AI Generator Video Free Online

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

The Visualization Handbook

The Visualization Handbook is a textbook by Charles D. Hansen and Christopher R. Johnson that serves as a survey of the field of scientific visualization by presenting the basic concepts and algorithms in addition to a current review of visualization research topics and tools. It is commonly used as a textbook for scientific visualization graduate courses. It is also commonly cited as a reference for scientific visualization and computer graphics in published papers, with almost 500 citations documented on Google Scholar. == Table of Contents == PART I - Introduction Overview of Visualization - William J. Schroeder and Kenneth M. Martin PART II - Scalar Field Visualization: Isosurfaces Accelerated Isosurface Extraction Approaches -Yarden Livnat Time-Dependent Isosurface Extraction - Han-Wei Shen Optimal Isosurface Extraction - Paolo Cignoni, Claudio Montani, Robert Scopigno, and Enrico Puppo Isosurface Extraction Using Extrema Graphs - Takayuki Itoh and Koji Koyamada Isosurfaces and Level-Sets - Ross Whitaker PART III - Scalar Field Visualization: Volume Rendering Overview of Volume Rendering - Arie E. Kaufman and Klaus Mueller Volume Rendering Using Splatting - Roger Crawfis, Daqing Xue, and Caixia Zhang Multidimensional Transfer Functions for Volume Rendering - Joe Kniss, Gordon Kindlmann, and Charles D. Hansen Pre-Integrated Volume Rendering - Martin Kraus and Thomas Ertl Hardware-Accelerated Volume Rendering - Hanspeter Pfister PART IV - Vector Field Visualization Overview of Flow Visualization - Daniel Weiskopf and Gordon Erlebacher Flow Textures: High-Resolution Flow Visualization - Gordon Erlebacher, Bruno Jobard, and Daniel Weiskopf Detection and Visualization of Vortices - Ming Jiang, Raghu Machiraju, and David Thompson PART V - Tensor Field Visualization Oriented Tensor Reconstruction - Leonid Zhukov and Alan H. Barr Diffusion Tensor MRI Visualization - Song Zhang, David Laidlaw, and Gordon Kindlmann Topological Methods for Flow Visualization - Gerik Scheuermann and Xavier Tricoche PART VI - Geometric Modeling for Visualization 3D Mesh Compression - Jarek Rossignac Variational Modeling Methods for Visualization - Hans Hagen and Ingrid Hotz Model Simplification - Jonathan D. Cohen and Dinesh Manocha PART VII - Virtual Environments for Visualization Direct Manipulation in Virtual Reality - Steve Bryson The Visual Haptic Workbench - Milan Ikits and J. Dean Brederson Virtual Geographic Information Systems - William Ribarsky Visualization Using Virtual Reality - R. Bowen Loftin, Jim X. Chen, and Larry Rosenblum PART VIII - Large-Scale Data Visualization Desktop Delivery: Access to Large Datasets - Philip D. Heermann and Constantine Pavlakos Techniques for Visualizing Time-Varying Volume Data - Kwan-Liu Ma and Eric B. Lum Large-Scale Data Visualization and Rendering: A Problem-Driven Approach - Patrick McCormick and James Ahrens Issues and Architectures in Large-Scale Data Visualization - Constantine Pavlakos and Philip D. Heermann Consuming Network Bandwidth with Visapult - Wes Bethel and John Shalf PART IX - Visualization Software and Frameworks The Visualization Toolkit - William J. Schroeder and Kenneth M. Martin Visualization in the SCIRun Problem-Solving Environment - David M. Weinstein, Steven Parker, Jenny Simpson, Kurt Zimmerman, and Greg M. Jones Numerical Algorithms Group IRIS Explorer - Jeremy Walton AVS and AVS/Express - Jean M. Favre and Mario Valle Vis5D, Cave5D, and VisAD - Bill Hibbard Visualization with AVS - W. T. Hewitt, Nigel W. John, Matthew D. Cooper, K. Yien Kwok, George W. Leaver, Joanna M. Leng, Paul G. Lever, Mary J. McDerby, James S. Perrin, Mark Riding, I. Ari Sadarjoen, Tobias M. Schiebeck, and Colin C. Venters ParaView: An End-User Tool for Large-Data Visualization - James Ahrens, Berk Geveci, and Charles Law The Insight Toolkit: An Open-Source Initiative in Data Segmentation and Registration - Terry S. Yoo amira: A Highly Interactive System for Visual Data Analysis - Detlev Stalling, Malte Westerhoff, and Hans-Christian Hege PART X - Perceptual Issues in Visualization Extending Visualization to Perceptualization: The Importance of Perception in Effective Communication of Information - David S. Ebert Art and Science in Visualization - Victoria Interrante Exploiting Human Visual Perception in Visualization - Alan Chalmers and Kirsten Cater PART XI - Selected Topics and Applications Scalable Network Visualization - Stephen G. Eick Visual Data-Mining Techniques - Daniel A. Keim, Mike Sips, and Mihael Ankerst Visualization in Weather and Climate Research - Don Middleton, Tim Scheitlin, and Bob Wilhelmson Painting and Visualization - Robert M. Kirby, Daniel F. Keefe, and David Laidlaw Visualization and Natural Control Systems for Microscopy - Russell M. Taylor II, David Borland, Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., Mike Falvo, Kevin Jeffay, Gail Jones, David Marshburn, Stergios J. Papadakis, Lu-Chang Qin, Adam Seeger, F. Donelson Smith, Dianne Sonnenwald, Richard Superfine, Sean Washburn, Chris Weigle, Mary Whitton, Leandra Vicci, Martin Guthold, Tom Hudson, Philip Williams, and Warren Robinett Visualization for Computational Accelerator Physics - Kwan-Liu Ma, Greg Schussman, and Brett Wilson
Read more →
ICAART

The International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART) is a meeting point for researchers (among others) with interest in the areas of Agents and Artificial Intelligence. There are 2 tracks in ICAART, one related to Agents and Distributed AI in general and the other one focused in topics related to Intelligent Systems and Computational Intelligence. The conference program is composed of several different kind of sessions like technical sessions, poster sessions, keynote lectures, tutorials, special sessions, doctoral consortiums, panels and industrial tracks. The papers presented in the conference are made available at the SCITEPRESS digital library, published in the conference proceedings and some of the best papers are invited to a post-publication with Springer. ICAART's first edition was in 2009 counting with several keynote speakers like Marco Dorigo, Edward H. Shortliffe and Eduard Hovy. Since then, the conference had several other invited speakers like Katia Sycara, Nick Jennings, Robert Kowalski, Boi Faltings and Tim Finin. Bart Selman is one of the names confirmed for the next edition of this conference. Since 2012 the conference is held in conjunction with 2 other conferences: the International Conference on Operations Research and Enterprise Systems (ICORES) and the International Conference on Pattern Recognition Applications and Methods (ICPRAM). == Areas == === Agents === Agent communication languages Cooperation and Coordination Distributed Problem Solving Economic Agent Models Emotional Intelligence Group Decision Making Intelligent Auctions and Markets Mobile Agents Multi-agent systems Negotiation and Interaction Protocols Nep News Detection Agent Models and Architectures Physical Agents at Work Privacy, Safety and Security Programming Environments and Languages Robot and Multi-Robot Systems Self Organizing Systems Semantic Web Simulation Swarm Intelligence Task Planning and Execution Transparency and Ethical Issues Agent-Oriented Software Engineering Web Intelligence Agent Platforms and Interoperability Autonomous systems Cloud Computing and Its Impact Cognitive robotics Collective Intelligence Conversational Agents === Artificial intelligence === AI and Creativity Deep Learning Evolutionary Computing Fuzzy Systems Hybrid Intelligent Systems Industrial Applications of AI Intelligence and Cybersecurity Intelligent User Interfaces Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Knowledge-Based Systems Ambient Intelligence Machine learning Model-Based Reasoning Natural Language Processing Neural Networks Ontologies Planning and Scheduling Social Network Analysis Soft Computing State Space Search Bayesian Networks Uncertainty in AI Vision and Perception Visualization Big Data Case-Based Reasoning Cognitive Systems Constraint Satisfaction Data Mining Data Science == Editions == === ICAART 2023 – Lisbon, Portugal === === ICAART 2020 – Valletta, Malta === === ICAART 2019 – Prague, Czech Republic === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-350-6 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-350-6 === ICAART 2018 – Funchal, Madeira, Portugal === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-275-2 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-275-2 === ICAART 2017 – Porto, Portugal === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-219-6 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-220-2 === ICAART 2016 – Rome, Italy === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-172-4 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-172-4 === ICAART 2015 – Lisbon, Portugal === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-073-4 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-074-1 === ICAART 2014 – ESEO, Angers, Loire Valley, France === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-758-015-4 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-758-016-1 === ICAART 2013 – Barcelona, Spain === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-8565-38-9 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-8565-39-6 === ICAART 2012 – Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-8425-95-9 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-8425-96-6 === ICAART 2011 – Rome, Italy === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-8425-40-9 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-8425-41-6 === ICAART 2010 – Valencia, Spain === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 1. ISBN 978-989-674-021-4 Proceedings - Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Volume 2. ISBN 978-989-674-022-1 === ICAART 2009 – Porto, Portugal === Proceedings - Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies. ISBN 978-989-8111-66-1
Read more →
The 100 (TV series)

The 100 (pronounced "The Hundred" ) is an American post-apocalyptic science fiction drama television series that premiered on March 19, 2014, on the CW network, and ended on September 30, 2020. Developed by Jason Rothenberg, the series is based on the young adult novel series The 100 by Kass Morgan. The 100 follows descendants of post-apocalyptic survivors from a space habitat, the Ark, who return to Earth nearly a century after a devastating nuclear apocalypse; the first people sent to Earth are a group of juvenile delinquents who encounter another group of survivors on the ground. The juvenile delinquents include Clarke Griffin (Eliza Taylor), Finn Collins (Thomas McDonell), Bellamy Blake (Bob Morley), Octavia Blake (Marie Avgeropoulos), Jasper Jordan (Devon Bostick), Monty Green (Christopher Larkin), and John Murphy (Richard Harmon). Other lead characters include Clarke's mother Dr. Abby Griffin (Paige Turco), Marcus Kane (Henry Ian Cusick), and Chancellor Thelonious Jaha (Isaiah Washington), all of whom are council members on the Ark, and Raven Reyes (Lindsey Morgan), a mechanic aboard the Ark. == Plot == Ninety-seven years after a devastating nuclear apocalypse wipes out most human life on Earth, thousands of people now live in a space station orbiting Earth, which they call the Ark. Three generations have been born in space, but when life-support systems on the Ark begin to fail, one hundred juvenile detainees are sent to Earth in a last attempt to determine whether it is habitable, or at least save resources for the remaining residents of the Ark. They discover that some humans survived the apocalypse: the Grounders, who live in clans locked in a power struggle; the Reapers, another group of grounders who have been turned into cannibals by the Mountain Men; and the Mountain Men, who live in Mount Weather, descended from those who locked themselves away before the apocalypse. Under the leadership of Clarke and Bellamy, the juveniles attempt to survive the harsh surface conditions, battle hostile grounders and establish communication with the Ark. In the second season, the survivors face a new threat from the Mountain Men, who harvest their bone marrow to survive the radiation. Clarke and the others form a fragile alliance with the grounders to rescue their people. The season ends with Clarke making a devastating choice to save them all. In season three, power struggles erupt between the Arkadians and the grounders after a controversial new leader takes charge. Meanwhile, an AI named A.L.I.E., responsible for the original apocalypse, begins taking control of people’s minds. Clarke destroys A.L.I.E. but learns another disaster is imminent. In the fourth season, nuclear reactors are melting down, threatening to wipe out life again. Clarke and her friends search for ways to survive, including experimenting with radiation-resistant blood and finding an underground bunker. As time runs out, only a select few are able to take shelter. The fifth season picks up six years later, when Earth is left largely uninhabitable except for one green valley, where new enemies arrive. Clarke protects her adopted daughter Madi while former survivors return from space and underground, triggering another war. The battle ends with the valley destroyed and the group entering cryosleep to find a new home. In season six, the group awakens 125 years later on a new planet called Sanctum, ruled by powerful families known as the Primes. Clarke fights to stop body-snatching rituals and protect her people from new threats, including a rebel group and a dangerous AI influence. The season ends with major losses and the destruction of the Primes' rule. In the seventh and final season, the survivors face unrest on Sanctum and clash with a mysterious group called the Disciples, who believe Clarke is key to saving humanity. A wormhole network reveals multiple planets and a final "test" that determines the fate of the species. Most transcend into a higher consciousness, but Clarke and a few others choose to live out their lives on a reborn Earth. == Cast and characters == Eliza Taylor as Clarke Griffin Paige Turco as Abigail "Abby" Griffin (seasons 1–6; guest season 7) Thomas McDonell as Finn Collins (seasons 1–2) Eli Goree as Wells Jaha (season 1; guest season 2) Marie Avgeropoulos as Octavia Blake Bob Morley as Bellamy Blake Kelly Hu as Callie "Cece" Cartwig (season 1) Christopher Larkin as Monty Green (seasons 1–5; guest season 6) Devon Bostick as Jasper Jordan (seasons 1–4) Isaiah Washington as Thelonious Jaha (seasons 1–5) Henry Ian Cusick as Marcus Kane (seasons 1–6) Lindsey Morgan as Raven Reyes (seasons 2–7; recurring season 1) Ricky Whittle as Lincoln (seasons 2–3; recurring season 1) Richard Harmon as John Murphy (seasons 3–7; recurring seasons 1–2) Zach McGowan as Roan (season 4; recurring season 3; guest season 7) Tasya Teles as Echo / Ash (seasons 5–7; guest seasons 2–3; recurring season 4) Shannon Kook as Jordan Green (seasons 6–7; guest season 5) JR Bourne as Russell Lightbourne / Malachi / Sheidheda (season 7; recurring season 6) Chuku Modu as Gabriel Santiago (season 7; recurring season 6) Shelby Flannery as Hope Diyoza (season 7; guest season 6) =
Read more →
Split Up (expert system)

Split Up is an intelligent decision support system, which makes predictions about the distribution of marital property following divorce in Australia. It is designed to assist judges, registrars of the Family Court of Australia, mediators and lawyers. Split Up operates as a hybrid system, combining rule – based reasoning with neural network theory. Rule based reasoning operates within strict parameters, in the form: IF < condition(s) > then . Neural networks, by contrast, are considered to be better suited to generate decisions in uncertain domains, since they can be taught to weigh the factors considered by judicial decision makers from case data. Yet, they do not provide an explanation for the conclusions they reach. Split_up, with a view to overcome this flaw, uses argument structures proposed by Toulmin as the basis for representations from which explanations can be generated. == Application == In Australian family law, a judge in determining the distribution of property will: identify the assets of the marriage included in the common pool establish what percentage of the common pool each party will receive determine a final property order in line with the decisions made in 1. and 2. Split_Up implements step 1 and 2 : the common pool determination and the prediction of a percentage split. === The common pool determination === Since the determination of marital property is rule based, it is implemented using directed graphs. However, the percentage split between the parties is discretionary in that a judge has a wide discretion to look at each party's contributions to the marriage under section 79(4) of the Family Law Act 1975. Broadly, the contributions can be taken as financial or non-financial. The party who can demonstrate a larger contribution to the marital relationship will receive a larger proportion of the assets. The court may further look at each party's financial resources and future needs under section 75(2)of the Family Law Act 1975. These needs can include factors such as the inability to gain employment, the continued care of a child under 18 years of age or medical expenses. This means that different judges may and will reach different conclusions based on the same facts, since each judge assigns different relevant weights to each factor. Split_up determines the percentage split by using a combination of rule- based reasoning and neural networks. === The percentage split determination === In order to determine how judges weigh the different factors, 103 written judgements of commonplace cases were used to establish a database comprising 94 relevant factors for percentage split determination. The factors relevant for a percentage split determination are: Past contributions of a husband relative to those of a wife The husband's future needs relative to those of the wife The wealth of the marriage The factors relevant for a determination of past contributions are The relative direct and indirect contributions of both parties The length of the marriage The relative contributions of both parties to the homemaking role The hierarchy provides a structure that is used to decompose the task of predicting an outcome into 35 subtasks. Outputs of tasks further down the hierarchy are used as inputs into sub-tasks higher up the hierarchy. Each sub-task is treated as a separate and smaller data mining exercise. Twenty one solid arcs represent inferences performed with the use of rule sets. For example, the level of wealth of a marriage is determined by a rule, which uses the common pool value. By contrast, the fourteen dashed arcs establish inferences performed with the use of neural networks. These receive their name from the fact that they resemble a nervous system in the brain. They consist of many self – adjusting processing elements cooperating in a densely interconnected network. Each processing element generates a single output that is transmitted to the other processing element. The output signal of a processing element depends on the input to the processing element, i.e. each input is gated by a weighting factor that determines the amount of influence that the input will have on the output. The strength of the weighting factors is adjusted autonomously by the processing element as the data is processed. In Split_Up, the neural network is a statistical technique for learning the weights of each of the relevant attributes used in a percentage split determination of marital property. Hence the inputs to the neural network are contributions, future needs and wealth, and the output the percentage split predicted. On each arc there is a statistical weight. Using back propagation the neural network learns the necessary pattern to recognize the prediction. It is trained by repeatedly exposing it to examples of the problem and learning the significance (weights) of the input nodes. The neural network used by Split_up is said to generalise well if the output of the network is correct (or nearly correct) for examples not seen during training, which classifies it as an intelligent system. === Toulmin Argument Structure === Since the manner in which these weights are learned is primarily statistical, domain knowledge of legal rules and principles is not modelled directly. However, explanations for a legal conclusion in a domain as discretionary as the determining the distribution of property following divorce, are at least as important as the conclusion reached. Hence the creators of Split_Up used Toulmin Argument structures, to provide independent explanations of the conclusions reached. These operate on the basis that every argument makes an assertion based on some data. The assertion of the argument stands as the claim of the argument. Since knowing the data and the claim, does not necessarily mean that the claim follows from the data, a mechanism is required to justify the claim in the light of the data. The justification is known as the warrant. The backing of an argument supports the validity of the warrant. In the legal domain, this is typically a reference to a statute or a precedent. Here, a neural network (or rules), produce a conclusion from the data of an argument and the data, warrant and backing are reproduced to generate an explanation. It is noteworthy, though, that an argument's warrant is reproduced as an explanation regardless of the claim values used. This lack of claim - sensitivity must be overcome by the different users, i.e., the judge, the representatives for the wife and the representatives for the husband, each of whom is encouraged to use the system to prepare their cases, but not to rely exclusively on its outcome.
Read more →
Mobile Passport Control

Mobile Passport Control (MPC) is a mobile app that enables eligible travelers entering the United States to submit their passport information and customs declaration form to Customs and Border Protection via smartphone or tablet and go through the inspections process using an expedited lane. It is available to "U.S. citizens, U.S. lawful permanent residents, Canadian B1/B2 citizen visitors and returning Visa Waiver Program travelers with approved ESTA". The app is available on iOS and Android devices and is operational at 34 US airports, 14 international airports offering preclearance facilities, and 4 seaports. The use of Mobile Passport Control operations have increased threefold from 2016 to 2017. == History == Mobile Passport Control operations were launched in Atlanta at the Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in 2016 and is now available at 34 U.S. airports, 14 international airports that offer preclearance and 4 U.S. cruise ports. The Mobile Passport app is authorized by CBP and sponsored by the Airports Council International-North America, Boeing, and the Port of Everglades. Airside Mobile, Inc. secured a Series A funding of $6 million in the fall of 2017. == How it works == During the customs process at the Federal Inspection Service (FIS) area of a U.S. airport, travelers arriving from international locations typically wait in long lines before presenting passports and paperwork and verbally answering questions made by CBP officials. Eligible travelers who have downloaded the Mobile Passport app can expedite this process by submitting information regarding their passport and trip details, and a newly-taken selfie, via their mobile device to CBP officials, then access an expedited line. Mobile Passport Control users will be required to show their physical passport(s) and briefly talk to a CBP officer. == Locations == === US airports === Atlanta (ATL) Baltimore (BWI) Boston (BOS) Charlotte (CLT) Chicago (ORD) Dallas/Ft Worth (DFW) Denver (DEN) Detroit (DTW) as of 7/2024 Ft. Lauderdale (FLL) Honolulu (HNL) Houston (HOU and IAH) Kansas City (MCI) Las Vegas (LAS) Los Angeles (LAX) Miami (MIA) Minneapolis (MSP) New York (JFK) Newark (EWR) Oakland (OAK) Orlando (MCO) Palm Beach (PBI) Philadelphia (PHL) Phoenix (PHX) Pittsburgh (PIT) Portland (PDX) Sacramento (SMF) San Diego (SAN) San Francisco (SFO) San Jose (SJC) San Juan (SJU) Seattle (SEA) Tampa (TPA) Washington Dulles (IAD) === International Preclearance locations === Abu Dhabi (AUH) Aruba (AUA) Bermuda (BDA) Calgary (YYC) Dublin (DUB) Edmonton (YEG) Halifax (YHZ) Montreal (YUL) Nassau (NAS) Ottawa (YOW) Shannon (SNN) Toronto (YYZ) Vancouver (YVR) Winnipeg (YWG) Sepinggan (BPN) === Seaports === Fort Lauderdale (PEV) Miami (MSE) San Juan (PUE) West Palm Beach (WPB)
Read more →
Oasis (Minecraft clone)

Oasis is a 2024 video game that attempts to replicate the 2011 sandbox game Minecraft, run entirely using generative artificial intelligence. The project, which began development in 2022 between the AI company Decart and the computer hardware startup Etched, was released by Decart to the public on October 31, 2024. The AI-driven simulation uses "next-frame prediction" to anticipate player actions based on keyboard and mouse inputs, trained on millions of hours of gameplay footage. Without memory or code, the game often outputs unpredictable changes in scenery and inventory, limiting its functionality as a traditional video game. Critics noted its lack of sound, low frame rate, and "dream-like" appearance, though some praised its unpredictability as entertaining. The project is seen as a potential proof of concept for AI-driven video games. == Creation and gameplay == The demo "proof of concept" version of the game was developed by Israeli San Francisco–based AI company Decart and Silicon Valley hardware startup Etched. The idea originated in 2022 when Robert Wachen, a Harvard graduate and co-founder of Etched, met Dean Leitersdorf, an Israel Institute of Technology graduate and co-founder of Decart. Sharing an interest in OpenAI's GPT-3, they collaborated to create the game, naming it after the setting of the novel and film Ready Player One. It was funded by a $21 million grant from Israeli-American billionaire Oren Zeev and New York–based Sequoia Capital. Decart released the game to the public for free on October 31, 2024. The AI replicates Minecraft's gameplay without code using "next-frame prediction", in which the AI tries to predict what the player will see after each keyboard and mouse input, which it was trained to do on millions of hours of Minecraft footage. The game used Nvidia graphics processing units or GPUs for its demo but plans to transition to more energy-efficient Sohu GPUs, under development by Etched, capable of supporting up to 4K graphics. Etched has also suggested the possibility of making the game open source in the future. Alongside Oasis, the company is co-developing AI-generated video and educational content. == Reception == Upon its launch, many players posted videos of their experience with the game online, which often showed Oasis could not maintain coherent logic in its actions or setting. The game also presented low-quality graphics, running between 360p and 720p consistently at 20 FPS, no in-game sound, and could only be played for five minutes at a time before restarting. These issues led some news outlets to refer to the game as a "nightmarish hallucination", and drawing comparisons to dementia and dreams. Despite the negative reviews, Leitersdorf, as well as a number of commentators, have commented that while the game may have fallen short of replicating Minecraft in its demo launch, it was the first step towards something more advanced, which could one day resemble Minecraft or any other game. Online publication The Backdash commented the game could be a "glimpse at the future of game development", while others like Tom's Hardware expressed doubts a game without code could ever look as good as one with, arguing they fail to capture "the point of what makes games fun—or even coherent". In terms of legality, Decart and Etched did not receive permission from Microsoft to create a copy of their game using generative artificial intelligence. No legal actions have been taken by the latter, however, as artificial intelligence and copyright remains largely vague legally.
Read more →
Privacy Lost

Privacy Lost is a 2023 short science fiction film directed by Peter Stoel and Robert Berger. It follows a family using augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) devices capable of reading emotional states, raising questions about privacy and manipulation. == Premise == Privacy Lost follows a family using AR glasses that capture and interpret emotions in real time. As the parents argue in a restaurant, their emotional states and even hidden feelings become visible through these glasses. An AI-driven waiter adapts its appearance for each family member, employing emotional data to influence their decisions. == Cast == Brian Kant as Waiter Michael Krass as Husband Estelle Levinson as Waitress Thor van der Linden as Scotty Carlijn van Ramshorst as Wife == Production == Filming took place at HeadQ Productions, a virtual studio located in Amsterdam. The creators sought to depict a near-future scenario in which real-time emotion analysis becomes part of daily interactions. The film was screened at the Augmented World Expo (AWE), where it was noted for its thematic focus on AI-driven manipulation and emotional tracking. The depiction of AR glasses and AI characters integrates modern visual effects to show how devices might analyze emotional responses in real time. It also depicts how AI-driven interactions could influence consumer decisions, pointing to concerns over potential misuse. == Themes == Privacy Lost focuses on the intersection of advanced AI capabilities and AR environments, showing how real-time emotional analysis can be leveraged for targeted persuasion. The film aims to highlight the social and ethical implications of emerging AR and AI technologies, underlining how establishing clear regulatory frameworks for them is necessary to protect individual privacy, govern the storage of emotion-based data, and prevent manipulative practices. Critics describe the film’s theme as dystopian and note that such a reality is unlikely to occur in the near future. However, despite the exaggerated scenario, the film emphasizes the importance of a responsible approach by developers toward emerging technologies.
Read more →
DARPA Grand Challenge

The DARPA Grand Challenge is a prize competition for American autonomous vehicles, funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the most prominent research organization of the United States Department of Defense. Congress has authorized DARPA to award cash prizes to further DARPA's mission to sponsor revolutionary, high-payoff research that bridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and military use. The initial DARPA Grand Challenge in 2004 was created to spur the development of technologies needed to create the first fully autonomous ground vehicles capable of completing a substantial off-road course within a limited time. The third event, the DARPA Urban Challenge in 2007, extended the initial Challenge to autonomous operation in a mock urban environment. The 2012 DARPA Robotics Challenge, focused on autonomous emergency-maintenance robots, and new Challenges are still being conceived. The DARPA Subterranean Challenge was tasked with building robotic teams to autonomously map, navigate, and search subterranean environments. Such teams could be useful in exploring hazardous areas and in search and rescue. In addition to the challenges in autonomous technology, DARPA has also conducted prize competitions in other areas of technology. == History and background == Fully autonomous vehicles have been an international pursuit for many years, from endeavors in Japan (starting in 1977), Germany (Ernst Dickmanns and VaMP), Italy (the ARGO Project), the European Union (EUREKA Prometheus Project), the United States of America, and other countries. DARPA funded the development of the first fully autonomous robot beginning in 1966 with the Shakey the robot project at Stanford Research Institute, now SRI International. The first autonomous ground vehicle capable of driving on and off roads was developed by DARPA as part of the Strategic Computing Initiative beginning in 1984 leading to demonstrations of autonomous navigation by the Autonomous Land Vehicle and the Navlab. The Grand Challenge was the first long distance competition for driverless cars in the world; other research efforts in the field of driverless cars take a more traditional commercial or academic approach. The U.S. Congress authorized DARPA to offer prize money ($1 million) for the first Grand Challenge to facilitate robotic development, with the ultimate goal of making one-third of ground military forces autonomous by 2015. Following the 2004 event, Dr. Tony Tether, the director of DARPA, announced that the prize money had been increased to $2 million for the next event, which was claimed on October 9, 2005. The first, second and third places in the 2007 Urban Challenge received $2 million, $1 million, and $500,000, respectively. 14 new teams have qualified in year 2015. The competition was open to teams and organizations from around the world, as long as there was at least one U.S. citizen on the roster. Teams have participated from high schools, universities, businesses and other organizations. More than 100 teams registered in the first year, bringing a wide variety of technological skills to the race. In the second year, 195 teams from 36 U.S. states and 4 foreign countries entered the race. == 2004 Grand Challenge == The first competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge was held on March 13, 2004 in the Mojave Desert region of the United States, along a 150-mile (240 km) route that follows along the path of Interstate 15 from just before Barstow, California to just past the California–Nevada border in Primm. None of the robot vehicles finished the route. Carnegie Mellon University's Red Team and car Sandstorm (a converted Humvee) traveled the farthest distance, completing 11.78 km (7.32 mi) of the course before getting hung up on a rock after making a switchback turn. No winner was declared, and the cash prize was not given. Therefore, a second DARPA Grand Challenge event was scheduled for 2005. == 2005 Grand Challenge == The second competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge began at 6:40 am on October 8, 2005. All but one of the 23 finalists in the 2005 race surpassed the 11.78 km (7.32 mi) distance completed by the best vehicle in the 2004 race. Five vehicles successfully completed the 212 km (132 mi) course: Vehicles in the 2005 race passed through three narrow tunnels and negotiated more than 100 sharp left and right turns. The race concluded through Beer Bottle Pass, a winding mountain pass with a sheer drop-off on one side and a rock face on the other. Although the 2004 course required more elevation gain and some very sharp switchbacks (Daggett Ridge) were required near the beginning of the route, the course had far fewer curves and generally wider roads than the 2005 course. The natural rivalry between the teams from Stanford and Carnegie Mellon (Sebastian Thrun, head of the Stanford team was previously a faculty member at Carnegie Mellon and colleague of Red Whittaker, head of the CMU team) was played out during the race. Mechanical problems plagued H1ghlander before it was passed by Stanley. Gray Team's entry was a miracle in itself, as the team from the suburbs of New Orleans was caught in Hurricane Katrina a few short weeks before the race. The fifth finisher, Terramax, a 30,000 pound entry from Oshkosh Truck, finished on the second day. The huge truck spent the night idling on the course, but was particularly nimble in carefully picking its way down the narrow roads of Beer Bottle Pass. == 2007 Urban Challenge == The third competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge, known as the "Urban Challenge", took place on November 3, 2007 at the site of the now-closed George Air Force Base (currently used as Southern California Logistics Airport), in Victorville, California (Google map). The course involved a 96 km (60 mi) urban area course, to be completed in less than 6 hours. Rules included obeying all traffic regulations while negotiating with other traffic and obstacles and merging into traffic. Unlike previous challenges, the 2007 Urban Challenge organizers divided competitors into two "tracks", A and B. All Track A and Track B teams were part of the same competition circuit, but the teams chosen for the Track A program received US $1 million in funding. These 11 teams largely represented major universities and large corporate interests such as CMU teaming with GM as Tartan Racing, Stanford teaming with Volkswagen, Virginia Tech teaming with TORC Robotics as VictorTango, Oshkosh Truck, Honeywell, Raytheon, Caltech, Autonomous Solutions, Cornell University, and MIT. One of the few independent entries in Track A was the Golem Group. DARPA has not publicly explained the rationale behind the selection of Track A teams. Teams were given maps sparsely charting the waypoints that defined the competition courses. At least one team, Tartan Racing, enhanced the maps through the insertion of additional extrapolated waypoints for improved navigation. A debriefing paper published by Team Jefferson illustrates graphically the contrast between the course map it was given by DARPA and the course map used by Tartan Racing. Tartan Racing claimed the $2 million prize with their vehicle "Boss", a Chevy Tahoe. The second-place finisher earning the $1 million prize was the Stanford Racing Team with their entry "Junior", a 2006 Volkswagen Passat. Coming in third place was team VictorTango, winning the $500,000 prize with their 2005 Ford Escape hybrid, "Odin". MIT placed 4th, with Cornell University and University of Pennsylvania/Lehigh University also completing the course. The six teams that successfully finished the entire course: While the 2004 and 2005 events were more physically challenging for the vehicles, the robots operated in isolation and only encountered other vehicles on the course when attempting to pass. The Urban Challenge required designers to build vehicles able to obey all traffic laws while they detect and avoid other robots on the course. This is a particular challenge for vehicle software, as vehicles must make "intelligent" decisions in real time based on the actions of other vehicles. Other than previous autonomous vehicle efforts that focused on structured situations such as highway driving with little interaction between the vehicles, this competition operated in a more cluttered urban environment and required the cars to perform sophisticated interactions with each other, such as maintaining precedence at a 4-way stop intersection. == 2012 Robotics Challenge == The DARPA Robotics Challenge is an ongoing competition focusing on humanoid robotics. The primary goal of the program is to develop ground robotic capabilities to execute complex tasks in dangerous, degraded, human-engineered environments. It launched in October 2012, and hosted the Virtual Robotics Competition in June 2013. Two more competitions are planned: the DRC Trials in December 2013, and the DRC Finals in December 2014. Unlike prior Challenges, the construction of the "vehicles" w
Read more →
AI data center

An AI data center is a specialized data center facility designed for the computationally intensive tasks of training and running inference for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning models. Unlike general-purpose data centers, they are optimized for the parallel processing demands of AI workloads, typically using hardware such as AI accelerators (e.g., GPUs, TPUs) and high-speed interconnects. The global push to construct these specialized facilities accelerated dramatically during the AI boom of the 2020s. Memory manufacturers prioritized production of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) essential for AI servers, which led to a global memory supply shortage amid a broader competition for advanced chips, power, and infrastructure. Major tech companies are estimated to spend $650 billion on AI data centers in 2026. == Architecture == Data centers for building and running large machine learning models contain specialized computer chips, GPUs, that use 2 to 4 times as much energy as their regular CPU counterparts (250-500 watts). AI data centers use 60 or more kilowatts per server rack, whereas more standard data centers typically use 5 to 10 kilowatts per rack. == Operators == As of August 2025, The Information tracked 18 planned or existing AI data centers in the United States, operated by Amazon Web Services, CoreWeave, Crusoe, Meta, Microsoft/OpenAI, Oracle, Tesla, and xAI. Other AI data center operators include Digital Realty and Alibaba. Data centers are also being built in China, India, Europe, Saudi Arabia, and Canada. The New Yorker described CoreWeave as the most prominent AI data center operator in the United States. Two types of data center providers for machine learning have been noted: hyperscalers and neoclouds. The Verge listed large technology companies such as Google, Meta, Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon as hyperscalers. The New York Times described neoclouds as "a new generation of data center providers". CoreWeave, Nebius, Nscale, and Lambda have been described as examples of neoclouds. In January 2025, OpenAI, in partnership with Oracle and Softbank, announced the Stargate project, which as of September 2025 is composed of six built or proposed AI data centers in the United States. In response to the Stargate project, Amazon launched in October 2025 an AI data center on 1,200 acres of farmland in Indiana. This data center, known as Project Rainier, is one of the largest AI data centers in the world, with Amazon spending $11 billion on the project. Rainier is specifically intended for training and running machine learning models from Anthropic. As of that time, this facility contains seven data centers (out of an estimated 30 planned) and will use 2.2 gigawatts of electricity (equivalent to 1 million households) and millions of gallons of water per year. Computer chips from Annapurna Labs and Anthropic, Trainium 2, were designed for use in such facilities. Amazon pumped millions of gallons of water out of the ground to construct the data center, and as of June 2025, Indiana state officials are investigating whether this dewatering process led to dry wells for local residents. In November 2025, Anthropic announced a plan in partnership with Fluidstack to develop artificial intelligence infrastructure in the United States, including data centers in New York and Texas, worth $50 billion. Other AI data center projects include the Colossus supercomputer from xAI, a Louisiana-based project from Meta, Hyperion, expected to use 5 GW of power, and a second Ohio-based Meta project, Prometheus, with a capacity of 1 GW. A 3,200-acre AI data center, capable of 4.4-4.5 GW of power and located on the decommissioned Homer City Generating Station, is under construction as of 2025, and will use seven 30-acre gas generating stations supplied by EQT. As of December 2025, CRH is working on over 100 data centers in the United States. In 2025, ExxonMobil and NextEra announced plans to build a data center powered by natural gas and using carbon capture technology, with 1.2 GW of power capacity. They previously purchased 2,500 acres of land in the Southeastern United States and plan to market the data center to an artificial intelligence company. The increased interest in AI data centers has led to several executives from companies in that space becoming billionaires, including CoreWeave, QTS, Nebius, Astera Labs, Groq, Fermi (which is connected to former United States Secretary of Energy Rick Perry), Snowflake and Cipher Mining. Several companies involved in cryptocurrency mining, such as Bitdeer, CoreWeave, Cipher Mining, TeraWulf, IREN, Core Scientific, and CleanSpark have also been involved with AI data centers. == Finances == Between January and August 2024, Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon collectively spent $125 billion on AI data centers. Citigroup forecasted that $2.8 trillion would be spent on AI data centers by 2030, while McKinsey and Company estimated that almost $7 trillion would be spent globally by that time. According to S&P Global, $61 billion has been spent on the data center market as a whole in 2025, while debt issuance for data centers was $182 billion during the same year. Large technology companies have offloaded the financial risks of building AI data centers by setting up special purpose vehicles or by contracting with neoclouds. For example, Meta's Hyperion was mostly funded by Blue Owl Capital, which did so using a bond offering from PIMCO. Those bonds were sold to a number of clients, including BlackRock. Meta did not borrow money itself and instead established a special purpose vehicle from which it would rent the data center. This deal was structured by Morgan Stanley for $30 billion, the largest known private capital transaction as of 2025. Neoclouds such as CoreWeave have gone into debt to buy computer chips from Nvidia for their data centers, and the chips themselves have been used for loan collateral. As of December 2025, CoreWeave took out three GPU-backed loans, collectively worth $12.4 billion, from private credit firms (Blackstone, Coatue, BlackRock, PIMCO) and from banks (Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo). Thus, these companies provide an indirect connection between private credit and established banks. Data centers have also established asset-backed securities, and debt for data centers has its own derivative financial products. The real estate industry, including asset managers, public companies and private investors, has also invested in data centers. == Energy sourcing == == Environmental footprint == Average AI data centers have an electricity footprint equivalent to 100,000 households, and use billions of gallons of water for cooling their hardware. In 2025, the International Energy Agency estimated that the larger AI data centers currently under construction could consume as much electricity as 2 million households. A 2024 report from the United States Department of Energy stated that data centers overall used 17 billion gallons of water per year in the United States, primarily due to "rapid proliferation of AI servers", and that this usage was forecasted to grow to nearly 80 billion gallons by 2028. Researchers estimated that AI data centers in the United States would emit 24-44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and use 731–1,125 million cubic meters of water per year between 2024 and 2030. Peaking power plants, which have been proposed as a power source for AI data centers, emit sulfur dioxide and have historically been located disproportionately near communities of color in the United States. Reciprocating internal combustion engines, proposed as another power source for a data center, emit PM 2.5, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. == AI data centers in the United States == In the United States, both the Biden administration and second Trump administration supported the construction of AI data centers. In January 2025, then-president Joe Biden signed an executive order for federal government agencies to support AI data centers on federal sites built by private companies, study their effect on energy prices, and encourage their use of renewable energy. In April 2025, the United States Department of Energy suggested 16 possible sites, including Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In its July 2025 AI Action Plan, the second Trump administration supported increased production of AI data centers. Several US states have incentivized local data center construction. For example, in 2024, lawmakers in Michigan approved tax breaks for data center equipment and construction material. Some data center companies have also invested or promised to invest in the infrastructure of local communities. In December 2025, Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen, and Richard Blumenthal wrote to seven technology companies (Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, CoreWeave, Digital Realty, and Equinix) that they w
Read more →
Really Simple Licensing

Really Simple Licensing (RSL) is an open content licensing standard that allows web publishers to set terms for web crawlers gathering training data for generative AI use. It was launched on September 10, 2025 and is managed by the nonprofit RSL Collective, co-founded by RSS co-creator Eckart Walther and former Ask.com CEO Doug Leeds. Participating companies at launch include Reddit, Yahoo, and Medium. Publishers can implement the RSL standard by adding licensing terms to their robots.txt files.
Read more →
European Conference on Artificial Intelligence

The European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI) is the leading conference in the field of Artificial Intelligence in Europe, and is commonly listed together with IJCAI and AAAI as one of the three major general AI conferences worldwide. The conference series has been held without interruption since 1974, originally under the name AISB. The conference was originally held biennially, but has been organized annually since ECAI 2022. The conferences are held under the auspices of the European Coordinating Committee for Artificial Intelligence (ECCAI) and organized by one of the member societies. The journal AI Communications, sponsored by the same society, regularly publishes special issues in which conference attendees report on the conference. Publication of a paper in ECAI is considered by some journals to be archival: the paper should be considered equivalent to a journal publication and that the contents of ECAI papers cannot be reformulated as separate journal submissions unless a significant amount of new material is added. == List of ECAI conferences == ECAI-1992 took place in Vienna, Austria. ECAI-1996 took place in Budapest, Hungary. ECAI-1998 tool place in Brighton, United Kingdom. ECAI-2000 took place in Berlin, Germany. ECAI-2004 took place in Valencia, Spain. ECAI-2006 took place in Riva del Garda, Italy. ECAI-2008 took place in Patras, Greece. ECAI-2010 took place in Lisbon, Portugal. ECAI-2012 took place in Montpellier, France. ECAI-2014 took place in Prague, Czech Republic. ECAI-2016 took place in The Hague, Netherlands. ECAI-2018 took place in Stockholm, Sweden. ECAI-2020 took place in Santiago de Compostela, Spain. ECAI-2022 took place in Vienna, Austria. ECAI-2023 took place in Kraków, Poland. ECAI-2024 took place in Santiago de Compostela, Spain. ECAI-2025 took place in Bologna, Italy.
Read more →
T-norm

In mathematics, a t-norm (also T-norm or, unabbreviated, triangular norm) is a kind of binary operation used in the framework of probabilistic metric spaces and in multi-valued logic, specifically in fuzzy logic. A t-norm generalizes intersection in a lattice and conjunction in logic. The name triangular norm refers to the fact that in the framework of probabilistic metric spaces t-norms are used to generalize the triangle inequality of ordinary metric spaces. == Definition == A t-norm is a function T: [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] that satisfies the following properties: Commutativity: T(a, b) = T(b, a) Monotonicity: T(a, b) ≤ T(c, d) if a ≤ c and b ≤ d Associativity: T(a, T(b, c)) = T(T(a, b), c) The number 1 acts as identity element: T(a, 1) = a Since a t-norm is a binary algebraic operation on the interval [0, 1], infix algebraic notation is also common, with the t-norm usually denoted by ∗ {\displaystyle } . The defining conditions of the t-norm are exactly those of a partially ordered abelian monoid on the real unit interval [0, 1]. (Cf. ordered group.) The monoidal operation of any partially ordered abelian monoid L is therefore by some authors called a triangular norm on L. === Classification of t-norms === A t-norm is called continuous if it is continuous as a function, in the usual interval topology on [0, 1]2. (Similarly for left- and right-continuity.) A t-norm is called strict if it is continuous and strictly monotone. A t-norm is called nilpotent if it is continuous and each x in the open interval (0, 1) is nilpotent, that is, there is a natural number n such that x ∗ {\displaystyle } ... ∗ {\displaystyle } x (n times) equals 0. A t-norm ∗ {\displaystyle } is called Archimedean if it has the Archimedean property, that is, if for each x, y in the open interval (0, 1) there is a natural number n such that x ∗ {\displaystyle } ... ∗ {\displaystyle } x (n times) is less than or equal to y. The usual partial ordering of t-norms is pointwise, that is, T1 ≤ T2 if T1(a, b) ≤ T2(a, b) for all a, b in [0, 1]. As functions, pointwise larger t-norms are sometimes called stronger than those pointwise smaller. In the semantics of t-norm fuzzy logics, however, the larger a t-norm, the weaker (in terms of logical strength) conjunction it represents. == Prominent examples == Minimum t-norm ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) = min { a , b } , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {min} }(a,b)=\min\{a,b\},} also called the Gödel t-norm, as it is the standard semantics for conjunction in Gödel fuzzy logic. Besides that, it occurs in most t-norm based fuzzy logics as the standard semantics for weak conjunction. It is the pointwise largest t-norm (see the properties of t-norms below). Product t-norm ⊤ p r o d ( a , b ) = a ⋅ b {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {prod} }(a,b)=a\cdot b} (the ordinary product of real numbers). Besides other uses, the product t-norm is the standard semantics for strong conjunction in product fuzzy logic. It is a strict Archimedean t-norm. Łukasiewicz t-norm ⊤ L u k ( a , b ) = max { 0 , a + b − 1 } . {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(a,b)=\max\{0,a+b-1\}.} The name comes from the fact that the t-norm is the standard semantics for strong conjunction in Łukasiewicz fuzzy logic. It is a nilpotent Archimedean t-norm, pointwise smaller than the product t-norm. Drastic t-norm ⊤ D ( a , b ) = { b if a = 1 a if b = 1 0 otherwise. {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)={\begin{cases}b&{\mbox{if }}a=1\\a&{\mbox{if }}b=1\\0&{\mbox{otherwise.}}\end{cases}}} The name reflects the fact that the drastic t-norm is the pointwise smallest t-norm (see the properties of t-norms below). It is a right-continuous Archimedean t-norm. Nilpotent minimum ⊤ n M ( a , b ) = { min ( a , b ) if a + b > 1 0 otherwise {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {nM} }(a,b)={\begin{cases}\min(a,b)&{\mbox{if }}a+b>1\\0&{\mbox{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is a standard example of a t-norm that is left-continuous, but not continuous. Despite its name, the nilpotent minimum is not a nilpotent t-norm. Hamacher product ⊤ H 0 ( a , b ) = { 0 if a = b = 0 a b a + b − a b otherwise {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {H} _{0}}(a,b)={\begin{cases}0&{\mbox{if }}a=b=0\\{\frac {ab}{a+b-ab}}&{\mbox{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} is a strict Archimedean t-norm, and an important representative of the parametric classes of Hamacher t-norms and Schweizer–Sklar t-norms. == Properties of t-norms == The drastic t-norm is the pointwise smallest t-norm and the minimum is the pointwise largest t-norm: ⊤ D ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)\leq \top (a,b)\leq \mathrm {\top _{min}} (a,b),} for any t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } and all a, b in [0, 1]. In particular, we have that: ⊤ D ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ L u k ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ p r o d ( a , b ) ≤ ⊤ m i n ( a , b ) , {\displaystyle \top _{\mathrm {D} }(a,b)\leq \top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(a,b)\leq \top _{\mathrm {prod} }(a,b)\leq \mathrm {\top _{min}} (a,b),} for all a, b in [0, 1]. For every t-norm T, the number 0 acts as null element: T(a, 0) = 0 for all a in [0, 1]. A t-norm T has zero divisors if and only if it has nilpotent elements; each nilpotent element of T is also a zero divisor of T. The set of all nilpotent elements is an interval [0, a] or [0, a), for some a in [0, 1]. === Properties of continuous t-norms === Although real functions of two variables can be continuous in each variable without being continuous on [0, 1]2, this is not the case with t-norms: a t-norm T is continuous if and only if it is continuous in one variable, i.e., if and only if the functions fy(x) = T(x, y) are continuous for each y in [0, 1]. Analogous theorems hold for left- and right-continuity of a t-norm. A continuous t-norm is Archimedean if and only if 0 and 1 are its only idempotents. A continuous Archimedean t-norm is strict if 0 is its only nilpotent element; otherwise it is nilpotent. By definition, moreover, a continuous Archimedean t-norm T is nilpotent if and only if each x < 1 is a nilpotent element of T. Thus with a continuous Archimedean t-norm T, either all or none of the elements of (0, 1) are nilpotent. If it is the case that all elements in (0, 1) are nilpotent, then the t-norm is isomorphic to the Łukasiewicz t-norm; i.e., there is a strictly increasing function f such that ⊤ ( x , y ) = f − 1 ( ⊤ L u k ( f ( x ) , f ( y ) ) ) . {\displaystyle \top (x,y)=f^{-1}(\top _{\mathrm {Luk} }(f(x),f(y))).} If on the other hand it is the case that there are no nilpotent elements of T, the t-norm is isomorphic to the product t-norm. In other words, all nilpotent t-norms are isomorphic, the Łukasiewicz t-norm being their prototypical representative; and all strict t-norms are isomorphic, with the product t-norm as their prototypical example. The Łukasiewicz t-norm is itself isomorphic to the product t-norm undercut at 0.25, i.e., to the function p(x, y) = max(0.25, x ⋅ y) on [0.25, 1]2. For each continuous t-norm, the set of its idempotents is a closed subset of [0, 1]. Its complement—the set of all elements that are not idempotent—is therefore a union of countably many non-overlapping open intervals. The restriction of the t-norm to any of these intervals (including its endpoints) is Archimedean, and thus isomorphic either to the Łukasiewicz t-norm or the product t-norm. For such x, y that do not fall into the same open interval of non-idempotents, the t-norm evaluates to the minimum of x and y. These conditions actually give a characterization of continuous t-norms, called the Mostert–Shields theorem, since every continuous t-norm can in this way be decomposed, and the described construction always yields a continuous t-norm. The theorem can also be formulated as follows: A t-norm is continuous if and only if it is isomorphic to an ordinal sum of the minimum, Łukasiewicz, and product t-norm. A similar characterization theorem for non-continuous t-norms is not known (not even for left-continuous ones), only some non-exhaustive methods for the construction of t-norms have been found. == Residuum == For any left-continuous t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } , there is a unique binary operation ⇒ {\displaystyle \Rightarrow } on [0, 1] such that ⊤ ( z , x ) ≤ y {\displaystyle \top (z,x)\leq y} if and only if z ≤ ( x ⇒ y ) {\displaystyle z\leq (x\Rightarrow y)} for all x, y, z in [0, 1]. This operation is called the residuum of the t-norm. In prefix notation, the residuum of a t-norm ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } is often denoted by ⊤ → {\displaystyle {\vec {\top }}} or by the letter R. The interval [0, 1] equipped with a t-norm and its residuum forms a residuated lattice. The relation between a t-norm T and its residuum R is an instance of adjunction (specifically, a Galois connection): the residuum forms a right adjoint R(x, –) to the functor T(–, x) for each x in the lattice [0, 1] taken as a poset category. In the standard semantics of t-norm based fuzzy logics, where conjunction is interpreted by a t-norm, the residuum plays the role of implication (often
Read more →
Catalog server

A catalog server provides a single point of access that allows users to centrally search for information across a distributed network. In other words, it indexes databases, files and information across large network and allows keywords, Boolean and other searches. If you need to provide a comprehensive searching service for your intranet, extranet or even the Internet, a catalog server is a standard solution.
Read more →
Use of artificial intelligence by the United States Department of Defense

The United States Department of Defense has been analyzing and employing military applications of artificial intelligence since at least 2014. The program initially focused on drones and other robots, but has also been using large language models for military research and analysis. The current US policy on lethal autonomous weapons is Department of Defense Directive 3000.09, updated in January 2023. == Background == The United States Department of Defense began developing lethal autonomous weapons as early as the Reagan administration. An early version of the Tomahawk missile could have been used to destroy Soviet ships without direct human control; the initiative was abandoned after the United States and the Soviet Union signed START I. By 2014, the United Kingdom, Israel, and Norway had already begun using missiles equipped with artificial intelligence systems. The Department of Defense established a policy on the use of artificial intelligence in 2012. == History == === 2016–2017: Carter secretaryship === In May 2016, secretary of defense Ash Carter stated that his Third Offset strategy would include utilizing artificial intelligence as a military advantage. The New York Times reported that year that the Department of Defense had tested an autonomous drone at an approximation of a Middle Eastern village at Camp Edwards. Deputy secretary of defense Robert O. Work, who advocated for developing artificial intelligence, told the Times that the United States needed to compete with China and Russia by having a tactical advantage they could not easily replicate. The initiative was developed by DARPA beginning in 2015. The use of artificial intelligence in the U.S. military was controversial within the department; in February, Paul Scharre, who worked for the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the secretaryships of Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, published a report about the risks of artificial intelligence for broad military applications. === 2017–2019: Mattis secretaryship === By 2017, the United States Air Force had already begun using artificial intelligence in military robots. The Air Force's use of Neurala, an artificial intelligence company, concerned officials in the Department of Defense after an investigation found that Neurala had accepted money from an investment firm with funding from a state-run Chinese company. The Department of Defense began heavily investing in artificial intelligence after Work established Project Maven, an initiative to encourage the development and integration of artificial intelligence in the military, in April 2017. In May 2018, secretary of defense Jim Mattis privately expressed to president Donald Trump that he needed to establish a national strategy on artificial intelligence, quoting an article from former secretary of state Henry Kissinger that called for a presidential commission on the technology. The Department of Defense established the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center the following month. Google began working with the Department of Defense on analyzing drone footage as early as March. Google's involvement in the initiative led to protests from employees and mass resignations. Seeking to quell internal unrest, Google stated it would not renew its contract with the Department of Defense in June. The Department of Defense announced an artificial intelligence contract with Microsoft in October. === 2025–present: Hegseth secretaryship === In December 2025, secretary of defense Pete Hegseth announced GenAI.mil, an artificial intelligence platform for the Department of Defense. In a video announcing the platform, Hegseth stated that Department of Defense workers would be able to "conduct deep research, format documents and even analyze video or imagery." The Department of Defense contracted first Gemini by Google, then ChatGPT by OpenAI, and finally Grok by xAI for the platform. Claude by Anthropic was also contracted by the Department of Defense and was in use on secure servers until it was revealed that Claude had been used in the 2026 operation to capture Nicolás Maduro, who was at the time the leader of Venezuela. This revelation sparked a high-profile dispute over Anthropic's ability to constrain Claude's useage, resulting in the termination of Anthropic's $200 million defense contract. The Department of Defense also moved to label Anthropic a supply chain risk, which was later blocked by a federal judge.
Read more →
Dartmouth workshop

The Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence was a 1956 summer workshop widely considered to be the founding event of artificial intelligence as a field. The workshop has been referred to as "the Constitutional Convention of AI". The project's four organizers, Claude Shannon, John McCarthy, Nathaniel Rochester and Marvin Minsky, are considered some of the "founding fathers" of AI. However it was not the first conference devoted to what would now be described as the question of artificial intelligence: it postdated meetings such as the 1951 Paris cybernetics conference and the Macy meetings. The project lasted approximately six to eight weeks and consisted largely of brainstorming sessions. Eleven mathematicians and scientists originally planned to attend; not all of them attended, but more than ten others came for short times. == Background == In the early 1950s, there were various names for the field of "thinking machines": cybernetics, automata theory, and complex information processing. The variety of names suggests the variety of conceptual orientations. In 1955, John McCarthy, then a young Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Dartmouth College, decided to organize a group to clarify and develop ideas about thinking machines. He picked the name 'Artificial Intelligence' for the new field. He chose the name partly for its neutrality; avoiding a focus on narrow automata theory, and avoiding cybernetics which was heavily focused on analog feedback, as well as him potentially having to accept the assertive Norbert Wiener as guru or having to argue with him. In early 1955, McCarthy approached the Rockefeller Foundation to request funding for a summer seminar at Dartmouth for about 10 participants. In June, he and Claude Shannon, a founder of information theory then at Bell Labs, met with Robert Morison, Director of Biological and Medical Research to discuss the idea and possible funding, though Morison was unsure whether money would be made available for such a visionary project. On September 2, 1955, the project was formally proposed by McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Nathaniel Rochester and Claude Shannon. The proposal is credited with introducing the term 'artificial intelligence'. The Proposal states: We propose that a 2-month, 10-man study of artificial intelligence be carried out during the summer of 1956 at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. The study is to proceed on the basis of the conjecture that every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it. An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves. We think that a significant advance can be made in one or more of these problems if a carefully selected group of scientists work on it together for a summer. The proposal goes on to discuss computers, natural language processing, neural networks, theory of computation, abstraction and creativity (these areas within the field of artificial intelligence are considered still relevant to the work of the field). On May 26, 1956, McCarthy notified Robert Morison of the planned 11 attendees: For the full period: 1) Dr. Marvin Minsky 2) Dr. Julian Bigelow 3) Professor D.M. Mackay 4) Mr. Ray Solomonoff 5) Mr. John Holland 6) Dr. John McCarthy For four weeks: 7) Dr. Claude Shannon 8) Mr. Nathaniel Rochester 9) Mr. Oliver Selfridge For the first two weeks: 10) Dr. Allen Newell 11) Professor Herbert Simon He noted, "we will concentrate on a problem of devising a way of programming a calculator to form concepts and to form generalizations. This of course is subject to change when the group gets together." The actual participants came at different times, mostly for much shorter times. Trenchard More replaced Rochester for three weeks and MacKay and Holland did not attend—but the project was set to begin. Around June 18, 1956, the earliest participants (perhaps only Ray Solomonoff, maybe with Tom Etter) arrived at the Dartmouth campus in Hanover, N.H., to join John McCarthy who already had an apartment there. Solomonoff and Minsky stayed at Professors' apartments, but most would stay at the Hanover Inn. == Dates == The Dartmouth Workshop is usually said to have run for six weeks. Ray Solomonoff's notes taken during the workshop, however, indicate that it ran for roughly eight weeks, from about June 18 to August 17. Solomonoff's notes start on June 22; June 28 mentions Minsky, June 30 mentions Hanover, N.H., July 1 mentions Tom Etter. On August 17, Solomonoff gave a final talk. == Participants == Initially, McCarthy lost his list of attendees. Instead, after the workshop, McCarthy sent Solomonoff a preliminary list of participants and visitors plus those interested in the subject. 47 people were listed. Solomonoff, however, made a list of participants in his notes of the summer project: Ray Solomonoff Marvin Minsky John McCarthy Claude Shannon Trenchard More Nat Rochester Oliver Selfridge Julian Bigelow W. Ross Ashby W.S. McCulloch Abraham Robinson Tom Etter John Nash David Sayre Arthur Samuel Kenneth R. Shoulders Shoulders' friend Alex Bernstein Herbert Simon Allen Newell Shannon attended Solomonoff's talk on July 10 and Bigelow gave a talk on August 15. Solomonoff doesn't mention Bernard Widrow, but in 1994 Widrow said that he and an unidentified colleague from the same lab in MIT had attended for one week. In the same interview Widrow recalled that "I think [Wesley] Clark and [Belmont] Farley were there from Lincoln Lab." Trenchard mentions R. Culver and Solomonoff mentions Bill Shutz. Herb Gelernter didn't attend, but was influenced later by what Rochester learned. In an article in IEEE Spectrum, Grace Solomonoff additionally identifies Peter Milner in a photo taken by Nathaniel Rochester in front of Dartmouth Hall. Ray Solomonoff, Marvin Minsky, and John McCarthy were the only three who stayed for the full time. Trenchard took attendance during two weeks of his three-week visit. From three to about eight people would attend the daily sessions. == Event and aftermath == They had the entire top floor of the Dartmouth Math Department to themselves, and most weekdays they would meet at the main math classroom where someone might lead a discussion focusing on his ideas, or more frequently, a general discussion would be held. It was not a directed group research project; discussions covered many topics, but several directions are considered to have been initiated or encouraged by the Workshop: the rise of symbolic methods, systems focused on limited domains (early expert systems), and deductive systems versus inductive systems. One participant, Arthur Samuel, said, "It was very interesting, very stimulating, very exciting". Ray Solomonoff kept notes giving his impression of the talks and the ideas from various discussions. === McCarthy's 1956 AI distribution list === This is the list in the "People Interested in the Artificial Intelligence Problem" document which McCarthy produced in 1956, partly in lieu of a list of attendees at the Dartmouth workshop. According to McCarthy the list was "being sent to the people on the list and a few others", and its purpose was "to let those on it know who is interested in receiving documents on the problem" of artificial intelligence. McCarthy also promised to deliver them a report on the Dartmouth conference, and to send an updated list soon afterwards. It includes people who did not attend the conference and does not include everyone who did attend it.
Read more →