AI Generator Uses Water

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

Time-compressed speech

Time-compressed speech refers to an audio recording of verbal text in which the text is presented in a much shorter time interval than it would through normally-paced real time speech. The basic purpose is to make recorded speech contain more words in a given time, yet still be understandable. For example: a paragraph that might normally be expected to take 20 seconds to read, might instead be presented in 15 seconds, which would represent a time-compression of 25% (5 seconds out of 20). The term "time-compressed speech" should not be confused with "speech compression", which controls the volume range of a sound, but does not alter its time envelope. == Methods == While some voice talents are capable of speaking at rates significantly in excess of general norms, the term "time-compressed speech" most usually refers to examples in which the time-reduction has been accomplished through some form of electronic processing of the recorded speech. In general, recorded speech can be electronically time-compressed by: increasing its speed (linear compression); removing silences (selective editing); a combination of the two (non-linear compression). The speed of a recording can be increased, which will cause the material to be presented at a faster rate (and hence in a shorter amount of time), but this has the undesirable side-effect of increasing the frequency of the whole passage, raising the pitch of the voices, which can reduce intelligibility. There are normally silences between words and sentences, and even small silences within certain words, both of which can be reduced or removed ("edited-out") which will also reduce the amount of time occupied by the full speech recording. However, this can also have the effect of removing verbal "punctuation" from the speech, causing words and sentences to run together unnaturally, again reducing intelligibility. Vowels are typically held a minimum of 20 milliseconds, over many cycles of the fundamental pitch. DSP systems can detect the beginning and end of each cycle and then skip over some fraction of those cycles, causing the material to be presented at a faster rate, without changing the pitch, maintaining a "normal" tone of voice. The current preferred method of time-compression is called "non-linear compression", which employs a combination of selectively removing silences; speeding up the speech to make the reduced silences sound normally-proportioned to the text; and finally applying various data algorithms to bring the speech back down to the proper pitch. This produces a more acceptable result than either of the two earlier techniques; however, if unrestrained, removing the silences and increasing the speed can make a selection of speech sound more insistent, possibly to the point of unpleasantness. == Applications == === Advertising === Time-compressed speech is frequently used in television and radio advertising. The advantage of time-compressed speech is that the same number of words can be compressed into a smaller amount of time, reducing advertising costs, and/or allowing more information to be included in a given radio or TV advertisement. It is usually most noticeable in the information-dense caveats and disclaimers presented (usually by legal requirement) at the end of commercials—the aural equivalent of the "fine print" in a printed contract. This practice, however, is not new: before electronic methods were developed, spokespeople who could talk extremely quickly and still be understood were widely used as voice talents for radio and TV advertisements, and especially for recording such disclaimers. === Education === Time-compressed speech has educational applications such as increasing the information density of trainings, and as a study aid. A number of studies have demonstrated that the average person is capable of relatively easily comprehending speech delivered at higher-than-normal rates, with the peak occurring at around 25% compression (that is, 25% faster than normal); this facility has been demonstrated in several languages. Conversational speech (in English) takes place at a rate of around 150 wpm (words per minute), but the average person is able to comprehend speech presented at rates of up to 200-250 wpm without undue difficulty. Blind and severely visually impaired subjects scored similar comprehension levels at even higher rates, up to 300-350 wpm. Blind people have been found to use time-compressed speech extensively, for example, when reviewing recorded lectures from high school and college classes, or professional trainings. Comprehension rates in older blind subjects have been found to be as good, or in some cases better than those found in younger sighted subjects. Other studies have determined that the ability to comprehend highly time-compressed speech tends to fall off with increased age, and is also reduced when the language of the time-compressed speech is not the listener's native language. Non-native speakers can, however, improve their comprehension level of time-compressed speech with multiday training. === Voice Mail === Voice mail systems have employed time-compressed speech since as far back as the 1970s. In this application, the technology enables the rapid review of messages in high-traffic systems, by a relatively small number of people. === Streaming Multimedia === Time-compressed speech has been explored as one of a variety of interrelated factors which may be manipulated to increase the efficiency of streaming multimedia presentations, by significantly reducing the latency times involved in the transfer of large digitally encoded media files.
Read more →
Information scientist

The term information scientist developed in the latter part of the twentieth century by Wm. Hovey Smith to describe an individual, usually with a relevant subject degree (such as one in Information and Computer Science - CIS) or high level of subject knowledge, providing focused information to scientific and technical research staff in industry. It is a role quite distinct from and complementary to that of a librarian. Developments in end-user searching, together with some convergence between the roles of librarian and information scientist, have led to a diminution in its use in this context, and the term information officer or information professional (information specialist) are also now used. The term was, and is, also used for an individual carrying out research in information science. Brian C. Vickery mentions that the Institute of Information Scientists (IIS) was established in London during 1958 and lists the criteria put forward by this institute "Criteria for Information Science" (appendix 1) as well as his own "Areas of study in information science" (appendix 2). The IIS merged with the Library Association in 2002 to form the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP). == Notable Information Scientists == See also Award of Merit - Association for Information Science and Technology Marcia Bates David Blair (information technologist) Samuel C. Bradford Michael Buckland John M. Carroll Blaise Cronin Emilia Currás Brenda Dervin Eugene Garfield Paul B. Kantor Frederick Wilfrid Lancaster Calvin Mooers Tefko Saracevic Linda C. Smith Robert Saxton Taylor Brian Campbell Vickery Thomas D. Wilson == Additional reading == Ellis, David and Merete Haugan. (1997) "Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment" (Journal of Documentation, Volume 53(4): pp. 384–403) Poole, Alex H. (2024). "'There's a big difference between going through life with the wind at your back, and going through life leaning into the wind': Feminism in Post-World War II Information Science". Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 61: 300–313. doi:10.1002/pra2.1029. Vickery, Brian Campbell (1988) "Essays presented to B. C. Vickery" (Journal of Documentation, Volume 44, pp. 199–283). Vickery, B. & Vickery, A. (1987) Information Science in theory and practice (London: Bowker-Saur, pp. 361–369)
Read more →
Algorithm engineering

Algorithm engineering focuses on the design, analysis, implementation, optimization, profiling and experimental evaluation of computer algorithms, bridging the gap between algorithmics theory and practical applications of algorithms in software engineering. It is a general methodology for algorithmic research. == Origins == In 1995, a report from an NSF-sponsored workshop "with the purpose of assessing the current goals and directions of the Theory of Computing (TOC) community" identified the slow speed of adoption of theoretical insights by practitioners as an important issue and suggested measures to reduce the uncertainty by practitioners whether a certain theoretical breakthrough will translate into practical gains in their field of work, and tackle the lack of ready-to-use algorithm libraries, which provide stable, bug-free and well-tested implementations for algorithmic problems and expose an easy-to-use interface for library consumers. But also, promising algorithmic approaches have been neglected due to difficulties in mathematical analysis. The term "algorithm engineering" was first used with specificity in 1997, with the first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE97), organized by Giuseppe F. Italiano. == Difference from algorithm theory == Algorithm engineering does not intend to replace or compete with algorithm theory, but tries to enrich, refine and reinforce its formal approaches with experimental algorithmics (also called empirical algorithmics). This way it can provide new insights into the efficiency and performance of algorithms in cases where the algorithm at hand is less amenable to algorithm theoretic analysis, formal analysis pessimistically suggests bounds which are unlikely to appear on inputs of practical interest, the algorithm relies on the intricacies of modern hardware architectures like data locality, branch prediction, instruction stalls, instruction latencies which the machine model used in Algorithm Theory is unable to capture in the required detail, the crossover between competing algorithms with different constant costs and asymptotic behaviors needs to be determined. == Methodology == Some researchers describe algorithm engineering's methodology as a cycle consisting of algorithm design, analysis, implementation and experimental evaluation, joined by further aspects like machine models or realistic inputs. They argue that equating algorithm engineering with experimental algorithmics is too limited, because viewing design and analysis, implementation and experimentation as separate activities ignores the crucial feedback loop between those elements of algorithm engineering. === Realistic models and real inputs === While specific applications are outside the methodology of algorithm engineering, they play an important role in shaping realistic models of the problem and the underlying machine, and supply real inputs and other design parameters for experiments. === Design === Compared to algorithm theory, which usually focuses on the asymptotic behavior of algorithms, algorithm engineers need to keep further requirements in mind: Simplicity of the algorithm, implementability in programming languages on real hardware, and allowing code reuse. Additionally, constant factors of algorithms have such a considerable impact on real-world inputs that sometimes an algorithm with worse asymptotic behavior performs better in practice due to lower constant factors. === Analysis === Some problems can be solved with heuristics and randomized algorithms in a simpler and more efficient fashion than with deterministic algorithms. Unfortunately, this makes even simple randomized algorithms difficult to analyze because there are subtle dependencies to be taken into account. === Implementation === Huge semantic gaps between theoretical insights, formulated algorithms, programming languages and hardware pose a challenge to efficient implementations of even simple algorithms, because small implementation details can have rippling effects on execution behavior. The only reliable way to compare several implementations of an algorithm is to spend an considerable amount of time on tuning and profiling, running those algorithms on multiple architectures, and looking at the generated machine code. === Experiments === See: Experimental algorithmics === Application engineering === Implementations of algorithms used for experiments differ in significant ways from code usable in applications. While the former prioritizes fast prototyping, performance and instrumentation for measurements during experiments, the latter requires thorough testing, maintainability, simplicity, and tuning for particular classes of inputs. === Algorithm libraries === Stable, well-tested algorithm libraries like LEDA play an important role in technology transfer by speeding up the adoption of new algorithms in applications. Such libraries reduce the required investment and risk for practitioners, because it removes the burden of understanding and implementing the results of academic research. == Conferences == Two main conferences on Algorithm Engineering are organized annually, namely: Symposium on Experimental Algorithms (SEA), established in 1997 (formerly known as WEA). SIAM Meeting on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX), established in 1999. The 1997 Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'97) was held in Venice (Italy) on September 11–13, 1997. The Third International Workshop on Algorithm Engineering (WAE'99) was held in London, UK in July 1999. The first Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experimentation (ALENEX99) was held in Baltimore, Maryland on January 15–16, 1999. It was sponsored by DIMACS, the Center for Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science (at Rutgers University), with additional support from SIGACT, the ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory, and SIAM, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
Read more →
Knowledge organization system

Knowledge organization system (KOS), concept system, or concept scheme is the generic term used in knowledge organization (KO) for the selection of concepts with an indication of selected semantic relations. Despite their differences in type, coverage, and application, all KOS aim to support the organization of knowledge and information to facilitate their management and retrieval. KOS vary in complexity from simple sorted lists to complex relational networks. They represent both structural and functional features, and serve to eliminate ambiguity, control synonyms, establish relationships, and present properties. From their origins in library and information science (LIS), KOS have been applied to other domains and disciplines within science and industry, although scholarly research and debate remain primarily within the KO field. Challenges of KOS include ambiguity of terminology, repercussions of biased systems, and potential obsolescence. KOS can be expressed in RDF and RDFS as per the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) recommendation by W3C, which aims to enable the sharing and linking of KOS via the Web. One of the largest collections of KOS is the BARTOC registry. == Types == While different schema of KOS have been proposed, most are generally arranged in terms of the complexity of their construction and maintenance. Some scholars argue that organizing KOS on a spectrum oversimplifies the shared characteristics among them, and may even result in a non-ideal structure being chosen. The following types are not exhaustive, and are often not mutually-exclusive in practice. === Term lists === Term lists are the least structured form of KOS. They include lists, glossaries, dictionaries, and synonym rings. Authority files and gazetteers may also be considered term lists, however other scholars categorize them and directories as "metadata-like models". Examples include the Union List of Artist Names name authority file and the GeoNames gazetteer. === Categorization and classification === KOS that emphasize specific (and often hierarchical) structures include subject headings, taxonomies, categorization schema, and classification schema & systems. Despite inconsistent use of the terms "categorization" and "classification" in some literature, categorization is generally loosely-assembled grouping schema and may include attributes that are not mutually exclusive (or having fuzzy boundaries), while classification is related to the arrangement of non-overlapping and mutually-exclusive classes. Classification schema may be universal (such as Dewey Decimal Classification and Information Coding Classification) or domain-specific (such as the National Library of Medicine Classification). === Relationship models === The types of KOS with greatest complexity and which utilize connections between concepts include thesauri, semantic networks, and ontologies. One of the most prominent examples of a semantic network is WordNet. === Others === Certain structures proposed to be considered types of KOS—but are not consistently included in schema—include folksonomies, topic maps, web directory structures, publication organization systems, and bibliometric maps. Some KOS organize other KOS themselves—for instance, PeriodO is a gazetteer of periodization categories. == Applications == Some early KOS were developed as a support system for abstracting and indexing services to be used by specially-trained searchers. With the growth of information digitization, usability became increasingly accessible, and more complex structures were developed. Prominent examples of KOS outside of LIS include organism taxonomy in biology, the periodic table of elements in chemistry, SIC and NAICS classification systems for industry & business, and AGROVOC agricultural controlled vocabulary. == Challenges == The study and design of KOS is an ongoing topic of discussion among KO scholars. === Terminology === [There is] a serious lack of vocabulary control in the literature on controlled vocabulary. Inconsistency of terminology within the study of KOS is a common issue. For instance, "ontology" is used for both a specific type of KOS as well as a generic term for any KOS. The terms "taxonomy", "classification", and "categorization" are also sometimes used interchangeably. === Bias === As knowledge can be historically and culturally biased, scholars have also discussed how KOS themselves can perpetuate harmful practices or stereotypes. For example, a number of concerns and criticisms about the classification of mental disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders have been raised, contributing to ongoing revisions. Ethical and intentional design approaches have been proposed for multi-perspective KOS in efforts to mitigate bias and other harmful practices. === Obsolescence === The possible obsolescence of the thesaurus and other simpler KOS has been the topic of debate, especially in the face of increasingly complex ontologies, the growing usage of "Google-like retrieval systems", and the move of KO theory and research away from LIS and toward computer science. Supporters of thesauri argue its continued usefulness for metadata enrichment, vocabulary mapping, and web services, as well as its usage in specific domains such as corporate intranets and digital image libraries.
Read more →
LakeFS

lakeFS is an open-source data version control system for managing data stored in object storage. It provides Git-like operations such as branching, committing, merging, and reverting for large-scale data stored in systems including Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, and Google Cloud Storage, as well as other S3-compatible object storage platforms. lakeFS is used in data engineering and machine learning workflows to manage changes to data, support reproducibility, and enable data governance across data lakes. The software is available as an open-source project, as well as in enterprise and managed service offerings, including lakeFS Cloud. == History == lakeFS was created in 2020 by Einat Orr and Oz Katz at Treeverse. Its first public release, version 0.8.1, appeared in August 2020 and introduced Git-style operations with support for Amazon S3. In 2021, Treeverse raised $23 million in a Series A funding round led by Dell Technologies Capital, Norwest Venture Partners, and Zeev Ventures. The same year, lakeFS was included in InfoWorld’s Best of Open Source Software (Bossie) awards. In June 2022, Treeverse introduced lakeFS Cloud, a managed service providing hosted lakeFS deployments for cloud-based data lakes. Version 1.0 was released in October 2023, adding integrations with platforms such as Databricks and Apache Iceberg, as well as support for orchestration tools including Apache Airflow. Public case studies and conference materials have described usage of lakeFS by organizations such as Microsoft, Volvo, and NASA. In July 2025, Treeverse announced an additional $20 million in growth funding to support further development of lakeFS. In November 2025, Treeverse announced the acquisition of the open-source data version control project DVC. == Software == === Overview === lakeFS provides Git-like operations such as branching, committing, merging, and reverting for datasets stored in object storage. These operations are used to manage changes to data, test modifications in isolation, reproduce specific data states, and recover from errors or unintended updates. === Architecture === lakeFS operates as a metadata layer on top of object storage systems such as Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, and Google Cloud Storage. It stores repository metadata describing commits, branches, and tags, enabling versioned views of data without copying underlying objects. The system provides access through multiple interfaces, including a web user interface, command-line tools, a REST API, and software development kits. It is designed to integrate with existing data engineering and machine learning workflows, and can be deployed either in self-hosted environments or as a managed service. === Functions === lakeFS provides version control functionality for data stored in object storage–based data lakes. Core features include: Atomic commits and version tracking for datasets, supporting reproducibility and auditability. Branching and merging mechanisms that allow isolated development and testing without duplicating data. Configurable hooks that can validate data or trigger external processes during commit and merge operations. The ability to revert repositories to earlier states to recover from data errors or failed changes. Recording of commit history and associated metadata for lineage tracking. Support for managing data across multiple object storage systems, including Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, Google Cloud Storage, and MinIO. Use of fixed data versions to reproduce experiments and machine learning model training. === Integrations === Coverage of lakeFS has described integrations with platforms such as Databricks and Apache Iceberg, as well as support for environments including Red Hat OpenShift. Additional materials describe its use with Trino, including validation of data changes prior to merging in versioned data workflows, as well as compatibility with orchestration tools such as Apache Airflow.
Read more →
Run-time algorithm specialization

In computer science, run-time algorithm specialization is a methodology for creating efficient algorithms for costly computation tasks of certain kinds. The methodology originates in the field of automated theorem proving and, more specifically, in the Vampire theorem prover project. The idea is inspired by the use of partial evaluation in optimising program translation. Many core operations in theorem provers exhibit the following pattern. Suppose that we need to execute some algorithm a l g ( A , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A,B)} in a situation where a value of A {\displaystyle A} is fixed for potentially many different values of B {\displaystyle B} . In order to do this efficiently, we can try to find a specialization of a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} for every fixed A {\displaystyle A} , i.e., such an algorithm a l g A {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}} , that executing a l g A ( B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}(B)} is equivalent to executing a l g ( A , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A,B)} . The specialized algorithm may be more efficient than the generic one, since it can exploit some particular properties of the fixed value A {\displaystyle A} . Typically, a l g A ( B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}(B)} can avoid some operations that a l g ( A , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A,B)} would have to perform, if they are known to be redundant for this particular parameter A {\displaystyle A} . In particular, we can often identify some tests that are true or false for A {\displaystyle A} , unroll loops and recursion, etc. == Difference from partial evaluation == The key difference between run-time specialization and partial evaluation is that the values of A {\displaystyle A} on which a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} is specialised are not known statically, so the specialization takes place at run-time. There is also an important technical difference. Partial evaluation is applied to algorithms explicitly represented as codes in some programming language. At run-time, we do not need any concrete representation of a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} . We only have to imagine a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} when we program the specialization procedure. All we need is a concrete representation of the specialized version a l g A {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}} . This also means that we cannot use any universal methods for specializing algorithms, which is usually the case with partial evaluation. Instead, we have to program a specialization procedure for every particular algorithm a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} . An important advantage of doing so is that we can use some powerful ad hoc tricks exploiting peculiarities of a l g {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}} and the representation of A {\displaystyle A} and B {\displaystyle B} , which are beyond the reach of any universal specialization methods. == Specialization with compilation == The specialized algorithm has to be represented in a form that can be interpreted. In many situations, usually when a l g A ( B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}(B)} is to be computed on many values of B {\displaystyle B} in a row, a l g A {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}_{A}} can be written as machine code instructions for a special abstract machine, and it is typically said that A {\displaystyle A} is compiled. The code itself can then be additionally optimized by answer-preserving transformations that rely only on the semantics of instructions of the abstract machine. The instructions of the abstract machine can usually be represented as records. One field of such a record, an instruction identifier (or instruction tag), would identify the instruction type, e.g. an integer field may be used, with particular integer values corresponding to particular instructions. Other fields may be used for storing additional parameters of the instruction, e.g. a pointer field may point to another instruction representing a label, if the semantics of the instruction require a jump. All instructions of the code can be stored in a traversable data structure such as an array, linked list, or tree. Interpretation (or execution) proceeds by fetching instructions in some order, identifying their type, and executing the actions associated with said type. In many programming languages, such as C and C++, a simple switch statement may be used to associate actions with different instruction identifiers. Modern compilers usually compile a switch statement with constant (e.g. integer) labels from a narrow range by storing the address of the statement corresponding to a value i {\displaystyle i} in the i {\displaystyle i} -th cell of a special array, as a means of efficient optimisation. This can be exploited by taking values for instruction identifiers from a small interval of values. == Data-and-algorithm specialization == There are situations when many instances of A {\displaystyle A} are intended for long-term storage and the calls of a l g ( A , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A,B)} occur with different B {\displaystyle B} in an unpredictable order. For example, we may have to check a l g ( A 1 , B 1 ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A_{1},B_{1})} first, then a l g ( A 2 , B 2 ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A_{2},B_{2})} , then a l g ( A 1 , B 3 ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A_{1},B_{3})} , and so on. In such circumstances, full-scale specialization with compilation may not be suitable due to excessive memory usage. However, we can sometimes find a compact specialized representation A ′ {\displaystyle A^{\prime }} for every A {\displaystyle A} , that can be stored with, or instead of, A {\displaystyle A} . We also define a variant a l g ′ {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}^{\prime }} that works on this representation and any call to a l g ( A , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}(A,B)} is replaced by a l g ′ ( A ′ , B ) {\displaystyle {\mathit {alg}}^{\prime }(A^{\prime },B)} , intended to do the same job faster.
Read more →
Artificial intelligence in Indonesia

Artificial intelligence in Indonesia refers to development, use and governance of artificial intelligence in Indonesia. Indonesia has treated AI as a national policy area through the Strategi Nasional Kecerdasan Artifisial or National Artificial Intelligence Strategy for 2020–2045. Public discussion has focused on the role of AI in sectors such as health, agriculture, education, mobile technology and e-commerce. Recent developments include AI ethics guidance issued by the communications ministry. Proposals for a national AI roadmap and sovereign AI fund, investment in cloud and AI infrastructure, and local-language AI initiatives for Bahasa Indonesia and regional Indonesian languages. == National strategy == Indonesia's National Artificial Intelligence Strategy is known in Indonesian as Strategi Nasional Kecerdasan Artifisial or Stranas KA. The strategy was published as a long-term framework for the development and use of AI between 2020 and 2045. It is intended to guide ministries, government agencies, regional governments and other stakeholders. The strategy identifies five priority sectors: health services, bureaucratic reform, education and research, food security, and mobility and smart cities. OECD lists the Ministry of Research and Technology and the National Research and Innovation Agency as organisations associated with the strategy. The strategy was developed through consultation with public and private stakeholders. == Institutions == The Indonesian Artificial Intelligence Industry Research and Innovation Collaboration, known as KORIKA is the nodal agency for the national AI strategy. KORIKA describes its vision as creating a collaborative ecosystem to accelerate implementation of the national AI strategy towards Vision Indonesia 2045. The Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs has also been involved in AI governance, digital policy and public communication. In 2025, Reuters reported that the ministry was preparing a national AI roadmap to give investors and developers a clearer view of Indonesia's market, infrastructure and computing capacity. == AI Governance == Indonesia has introduced policy guidance on the ethical use of artificial intelligence. The policy sets out ethical values for the development and use of AI. These include humanity, security, transparency, credibility and accountability, personal data protection, sustainable development and intellectual property protection. A UNESCO country profile on Indonesia noted that Indonesia had adopted a national AI strategy and had policy frameworks. It also identified gaps in internet access, gender inclusion, language datasets, digital talent and cybersecurity. UNESCO recommended that Indonesia update its AI standards, invest in ethical AI, strengthen research coordination and consider establishing a national agency for artificial intelligence. In May 2026, Antara News reported comments by Deputy Minister of Communication and Digital Affairs Nezar Patria. Who said that AI safety requires partnerships, shared standards and continuing dialogue. == Sectors == AI policy discussions in Indonesia have identified health, agriculture, education, government services, mobility and smart cities as areas where AI could be applied. Mobile technology and e-commerce have been discussed as important areas of AI adoption in Indonesia. Research on AI adoption in Indonesia by Siddhartha Paul Tiwari and Adi Fahrudin has also examined mobile and e-commerce sectors. UNESCO has also noted that Indonesia's large digital economy and startup ecosystem have supported AI adoption, while also pointing to challenges in talent, research capacity and cybersecurity. Indonesia is one of the developing-country markets attracting AI infrastructure investment, including data centres. == Challenges == Indonesia faces several challenges in developing and governing AI. These include gaps in computing infrastructure, uneven connectivity outside major cities, shortages of skilled workers, limited research funding, cybersecurity risks, misinformation, data leaks and the underrepresentation of Indonesian and indigenous languages in AI datasets. UNESCO noted that Bahasa is spoken by around 200 million people but remains underrepresented in AI. It also noted that Indonesia has more than 700 indigenous languages, many of which face the risk of extinction. UNESCO recommended stronger coordination in AI research and a more unified strategy for using AI in language preservation.
Read more →
Conceptualization (information science)

In information science, a conceptualization is an abstract simplified view of some selected parts of the world, containing the objects, concepts, and other entities that are presumed of interest for some particular purpose and the relationships between them. An explicit specification of a conceptualization is an ontology, and it may occur that a conceptualization can be realized by several distinct ontologies. An ontological commitment in describing ontological comparisons is taken to refer to that subset of elements of an ontology shared with all the others. "An ontology is language-dependent", its objects and interrelations described within the language it uses, while a conceptualization is always the same, more general, its concepts existing "independently of the language used to describe it". The relation between these terms is shown in the figure to the right. Not all workers in knowledge engineering use the term "conceptualization", but instead refer to the conceptualization itself, or to the ontological commitment of all its realizations, as an overarching ontology. == Purpose and implementation == As a higher level abstraction, a conceptualization facilitates the discussion and comparison of its various ontologies, facilitating knowledge sharing and reuse. Each ontology based upon the same overarching conceptualization maps the conceptualization into specific elements and their relationships. The question then arises as to how to describe the "conceptualization" in terms that can encompass multiple ontologies. This issue has been called the Tower of Babel problem, that is, how can persons used to one ontology talk with others using a different ontology? This problem is easily grasped, but a general resolution is not at hand. It can be a "bottom-up" or a "top-down" approach, or something in between. However, in more artificial situations, such as information systems, the idea of a "conceptualization" and the "ontological commitment" of various ontologies that realize the "conceptualization" is possible. The formation of a conceptualization and its ontologies involves these steps: specification of the conceptualization ontology concepts: every definition involves the definitions of other terms relationships between the concepts: this step maps conceptual relationships onto the ontology structure groups of concepts: this step may lead to the creation of sub-ontologies formal description of ontology commitments, for example, to make them computer readable An example of moving conception into a language leading to a variety of ontologies is the expression of a process in pseudocode (a strictly structured form of ordinary language) leading to implementation in several different formal computer languages like Lisp or Fortran. The pseudocode makes it easier to understand the instructions and compare implementations, but the formal languages make possible the compilation of the ideas as computer instructions. Another example is mathematics, where a very general formulation (the analog of a conceptualization) is illustrated with "applications" that are more specialized examples. For instance, aspects of a function space can be illustrated using a vector space or a topological space that introduce interpretations of the "elements" of the conceptualization and additional relationships between them but preserve the connections required in the function space.
Read more →
Client honeypot

Honeypots are security devices whose value lie in being probed and compromised. Traditional honeypots are servers (or devices that expose server services) that wait passively to be attacked. Client Honeypots are active security devices in search of malicious servers that attack clients. The client honeypot poses as a client and interacts with the server to examine whether an attack has occurred. Often the focus of client honeypots is on web browsers, but any client that interacts with servers can be part of a client honeypot (for example ftp, email, ssh, etc.). There are several terms that are used to describe client honeypots. Besides client honeypot, which is the generic classification, honeyclient is the other term that is generally used and accepted. However, there is a subtlety here, as "honeyclient" is actually a homograph that could also refer to the first known open source client honeypot implementation (see below), although this should be clear from the context. == Architecture == A client honeypot is composed of three components. The first component, a queuer, is responsible for creating a list of servers for the client to visit. This list can be created, for example, through crawling. The second component is the client itself, which is able to make a requests to servers identified by the queuer. After the interaction with the server has taken place, the third component, an analysis engine, is responsible for determining whether an attack has taken place on the client honeypot. In addition to these components, client honeypots are usually equipped with some sort of containment strategy to prevent successful attacks from spreading beyond the client honeypot. This is usually achieved through the use of firewalls and virtual machine sandboxes. Analogous to traditional server honeypots, client honeypots are mainly classified by their interaction level: high or low; which denotes the level of functional interaction the server can utilize on the client honeypot. In addition to this there are also newly hybrid approaches which denotes the usage of both high and low interaction detection techniques. == High interaction == High interaction client honeypots are fully functional systems comparable to real systems with real clients. As such, no functional limitations (besides the containment strategy) exist on high interaction client honeypots. Attacks on high interaction client honeypots are detected via inspection of the state of the system after a server has been interacted with. The detection of changes to the client honeypot may indicate the occurrence of an attack against that has exploited a vulnerability of the client. An example of such a change is the presence of a new or altered file. High interaction client honeypots are very effective at detecting unknown attacks on clients. However, the tradeoff for this accuracy is a performance hit from the amount of system state that has to be monitored to make an attack assessment. Also, this detection mechanism is prone to various forms of evasion by the exploit. For example, an attack could delay the exploit from immediately triggering (time bombs) or could trigger upon a particular set of conditions or actions (logic bombs). Since no immediate, detectable state change occurred, the client honeypot is likely to incorrectly classify the server as safe even though it did successfully perform its attack on the client. Finally, if the client honeypots are running in virtual machines, then an exploit may try to detect the presence of the virtual environment and cease from triggering or behave differently. === Capture-HPC === Capture [1] is a high interaction client honeypot developed by researchers at Victoria University of Wellington, NZ. Capture differs from existing client honeypots in various ways. First, it is designed to be fast. State changes are being detected using an event based model allowing to react to state changes as they occur. Second, Capture is designed to be scalable. A central Capture server is able to control numerous clients across a network. Third, Capture is supposed to be a framework that allows to utilize different clients. The initial version of Capture supports Internet Explorer, but the current version supports all major browsers (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, Safari) as well as other HTTP aware client applications, such as office applications and media players. === HoneyClient === HoneyClient [2] is a web browser based (IE/FireFox) high interaction client honeypot designed by Kathy Wang in 2004 and subsequently developed at MITRE. It was the first open source client honeypot and is a mix of Perl, C++, and Ruby. HoneyClient is state-based and detects attacks on Windows clients by monitoring files, process events, and registry entries. It has integrated the Capture-HPC real-time integrity checker to perform this detection. HoneyClient also contains a crawler, so it can be seeded with a list of initial URLs from which to start and can then continue to traverse web sites in search of client-side malware. === HoneyMonkey (dead since 2010) === HoneyMonkey [3] is a web browser based (IE) high interaction client honeypot implemented by Microsoft in 2005. It is not available for download. HoneyMonkey is state based and detects attacks on clients by monitoring files, registry, and processes. A unique characteristic of HoneyMonkey is its layered approach to interacting with servers in order to identify zero-day exploits. HoneyMonkey initially crawls the web with a vulnerable configuration. Once an attack has been identified, the server is reexamined with a fully patched configuration. If the attack is still detected, one can conclude that the attack utilizes an exploit for which no patch has been publicly released yet and therefore is quite dangerous. === SHELIA (dead since 2009) === Shelia [4] is a high interaction client honeypot developed by Joan Robert Rocaspana at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. It integrates with an email reader and processes each email it receives (URLs & attachments). Depending on the type of URL or attachment received, it opens a different client application (e.g. browser, office application, etc.) It monitors whether executable instructions are executed in data area of memory (which would indicate a buffer overflow exploit has been triggered). With such an approach, SHELIA is not only able to detect exploits, but is able to actually ward off exploits from triggering. === UW Spycrawler === The Spycrawler [5] developed at the University of Washington is yet another browser based (Mozilla) high interaction client honeypot developed by Moshchuk et al. in 2005. This client honeypot is not available for download. The Spycrawler is state based and detects attacks on clients by monitoring files, processes, registry, and browser crashes. Spycrawlers detection mechanism is event based. Further, it increases the passage of time of the virtual machine the Spycrawler is operating in to overcome (or rather reduce the impact of) time bombs. === Web Exploit Finder === WEF [6] is an implementation of an automatic drive-by-download – detection in a virtualized environment, developed by Thomas Müller, Benjamin Mack and Mehmet Arziman, three students from the Hochschule der Medien (HdM), Stuttgart during the summer term in 2006. WEF can be used as an active HoneyNet with a complete virtualization architecture underneath for rollbacks of compromised virtualized machines. == Low interaction == Low interaction client honeypots differ from high interaction client honeypots in that they do not utilize an entire real system, but rather use lightweight or simulated clients to interact with the server. (in the browser world, they are similar to web crawlers). Responses from servers are examined directly to assess whether an attack has taken place. This could be done, for example, by examining the response for the presence of malicious strings. Low interaction client honeypots are easier to deploy and operate than high interaction client honeypots and also perform better. However, they are likely to have a lower detection rate since attacks have to be known to the client honeypot in order for it to detect them; new attacks are likely to go unnoticed. They also suffer from the problem of evasion by exploits, which may be exacerbated due to their simplicity, thus making it easier for an exploit to detect the presence of the client honeypot. === HoneyC === HoneyC [7] is a low interaction client honeypot developed at Victoria University of Wellington by Christian Seifert in 2006. HoneyC is a platform independent open source framework written in Ruby. It currently concentrates driving a web browser simulator to interact with servers. Malicious servers are detected by statically examining the web server's response for malicious strings through the usage of Snort signatures. === Monkey-Spider (dead since 2008) === Monkey-Spider [8] is a low-interaction client honeypot i
Read more →
Conceptualization (information science)

In information science, a conceptualization is an abstract simplified view of some selected parts of the world, containing the objects, concepts, and other entities that are presumed of interest for some particular purpose and the relationships between them. An explicit specification of a conceptualization is an ontology, and it may occur that a conceptualization can be realized by several distinct ontologies. An ontological commitment in describing ontological comparisons is taken to refer to that subset of elements of an ontology shared with all the others. "An ontology is language-dependent", its objects and interrelations described within the language it uses, while a conceptualization is always the same, more general, its concepts existing "independently of the language used to describe it". The relation between these terms is shown in the figure to the right. Not all workers in knowledge engineering use the term "conceptualization", but instead refer to the conceptualization itself, or to the ontological commitment of all its realizations, as an overarching ontology. == Purpose and implementation == As a higher level abstraction, a conceptualization facilitates the discussion and comparison of its various ontologies, facilitating knowledge sharing and reuse. Each ontology based upon the same overarching conceptualization maps the conceptualization into specific elements and their relationships. The question then arises as to how to describe the "conceptualization" in terms that can encompass multiple ontologies. This issue has been called the Tower of Babel problem, that is, how can persons used to one ontology talk with others using a different ontology? This problem is easily grasped, but a general resolution is not at hand. It can be a "bottom-up" or a "top-down" approach, or something in between. However, in more artificial situations, such as information systems, the idea of a "conceptualization" and the "ontological commitment" of various ontologies that realize the "conceptualization" is possible. The formation of a conceptualization and its ontologies involves these steps: specification of the conceptualization ontology concepts: every definition involves the definitions of other terms relationships between the concepts: this step maps conceptual relationships onto the ontology structure groups of concepts: this step may lead to the creation of sub-ontologies formal description of ontology commitments, for example, to make them computer readable An example of moving conception into a language leading to a variety of ontologies is the expression of a process in pseudocode (a strictly structured form of ordinary language) leading to implementation in several different formal computer languages like Lisp or Fortran. The pseudocode makes it easier to understand the instructions and compare implementations, but the formal languages make possible the compilation of the ideas as computer instructions. Another example is mathematics, where a very general formulation (the analog of a conceptualization) is illustrated with "applications" that are more specialized examples. For instance, aspects of a function space can be illustrated using a vector space or a topological space that introduce interpretations of the "elements" of the conceptualization and additional relationships between them but preserve the connections required in the function space.
Read more →
Iteration

Iteration means repeating a process to generate a (possibly unbounded) sequence of outcomes. Each repetition of the process is a single iteration, and the outcome of each iteration is the starting point of the next iteration. In mathematics and computer science, iteration (along with the related technique of recursion) is a standard element of algorithms. == Mathematics == In mathematics, iteration may refer to the process of iterating a function, i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviors and difficult problems – for examples, see the Collatz conjecture and juggler sequences. Another use of iteration in mathematics is in iterative methods which are used to produce approximate numerical solutions to certain mathematical problems. Newton's method is an example of an iterative method. Manual calculation of a number's square root is a common use and a well-known example. == Computing == In computing, iteration is a technique that marks out of a block of statements within a computer program for a defined number of repetitions. That block of statements is said to be iterated. A computer programmer might also refer to that block of statements as an iteration. === Implementations === Loops constitute the most common language constructs for performing iterations. The following pseudocode "iterates" three times the line of code between begin & end through a for loop, and uses the values of i as increments. It is permissible, and often necessary, to use values from other parts of the program outside the bracketed block of statements, to perform the desired function. Iterators constitute alternative language constructs to loops, which ensure consistent iterations over specific data structures. They can eventually save time and effort in later coding attempts. In particular, an iterator allows one to repeat the same kind of operation at each node of such a data structure, often in some pre-defined order. Iteratees are purely functional language constructs, which accept or reject data during the iterations. === Relation with recursion === Recursions and iterations have different algorithmic definitions, even though they can generate identical results. The primary difference is that recursion can be a solution without prior knowledge as to how many times the action must repeat, while a successful iteration requires that foreknowledge. Some types of programming languages, known as functional programming languages, are designed such that they do not set up a block of statements for explicit repetition, as with the for loop. Instead, those programming languages exclusively use recursion. Rather than call out a block of code to repeate a pre-defined number of times, the executing code block instead "divides" the work into a number of separate pieces, after which the code block executes itself on each individual piece. Each piece of work is divided repeatedly until the "amount" of work is as small as possible, at which point the algorithm does that work very quickly. The algorithm then "reverses" and reassembles the pieces into a complete whole. The classic example of recursion is in list-sorting algorithms, such as merge sort. The merge sort recursive algorithm first repeatedly divides the list into consecutive pairs. Each pair is then ordered, then each consecutive pair of pairs, and so forth until the elements of the list are in the desired order. The code below is an example of a recursive algorithm in the Scheme programming language that outputs the same result as the pseudocode under the previous heading. == Education == In some schools of pedagogy, iterations are used to describe the process of teaching or guiding students to repeat experiments, assessments, or projects, until more accurate results are found, or the student has mastered the technical skill. This idea is found in the old adage, "Practice makes perfect." In particular, "iterative" is defined as the "process of learning and development that involves cyclical inquiry, enabling multiple opportunities for people to revisit ideas and critically reflect on their implication." Unlike computing and math, educational iterations are not predetermined; instead, the task is repeated until success according to some external criteria (often a test) is achieved.
Read more →
Informationist

An informationist (or information specialist in context) provides research and knowledge management services in the context of clinical care or biomedical research. Although there is no one educational pathway or formalized set of skills or knowledge for informationists, one way to think of the informationist is as one who possesses the knowledge and skill of a medical librarian with extensive research specialization and some formal clinical or public health education that goes beyond on-the-job osmosis. Medical librarians and other biomedical professional organizations have been exploring the possibilities for evaluating how informationists are being used and whether their activities supplement or replace medical library activity. More generally, an informationist is a professional who works with information within a particular business, analytic or scientific context to drive toward outcomes based on evidence, analysis, prediction and execution. For example, an extension of the term is increasingly emerging in financial services, life sciences and health care industries. Though still nascently in use, its adoption applies to individuals with extensive industry expertise, acute familiarity with organizational structures and processes, deep domain level information mastery and information systems technical savvy. Informationists in this context support transformational initiatives within and across functional areas of an enterprise as architects, governance experts, continuous improvement advocates and strategists. == Background == The term was proposed in 2000 by Davidoff & Florance. Their editorial suggested that physicians should be delegating their information needs to informationists, just as they currently order CT scans from radiologists or cardiac catheterizations from cardiologists. They conceived of an information professional who was embedded in (and indeed, supported by) the clinical departments. Supporters of the concept see it as a means for librarians to reinvigorate connections with the faculty/clinicians, as well as provide superior service by dint of informationists' biomedical training. Critics complained that the idea is nothing new; librarians already provide in-depth, high quality information services and clinical medical librarians have been working alongside physicians, nurses and other clinicians for years. Large informationist programs in the U.S. exist at the National Institutes of Health and at Vanderbilt University. Welch Medical Library at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) is developing an informationist service model in which its 10 clinical and public health librarians are moving from serving as liaison librarians for assigned departments toward becoming embedded informationists within their departments. To prepare for the embedded informationist role, librarians are undertaking education as needed to supplement their backgrounds. For example, librarians bring experience in clinical behavior counseling, public health, nursing, and more. Informationist training can then focus upon filling gaps in research methods knowledge more so than on gaining additional knowledge in the librarian's area of expertise. Courses, seminars and workshops being undertaken include those covering systematic reviews, evidence-based medicine, critical appraisal, medical language, anatomy and physiology, biostatistics, and clinical research. The term informationist is related to that of informatician—also informaticist—and many informationists do possess skills in clinical topics, bioinformatics, and biomedical informatics. Harvard University, the University of Pittsburgh, and Washington University in St. Louis are examples of institutional libraries which have hired PhD-level scientists (who may or may not have library degrees) to provide informatics support for biomedical research.
Read more →
Capture the flag (cybersecurity)

In computer security, Capture the Flag (CTF) is an exercise in which participants attempt to find text strings, called "flags", which are secretly hidden in purposefully vulnerable programs or websites. They can be used for both competitive or educational purposes. In two main variations of CTFs, participants either steal flags from other participants (attack/defense-style CTFs) or from organizers (jeopardy-style challenges). A mixed competition combines these two styles. Competitions can include hiding flags in hardware devices, they can be both online or in-person, and can be advanced or entry-level. The game is inspired by the traditional outdoor sport with the same name. CTFs are used as a tool for developing and refining cybersecurity skills, making them popular in both professional and academic settings. == Overview == Capture the Flag (CTF) is a cybersecurity competition that is used to test and develop computer security skills. It was first developed in 1996 at DEF CON, the largest cybersecurity conference in the United States which is hosted annually in Las Vegas, Nevada. The conference hosts a weekend of cybersecurity competitions, including their flagship CTF. Two popular CTF formats are jeopardy and attack-defense. Both formats test participant’s knowledge in cybersecurity, but differ in objective. In the Jeopardy format, participating teams must complete as many challenges of varying point values from a various categories such as cryptography, web exploitation, and reverse engineering. In the attack-defense format, competing teams must defend their vulnerable computer systems while attacking their opponent's systems. The exercise involves a diverse array of tasks, including exploitation and cracking passwords, but there is little evidence showing how these tasks translate into cybersecurity knowledge held by security experts. Recent research has shown that the Capture the Flag tasks mainly covered technical knowledge but lacked social topics like social engineering and awareness on cybersecurity. == Educational applications == CTFs have been shown to be an effective way to improve cybersecurity education through gamification. There are many examples of CTFs designed to teach cybersecurity skills to a wide variety of audiences, including PicoCTF, organized by the Carnegie Mellon CyLab, which is oriented towards high school students, and Arizona State University supported pwn.college. Beyond educational CTF events and resources, CTFs has been shown to be a highly effective way to instill cybersecurity concepts in the classroom. CTFs have been included in undergraduate computer science classes such as Introduction to Information Security at the National University of Singapore. CTFs are also popular in military academies. They are often included as part of the curriculum for cybersecurity courses, with the NSA organized Cyber Exercise culminating in a CTF competition between the US service academies and military colleges. == Competitions == Many CTF organizers register their competition with the CTFtime platform. This allows the tracking of the position of teams over time and across competitions. These include "Plaid Parliament of Pwning", "More Smoked Leet Chicken", "Dragon Sector", "dcua", "Eat, Sleep, Pwn, Repeat", "perfect blue", "organizers" and "Blue Water". Overall the "Plaid Parliament of Pwning" and "Dragon Sector" have both placed first worldwide the most with three times each. === Community competitions === Every year there are dozens of CTFs organized in a variety of formats. Many CTFs are associated with cybersecurity conferences such as DEF CON, various editions of SANS Institute's NetWars, HITCON, and BSides. The DEF CON CTF, an attack-defence CTF, is notable for being one of the oldest CTF competitions to exist, and has been variously referred to as the "World Series", "Superbowl", and "Olympics", of hacking by media outlets. The NYU Tandon hosted Cybersecurity Awareness Worldwide (CSAW) CTF is one of the largest open-entry competitions for students learning cybersecurity from around the world. In 2021, it hosted over 1200 teams during the qualification round. In addition to conference organized CTFs, many CTF clubs and teams organize CTF competitions. Many CTF clubs and teams are associated with universities, such as the CMU associated Plaid Parliament of Pwning, which hosts PlaidCTF, and the ASU associated Shellphish. Some community CTFs are online and open to all participants. The SANS Institute Holiday Hack Challenge and TryHackMe Advent of Cyber. === Government-supported competitions === Governmentally supported CTF competitions include the DARPA Cyber Grand Challenge and ENISA European Cybersecurity Challenge. In 2023, the US Space Force-sponsored Hack-a-Sat CTF competition included, for the first time, a live orbital satellite for participants to exploit. === Corporate-supported competitions === Corporations and other organizations sometimes use CTFs as a training or evaluation exercise, with benefits similar to those in educational settings. In addition to internal CTF exercises, some corporations such as Google and Tencent host publicly accessible CTF competitions. == In popular culture == In Mr. Robot, a qualification round for the DEF CON CTF competition is depicted in the season 3 opener "eps3.0_power-saver-mode.h". The logo for DEF CON can be seen in the background. In The Undeclared War, a CTF is depicted in the opening scene of the series as a recruitment exercise used by GCHQ. Go Go Squid!, a Chinese television series, is based around training for and competing in highly stylized CTF competitions .
Read more →
Artificial imagination

Artificial imagination is a narrow subcomponent of artificial general intelligence which generates, simulates, and facilitates real or possible fiction models to create predictions, inventions, or conscious experiences. The term artificial imagination is also used to describe a property of machines or programs. Some of the traits that researchers hope to simulate include creativity, vision, digital art, humor, and satire. Practitioners in the field are researching various aspects of Artificial imagination, such as Artificial (visual) imagination, Artificial (aural) Imagination, modeling/filtering content based on human emotions and Interactive Search. Some articles on the topic speculate on how artificial imagination may evolve to create an artificial world "people may be comfortable enough to escape from the real world". Some researchers such as G. Schleis and M. Rizki have focused on using artificial neural networks to simulate artificial imagination. Another important project is being led by Hiroharu Kato and Tatsuya Harada at the University of Tokyo in Japan. They have developed a computer capable of translating a description of an object into an image, which could be the easiest way to define what imagination is. Their idea is based on the concept of an image as a series of pixels divided into short sequences that correspond to a specific part of an image. The scientists call this sequences "visual words" and those can be interpreted by the machine using statistical distribution to read an create an image of an object the machine has not encountered. The topic of artificial imagination has garnered interest from scholars outside the computer science domain, such as noted communications scholar Ernest Bormann, who came up with the Symbolic Convergence Theory and worked on a project to develop artificial imagination in computer systems. An interdisciplinary research seminar organized by the artist Grégory Chatonsky on artificial imagination and postdigital art has taken place since 2017 at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris. == Use in interactive search == The typical application of artificial imagination is for an interactive search. Interactive searching has been developed since the mid-1990s, accompanied by the World Wide Web's development and the optimization of search engines. Based on the first query and feedback from a user, the databases to be searched are reorganized to improve the searching results. Artificial imagination allows us to synthesize images and to develop a new image, whether it is in the database, regardless its existence in the real world. For example, the computer shows results that are based on the answer from the initial query. The user selects several relevant images, and then the technology analyzes these selections and reorganizes the images' ranks to fit the query. In this process, artificial imagination is used to synthesize the selected images and to improve the searching result with additional relevant synthesized images. This technique is based on several algorithms, including the Rocchio algorithm and the evolutionary algorithm. The Rocchio algorithm, locating a query point near relevant examples and far away from irrelevant examples, is simple and works well in a small system where the databases are arranged in certain ranks. The evolutionary synthesis is composed of two steps: a standard algorithm and an enhancement of the standard algorithm. Through feedback from the user, there would be additional images synthesized so as to be suited to what the user is looking for. == General artificial imagination == Artificial imagination has a more general definition and wide applications. The traditional fields of artificial imagination include visual imagination and aural imagination. More generally, all the actions to form ideas, images and concepts can be linked to imagination. Thus, artificial imagination means more than only generating graphs. For example, moral imagination is an important research subfield of artificial imagination, although classification of artificial imagination is difficult. Morals are an important part to human beings' logic, while artificial morals are important in artificial imagination and artificial intelligence. A common criticism of artificial intelligence is whether human beings should take responsibility for machines' mistakes or decisions and how to develop well-behaved machines. As nobody can give a clear description of the best moral rules, it is impossible to create machines with commonly accepted moral rules. However, recent research about artificial morals circumvent the definition of moral. Instead, machine learning methods are applied to train machines to imitate human morals. As the data about moral decisions from thousands of different people are considered, the trained moral model can reflect widely accepted rules. Memory is another major field of artificial imagination. Researchers such as Aude Oliva have performed extensive work on artificial memory, especially visual memory. Compared to visual imagination, the visual memory focuses more on how machine understand, analyse and store pictures in a human way. In addition, characters like spatial features are also considered. As this field is based on the brains' biological structures, extensive research on neuroscience has also been performed, which makes it a large intersection between biology and computer science.
Read more →
Algorithmic management

Algorithmic management is a term used to describe certain labor management practices in the contemporary digital economy. In scholarly uses, the term was initially coined in 2015 by Min Kyung Lee, Daniel Kusbit, Evan Metsky, and Laura Dabbish to describe the managerial role played by algorithms on the Uber and Lyft platforms, but has since been taken up by other scholars to describe more generally the managerial and organisational characteristics of platform economies. However, digital direction of labor was present in manufacturing already since the 1970s and algorithmic management is becoming increasingly widespread across a wide range of industries. The concept of algorithmic management can be broadly defined as the delegation of managerial functions to algorithmic and automated systems. Algorithmic management has been enabled by "recent advances in digital technologies" which allow for the real-time and "large-scale collection of data" which is then used to "improve learning algorithms that carry out learning and control functions traditionally performed by managers". The term does not refer to a specific underlying technology, and encompasses the design choices, organisational policies, and governance that surround the managerial use of algorithms in workplaces. In the contemporary workplace, firms employ an ecology of accounting devices, such as "rankings, lists, classifications, stars and other symbols' in order to effectively manage their operations and create value without the need for traditional forms of hierarchical control." Many of these devices fall under the label of what is called algorithmic management, and were first developed by companies operating in the sharing economy or gig economy, functioning as effective labor and cost cutting measures. The Data&Society explainer of the term, for example, describes algorithmic management as 'a diverse set of technological tools and techniques that structure the conditions of work and remotely manage workforces. Data&Society also provides a list of five typical features of algorithmic management: Prolific data collection and surveillance of workers through technology; Real-time responsiveness to data that informs management decisions; Automated or semi-automated decision-making; Transfer of performance evaluations to rating systems or other metrics; and The use of "nudges" and penalties to indirectly incentivize worker behaviors. Proponents of algorithmic management claim that it "creates new employment opportunities, better and cheaper consumer services, transparency and fairness in parts of the labour market that are characterised by inefficiency, opacity and capricious human bosses." On the other hand, critics of algorithmic management claim that the practice leads to several issues, especially as it impacts the employment status of workers managed by its new array of tools and techniques. == History of the term == "Algorithmic management" was first described by Lee, Kusbit, Metsky, and Dabbish in 2015 in their study of the Uber and Lyft platforms. In their study, Lee et al. termed "software algorithms that assume managerial functions and surrounding institutional devices that support algorithms in practice" algorithmic management. Software algorithms, it was said, are increasingly used to "allocate, optimize, and evaluate work" by platforms in managing their vast workforces. In Lee et al.'s paper on Uber and Lyft this included the use of algorithms to assign work to drivers, as mechanisms to optimise pricing for services, and as systems for evaluating driver performance. In 2016, Alex Rosenblat and Luke Stark sought to extend on this understanding of algorithmic management "to elucidate on the automated implementation of company policies on the behaviours and practices of Uber drivers." Rosenblat and Stark found in their study that algorithmic management practices contributed to a system beset by power asymmetries, where drivers had little control over "critical aspects of their work", whereas Uber had far greater control over the labor of its drivers. Since this time, studies of algorithmic management have extended the use of the term to describe the management practices of various firms, where, for example, algorithms "are taking over scheduling work in fast food restaurants and grocery stores, using various forms of performance metrics ad even mood... to assign the fastest employees to work in peak times." Algorithmic management is seen to be especially prevalent in gig work on platforms, such as on Upwork and Deliveroo, and in the sharing economy, such as in the case of Airbnb. Furthermore, recent research has defined sub-constructs that fall under the umbrella term of algorithmic management, for example, "algorithmic nudging". A Harvard Business Review article published in 2021 explains: "Companies are increasingly using algorithms to manage and control individuals not by force, but rather by nudging them into desirable behavior — in other words, learning from their personalized data and altering their choices in some subtle way." While the concept builds on nudging theory popularized by University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler and Harvard Law School professor Cass Sunstein, "due to recent advances in AI and machine learning, algorithmic nudging is much more powerful than its non-algorithmic counterpart. With so much data about workers' behavioral patterns at their fingertips, companies can now develop personalized strategies for changing individuals' decisions and behaviors at large scale. These algorithms can be adjusted in real-time, making the approach even more effective." == Relationships with other labor management practices == Algorithmic management has been compared and contrasted with other forms of management, such as Scientific management approaches, as pioneered by Frederick Taylor in the early 1900s. Henri Schildt has called algorithmic management "Scientific management 2.0", where management "is no longer a human practice, but a process embedded in technology." Similarly, Kathleen Griesbach, Adam Reich, Luke Elliott-Negri, and Ruth Milkman suggest that, while "algorithmic control over labor may be relatively new, it replicates many features of older mechanisms of labor control." On the other hand, some commentators have argued that algorithmic management is not simply a new form of Scientific management or digital Taylorism, but represents a distinct approach to labor control in platform economies. David Stark and Ivana Pais, for example, state that, "In contrast to Scientific Management at the turn of the twentieth century, in the algorithmic management of the twenty-first century there are rules but these are not bureaucratic, there are rankings but not ranks, and there is monitoring but it is not disciplinary. Algorithmic management does not automate bureaucratic structures and practices to create some new form of algorithmic bureaucracy. Whereas the devices and practices of Taylorism were part of a system of hierarchical supervision, the devices and practices of algorithmic management take place within a different economy of attention and a new regime of visibility. Triangular rather than vertical, and not as a panopticon, the lines of vision in algorithmic management are not lines of supervision." Similarly, Data&Society's explainer for algorithmic management claims that the practice represents a marked departure from earlier management structures that more strongly rely on human supervisors to direct workers. In analyzing the difference and the similarities to previous management styles, David Stark and Pieter Vanden Broeck expand the applicability of algorithmic management beyond the workplace. They develop a theory of algorithmic management in terms of broader changes in the shape and structure of organization in the 21st century, attentive to the erosion of organization's boundaries whereby heterogeneous actors, assets, and activities, are coopted regardless of their place in organizational space. Stark and Vanden Broeck propose the following means of differentiating algorithmic management from other historical managerial paradigms: == Issues == Algorithmic management can provide an effective and efficient means of workforce control and value creation in the contemporary digital economy. However, commentators have highlighted several issues that algorithmic management poses, especially for the workers it manages. Criticisms of the practice often highlight several key issues pertaining to algorithmic management practices, such as the imperfection and scope of its surveillance and control measures, which also threaten to lock workers out of key decision-making processes; its lack of transparency for users and information asymmetries; its potential for bias and discrimination; its dehumanizing tendencies; and its potential to create conditions which sidestep traditional employer-employee accountability. This last point has been especi
Read more →