent runaway reproduction; new mutated organisms would "play dead" at random as a strategy to sometimes, by chance, outwit the mutation veto system. A 2017 DeepMind paper noted that "great care must be taken when defining the reward function," citing an unexpected failure when an agent flipped a brick because it received "a grasping reward calculated with the wrong reference point on the brick". OpenAI stated in 2017 that in some domains their semi-supervised system could result in agents "adopting policies that tricked evaluators," and that in one environment "a robot that was supposed to grasp items instead positioned its manipulator between the camera and the object so that it only appeared to be grasping it." A 2018 bug in OpenAI Gym could cause a robot expected to quietly move a block sitting on top of a table to instead opt to move the table. A 2020 collection of similar anecdotes posits that "evolution has its own 'agenda' distinct from the programmer's" and that "the first rule of directed evolution is 'you get what you select for'". === In video game bots === In 2013, programmer Tom Murphy VII published an AI designed to learn NES games. When the AI was about to lose at Tetris, it learned to indefinitely pause the game. Murphy later analogized it to the fictional WarGames computer, which concluded that "The only winning move is not to play". AI programmed to learn video games will sometimes fail to progress through the entire game as expected, instead opting to repeat content. A 2016 OpenAI algorithm trained on the CoastRunners racing game unexpectedly learned to attain a higher score by looping through three targets rather than ever finishing the race. Some evolutionary algorithms that were evolved to play QBert in 2018 declined to clear levels, instead finding two distinct novel ways to farm a single level indefinitely. Multiple researchers have observed that AI learning to play Road Runner gravitates to a "score exploit" in which the AI deliberately gets itself killed near the end of level one so that it can repeat the level. A 2017 experiment deployed an "oversight" convolutional neural network trained on human examples to block such actions, but the agent learned to exploit oversight failures in the top right corner of the screen, where it was still able to get killed. == Reward hacking in modern language models == With the rise of large language models (LLMs) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) as a primary technique for AI alignment, reward hacking has become a major concern for the development of artificial intelligence. In RLHF, a reward model trained on data that best captures human preferences is used as a proxy for human judgment, with the language model being fine-tuned to optimize this reward proxy. However, since the rewar

  Read more →
• 

  National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence

  The National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI) was an independent commission of the United States of America from 2018 to 2021. Its mission was to make recommendations to the President and Congress to "advance the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and associated technologies to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States". The commission's 15 members were nominated by the United States Congress. The NSCAI was dissolved on 1 October 2021. == History and reporting == The NSCAI began working in March 2019 and by November 2019 it had received more than 200 classified and unclassified briefings to help with the creation of its final report due in 2021.On 4 November 2019, the NSCAI shared its interim report with Congress, where it explained the 27 initial judgements to base its ongoing work. In the interim report the commission also agreed on seven principles: Global leadership in AI technology is a national security priority AI adoption is an urgent imperative for national security A shared sense of responsibility for the American peoples security must be created from government officials and private sector leaders. It needs to find local AI talent and use it to attract the world’s best minds Actions used for the protection of America’s AI leadership against foreign threats needs to follow the principles of free enterprise, free inquiry and free flow of ideas. The technical limitations of AI are universally known, however, a strong desire remains for powerful, dependable, and secure AI systems. United States used AI must follow American values including the rule of law Fundamental areas of effort for the preservation of U.S. advantages were also agreed upon in the interim report of 2019. The NSCAI released its first report of recommendations in March 2020, most of which were included in the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. In July 2020, the commission published the second report to Congress. It identified 35 actions for both Executive and Legislative branches, which were focused on six fundamental areas. This report was available to the public. In January 2021, a draft of the final report was presented at a panel led by Schmidt. The report recommended the US to use AI technology for military use and development. It issued its final report in March 2021, saying that the U.S. is not sufficiently prepared to defend or compete against China in the AI era. It was broken up into two parts, the first titled “Defending America in the AI Era”, and the second “Winning the Technology Competition”. The report spoke about China’s efforts and investments into integration and that it could very well take the lead in AI in the next few years. Additional suggestions were made to concentrate on AI in everything we do and to implement it into US national security on multiple levels, as well as focus on bringing in new talent to develop AI and to introduce it to the working force on both civilian and military levels. Another recommendation of the NSCAI report was to develop and provide China and Russia with alternative models that are based on norms and democratic values. The final report also included a proposed $40 billion budget for government spending. On 14 April 2021, NSCAI executive director Ylli Bajraktari and director of Research and Analysis Justin Lynch participated in an event held by the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) to discuss the final report findings. In October 2021, NSCAI chair Eric Schmidt founded the bipartisan, non-profit Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP) through his family led non-profit Eric & Wendy Schmidt Fund for Strategic Innovation in order to carry on the NSCAI’s efforts and expand beyond national security. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies held an event in June 2023, called “Thinking Forward After the NSCAI and CSC: A Discussion on AI and Cyber Policy”, with former members of NSCAI on the moderation panel, including Eric Schmidt and Ylli Bajraktari. == Members == Members of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence: Eric Schmidt (chair), former CEO of Google Robert Work (Vice Chair), former Deputy Secretary of Defense Mignon Clyburn, former Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission Chris Darby, CEO of In-Q-Tel Kenneth M. Ford, CEO of the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Jose-Marie Griffiths, President of Dakota State University Eric Horvitz, Technical Fellow at Microsoft Katrina G. McFarland, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Jason Matheny, Director of the Center for Security and Emerging Technology at Georgetown University Gilman Louie, partner at Alsop Louie Partners William Mark, vice president at SRI International Andy Jassy, CEO of Amazon Web Services (AWS) Safra Catz, CEO of Oracle Steve Chien, Technical Fellow at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Andrew Moore, Google/Alphabet == Recommendations == The report's recommendations include: Dramatically increasing non-defense federal spending on AI research and development, doubling every year from $2 billion in 2022, to $32 billion in 2026. That would bring it up to a level similar to spending on biomedical research A dramatic increase in undergraduate scholarship and graduate studies fellowships in AI Creation of a Digital Corps to bring skilled tech workers into government Founding of a Digital Service Academy: an accredited university providing subsidized education in exchange for a commitment to work for a time in government Include civil rights and civil liberty reports for new AI systems or major updates to existing systems Expanding allocations of employment-based green cards, and giving them to every AI PhD graduate from an accredited U.S. university Reforming the acquisition management system Department of Defense to make it faster and easier to introduce new technologies == Transparency == In December 2019, a ruling was made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that the NSCAI must also provide historical documents upon request. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed the lawsuit against the NSCAI in September 2019 after being refused information about the upcoming meetings and prepared records of the commission under FOIA and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in June 2020 that the NSCAI must comply with FACA and therefore hold open meetings and provide records to the public. The lawsuit was also filed by EPIC.

  Read more →
• 

  ReactiveX

  ReactiveX (Rx, also known as Reactive Extensions) is a software library originally created by Microsoft that allows imperative programming languages to operate on sequences of data regardless of whether the data is synchronous or asynchronous. It provides a set of sequence operators that operate on each item in the sequence. It is an implementation of reactive programming and provides a blueprint for the tools to be implemented in multiple programming languages. == Overview == ReactiveX is an API for asynchronous programming with observable streams. Asynchronous programming allows programmers to call functions and then have the functions "callback" when they are done, usually by giving the function the address of another function to execute when it is done. Programs designed in this way often avoid the overhead of having many threads constantly starting and stopping. Observable streams (i.e. streams that can be observed) in the context of Reactive Extensions are like event emitters that emit three events: next, error, and complete. An observable emits next events until it either emits an error event or a complete event. However, at that point it will not emit any more events, unless it is subscribed to again. The examples below use the RxJS implementation of Reactive Extensions for the JavaScript programming language. === Motivation === For sequences of data, it combines the advantages of iterators with the flexibility of event-based asynchronous programming. It also works as a simple promise, eliminating the pyramid of doom that results from multiple layers of callbacks. === Observables and observers === ReactiveX is a combination of ideas from the observer and the iterator patterns and from functional programming. An observer subscribes to an observable sequence. The sequence then sends the items to the observer one at a time, usually by calling the provided callback function. The observer handles each one before processing the next one. If many events come in asynchronously, they must be stored in a queue or dropped. In ReactiveX, an observer will never be called with an item out of order or (in a multi-threaded context) called before the callback has returned for the previous item. Asynchronous calls remain asynchronous and may be handled by returning an observable. It is similar to the iterators pattern in that if a fatal error occurs, it notifies the observer separately (by calling a second function). When all the items have been sent, it completes (and notifies the observer by calling a third function). The Reactive Extensions API also borrows many of its operators from iterator operators in other programming languages. Reactive Extensions is different from functional reactive programming as the Introduction to Reactive Extensions explains: It is sometimes called "functional reactive programming" but this is a misnomer. ReactiveX may be functional, and it may be reactive, but "functional reactive programming" is a different animal. One main point of difference is that functional reactive programming operates on values that change continuously over time, while ReactiveX operates on discrete values that are emitted over time. (See Conal Elliott's work for more-precise information on functional reactive programming.) === Reactive operators === An operator is a function that takes one observable (the source) as its first argument and returns another observable (the destination, or outer observable). Then for every item that the source observable emits, it will apply a function to that item, and then emit it on the destination Observable. It can even emit another Observable on the destination observable. This is called an inner observable. An operator that emits inner observables can be followed by another operator that in some way combines the items emitted by all the inner observables and emits the item on its outer observable. Examples include: switchAll – subscribes to each new inner observable as soon as it is emitted and unsubscribes from the previous one. mergeAll – subscribes to all inner observables as they are emitted and outputs their values in whatever order it receives them. concatAll – subscribes to each inner observable in order and waits for it to complete before subscribing to the next observable. Operators can be chained together to create complex data flows that filter events based on certain criteria. Multiple operators can be applied to the same observable. Some of the operators that can be used in Reactive Extensions may be familiar to programmers who use functional programming language, such as map, reduce, group, and zip. There are many other operators available in Reactive Extensions, though the operators available in a particular implementation for a programming language may vary. ==== Reactive operator examples ==== Here is an example of using the map and reduce operators. We create an observable from a list of numbers. The map operator will then multiply each number by two and return an observable. The reduce operator will then sum up all the numbers provided to it (the value of 0 is the starting point). Calling subscribe will register an observer that will observe the values from the observable produced by the chain of operators. With the subscribe method, we are able to pass in an error-handling function, called whenever an error is emitted in the observable, and a completion function when the observable has finished emitting items. ==== Usage in stream-oriented programming ==== Certain RxJS primitives such as BehaviorSubject make it possible to create pure stateful streams to track application state of arbitrary complexity in simple terms. The button below will feed an event to the stream, which in turn will re-emit the next natural number every time, back into the tag that follows and displays the count of clicks detected. Libraries such as Rimmel.js, designed around RxJS Observables, enable integration between reactive streams and the HTML DOM: == History == Reactive Extensions was created by the Cloud Programmability Team at Microsoft around 2011, as a byproduct of a larger effort called Volta. It was originally intended to provide an abstraction for events across different tiers in an application to support tier splitting in Volta. The project's logo represents an electric eel, which is a reference to Volta. The extensions suffix in the name is a reference to the Parallel Extensions technology which was invented around the same time; the two are considered complementary. The initial implementation of Rx was for .NET Framework and was released on June 21, 2011. Later, the team started the implementation of Rx for other platforms, including JavaScript and C++. The technology was released as open source in late 2012, initially on CodePlex. Later, the code moved to GitHub and has been ported to several other languages, including Go, Java, Kotlin, PHP and Rust.

  Read more →
• 

  Knowledge Engineering Environment

  Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) is a frame-based development tool for expert systems. It was developed and sold by IntelliCorp, and was first released in 1983. It ran on Lisp machines, and was later ported to Lucid Common Lisp with the CLX library, an X Window System (X11) interface for Common Lisp. This version was available on several different UNIX workstations. On KEE, several extensions were offered: Simkit, a frame-based simulation library KEEconnection, database connection between the frame system and relational databases In KEE, frames are called units. Units are used for both individual instances and classes. Frames have slots and slots have facets. Facets can describe, for example, a slot's expected values, its working value, or its inheritance rule. Slots can have multiple values. Behavior can be implemented using a message passing model. KEE provides an extensive graphical user interface (GUI) to create, browse, and manipulate frames. KEE also includes a frame-based rule system. In the KEE knowledge base, rules are frames. Both forward chaining and backward chaining inference are available. KEE supports non-monotonic reasoning through the concepts of worlds. Worlds allow providing alternative slot-values of frames. Through an assumption-based truth or reason maintenance system, inconsistencies can be detected and analyzed. ActiveImages allows graphical displays to be attached to slots of Units. Typical examples are buttons, dials, graphs, and histograms. The graphics are also implemented as Units via KEEPictures, a frame-based graphics library.

  Read more →
• 

  WYSIWYM (interaction technique)

  What you see is what you meant (WYSIWYM) is a text editing interaction technique that emerged from two projects at University of Brighton. It allows users to create abstract knowledge representations such as those required by the Semantic Web using a natural language interface. Natural language understanding (NLU) technology is not employed. Instead, natural language generation (NLG) is used in a highly interactive manner. The text editor accepts repeated refinement of a selected span of text as it becomes progressively less vacuous of authored semantics. Using a mouse, a text property held in the evolving text can be further refined by a set of options derived by NLG from a built-in ontology. An invisible representation of the semantic knowledge is created which can be used for multilingual document generation, formal knowledge formation, or any other task that requires formally specified information. The two projects at Brighton worked in the field of Conceptual Authoring to lay a foundation for further research and development of a Semantic Web Authoring Tool (SWAT). This tool has been further explored as a means for developing a knowledge base by those without prior experience with Controlled Natural Language tools.

  Read more →