AI Generator Letter

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

  • Color management

    Color management

    Color management is the process of ensuring consistent and accurate colors across various devices, such as monitors, printers, and cameras. It involves the use of color profiles, which are standardized descriptions of how colors should be displayed or reproduced. Color management is necessary because different devices have different color capabilities and characteristics. For example, a monitor may display colors differently than a printer can reproduce them. Without color management, the same image may appear differently on different devices, leading to inconsistencies and inaccuracies. To achieve color management, a color profile is created for each device involved in the color workflow. This profile describes the device's color capabilities and characteristics, such as its color gamut (range of colors it can display or reproduce) and color temperature. These profiles are then used to translate colors between devices, ensuring consistent and accurate color reproduction. Color management is particularly important in industries such as graphic design, photography, and printing, where accurate color representation is crucial. It helps to maintain color consistency throughout the entire workflow, from capturing an image to displaying or printing it. Parts of color management are implemented in the operating system (OS), helper libraries, the application, and devices. The type of color profile that is typically used is called an ICC profile. A cross-platform view of color management is the use of an ICC-compatible color management system. The International Color Consortium (ICC) is an industry consortium that has defined: an open standard for a Color Matching Module (CMM) at the OS level color profiles for: devices, including DeviceLink profiles that transform one device profile (color space) to another device profile without passing through an intermediate color space, such as LAB, more accurately preserving color working spaces, the color spaces in which color data is meant to be manipulated There are other approaches to color management besides using ICC profiles. This is partly due to history and partly because of other needs than the ICC standard covers. The film and broadcasting industries make use of some of the same concepts, but they frequently rely on more limited boutique solutions. The film industry, for instance, often uses 3D LUTs (lookup table) to represent a complete color transformation for a specific RGB encoding. At the consumer level, system wide color management is available in most of Apple's products (macOS, iOS, iPadOS, watchOS). Microsoft Windows lacks system wide color management and virtually all applications do not employ color management. Windows' media player API is not color space aware, and if applications want to color manage videos manually, they have to incur significant performance and power consumption penalties. Android supports system wide color management, but most devices ship with color management disabled. == Overview == Characterize. Every color-managed device requires a personalized table, or "color profile," which characterizes the color response of that particular device. Standardize. Each color profile describes these colors relative to a standardized set of reference colors (the "Profile Connection Space"). Translate. Color-managed software then uses these standardized profiles to translate color from one device to another. This is usually performed by a color management module (CMM). == Hardware == === Characterization === To describe the behavior of various output devices, they must be compared (measured) in relation to a standard color space. Often a step called linearization is performed first, to undo the effect of gamma correction that was done to get the most out of limited 8-bit color paths. Instruments used for measuring device colors include colorimeters and spectrophotometers. As an intermediate result, the device gamut is described in the form of scattered measurement data. The transformation of the scattered measurement data into a more regular form, usable by the application, is called profiling. Profiling is a complex process involving mathematics, intense computation, judgment, testing, and iteration. After the profiling is finished, an idealized color description of the device is created. This description is called a profile. === Calibration === Calibration is like characterization, except that it can include the adjustment of the device, as opposed to just the measurement of the device. Color management is sometimes sidestepped by calibrating devices to a common standard color space such as sRGB; when such calibration is done well enough, no color translations are needed to get all devices to handle colors consistently. This avoidance of the complexity of color management was one of the goals in the development of sRGB. == Color profiles == === Embedding === Image formats themselves (such as TIFF, JPEG, PNG, EPS, PDF, and SVG) may contain embedded color profiles but are not required to do so by the image format. The International Color Consortium standard was created to bring various developers and manufacturers together. The ICC standard permits the exchange of output device characteristics and color spaces in the form of metadata. This allows the embedding of color profiles into images as well as storing them in a database or a profile directory. === Working spaces === Working spaces, such as sRGB, Adobe RGB or ProPhoto are color spaces that facilitate good results while editing. For instance, pixels with equal values of R,G,B should appear neutral. Using a large (gamut) working space will lead to posterization, while using a small working space will lead to clipping. This trade-off is a consideration for the critical image editor. == Color transformation == Color transformation, or color space conversion, is the transformation of the representation of a color from one color space to another. This calculation is required whenever data is exchanged inside a color-managed chain and carried out by a Color Matching Module. Transforming profiled color information to different output devices is achieved by referencing the profile data into a standard color space. It makes it easier to convert colors from one device to a selected standard color space and from that to the colors of another device. By ensuring that the reference color space covers the many possible colors that humans can see, this concept allows one to exchange colors between many different color output devices. Color transformations can be represented by two profiles (source profile and target profile) or by a devicelink profile. In this process there are approximations involved which make sure that the image keeps its important color qualities and also gives an opportunity to control on how the colors are being changed. === Profile connection space === In the terminology of the International Color Consortium, a translation between two color spaces can go through a profile connection space (PCS): Color Space 1 → PCS (CIELAB or CIEXYZ) → Color space 2; conversions into and out of the PCS are each specified by a profile. === Gamut mapping === In nearly every translation process, we have to deal with the fact that the color gamut of different devices vary in range which makes an accurate reproduction impossible. They therefore need some rearrangement near the borders of the gamut. Some colors must be shifted to the inside of the gamut, as they otherwise cannot be represented on the output device and would simply be clipped. This so-called gamut mismatch occurs for example, when we translate from the RGB color space with a wider gamut into the CMYK color space with a narrower gamut range. In this example, the dark highly saturated purplish-blue color of a typical computer monitor's "blue" primary is impossible to print on paper with a typical CMYK printer. The nearest approximation within the printer's gamut will be much less saturated. Conversely, an inkjet printer's "cyan" primary, a saturated mid-brightness blue, is outside the gamut of a typical computer monitor. The color management system can utilize various methods to achieve desired results and give experienced users control of the gamut mapping behavior. ==== Rendering intent ==== When the gamut of source color space exceeds that of the destination, saturated colors are liable to become clipped (inaccurately represented), or more formally burned. The color management module can deal with this problem in several ways. The ICC specification includes four different rendering intents, listed below. Before the actual rendering intent is carried out, one can temporarily simulate the rendering by soft proofing. It is a useful tool as it predicts the outcome of the colors and is available as an application in many color management systems: Absolute colorimetric Absolute colorimetry and relative colorimetry actually use the same table but differ in the adjust

    Read more →
  • François Chollet

    François Chollet

    François Chollet (French: [fʁɑ̃swa ʃoˈlɛ]; born 20 October 1989) is a French software engineer, artificial intelligence (AI) researcher, and former Senior Staff Engineer at Google. Chollet is the creator of the Keras deep-learning library released in 2015. His research focuses on computer vision, the application of machine learning to formal reasoning, abstraction, and how to achieve greater generality in artificial intelligence (AGI). == Education and career == In 2012, Chollet graduated with a Diplôme d'Ingénieur (Master of Engineering) from ENSTA Paris, a school of the Polytechnic Institute of Paris. In 2015, Chollet started working at Google shortly after releasing Keras. In 2019, he published the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for Artificial General Intelligence (ARC-AGI) benchmark, which measures the ability of AI systems to solve novel reasoning problems. In 2024, Chollet launched ARC Prize, a US$1 million competition to solve the ARC-AGI benchmark. He left Google in November 2024 after more than 9 years with the company to found with Zapier co-founder Mike Knoop a new startup focused on developing AGI with program synthesis. In early 2025, Chollet announced the expansion of ARC Prize into a full-fledged non-profit foundation, to further the mission of guiding and accelerating research progress towards artificial general intelligence. == Books and publications == Chollet's research papers in artificial intelligence have been published at major conferences in the field, including the Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), and the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR). Chollet is the author of Xception: Deep Learning with Depthwise Separable Convolutions, which is among the top ten most cited papers in CVPR proceedings at more than 18,000 citations. Chollet is the author of the book Deep Learning with Python, which sold over 100,000 copies, and the co-author with Tomasz Kalinowski of Deep Learning With R. == Awards == On December 1, 2021, Chollet won the Global Swiss AI Award for breakthroughs in AI. In September 2024, Chollet was named by TIME as one of the 100 most influential people in AI.

    Read more →
  • AI Essay Writers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    AI Essay Writers Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

    Trying to pick the best AI essay writer? An AI essay writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI essay writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

    Read more →
  • AI Sales Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    AI Sales Assistants: Free vs Paid (2026)

    Trying to pick the best AI sales assistant? An AI sales assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI sales assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • Buckeye Corpus

    Buckeye Corpus

    The Buckeye Corpus of conversational speech is a speech corpus created by a team of linguists and psychologists at Ohio State University led by Prof. Mark Pitt. It contains high-quality recordings from 40 speakers in Columbus, Ohio conversing freely with an interviewer. The interviewer's voice is heard only faintly in the background of these recordings. The sessions were conducted as Sociolinguistics interviews, and are essentially monologues. The speech has been orthographically transcribed and phonetically labeled. The audio and text files, together with time-aligned phonetic labels, are stored in a format for use with speech analysis software (Xwaves and Wavesurfer). Software for searching the transcription files is also available at the project web site. The corpus is available to researchers in academia and industry. The project was funded by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders and the Office of Research at Ohio State University.

    Read more →
  • Lori Levin

    Lori Levin

    Lorraine Susan (Lori) Levin is an American computer scientist and computational linguist specializing in natural language processing, particularly involving syntax, morphosyntax, and languages with small corpora. She is a research professor in the Language Technologies Institute of the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science, and one of the founders of the North American Computational Linguistics Open Competition. == Education and career == Levin has a 1979 bachelor's degree in linguistics (summa cum laude) from the University of Pennsylvania, and a 1986 Ph.D. in linguistics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her dissertation, Operations on Lexical Forms: Unaccusative Rules in Germanic Languages, was jointly supervised by Joan Bresnan and Kenneth L. Hale. She worked as an assistant professor of linguistics at the University of Pittsburgh from 1983 until 1988, when she joined the Carnegie Mellon University Language Technologies Institute. == Recognition == Levin was named as a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics in 2025, "for pioneering work on the use of phonetics, syntax, lexical semantics and dialogue modeling in machine translation and in the transfer of NLP technologies to low resource languages, as well as an enduring contribution to the North American Computational Linguistics Olympiad". Levin was awarded the Antonio Zampolli prize of the ELRA Language Resources Association at the LREC 2026 conference.

    Read more →
  • MRF optimization via dual decomposition

    MRF optimization via dual decomposition

    In dual decomposition a problem is broken into smaller subproblems and a solution to the relaxed problem is found. This method can be employed for MRF optimization. Dual decomposition is applied to markov logic programs as an inference technique. == Background == Discrete MRF Optimization (inference) is very important in Machine Learning and Computer vision, which is realized on CUDA graphical processing units. Consider a graph G = ( V , E ) {\displaystyle G=(V,E)} with nodes V {\displaystyle V} and Edges E {\displaystyle E} . The goal is to assign a label l p {\displaystyle l_{p}} to each p ∈ V {\displaystyle p\in V} so that the MRF Energy is minimized: (1) min Σ p ∈ V θ p ( l p ) + Σ p q ∈ ε θ p q ( l p ) ( l q ) {\displaystyle \min \Sigma _{p\in V}\theta _{p}(l_{p})+\Sigma _{pq\in \varepsilon }\theta _{pq}(l_{p})(l_{q})} Major MRF Optimization methods are based on Graph cuts or Message passing. They rely on the following integer linear programming formulation (2) min x E ( θ , x ) = θ . x = ∑ p ∈ V θ p . x p + ∑ p q ∈ ε θ p q . x p q {\displaystyle \min _{x}E(\theta ,x)=\theta .x=\sum _{p\in V}\theta _{p}.x_{p}+\sum _{pq\in \varepsilon }\theta _{pq}.x_{pq}} In many applications, the MRF-variables are {0,1}-variables that satisfy: x p ( l ) = 1 {\displaystyle x_{p}(l)=1} ⇔ {\displaystyle \Leftrightarrow } label l {\displaystyle l} is assigned to p {\displaystyle p} , while x p q ( l , l ′ ) = 1 {\displaystyle x_{pq}(l,l^{\prime })=1} , labels l , l ′ {\displaystyle l,l^{\prime }} are assigned to p , q {\displaystyle p,q} . == Dual Decomposition == The main idea behind decomposition is surprisingly simple: decompose your original complex problem into smaller solvable subproblems, extract a solution by cleverly combining the solutions from these subproblems. A sample problem to decompose: min x Σ i f i ( x ) {\displaystyle \min _{x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x)} where x ∈ C {\displaystyle x\in C} In this problem, separately minimizing every single f i ( x ) {\displaystyle f^{i}(x)} over x {\displaystyle x} is easy; but minimizing their sum is a complex problem. So the problem needs to get decomposed using auxiliary variables { x i } {\displaystyle \{x^{i}\}} and the problem will be as follows: min { x i } , x Σ i f i ( x i ) {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{i}\},x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x^{i})} where x i ∈ C , x i = x {\displaystyle x^{i}\in C,x^{i}=x} Now we can relax the constraints by multipliers { λ i } {\displaystyle \{\lambda ^{i}\}} which gives us the following Lagrangian dual function: g ( { λ i } ) = min { x i ∈ C } , x Σ i f i ( x i ) + Σ i λ i . ( x i − x ) = min { x i ∈ C } , x Σ i [ f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i ] − ( Σ i λ i ) x {\displaystyle g(\{\lambda ^{i}\})=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\},x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x^{i})+\Sigma _{i}\lambda ^{i}.(x^{i}-x)=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\},x}\Sigma _{i}[f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}]-(\Sigma _{i}\lambda ^{i})x} Now we eliminate x {\displaystyle x} from the dual function by minimizing over x {\displaystyle x} and dual function becomes: g ( { λ i } ) = min { x i ∈ C } Σ i [ f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i ] {\displaystyle g(\{\lambda ^{i}\})=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\}}\Sigma _{i}[f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}]} We can set up a Lagrangian dual problem: (3) max { λ i } ∈ Λ g ( λ i ) = Σ i g i ( x i ) , {\displaystyle \max _{\{\lambda ^{i}\}\in \Lambda }g({\lambda ^{i}})=\Sigma _{i}g^{i}(x^{i}),} The Master problem (4) g i ( x i ) = m i n x i f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i {\displaystyle g^{i}(x^{i})=min_{x^{i}}f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}} where x i ∈ C {\displaystyle x^{i}\in C} The Slave problems == MRF optimization via Dual Decomposition == The original MRF optimization problem is NP-hard and we need to transform it into something easier. τ {\displaystyle \tau } is a set of sub-trees of graph G {\displaystyle G} where its trees cover all nodes and edges of the main graph. And MRFs defined for every tree T {\displaystyle T} in τ {\displaystyle \tau } will be smaller. The vector of MRF parameters is θ T {\displaystyle \theta ^{T}} and the vector of MRF variables is x T {\displaystyle x^{T}} , these two are just smaller in comparison with original MRF vectors θ , x {\displaystyle \theta ,x} . For all vectors θ T {\displaystyle \theta ^{T}} we'll have the following: (5) ∑ T ∈ τ ( p ) θ p T = θ p , ∑ T ∈ τ ( p q ) θ p q T = θ p q . {\displaystyle \sum _{T\in \tau (p)}\theta _{p}^{T}=\theta _{p},\sum _{T\in \tau (pq)}\theta _{pq}^{T}=\theta _{pq}.} Where τ ( p ) {\displaystyle \tau (p)} and τ ( p q ) {\displaystyle \tau (pq)} denote all trees of τ {\displaystyle \tau } than contain node p {\displaystyle p} and edge p q {\displaystyle pq} respectively. We simply can write: (6) E ( θ , x ) = ∑ T ∈ τ E ( θ T , x T ) {\displaystyle E(\theta ,x)=\sum _{T\in \tau }E(\theta ^{T},x^{T})} And our constraints will be: (7) x T ∈ χ T , x T = x | T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T},x^{T}=x_{|T},\forall T\in \tau } Our original MRF problem will become: (8) min { x T } , x Σ T ∈ τ E ( θ T , x T ) {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{T}\},x}\Sigma _{T\in \tau }E(\theta ^{T},x^{T})} where x T ∈ χ T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T},\forall T\in \tau } and x T ∈ x | T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in x_{|T},\forall T\in \tau } And we'll have the dual problem we were seeking: (9) max { λ T } ∈ Λ g ( { λ T } ) = ∑ T ∈ τ g T ( λ T ) , {\displaystyle \max _{\{\lambda ^{T}\}\in \Lambda }g(\{\lambda ^{T}\})=\sum _{T\in \tau }g^{T}(\lambda ^{T}),} The Master problem where each function g T ( . ) {\displaystyle g^{T}(.)} is defined as: (10) g T ( λ T ) = min x T E ( θ T + λ T , x T ) {\displaystyle g^{T}(\lambda ^{T})=\min _{x^{T}}E(\theta ^{T}+\lambda ^{T},x^{T})} where x T ∈ χ T {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T}} The Slave problems == Theoretical Properties == Theorem 1. Lagrangian relaxation (9) is equivalent to the LP relaxation of (2). min { x T } , x { E ( x , θ ) | x p T = s p , x T ∈ CONVEXHULL ( χ T ) } {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{T}\},x}\{E(x,\theta )|x_{p}^{T}=s_{p},x^{T}\in {\text{CONVEXHULL}}(\chi ^{T})\}} Theorem 2. If the sequence of multipliers { α t } {\displaystyle \{\alpha _{t}\}} satisfies α t ≥ 0 , lim t → ∞ α t = 0 , ∑ t = 0 ∞ α t = ∞ {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}\geq 0,\lim _{t\to \infty }\alpha _{t}=0,\sum _{t=0}^{\infty }\alpha _{t}=\infty } then the algorithm converges to the optimal solution of (9). Theorem 3. The distance of the current solution { θ T } {\displaystyle \{\theta ^{T}\}} to the optimal solution { θ ¯ T } {\displaystyle \{{\bar {\theta }}^{T}\}} , which decreases at every iteration. Theorem 4. Any solution obtained by the method satisfies the WTA (weak tree agreement) condition. Theorem 5. For binary MRFs with sub-modular energies, the method computes a globally optimal solution.

    Read more →
  • AI Text-to-video Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

    AI Text-to-video Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

    Curious about the best AI text-to-video tool? An AI text-to-video tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI text-to-video tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

    Read more →
  • Nuance Communications

    Nuance Communications

    Nuance Communications, Inc. was an American multinational computer software technology corporation, headquartered in Burlington, Massachusetts, that markets speech recognition and artificial intelligence software. Nuance merged with its competitor in the commercial large-scale speech application business, ScanSoft, in October 2005. ScanSoft was a Xerox spin-off that was bought in 1999 by Visioneer, a hardware and software scanner company, which adopted ScanSoft as the new merged company name. The original ScanSoft had its roots in Kurzweil Computer Products. In April 2021, Microsoft announced it would buy Nuance Communications. The deal is an all-cash transaction of $19.7 billion, including company debt, or $56 per share. The acquisition was completed in March 2022. == History == The Speech Technology and Research (STAR) Laboratory at SRI International began the journey that, in 1994, resulted in a spin-off company; Corona Corporation (later renamed to Nuance Communications ). Nuance Communications (NUAN) went public on the Nasdaq Stock Market in 1995. Nuance focused on commercializing advanced speech recognition technologies. Nuance was an early spinoff of SRI's Speech Technology and Research (STAR) Laboratory, a world leader in audio processing, speech and speaker analytics and spoken language research. The technology that served as the foundation of Nuance's speech recognition solution started at the STAR Lab and helped launch Nuance more than 20 years ago. In 1995, The SRI Language Modeling Toolkit (SRILM) was developed. This provides the tools to build and apply statistical language models (LMs), primarily for use in speech recognition, statistical tagging and segmentation, and machine translation. In terms of commercialization of natural automated speech recognition, SRI's natural language speech recognition software was the first to be deployed by a major corporation. In 1996, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., used Nuance's speech recognition technology to allow customers to receive stock quotes over the telephone. One of the key features of the ‘Schwab Discount Brokerage system’, was the ability to recognize English words even when spoken by customers with accents. In 1997, Nuance Communications developed the first large scale commercial dialog system for United Parcel Services (UPS). UPS used the voice recognition platform to handle very large numbers of inquiries about package status. The company that would later merge with Nuance Communications started life as Visioneer, incorporated in 1992. In 1999, Visioneer acquired ScanSoft, Inc. (SSFT), and the combined company became known as ScanSoft. In September 2005, ScanSoft Inc. acquired and merged with Nuance Communications (NUAN), a natural language DOD-project spinoff from SRI International. The resulting company adopted the Nuance name. During the prior decade, the two companies competed in the commercial large-scale speech application business. === Data breach === Between 2014 and 2017, Nuance exposed over 45,000 patient records. == Solutions == Customer service virtual assistants Speech recognition — for people Speech recognition — for business Speech recognition — for physicians Accessibility Power PDF Managed Print Services Transcription === ScanSoft origins === In 1974, Raymond Kurzweil founded Kurzweil Computer Products, Inc. to develop the first omni-font optical character-recognition system – a computer program capable of recognizing text written in any normal font. In 1980, Kurzweil sold his company to Xerox. The company became known as Xerox Imaging Systems (XIS), and later ScanSoft. In March 1992, a new company called Visioneer, Inc. was founded to develop scanner hardware and software products, such as a sheetfed scanner called PaperMax and the document management software PaperPort. Visioneer eventually sold its hardware division to Primax Electronics, Ltd. in January 1999. Two months later, in March, Visioneer acquired ScanSoft from Xerox to form a new public company with ScanSoft as the new company-wide name. Prior to 2001, ScanSoft focused primarily on desktop imaging software such as TextBridge, PaperPort and OmniPage. Beginning with the December 2001 acquisition of Lernout & Hauspie assets, the company moved into the speech recognition business and began to compete with Nuance. Lernout & Hauspie had acquired speech recognition company Dragon Systems in June 2001, shortly before becoming bankrupt in October. Scansoft acquired speech recognition company SpeechWorks in 2003. === Partnership with Siri and Apple Inc. === In 2013, Nuance confirmed that its natural language processing algorithms supported Apple's Siri voice assistant. === Focus on health care === In 2019, Nuance spun off its automotive division as the company Cerence, allowing it to focus on health care applications. === Acquisition by Microsoft === On April 12, 2021, Microsoft announced that it would buy Nuance Communications for $19.7 billion, or $56 a share, a 22% increase over the previous closing price. Nuance's CEO, Mark Benjamin, stayed with the company. This was Microsoft's second-biggest acquisition up to that point, after its purchase of LinkedIn for $24 billion (~$30.7 billion in 2024) in 2016. Shortly after the deal, the Competition and Markets Authority, a UK regulatory body, stated it was looking into the deal on the basis of antitrust concerns. In December 2021, it was reported that the deal would be approved by the European Union. The acquisition was completed on March 4, 2022. In May 2023, Nuance announced an unspecified number of layoffs.

    Read more →
  • Janyce Wiebe

    Janyce Wiebe

    Janyce Marbury Wiebe (1959–2018) was an American computer science specializing in natural language processing and known for her work on subjectivity, sentiment analysis, opinion mining, discourse processing, and word-sense disambiguation. == Early life and education == Wiebe was born in 1959, in Albany, New York. She majored in English at the Binghamton University, graduating in 1981, and completed a Ph.D. in computer science in 1990, at the University at Buffalo. Her dissertation, Recognizing Subjective Sentences: A Computational Investigation of Narrative Text, was supervised by philosopher William J. Rapaport. == Career == After postdoctoral research at the University of Toronto, she became an assistant professor at New Mexico State University in 1992. In 2000, she moved to the University of Pittsburgh, where she became a professor of computer science and director of the Intelligent Systems Program. == Recognition == Wiebe was named a Fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics in 2015. == Death == She died of leukemia on December 10, 2018.

    Read more →
  • Generalized nondeterministic finite automaton

    Generalized nondeterministic finite automaton

    In the theory of computation, a generalized nondeterministic finite automaton (GNFA), also known as an expression automaton or a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine, is a variation of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) where each transition is labeled with any regular expression. The GNFA reads blocks of symbols from the input which constitute a string as defined by the regular expression on the transition. There are several differences between a standard finite state machine and a generalized nondeterministic finite state machine. A GNFA must have only one start state and one accept state, and these cannot be the same state, whereas an NFA or DFA both may have several accept states, and the start state can be an accept state. A GNFA must have only one transition between any two states, whereas a NFA or DFA both allow for numerous transitions between states. In a GNFA, a state has a single transition to every state in the machine, although often it is a convention to ignore the transitions that are labelled with the empty set when drawing generalized nondeterministic finite state machines. == Formal definition == A GNFA can be defined as a 5-tuple, (S, Σ, T, s, a), consisting of a finite set of states (S); a finite set called the alphabet (Σ); a transition function (T : (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {a}) × (S ∖ {\displaystyle \setminus } {s}) → R); a start state (s ∈ S); an accept state (a ∈ S); where R is the collection of all regular expressions over the alphabet Σ. The transition function takes as its argument a pair of two states and outputs a regular expression (the label of the transition). This differs from other finite state machines, which take as input a single state and an input from the alphabet (or the empty string in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines) and outputs the next state (or the set of possible states in the case of nondeterministic finite state machines). A DFA or NFA can easily be converted into a GNFA and then the GNFA can be easily converted into a regular expression by repeatedly collapsing parts of it to single edges until S = {s, a}. Similarly, GNFAs can be reduced to NFAs by changing regular expression operators into new edges until each edge is labelled with a regular expression matching a single string of length at most 1. NFAs, in turn, can be reduced to DFAs using the powerset construction. This shows that GNFAs recognize the same set of formal languages as DFAs and NFAs.

    Read more →
  • Aslı Çelikyılmaz

    Aslı Çelikyılmaz

    Aslı Çelikyılmaz is an engineer specializing in natural language processing, and particularly in natural language generation for software agents with advanced reasoning and real-world modeling capabilities. Educated in Turkey and Canada, she works in the US as senior research lead at Fundamentals AI Research, Meta. She also holds an affiliate faculty position in computer science at the University of Washington, and is co-editor-in-chief of the journal Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics. == Education and career == Çelikyılmaz is a 1997 graduate of Istanbul Technical University, where she studied industrial engineering. After a 2002 master's degree in computer and information science from Seneca Polytechnic in Toronto, and a second master's degree in information science from the University of Toronto in 2005, she completed a Ph.D. in information science at the University of Toronto in 2008. She worked as a postdoctoral researcher in California, at the University of California, Berkeley, from 2008 to 2010. In 2010 she joined Microsoft in Sunnyvale, California, where she became a senior scientist and later a senior principal researcher in Redmond, Washington. She added her affiliation with the University of Washington in 2018, and moved to Meta in Seattle in 2021. == Recognition == Çelikyılmaz was named to the 2026 class of IEEE Fellows, "for contributions to conversational systems and language generation".

    Read more →
  • Concordancer

    Concordancer

    A concordancer is a computer program that automatically constructs a concordance—an alphabetised index of every occurrence of a word or phrase in a body of text, each entry displayed with its surrounding context. Concordancers are primary tools in corpus linguistics, lexicography, computer-assisted translation, and language teaching. The most common display format is the key word in context (KWIC) layout, in which each hit appears centred on a line with a fixed span of words to its left and right, enabling rapid scanning of usage patterns across many occurrences. == History == === Pre-computational concordances === The compilation of concordances predates computers by many centuries. Around 1230, the French Dominican cardinal Hugh of Saint-Cher directed a team of friars in assembling a concordance of the Latin Vulgate Bible, generally regarded as the first systematic concordance of any text. To help readers locate passages, Hugh divided each biblical chapter into lettered sections. Later milestones include a Hebrew Old Testament concordance compiled by Rabbi Mordecai Nathan (1448), Alexander Cruden's Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures (1737), and the manuscript Asaf ha-Mazkir, an unfinished concordance to the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Moses Rigotz around the turn of the 19th century. === First computer concordance === The first concordance produced with computing assistance was the Index Thomisticus, a comprehensive lexical index of the writings of and around Thomas Aquinas, totalling approximately 10.6 million Latin words. The Italian Jesuit priest Roberto Busa conceived the project in 1946 and secured the sponsorship of IBM in 1949 after a meeting with chairman Thomas J. Watson. Keypunch operators in Gallarate, Italy, encoded the texts onto punched cards from around 1950. IBM executive Paul Tasman developed the processing methods. The full 56-volume printed edition was completed around 1980, followed by a CD-ROM edition in 1989 and a web-accessible version in 2005. === The KWIC format === The key word in context (KWIC) display was formalised as a computational technique by Hans Peter Luhn, a researcher at IBM, in a 1960 paper in American Documentation. In KWIC output, each instance of the search term (the node word) is centred on a line with a fixed window of words to each side; sorting the resulting lines alphabetically by the immediately adjacent word reveals collocational and phraseological patterns at a glance. === COCOA === One of the first dedicated concordancing programs was COCOA (COunt and COncordance Generation on Atlas), created in 1965 by D. B. Russell at University College London and the Atlas Computer Laboratory in Harwell, Oxfordshire. Written in approximately 4,000 cards of FORTRAN, it processed text annotated with flat, non-hierarchical markup tags and could produce word counts and concordances in multiple languages. Within its first six months COCOA had been applied to texts in at least six languages. A second version designed for multiple mainframe platforms was distributed to British computing centres in the mid-1970s. Growing dissatisfaction with its interface and the eventual withdrawal of Atlas Laboratory support prompted British funding bodies to commission a successor program. === Oxford Concordance Program === The Oxford Concordance Program (OCP) was designed and written in FORTRAN by Susan Hockey and Ian Marriott at Oxford University Computing Services (OUCS) between 1979 and 1980 and first released in 1981. Hockey and Marriott acknowledged that OCP owed much to COCOA and the CLOC system at the University of Birmingham. OCP accepted COCOA-format markup to encode metadata such as author, act, scene, and line number, and was described by its authors as "a machine-independent text analysis program for producing word lists, indices and concordances in a variety of languages and alphabets." By the mid-1980s it had been licensed to approximately 240 institutions in 23 countries. A personal computer version, Micro-OCP, was developed for the IBM PC and sold by Oxford University Press from the late 1980s. Version 2 was rewritten in 1985–86 and documented in the same 1987 article by Hockey and co-author John Martin. === Personal computer era === The availability of affordable personal computers in the 1980s and 1990s enabled standalone concordancing applications that analysts could run locally without specialist computing facilities. MicroConcord, developed by Mike Scott and Tim Johns and published by Oxford University Press in 1993 for MS-DOS, was among the first concordancers designed specifically for classroom language teaching. WordSmith Tools, also developed by Mike Scott, was first released in 1996 and became one of the most widely used corpus analysis suites in academic linguistics research. Other tools from this era include TACT (University of Toronto, 1989), a suite of MS-DOS freeware programs for literary text analysis, and MonoConc, a Windows concordancer created by Michael Barlow. === Web-based concordancers === From the late 1990s onwards, web-based concordancers hosted on remote servers gave researchers browser access to large preloaded corpora without requiring local storage or processing. The Sketch Engine, developed by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý (Masaryk University), was launched commercially in July 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited and introduced word sketches—automatically generated one-page profiles of a word's typical grammatical relations and collocations. AntConc, created by Laurence Anthony at Waseda University, Tokyo, was first released in 2002 as freeware for Windows, macOS, and Linux. == Features == Modern concordancers typically offer a range of analytical functions beyond basic KWIC display. These commonly include: KWIC display with the node word centred and context words in aligned columns, sortable by the word one, two, or three positions to the left or right of the node (L1–L3 and R1–R3) Concordance plots, visualising the distribution of hits as marks along a scaled bar representing each text in the corpus Frequency and word lists, both alphabetical and ranked by frequency Collocation statistics, identifying words that co-occur with the search term more often than chance, quantified by measures such as mutual information, the t-score, or log-likelihood Keyword analysis, comparing word frequencies between a study corpus and a reference corpus to identify statistically distinctive items N-gram analysis, finding frequently recurring word sequences of a specified length Part-of-speech tagging integration, allowing searches filtered to particular grammatical categories Unicode support for multilingual text Bilingual and parallel concordancers additionally display aligned text in two or more languages side by side, enabling comparison of translation equivalents across language pairs. == Notable concordancers == === WordSmith Tools === Created by Mike Scott and first released in 1996, WordSmith Tools is a Windows corpus analysis suite that evolved from MicroConcord. Its three core modules are Concord (KWIC concordances), WordList (frequency and alphabetical word lists), and Keywords (statistical keyword identification relative to a reference corpus). Oxford University Press used WordSmith Tools for dictionary preparation work. Version 4.0 is freely available; later versions are sold by Lexical Analysis Software Limited. === AntConc === AntConc is a freeware, multiplatform concordancing toolkit created by Laurence Anthony, Professor of Applied Linguistics at Waseda University, Tokyo. First released in 2002 and formally described in a 2005 academic paper, it runs on Windows, macOS, and Linux. Its tools include a KWIC concordancer, a concordance plot for visualising distribution across texts, a collocates tool, a keyword list, and an n-gram analysis module. Because it is free and requires only plain text files, AntConc is widely used in linguistics courses and independent research worldwide. === Sketch Engine === The Sketch Engine is a corpus management and query system co-created by Adam Kilgarriff and Pavel Rychlý and launched in 2003 by Lexical Computing Limited. It provides browser-based access to over 800 corpora in more than 100 languages. Beyond concordance searching, it offers word sketches, collocation analysis, distributional thesaurus construction, keyword and terminology extraction, and diachronic analysis. It is used by major publishers including Macmillan and Oxford University Press for lexicographic research. A subset tool, SKELL (Sketch Engine for Language Learning), is freely accessible to individual learners. === Wmatrix === Wmatrix is a web-based corpus processing environment developed by Paul Rayson at the University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language (UCREL), Lancaster University. Alongside concordances and frequency lists, Wmatrix integrates CLAWS part-of-speech tagging and the USAS semantic tagger, enabling keyword analysis simultane

    Read more →
  • IBM alignment models

    IBM alignment models

    The IBM alignment models are a sequence of increasingly complex models used in statistical machine translation to train a translation model and an alignment model, starting with lexical translation probabilities and moving to reordering and word duplication. They underpinned the majority of statistical machine translation systems for almost twenty years starting in the early 1990s, until neural machine translation began to dominate. These models offer principled probabilistic formulation and (mostly) tractable inference. The IBM alignment models were published in parts in 1988 and 1990, and the entire series is published in 1993. Every author of the 1993 paper subsequently went to the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies. The original work on statistical machine translation at IBM proposed five models, and a model 6 was proposed later. The sequence of the six models can be summarized as: Model 1: lexical translation Model 2: additional absolute alignment model Model 3: extra fertility model Model 4: added relative alignment model Model 5: fixed deficiency problem. Model 6: Model 4 combined with a HMM alignment model in a log linear way == Mathematical setup == The IBM alignment models translation as a conditional probability model. For each source-language ("foreign") sentence f {\displaystyle f} , we generate both a target-language ("English") sentence e {\displaystyle e} and an alignment a {\displaystyle a} . The problem then is to find a good statistical model for p ( e , a | f ) {\displaystyle p(e,a|f)} , the probability that we would generate English language sentence e {\displaystyle e} and an alignment a {\displaystyle a} given a foreign sentence f {\displaystyle f} . The meaning of an alignment grows increasingly complicated as the model version number grew. See Model 1 for the most simple and understandable version. == Model 1 == === Word alignment === Given any foreign-English sentence pair ( e , f ) {\displaystyle (e,f)} , an alignment for the sentence pair is a function of type { 1 , . , . . . , l e } → { 0 , 1 , . , . . . , l f } {\displaystyle \{1,.,...,l_{e}\}\to \{0,1,.,...,l_{f}\}} . That is, we assume that the English word at location i {\displaystyle i} is "explained" by the foreign word at location a ( i ) {\displaystyle a(i)} . For example, consider the following pair of sentences It will surely rain tomorrow -- 明日 は きっと 雨 だWe can align some English words to corresponding Japanese words, but not everyone:it -> ? will -> ? surely -> きっと rain -> 雨 tomorrow -> 明日This in general happens due to the different grammar and conventions of speech in different languages. English sentences require a subject, and when there is no subject available, it uses a dummy pronoun it. Japanese verbs do not have different forms for future and present tense, and the future tense is implied by the noun 明日 (tomorrow). Conversely, the topic-marker は and the grammar word だ (roughly "to be") do not correspond to any word in the English sentence. So, we can write the alignment as 1-> 0; 2 -> 0; 3 -> 3; 4 -> 4; 5 -> 1where 0 means that there is no corresponding alignment. Thus, we see that the alignment function is in general a function of type { 1 , . , . . . , l e } → { 0 , 1 , . , . . . , l f } {\displaystyle \{1,.,...,l_{e}\}\to \{0,1,.,...,l_{f}\}} . Future models will allow one English world to be aligned with multiple foreign words. === Statistical model === Given the above definition of alignment, we can define the statistical model used by Model 1: Start with a "dictionary". Its entries are of form t ( e i | f j ) {\displaystyle t(e_{i}|f_{j})} , which can be interpreted as saying "the foreign word f j {\displaystyle f_{j}} is translated to the English word e i {\displaystyle e_{i}} with probability t ( e i | f j ) {\displaystyle t(e_{i}|f_{j})} ". After being given a foreign sentence f {\displaystyle f} with length l f {\displaystyle l_{f}} , we first generate an English sentence length l e {\displaystyle l_{e}} uniformly in a range U n i f o r m [ 1 , 2 , . . . , N ] {\displaystyle Uniform[1,2,...,N]} . In particular, it does not depend on f {\displaystyle f} or l f {\displaystyle l_{f}} . Then, we generate an alignment uniformly in the set of all possible alignment functions { 1 , . , . . . , l e } → { 0 , 1 , . , . . . , l f } {\displaystyle \{1,.,...,l_{e}\}\to \{0,1,.,...,l_{f}\}} . Finally, for each English word e 1 , e 2 , . . . e l e {\displaystyle e_{1},e_{2},...e_{l_{e}}} , generate each one independently of every other English word. For the word e i {\displaystyle e_{i}} , generate it according to t ( e i | f a ( i ) ) {\displaystyle t(e_{i}|f_{a(i)})} . Together, we have the probability p ( e , a | f ) = 1 / N ( 1 + l f ) l e ∏ i = 1 l e t ( e i | f a ( i ) ) {\displaystyle p(e,a|f)={\frac {1/N}{(1+l_{f})^{l_{e}}}}\prod _{i=1}^{l_{e}}t(e_{i}|f_{a(i)})} IBM Model 1 uses very simplistic assumptions on the statistical model, in order to allow the following algorithm to have closed-form solution. === Learning from a corpus === If a dictionary is not provided at the start, but we have a corpus of English-foreign language pairs { ( e ( k ) , f ( k ) ) } k {\displaystyle \{(e^{(k)},f^{(k)})\}_{k}} (without alignment information), then the model can be cast into the following form: fixed parameters: the foreign sentences { f ( k ) } k {\displaystyle \{f^{(k)}\}_{k}} . learnable parameters: the entries of the dictionary t ( e i | f j ) {\displaystyle t(e_{i}|f_{j})} . observable variables: the English sentences { e ( k ) } k {\displaystyle \{e^{(k)}\}_{k}} . latent variables: the alignments { a ( k ) } k {\displaystyle \{a^{(k)}\}_{k}} In this form, this is exactly the kind of problem solved by expectation–maximization algorithm. Due to the simplistic assumptions, the algorithm has a closed-form, efficiently computable solution, which is the solution to the following equations: { max t ′ ∑ k ∑ i ∑ a ( k ) t ( a ( k ) | e ( k ) , f ( k ) ) ln ⁡ t ( e i ( k ) | f a ( k ) ( i ) ( k ) ) ∑ x t ′ ( e x | f y ) = 1 ∀ y {\displaystyle {\begin{cases}\max _{t'}\sum _{k}\sum _{i}\sum _{a^{(k)}}t(a^{(k)}|e^{(k)},f^{(k)})\ln t(e_{i}^{(k)}|f_{a^{(k)}(i)}^{(k)})\\\sum _{x}t'(e_{x}|f_{y})=1\quad \forall y\end{cases}}} This can be solved by Lagrangian multipliers, then simplified. For a detailed derivation of the algorithm, see chapter 4 and. In short, the EM algorithm goes as follows:INPUT. a corpus of English-foreign sentence pairs { ( e ( k ) , f ( k ) ) } k {\displaystyle \{(e^{(k)},f^{(k)})\}_{k}} INITIALIZE. matrix of translations probabilities t ( e x | f y ) {\displaystyle t(e_{x}|f_{y})} .This could either be uniform or random. It is only required that every entry is positive, and for each y {\displaystyle y} , the probability sums to one: ∑ x t ( e x | f y ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{x}t(e_{x}|f_{y})=1} . LOOP. until t ( e x | f y ) {\displaystyle t(e_{x}|f_{y})} converges: t ( e x | f y ) ← t ( e x | f y ) λ y ∑ k , i , j δ ( e x , e i ( k ) ) δ ( f y , f j ( k ) ) ∑ j ′ t ( e i ( k ) | f j ′ ( k ) ) {\displaystyle t(e_{x}|f_{y})\leftarrow {\frac {t(e_{x}|f_{y})}{\lambda _{y}}}\sum _{k,i,j}{\frac {\delta (e_{x},e_{i}^{(k)})\delta (f_{y},f_{j}^{(k)})}{\sum _{j'}t(e_{i}^{(k)}|f_{j'}^{(k)})}}} where each λ y {\displaystyle \lambda _{y}} is a normalization constant that makes sure each ∑ x t ( e x | f y ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{x}t(e_{x}|f_{y})=1} .RETURN. t ( e x | f y ) {\displaystyle t(e_{x}|f_{y})} .In the above formula, δ {\displaystyle \delta } is the Dirac delta function -- it equals 1 if the two entries are equal, and 0 otherwise. The index notation is as follows: k {\displaystyle k} ranges over English-foreign sentence pairs in corpus; i {\displaystyle i} ranges over words in English sentences; j {\displaystyle j} ranges over words in foreign language sentences; x {\displaystyle x} ranges over the entire vocabulary of English words in the corpus; y {\displaystyle y} ranges over the entire vocabulary of foreign words in the corpus. === Limitations === There are several limitations to the IBM model 1. No fluency: Given any sentence pair ( e , f ) {\displaystyle (e,f)} , any permutation of the English sentence is equally likely: p ( e | f ) = p ( e ′ | f ) {\displaystyle p(e|f)=p(e'|f)} for any permutation of the English sentence e {\displaystyle e} into e ′ {\displaystyle e'} . No length preference: The probability of each length of translation is equal: ∑ e has length l p ( e | f ) = 1 N {\displaystyle \sum _{e{\text{ has length }}l}p(e|f)={\frac {1}{N}}} for any l ∈ { 1 , 2 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle l\in \{1,2,...,N\}} . Does not explicitly model fertility: some foreign words tend to produce a fixed number of English words. For example, for German-to-English translation, ja is usually omitted, and zum is usually translated to one of to the, for the, to a, for a. == Model 2 == Model 2 allows alignment to be conditional on sentence lengths. That is, we have a probability distribution p a ( j | i , l e , l f ) {\displaystyle

    Read more →
  • Is an AI Sales Assistant Worth It in 2026?

    Is an AI Sales Assistant Worth It in 2026?

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

    Read more →