AI Image Generation Tools

AI Image Generation Tools — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

MultiValue database

A MultiValue database is a type of NoSQL and multidimensional database. It is typically considered synonymous with PICK, a database originally developed as the Pick operating system. MultiValue databases include commercial products from Rocket Software, Revelation, InterSystems, Northgate Information Solutions, ONgroup, and other companies. These databases differ from a relational database in that they have features that support and encourage the use of attributes which can take a list of values, rather than all attributes being single-valued. They are often categorized with MUMPS within the category of post-relational databases, although the data model actually pre-dates the relational model. Unlike SQL-DBMS tools, most MultiValue databases can be accessed both with or without SQL. == History == Don Nelson designed the MultiValue data model in the early to mid-1960s. Dick Pick, a developer at TRW, worked on the first implementation of this model for the US Army in 1965. Pick considered the software to be in the public domain because it was written for the military, this was but the first dispute regarding MultiValue databases that was addressed by the courts. Ken Simms wrote DataBASIC, sometimes known as S-BASIC, in the mid-1970s. It was based on Dartmouth BASIC, but had enhanced features for data management. Simms played a lot of Star Trek (a text-based early computer game originally written in Dartmouth BASIC) while developing the language, to ensure that DataBASIC functioned to his satisfaction. Three of the implementations of MultiValue - PICK version R77, Microdata Reality 3.x, and Prime Information 1.0 - were very similar. In spite of attempts to standardize, particularly by International Spectrum and the Spectrum Manufacturers Association, who designed a logo for all to use, there are no standards across MultiValue implementations. Subsequently, these flavors diverged, although with some cross-over. These streams of MultiValue database development could be classified as one stemming from PICK R83, one from Microdata Reality, and one from Prime Information. Because of the differences, some implementations have provisions for supporting several flavors of the languages. An attempt to document the similarities and differences can be found at the Post-Relational Database Reference (PRDB). One reasonable hypothesis for this data model lasting 50 years, with new database implementations of the model even in the 21st century is that it provides inexpensive database solutions. == Data model example == In a MultiValue database system: a database or schema is called an "account" a table or collection is called a "file" a column or field is called a field or an "attribute", which is composed of "multi-value attributes" and "sub-value attributes" to store multiple values in the same attribute. a row or document is called a "record" or "item" Data is stored using two separate files: a "file" to store raw data and a "dictionary" to store the format for displaying the raw data. For example, assume there's a file (table) called "PERSON". In this file, there is an attribute called "eMailAddress". The eMailAddress field can store a variable number of email address values in a single record. The list [[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]] can be stored and accessed via a single query when accessing the associated record. Achieving the same (one-to-many) relationship within a traditional relational database system would include creating an additional table to store the variable number of email addresses associated with a single "PERSON" record. However, modern relational database systems support this multi-value data model too. For example, in PostgreSQL, a column can be an array of any base type. == MultiValue Basic Language == Multivalue Basic (now commonly styled as mvBasic) is a family of programming languages more or less common (and portable) to all the multivalue databases derived from the original Pick Operating System. The variations between implementations are known as flavours. The language originates from Dartmouth Basic and the earliest implementation of PickBASIC (now D3 FlashBasic). Over time various customisations and extensions have been added to take advantage of capabilities added to the different flavours while staying mainly in sync. mvBasic statements and functions are designed to access and take advantage of the multivalue database model and providing the usual capabilities of most modern languages. For example, cryptography and communications. mvBasic is typeless and lends itself to structured programming techniques. Example code is available but limited. Whilst there are commercial applications and tools available, the multivalue database community has not embraced the open source library/package model to the degree seen with other languages. The typical mvBasic compiler compiles program source to a P-code executable object and runs in an interpreter, with D3 FlashBasic and jBASE being notable exceptions. == MultiValue Query Language == Known as ENGLISH, ACCESS, AQL, UniQuery, Retrieve, CMQL, and by many other names over the years, corresponding to the different MultiValue implementations, the MultiValue query language differs from SQL in several respects. Each query is issued against a single dictionary within the schema, which could be understood as a virtual file or a portal to the database through which to view the data. LIST PEOPLE LAST_NAME FIRST_NAME EMAIL_ADDRESSES WITH LAST_NAME LIKE "Van..." The above statement would list all e-mail addresses for each person whose last name starts with "Van". A single entry would be output for each person, with multiple lines showing the multiple e-mail addresses (without repeating other data about the person).
Read more →
A.I.s

A.I.s is a themed anthology of science fiction short works edited by American writers Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois. It was first published in paperback by Ace Books in December 2004. It was reissued as an ebook by Baen Books in June 2013. The book collects ten novelettes and short stories by various science fiction authors, together with a preface by the editors. == Contents == "Preface" (Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois) "Antibodies" (Charles Stross) "Trojan Horse" (Michael Swanwick) "Birth Day" (Robert Reed) "The Hydrogen Wall" (Gregory Benford) "The Turing Test" (Chris Beckett) "Dante Dreams" (Stephen Baxter) "The Names of All the Spirits" (J. R. Dunn) "From the Corner of My Eye" (Alexander Glass) "Halfjack" (Roger Zelazny) "Computer Virus" (Nancy Kress)
Read more →
HYPO CBR

HYPO is a computer program, an expert system, that models reasoning with cases and hypotheticals in the legal domain. It is the first of its kind and the most sophisticated of the case-based legal reasoners, which was designed by Kevin Ashley for his Ph.D dissertation in 1987 at the University of Massachusetts Amherst under the supervision of Edwina Rissland. HYPO's design represents a hybrid generalization/comparative evaluation method appropriate for a domain with a weak analytical theory and applies to tasks that rarely involve just one right answer. The domain covers US trade secret law, and is substantially a common law domain. Since Anglo-American common law operates under the doctrine of precedent, the definitive way of interpreting problems is of necessity and case-based. Thus, HYPO did not involve the analysis of a statute, as required by the Prolog program. Rissland and Ashley (1987) envisioned HYPO as employing the key tasks performed by lawyers when analyzing case law for precedence to generate arguments for the prosecution or the defence. HYPO was a successful example of a general category of legal expert systems (LESs), it applies artificial intelligence (A.I.) techniques to the domain of legal reasoning in patent law, implementing a case-based reasoning (CBR) system, in contrast to rule based systems like MYCIN, or mixed-paradigm systems integrating CBR with rule-based or model-based reasoning like IKBALS II. A legal case-based reasoning essentially reasons from prior tried cases, comparing the contextual information in the current input case with that of cases previously tried and entered into the system. As noted by Ashley and Rissland (1988) CBR is used to "... capture expertise in domains where rules are ill-defined, incomplete or inconsistent". The HYPO project set out to model the creation of hypotheticals in law, where no case matches well enough. HYPO uses hypotheticals for a variety of tasks necessary for good interpretation: "to redefine old situations in terms of new dimensions, to create new standard cases when an appropriate one doesn’t exist, to explore and test the limits of a concept, to refocus a case by excluding some issues and to organize or cluster cases". Hypotheticals can include facts that support two conflicting lines of reasoning. So, it makes and responds to arguments from competing viewpoints about who should win the dispute. HYPO use heuristics such as making a case weaker or stronger, making a case extreme, enabling a near-miss, disabling a near-hit to generate hypotheticals in the context of an argument by using the dimensions mechanism. Dimensions have a range of values, along which the supportive strength that may shift from one side to the other. What differentiated this expert system from others was its facility not only to return a primary to best-case response but to return near-best-fit responses also. == Components == Legal knowledge in HYPO is contained in: the case-knowledge-base (CKB) and the library of dimensions. The CKB contains HYPO's base of known cases that are highly structured objects and sub-objects both real and hypothetical in the area of trade secret law. Each case is represented as a hierarchical set of frames whose slots are important facets of the case (e.g. Plaintiff, defendant, secret knowledge, employer/employee data).Ashley’s HYPO system used a database of thirty cases in the area indexed by thirteen dimensions. A key mechanism in HYPO is a dimension i.e. a mechanism to allow retrieval from the CKB, in order to represent legal cases. Ashley's dimensions are composed of (i) prerequisites, which are a set of factual predicates that must be satisfied for the dimension to apply (ii) focal slots, which accommodate one or two of the dimension's prerequisites designated as being indicative of the case's strength along that dimension and (iii) range information, which tells how a change in focal slot value effects the strength of a party's case along a given dimension. Dimensions focus attention on important aspects of cases. In HYPO's domain of misappropriation of trade secrets the dimension called “secrets voluntary disclosed” captures the idea that the more disclosures the plaintiff has made of his/her putative secret, the less convincing is his/her argument that the defendant is responsible for letting the secret. HYPO, like any other CBR system has also the following components: Similarity/relevancy metrics: that is, standards by which to evaluate the closeness of cases, judge their relevancy to the instant case, and select “most on point” cases. Half-Order Theory of the Application Domain: that is, hierarchies and taxonomies of knowledge, especially regarding the application domain. Precedent-based argumentation abilities: that is, capabilities to generate and evaluate precedent-based arguments. Knowledge to generate hypotheticals: that is, the ability to generate hypothetical cases to deal with various circumstances, like testing the validity of an interpretation or argument by providing gedanken experiments such as test cases or to fill in a weak CKB. == Functions == HYPO's method of creating an argument and justifying a solution or position has several steps. HYPO begins its processing with the current fact situation (cfs) which is direct input by the user into HYPO's representation framework. Once the user inputs the case, HYPO begins its legal analysis. The cfc is analyzed for relevant factors. Based on these factors HYPO selects the relevant cases and produces a case-analysis-record that records which dimensions apply to the cfc and which nearly apply (i.e. are "near misses"). The combined list of applicable and near miss dimensions is called the D-list. At this point the fact gathered module may request additional information from the user in order to draw a legal conclusion. Once all the facts are in the case-positioner module it uses the case-analysis record to create the claim lattice. This is a technique that organizes the relevant retrieved cases from the point of view of the cfc and makes it easy for HYPO to ascertain the most-on point cases (mopc) and to least on-point-cases. HYPO's arguments are 3ply, leading to the construction of the skeleton of an argument: it makes a point for one side, drawing the analogy between the problem and the precedent, responds with an argument for the opponent side, endeavoring to differentiate the cited case and citing other cases as counterarguments. Then it makes a final rebuttal, attempting to differentiate the counterarguments. The claim lattice also enables the HYPO-generator module to produce legally hypotheticals. With its use of dimension-based heuristics, the HYPO-generator does a heuristic search of the space of all possible cases. Lastly, the Explanation module expands upon the argument skeleton and provides explanation and justification for the different lines of analysis and cases found by HYPO. == An intelligent legal tutoring system == Legal expert systems are specifically designed to teach an area of law and are useful for pedagogical purposes. Ashley's work was mainly concerned to build tools to help students understand legal reasoning. Explanation and argument are the bases of the case method used in many professional schools in the U.S., first introduced by the Dean of the Harvard Law School, Christopher Columbus Langdell in 1870. The case method focuses on close readings of cases and principles; it involves students in pointed Socratic dialogue and makes strong use of hypotheticals (hypos). Thus, CATO (Aleven 1997) was a research project to device and test an intelligent, case-based tutorial program for teaching law students how to argue with cases implementing the HYPO program. Within the tutor system, Ashley and Aleven (1991) proposed to leverage an understanding of legal reasoning against the standard case-based tutoring methodology. What makes this tutoring system stand out is the additional levels of abstraction involved in its results. The system presents exercises, including the facts of a problem and a set of on-line cases and instructions to make, or respond to, a legal argument about the problem. The student/user will have a set of tools to analyze the problem and fashion an answer comparing it to other cases. Instead of simply generating precedent cases, the system works to interpret student responses, comparing them against a list of possibilities and responding to student entries, for example, by citing counterexamples, and providing feedback on a student's problem solving activities with explanations of correctness or giving further hints as to what may be wrong with evaluating a student's ability to perform legal reasoning and argument, examples and follow-up assignments by employing HYPO's model of case-based structure. == HYPO’s progeny == The quality of HYPO's results speak for themselves, in that a number of sequent legal reasoning systems are either directly based upon H
Read more →
Fuzzy mathematics

Fuzzy mathematics is a branch of mathematics that extends classical set theory and logic to model reasoning under uncertainty. Initiated by Lotfi Asker Zadeh in 1965 with the introduction of fuzzy sets, the field has since evolved to include fuzzy set theory, fuzzy logic, and various fuzzy analogues of traditional mathematic structures. Unlike classical mathematics, which usually relies on binary membership (an element either belongs to a set or it does not), fuzzy mathematics allows elements to partially belong to a set, with degrees of membership represented by values in the interval [0, 1]. This framework enables more flexible modeling of imprecise or vague concepts. Fuzzy mathematics has found applications in numerous domains, including control theory, artificial intelligence, decision theory, pattern recognition, and linguistics, where the modeling of gradations and uncertainty is essential. == Definition == A fuzzy subset A of a set X is defined by a function A: X → L, where L is typically the interval [0, 1]. This function is called the membership function of the fuzzy subset and assigns to each element x in X a degree of membership A(x) in the fuzzy set A. In classical set theory, a subset of X can be represented by an indicator function (also known as a characteristic function), which maps elements to either 0 or 1, indicating non-membership or full membership, respectively. Fuzzy subsets generalize this concept by allowing any real value between 0 and 1, thereby enabling partial membership. More generally, the codomain L of the membership function can be replaced with any complete lattice, resulting in the broader framework of L-fuzzy sets. == Fuzzification == The development of fuzzification in mathematics can be broadly divided into three historical stages: Initial, straightforward fuzzifications (1960s–1970s), Expansion of generalization techniques (1980s), Standardization, axiomatization, and L-fuzzification (1990s). Fuzzification generally involves extending classical mathematical concepts from binary (crisp) logic, where membership is determined by characteristic functions, to fuzzy logic, where membership is expressed by values in the interval [0, 1] via membership functions. Let A and B be fuzzy subsets of a set X. The fuzzy versions of set-theoretic operations are commonly defined as: ( A ∩ B ) ( x ) = min ( A ( x ) , B ( x ) ) {\displaystyle (A\cap B)(x)=\min(A(x),B(x))} ( A ∪ B ) ( x ) = max ( A ( x ) , B ( x ) ) {\displaystyle (A\cup B)(x)=\max(A(x),B(x))} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in X} . These operations can be generalized using t-norms and t-conorms, respectively. For example, the minimum operation can be replaced by multiplication: ( A ∩ B ) ( x ) = A ( x ) ⋅ B ( x ) {\displaystyle (A\cap B)(x)=A(x)\cdot B(x)} Fuzzification of algebraic structures often relies on generalizing the closure property. Let ∗ {\displaystyle } be a binary operation on X, and let A be a fuzzy subset of X. Then A is said to satisfy fuzzy closure if: A ( x ∗ y ) ≥ min ( A ( x ) , A ( y ) ) {\displaystyle A(xy)\geq \min(A(x),A(y))} for all x , y ∈ X {\displaystyle x,y\in X} . If ( G , ∗ ) {\displaystyle (G,)} is a group, then a fuzzy subset A of G is a fuzzy subgroup if: A ( x ∗ y − 1 ) ≥ min ( A ( x ) , A ( y − 1 ) ) {\displaystyle A(xy^{-1})\geq \min(A(x),A(y^{-1}))} for all x , y ∈ G {\displaystyle x,y\in G} . Similar generalizations apply to relational properties. For example, for example, for fuzzification of the transitivity property, a fuzzy relation R {\displaystyle R} on X {\displaystyle X} (i.e., a fuzzy subset of X × X {\displaystyle X\times X} ) is said to be fuzzy transitive if: R ( x , z ) ≥ min ( R ( x , y ) , R ( y , z ) ) {\displaystyle R(x,z)\geq \min(R(x,y),R(y,z))} for all x , y , z ∈ X {\displaystyle x,y,z\in X} . == Fuzzy analogues == Fuzzy subgroupoids and fuzzy subgroups were introduced in 1971 by A. Rosenfeld. Analogues of other mathematical subjects have been translated to fuzzy mathematics, such as fuzzy field theory and fuzzy Galois theory, fuzzy topology, fuzzy geometry, fuzzy orderings, and fuzzy graphs.
Read more →
Automated penetration testing

Automated penetration testing (also known as autonomous penetration testing or automated offensive security) is the application of software-driven workflows and orchestration to simulate cyberattack techniques. These methods are used to identify, validate, and exploit security vulnerabilities in IT assets such as networks, applications, and cloud infrastructure. Automated penetration testing is the use of software to simulate cyberattacks in order to rapidly identify exploitable vulnerabilities across systems without relying solely on human testers. In technical literature, the term describes a spectrum of activities ranging from scripted exploit orchestration to experimental systems designed for fully autonomous attack planning. Automated Penetration Testing falls short of testing using manual experts in terms of discovery of deep complex vulnerabilities and contextual business logic vulnerabilities. == Terminology and scope == The label “automated penetration testing” appears frequently in vendor and practitioner writing but lacks a single, neutral, standards-based definition. In the literature the term’s scope varies: some authors use it to mean automation of specific penetration-testing tasks (scanning, exploitation attempts, evidence collection), others to describe integrated, repeatable assessment pipelines, and a smaller body of work investigates autonomous decision-making agents that select attack steps algorithmically. To avoid implying consensus, this article describes common techniques and architectures reported in the literature and industry, and it notes where claims are primarily found in practitioner publications or early-stage research. Its important to note the differences between automated penetration testing and traditional penetration testing using human skill. The most important difference is scope and speed. Automated penetration testing generally fails at discovering exposures and weakness associated with business logic due to a lack of contextual understanding. The benefit of Automated Penetration testing is speed at which it can be conducted. Traditional penetration testing also is expected to be accurate and contain no false positives. This is due to the human validation aspect of the test. Automated approaches are expected to contain mistakes and false positives which need to be validated upon completion of the test. == History == Automated offensive techniques build on decades of tools and scripting that aided vulnerability discovery and exploitation. Early vulnerability scanners and community scripting in the 1990s and 2000s created the first layers of automation. Later, modular exploitation frameworks (notably Metasploit) integrated scanning and exploitation modules and made automated proof-of-concept attacks more accessible. Over the 2010s–2020s, as cloud platforms, APIs and continuous delivery practices increased the need for frequent validation, academic and industry interest in formalizing automated approaches also grew. == Methodologies and architectures == Descriptions in the literature and technical reports cluster automated capabilities into several overlapping models: Scripted/engineered playbooks (task automation): Predefined workflows or playbooks encode common attack paths (for example, web application exploit sequences or lateral-movement chains). These playbooks are designed to reproduce known techniques in a controlled way to validate exploitability and reduce manual repetition. Exploit-oriented orchestration: Automation orchestrates exploitation modules from established frameworks to perform controlled proof-of-concept attacks that confirm exploitability rather than simply flagging potential weaknesses. This approach can reduce false positives versus passive scanning when tests are run in an appropriately controlled environment. Orchestrated multi-tool pipelines: A coordinated toolchain integrates reconnaissance, vulnerability scanning, credential testing, exploitation modules and reporting. Data and state persist across stages so that multi-step workflows (e.g., discover → escalate → pivot) can be executed repeatably, approximating manual penetration-test methodologies at larger scale. Continuous / CI-integrated testing: Automation embedded in build or deployment pipelines (CI/CD) triggers assessments automatically on new builds, configuration changes, or on a schedule, supporting frequent, repeatable validation aligned with DevOps practices. Academic theses and experimental work describe CI/CD-integrated proof-of-concept systems for web applications and internal networks. Research on autonomous planning and learning: Recent academic work explores machine learning and reinforcement-learning approaches to select or prioritise attack steps, generate attack sequences, or optimize the testing path; these approaches are largely experimental and raise distinct validation and safety questions. == Tools and vendors == Automated penetration testing is provided by a mix of open-source projects, commercial platforms, and professional services. These often follow the penetration testing as a service (PTaaS) model, which integrates automated scanning with manual validation by security analysts. Examples of widely known tools and vendors in the space include exploitation frameworks such as Metasploit, commercial automated platforms and PTaaS providers, and specialist vendors that offer breach-and-attack simulation (BAS) or continuous testing capabilities. == Applications and deployment models == In industry practice, some organizations deploy automated techniques through dedicated security validation platforms rather than bespoke toolchains. These platforms are typically used for continuous or scheduled validation in pre-production or controlled environments and are often positioned alongside, rather than in place of, human-led penetration testing. Examples discussed in secondary literature include platforms such as Pentera, which are commonly classified under breach-and-attack simulation or automated security validation rather than as standalone penetration-testing methodologies.
Read more →
Predicate (logic)

In logic, a predicate is a non-logical symbol that represents a property or a relation, though, formally, does not need to represent anything at all. For instance, in the first-order formula P ( a ) {\displaystyle P(a)} , the symbol P {\displaystyle P} is a predicate that applies to the individual constant a {\displaystyle a} which evaluates to either true or false. Similarly, in the formula R ( a , b ) {\displaystyle R(a,b)} , the symbol R {\displaystyle R} is a predicate that applies to the individual constants a {\displaystyle a} and b {\displaystyle b} . Predicates are considered a primitive notion of first-order, and higher-order logic and are therefore not defined in terms of other more basic concepts. The term derives from the grammatical term "predicate", meaning a word or phrase that represents a property or relation. In the semantics of logic, predicates are interpreted as relations. For instance, in a standard semantics for first-order logic, the formula R ( a , b ) {\displaystyle R(a,b)} would be true on an interpretation if the entities denoted by a {\displaystyle a} and b {\displaystyle b} stand in the relation denoted by R {\displaystyle R} . Since predicates are non-logical symbols, they can denote different relations depending on the interpretation given to them. While first-order logic only includes predicates that apply to individual objects, other logics may allow predicates that apply to collections of objects defined by other predicates. Strictly speaking, a predicate does not need to be given any interpretation, so long as its syntactic properties are well-defined. For example, equality may be understood solely through its reflexive and substitution properties (cf. Equality (mathematics) § Axioms). Other properties can be derived from these, and they are sufficient for proving theorems in mathematics. Similarly, set membership can be understood solely through the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. == Predicates in different systems == A predicate is a statement or mathematical assertion that contains variables, sometimes referred to as predicate variables, and may be true or false depending on those variables’ value or values. In propositional logic, atomic formulas are sometimes regarded as zero-place predicates. In a sense, these are nullary (i.e. 0-arity) predicates. In first-order logic, a predicate is a non-logical relation symbol, which forms an atomic formula when applied to an appropriate number of terms. In set theory with the law of excluded middle, predicates are understood to be characteristic functions or set indicator functions (i.e., functions from a set element to a truth value). Set-builder notation makes use of predicates to define sets. In autoepistemic logic, which rejects the law of excluded middle, predicates may be true, false, or simply unknown. In particular, a given collection of facts may be insufficient to determine the truth or falsehood of a predicate. In fuzzy logic, the strict true/false valuation of the predicate is replaced by a quantity interpreted as the degree of truth.
Read more →
Rumelhart Prize

The David E. Rumelhart Prize for Contributions to the Theoretical Foundations of Human Cognition was founded in 2001 in honor of the cognitive scientist David Rumelhart to introduce the equivalent of a Nobel Prize for cognitive science. It is awarded annually to "an individual or collaborative team making a significant contemporary contribution to the theoretical foundations of human cognition". The annual award is presented at the Cognitive Science Society meeting, where the recipient gives a lecture and receives a check for $100,000. At the conclusion of the ceremony, the next year's award winner is announced. The award is funded by the Robert J. Glushko and Pamela Samuelson Foundation. The Rumelhart Prize committee is independent of the Cognitive Science Society. However, the society provides a large and interested audience for the awards. == Selection Committee == As of 2022, the selection committee for the prize consisted of: Richard Cooper (chair) Dedre Gentner Robert J. Glushko Tania Lombrozo Steven T. Piantadosi Jesse Snedeker == Recipients ==
Read more →
Argument technology

Argument technology is a sub-field of collective intelligence and artificial intelligence that focuses on applying computational techniques to the creation, identification, analysis, navigation, evaluation and visualisation of arguments and debates. In the 1980s and 1990s, philosophical theories of arguments in general, and argumentation theory in particular, were leveraged to handle key computational challenges, such as modeling non-monotonic and defeasible reasoning and designing robust coordination protocols for multi-agent systems. At the same time, mechanisms for computing semantics of Argumentation frameworks were introduced as a way of providing a calculus of opposition for computing what it is reasonable to believe in the context of conflicting arguments. With these foundations in place, the area was kick-started by a workshop held in the Scottish Highlands in 2000, the result of which was a book coauthored by philosophers of argument, rhetoricians, legal scholars and AI researchers. Since then, the area has been supported by various dedicated events such as the International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA) which has run annually since 2001; the International Workshop on Argument in Multi Agent Systems (ArgMAS) annually since 2004; the Workshop on Argument Mining, annually since 2014, and the Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), biennially since 2006. Since 2010, the field has also had its own journal, Argument & Computation, which was published by Taylor & Francis until 2016 and since then by IOS Press. One of the challenges that argument technology faced was a lack of standardisation in the representation and underlying conception of argument in machine readable terms. Many different software tools for manual argument analysis, in particular, developed idiosyncratic and ad hoc ways of representing arguments which reflected differing underlying ways of conceiving of argumentative structure. This lack of standardisation also meant that there was no interchange between tools or between research projects, and little re-use of data resources that were often expensive to create. To tackle this problem, the Argument Interchange Format set out to establish a common standard that captured the minimal common features of argumentation which could then be extended in different settings. Since about 2018, argument technology has been growing rapidly, with, for example, IBM's Grand Challenge, Project Debater, results for which were published in Nature in March 2021; German research funder, DFG's nationwide research programme on Robust Argumentation Machines, RATIO, begun in 2019; and UK nationwide deployment of The Evidence Toolkit by the BBC in 2019. A 2021 video narrated by Stephen Fry provides a summary of the societal motivations for work in argument technology. Argument technology has applications in a variety of domains, including education, healthcare, policy making, political science, intelligence analysis and risk management and has a variety of sub-fields, methodologies and technologies. == Technologies == === Argument assistant === An argument assistant is a software tool which support users when writing arguments. Argument assistants can help users compose content, review content from one other, including in dialogical contexts. In addition to Web services, such functionalities can be provided through the plugin architectures of word processor software or those of Web browsers. Internet forums, for instance, can be greatly enhanced by such software tools and services. === Argument blogging === ArguBlogging is software which allows its users to select portions of hypertext on webpages in their Web browsers and to agree or disagree with the selected content, posting their arguments to their blogs with linked argument data. It is implemented as a bookmarklet, adding functionality to Web browsers and interoperating with blogging platforms such as Blogger and Tumblr. === Argument mapping === Argument maps are visual, diagrammatic representations of arguments. Such visual diagrams facilitate diagrammatic reasoning and promote one's ability to grasp and to make sense of information rapidly and readily. Argument maps can provide structured, semi-formal frameworks for representing arguments using interactive visual language. One avenue of research and development is the design of online platforms to leverage collective intelligence to populate such maps and to integrate data, optimize and assess arguments. === Argument mining === Argument mining, or argumentation mining, is a research area within the natural language processing field. The goal of argument mining is the automatic extraction and identification of argumentative structures from natural language text with the aid of computer programs. === Argument search === An argument search engine is a search engine that is given a topic as a user query and returns a list of arguments for and against the topic or about that topic. Such engines could be used to support informed decision-making or to help debaters prepare for debates. === Automated argumentative essay scoring === The goal of automated argumentative essay scoring systems is to assist students in improving their writing skills by measuring the quality of their argumentative content. === Debate technology === Debate technology focuses on human-machine interaction and in particular providing systems that support, monitor and engage in debate. One of the most high-profile examples of debating technology is IBM's Project Debater which combines scripted communication with very large-scale processing of news articles to identify and construct arguments on the fly in a competitive debating setting. Debating technology also encompasses tools aimed at providing insight into debates, typically using techniques from data science. These analytics have been developed in both academic and commercial settings. === Decision support system === Argument technology can reduce both individual and group biases and facilitate more accurate decisions. Argument-based decision support systems do so by helping users to distinguish between claims and the evidence supporting them, and express their confidence in and evaluate the strength of evidence of competing claims. They have been used to improve predictions of housing market trends, risk analysis, ethical and legal decision making. ==== Ethical decision support system ==== An ethical decision support system is a decision support system which supports users in moral reasoning and decision-making. ==== Legal decision support system ==== A legal decision support system is a decision support system which supports users in legal reasoning and decision-making. === Explainable artificial intelligence === An explainable or transparent artificial intelligence system is an artificial intelligence system whose actions can be easily understood by humans. === Intelligent tutoring system === An intelligent tutoring system is a computer system that aims to provide immediate and customized instruction or feedback to learners, usually without requiring intervention from a human teacher. The intersection of argument technology and intelligent tutoring systems includes computer systems which aim to provide instruction in: critical thinking, argumentation, ethics, law, mathematics, and philosophy. === Legal expert system === A legal expert system is a domain-specific expert system that uses artificial intelligence to emulate the decision-making abilities of a human expert in the field of law. === Machine ethics === Machine ethics is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with the moral behavior of artificially intelligent beings. As humans argue with respect to morality and moral behavior, argument can be envisioned as a component of machine ethics systems and moral reasoning components. === Proof assistant === In computer science and mathematical logic, a proof assistant or interactive theorem prover is a software tool to assist with the development of formal proofs by human-machine collaboration. This involves some sort of interactive proof editor, or other interface, with which a human can guide the search for proofs, the details of which are stored in, and some steps provided by, a computer. === Ethical considerations === Ethical considerations of argument technology include privacy, transparency, societal concerns, and diversity in representation. These factors cut across different levels such as technology, user interface design, user, service context, and society. There is concern about unethical misuse for "generating arguments on controversial topics with specific stances and deploying them on social platforms". Another issue may concern the design of conclusion-making algorithms, such as e.g. enabling such to conclude that certain key data is needed instead of only making lists of best-fit conclusions or enabling the generation of multi
Read more →
Belief–desire–intention model

For popular psychology, the belief–desire–intention (BDI) model of human practical reasoning was developed by Michael Bratman as a way of explaining future-directed intention. BDI is fundamentally reliant on folk psychology (the 'theory theory'), which is the notion that our mental models of the world are theories. It was used as a basis for developing the belief–desire–intention software model. == Applications == BDI was part of the inspiration behind the BDI software architecture, which Bratman was also involved in developing. Here, the notion of intention was seen as a way of limiting time spent on deliberating about what to do, by eliminating choices inconsistent with current intentions. BDI has also aroused some interest in psychology. BDI formed the basis for a computational model of childlike reasoning CRIBB.
Read more →
Data processing unit

A data processing unit (DPU) is a programmable computer processor that tightly integrates a general-purpose CPU with network interface hardware. They are also occasionally called "IPUs" (infrastructure processing unit) or "SmartNICs". They can be used in place of traditional NICs to relieve the main CPU of complex networking responsibilities and other "infrastructural" duties; although their features vary, they may be used to perform encryption/decryption, serve as a firewall, handle TCP/IP, process HTTP requests, or even function as a hypervisor or storage controller. These devices can be attractive to cloud computing providers whose servers might otherwise spend a significant amount of CPU time on these tasks, cutting into the cycles they can provide to guests. They see use in other kinds of data center environments as well due to their improved power consumption efficiency for routine networking tasks compared to general-purpose CPUs.
Read more →
Batch normalization

In artificial neural networks, batch normalization (also known as batch norm) is a normalization technique used to make training faster and more stable by adjusting the inputs to each layer—re-centering them around zero and re-scaling them to a standard size. It was introduced by Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy in 2015. Experts still debate why batch normalization works so well. It was initially thought to tackle internal covariate shift, a problem where parameter initialization and changes in the distribution of the inputs of each layer affect the learning rate of the network. However, newer research suggests it doesn’t fix this shift but instead smooths the objective function—a mathematical guide the network follows to improve—enhancing performance. In very deep networks, batch normalization can initially cause a severe gradient explosion—where updates to the network grow uncontrollably large—but this is managed with shortcuts called skip connections in residual networks. Another theory is that batch normalization adjusts data by handling its size and path separately, speeding up training. == Internal covariate shift == Each layer in a neural network has inputs that follow a specific distribution, which shifts during training due to two main factors: the random starting values of the network’s settings (parameter initialization) and the natural variation in the input data. This shifting pattern affecting the inputs to the network’s inner layers is called internal covariate shift. While a strict definition isn’t fully agreed upon, experiments show that it involves changes in the means and variances of these inputs during training. Batch normalization was first developed to address internal covariate shift. During training, as the parameters of preceding layers adjust, the distribution of inputs to the current layer changes accordingly, such that the current layer needs to constantly readjust to new distributions. This issue is particularly severe in deep networks, because small changes in shallower hidden layers will be amplified as they propagate within the network, resulting in significant shift in deeper hidden layers. Batch normalization was proposed to reduced these unwanted shifts to speed up training and produce more reliable models. Beyond possibly tackling internal covariate shift, batch normalization offers several additional advantages. It allows the network to use a higher learning rate—a setting that controls how quickly the network learns—without causing problems like vanishing or exploding gradients, where updates become too small or too large. It also appears to have a regularizing effect, improving the network’s ability to generalize to new data, reducing the need for dropout, a technique used to prevent overfitting (when a model learns the training data too well and fails on new data). Additionally, networks using batch normalization are less sensitive to the choice of starting settings or learning rates, making them more robust and adaptable. == Procedures == === Transformation === In a neural network, batch normalization is achieved through a normalization step that fixes the means and variances of each layer's inputs. Ideally, the normalization would be conducted over the entire training set, but to use this step jointly with stochastic optimization methods, it is impractical to use the global information. Thus, normalization is restrained to each mini-batch in the training process. Let us use B to denote a mini-batch of size m of the entire training set. The empirical mean and variance of B could thus be denoted as μ B = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m x i {\displaystyle \mu _{B}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}x_{i}} and σ B 2 = 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( x i − μ B ) 2 {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{2}={\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(x_{i}-\mu _{B})^{2}} . For a layer of the network with d-dimensional input, x = ( x ( 1 ) , . . . , x ( d ) ) {\displaystyle x=(x^{(1)},...,x^{(d)})} , each dimension of its input is then normalized (i.e. re-centered and re-scaled) separately, x ^ i ( k ) = x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 + ϵ {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}={\frac {x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}+\epsilon }}}} , where k ∈ [ 1 , d ] {\displaystyle k\in [1,d]} and i ∈ [ 1 , m ] {\displaystyle i\in [1,m]} ; μ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \mu _{B}^{(k)}} and σ B ( k ) {\displaystyle \sigma _{B}^{(k)}} are the per-dimension mean and standard deviation, respectively. ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is added in the denominator for numerical stability and is an arbitrarily small positive constant. The resulting normalized activation x ^ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}^{(k)}} have zero mean and unit variance, if ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is not taken into account. To restore the representation power of the network, a transformation step then follows as y i ( k ) = γ ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) + β ( k ) {\displaystyle y_{i}^{(k)}=\gamma ^{(k)}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}+\beta ^{(k)}} , where the parameters γ ( k ) {\displaystyle \gamma ^{(k)}} and β ( k ) {\displaystyle \beta ^{(k)}} are subsequently learned in the optimization process. Formally, the operation that implements batch normalization is a transform B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) : x 1... m ( k ) → y 1... m ( k ) {\displaystyle BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}:x_{1...m}^{(k)}\rightarrow y_{1...m}^{(k)}} called the Batch Normalizing transform. The output of the BN transform y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) ( x ( k ) ) {\displaystyle y^{(k)}=BN_{\gamma ^{(k)},\beta ^{(k)}}(x^{(k)})} is then passed to other network layers, while the normalized output x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} remains internal to the current layer. === Backpropagation === The described BN transform is a differentiable operation, and the gradient of the loss l {\displaystyle l} with respect to the different parameters can be computed directly with the chain rule. Specifically, ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} depends on the choice of activation function, and the gradient against other parameters could be expressed as a function of ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} : ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) γ ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}\gamma ^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ γ ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) x ^ i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \gamma ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}} , ∂ l ∂ β ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \beta ^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}} , ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) ( − γ ( k ) 2 ( σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ ) − 3 / 2 ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})\left(-{\frac {\gamma ^{(k)}}{2}}(\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon )^{-3/2}\right)} , ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) = ∑ i = 1 m ∂ l ∂ y i ( k ) − γ ( k ) σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 1 m ∑ i = 1 m ( − 2 ) ⋅ ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {\partial l}{\partial y_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {-\gamma ^{(k)}}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {1}{m}}\sum _{i=1}^{m}(-2)\cdot (x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})} , and ∂ l ∂ x i ( k ) = ∂ l ∂ x ^ i ( k ) 1 σ B ( k ) 2 + ϵ + ∂ l ∂ σ B ( k ) 2 2 ( x i ( k ) − μ B ( k ) ) m + ∂ l ∂ μ B ( k ) 1 m {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial l}{\partial x_{i}^{(k)}}}={\frac {\partial l}{\partial {\hat {x}}_{i}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{\sqrt {\sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}+\epsilon }}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \sigma _{B}^{(k)^{2}}}}{\frac {2(x_{i}^{(k)}-\mu _{B}^{(k)})}{m}}+{\frac {\partial l}{\partial \mu _{B}^{(k)}}}{\frac {1}{m}}} . === Inference === During the training stage, the normalization steps depend on the mini-batches to ensure efficient and reliable training. However, in the inference stage, this dependence is not useful any more. Instead, the normalization step in this stage is computed with the population statistics such that the output could depend on the input in a deterministic manner. The population mean, E [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]} , and variance, Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]} , are computed as: E [ x ( k ) ] = E B [ μ B ( k ) ] {\displaystyle E[x^{(k)}]=E_{B}[\mu _{B}^{(k)}]} , and Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] = m m − 1 E B [ ( σ B ( k ) ) 2 ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [x^{(k)}]={\frac {m}{m-1}}E_{B}[\left(\sigma _{B}^{(k)}\right)^{2}]} . The population statistics thus is a complete representation of the mini-batches. The BN transform in the inference step thus becomes y ( k ) = B N γ ( k ) , β ( k ) inf ( x ( k ) ) = γ ( k ) x ( k ) − E [ x ( k ) ] Var ⁡ [ x ( k ) ] + ϵ + β
Read more →
GITEX AI Europe

GITEX AI Europe is an annual technology trade show and conference held in Berlin, Germany, as part of GITEX GLOBAL. The event focuses on the European technology market, specifically in the sectors of artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, quantum computing, and digital infrastructure. The event is organized by Kaoun International GmbH, the international arm of the Dubai World Trade Centre (DWTC), in partnership with Messe Berlin. == History == The establishment of GITEX AI Europe was announced in 2023 as part of a strategic move to bring the GITEX brand to the European market. The inaugural edition took place from May 21 to 23, 2025, at the Messe Berlin exhibition grounds. The launch was supported by the Berlin Senate and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action. The first edition of GITEX AI Europe in 2025 featured 21,650 attendees, 1,434 exhibiting companies, and 755 startups, with 513 speakers representing 125 countries. The next edition is scheduled for June 30 – July 1, 2026 in Berlin. == Program == The event consists of an exhibition floor for corporate displays, several conference stages for keynote speeches, and specialized sub-events. The conference program includes tracks such as "AI Stack Sovereignty," "Cyber Regulation & Trust Convergence," and "Institutional Growth Capital." GITEX AI Europe incorporates brands under its umbrella: AI Everything Europe: Focused on the development and application of generative AI and machine learning. North Star Europe: A dedicated program for startups and venture capital, featuring the "Supernova Challenge" pitch competition. GISEC Europe: A cybersecurity forum discussing regulation and infrastructure defense. GITEX Quantum Expo: Focused on the commercialization of quantum computing. Institutional partners for the event include the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action, the European Innovation Council (EIC), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Bitkom, and Digital Dubai.
Read more →
Vatican News App

The Vatican News App is an official mobile application software issued by the Vatican's Dicastery for Communication. Formerly titled The Pope App, the app was launched on January 23, 2013, under the auspices of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, a now-defunct dicastery that was merged into the Secretariat (now Dicastery) for Communication in March 2016. Initially, The Pope App was available only on iOS devices, but became available for Android phones at the end of February 2013. The app is available for download on iOS and Android in five languages: English, French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish. It was originally promoted as an application with focus on the figure of the Pope which made it possible to follow the Pope's events while they are taking place. Alerts notified the followers by informing and offering access to "official papal-related content in a variety of formats". The app also enabled its users to see areas of the Vatican through webcams allocated throughout St. Peter's Square in Rome that broadcast images. In early 2018, The Pope App was relaunched as the Vatican News App, accompanied by a redesign that eliminated many of the previous version's features, reducing the app to a more conventional news service, with increased emphasis on news from the Vatican and the worldwide Catholic Church and less focus on the day-to-day activities of the Pope.
Read more →
Constructive cooperative coevolution

The constructive cooperative coevolutionary algorithm (also called C3) is a global optimisation algorithm in artificial intelligence based on the multi-start architecture of the greedy randomized adaptive search procedure (GRASP). It incorporates the existing cooperative coevolutionary algorithm (CC). The considered problem is decomposed into subproblems. These subproblems are optimised separately while exchanging information in order to solve the complete problem. An optimisation algorithm, usually but not necessarily an evolutionary algorithm, is embedded in C3 for optimising those subproblems. The nature of the embedded optimisation algorithm determines whether C3's behaviour is deterministic or stochastic. The C3 optimisation algorithm was originally designed for simulation-based optimisation but it can be used for global optimisation problems in general. Its strength over other optimisation algorithms, specifically cooperative coevolution, is that it is better able to handle non-separable optimisation problems. An improved version was proposed later, called the Improved Constructive Cooperative Coevolutionary Differential Evolution (C3iDE), which removes several limitations with the previous version. A novel element of C3iDE is the advanced initialisation of the subpopulations. C3iDE initially optimises the subpopulations in a partially co-adaptive fashion. During the initial optimisation of a subpopulation, only a subset of the other subcomponents is considered for the co-adaptation. This subset increases stepwise until all subcomponents are considered. This makes C3iDE very effective on large-scale global optimisation problems (up to 1000 dimensions) compared to cooperative coevolutionary algorithm (CC) and Differential evolution. The improved algorithm has then been adapted for multi-objective optimization. == Algorithm == As shown in the pseudo code below, an iteration of C3 exists of two phases. In Phase I, the constructive phase, a feasible solution for the entire problem is constructed in a stepwise manner. Considering a different subproblem in each step. After the final step, all subproblems are considered and a solution for the complete problem has been constructed. This constructed solution is then used as the initial solution in Phase II, the local improvement phase. The CC algorithm is employed to further optimise the constructed solution. A cycle of Phase II includes optimising the subproblems separately while keeping the parameters of the other subproblems fixed to a central blackboard solution. When this is done for each subproblem, the found solution are combined during a "collaboration" step, and the best one among the produced combinations becomes the blackboard solution for the next cycle. In the next cycle, the same is repeated. Phase II, and thereby the current iteration, are terminated when the search of the CC algorithm stagnates and no significantly better solutions are being found. Then, the next iteration is started. At the start of the next iteration, a new feasible solution is constructed, utilising solutions that were found during the Phase I of the previous iteration(s). This constructed solution is then used as the initial solution in Phase II in the same way as in the first iteration. This is repeated until one of the termination criteria for the optimisation is reached, e.g. a maximum number of evaluations. {Sphase1} ← ∅ while termination criteria not satisfied do if {Sphase1} = ∅ then {Sphase1} ← SubOpt(∅, 1) end if while pphase1 not completely constructed do pphase1 ← GetBest({Sphase1}) {Sphase1} ← SubOpt(pphase1, inext subproblem) end while pphase2 ← GetBest({Sphase1}) while not stagnate do {Sphase2} ← ∅ for each subproblem i do {Sphase2} ← SubOpt(pphase2,i) end for {Sphase2} ← Collab({Sphase2}) pphase2 ← GetBest({Sphase2}) end while end while == Multi-objective optimisation == The multi-objective version of the C3 algorithm is a Pareto-based algorithm which uses the same divide-and-conquer strategy as the single-objective C3 optimisation algorithm . The algorithm again starts with the advanced constructive initial optimisations of the subpopulations, considering an increasing subset of subproblems. The subset increases until the entire set of all subproblems is included. During these initial optimisations, the subpopulation of the latest included subproblem is evolved by a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm. For the fitness calculations of the members of the subpopulation, they are combined with a collaborator solution from each of the previously optimised subpopulations. Once all subproblems' subpopulations have been initially optimised, the multi-objective C3 optimisation algorithm continues to optimise each subproblem in a round-robin fashion, but now collaborator solutions from all other subproblems' subspopulations are combined with the member of the subpopulation that is being evaluated. The collaborator solution is selected randomly from the solutions that make up the Pareto-optimal front of the subpopulation. The fitness assignment to the collaborator solutions is done in an optimistic fashion (i.e. an "old" fitness value is replaced when the new one is better). == Applications == The constructive cooperative coevolution algorithm has been applied to different types of problems, e.g. a set of standard benchmark functions, optimisation of sheet metal press lines and interacting production stations. The C3 algorithm has been embedded with, amongst others, the differential evolution algorithm and the particle swarm optimiser for the subproblem optimisations.
Read more →
Eden: It's an Endless World!

Eden: It's an Endless World!, also known simply as Eden (stylized in all caps), is a Japanese science fiction manga series written and illustrated by Hiroki Endo. It was serialized in Kodansha's seinen manga magazine Monthly Afternoon from September 1997 to June 2008, with its chapters collected in 18 tankōbon volumes. == Premise == The story is set in the near future, following the "closure virus" pandemic has killed 15 percent of the world's population, crippled or disfigured many more, with catastrophic effect on global politics. Its themes and many character names are taken from Gnostic mythology. == Plot == The series begins with a long introduction, with the characters Ennoia and Hannah living a peaceful life on a remote and isolated island called Eden, with researcher Lane Morris, who is their guardian and a victim of the pandemic. The events that led to this situation are revealed in flashbacks, leading up to the return of Ennoia's father, along with the forces of the Propater Federation. Following this, the story moves forwards twenty years, and focuses on Ennoia's son, Elijah, the main character, and his own conflict with the powerful and monopolistic Propater federation to save his sister, Mana Ballard, kidnapped by Propater when he was very young. She is being held to threaten Ennoia Ballard, father of the two characters, who has become a powerful drug lord in South America, feared and despised by many, including, to an extent, his own family. During a terrorist attack, Elijah, aged 15, is separated from his mother and his sister is kidnapped, along with his mother Hannah and now has to handle things on his own. Eden is about his coming-of-age as a man and trying to survive both bodily and morally in world that is too complex for mere "black and white". He encounters many other characters, both allies and enemies, all sharing the same struggle to survive in a post-apocalyptic dystopian world. Many stories are included of the people Elijah meets, telling their past or following life, sometimes volumes later, furthering understanding of the characters and giving increased depth to the world of the book as a whole. Later in the series, the story once again moves forwards in time, jumping four more years ahead. The Closure Virus, the cause of the original pandemic, mutates, this time assimilating non-organic matter as well as organic, known as "colloid" (or "Disclosure Virus"). The story rejoins Elijah, now 19 years old, as well as many other old characters, and some new, as the world begins to deal with this new threat that is swallowing many cities in the world, leaving lakes and craters, and many people. It is later discovered that the several colloids in the world, are linked with a net of underground auto-built "cables," and that the colloid itself, stores all the memories of the people it swallows. == Characters == Elijah Ballard (エリヤ・バラード, Eriya Barādo) Elijah is introduced while on the run from Propater. He becomes involved in his father's criminal activities, and undergoes a coming of age into adulthood. Ennoia Ballard (エンノイア・バラード, Ennoia Barādo) Elijah's father. Hannah Mayall (ハナ・メイオール, Hana Meiōru) Elijah's mother. Mana Ballard (マナ・バラード, Mana Barādo) Elijah's sister, who remains in Propater hands whilst her mother is rescued. Elijah's fight to free her is a focus of the later parts of the story. Nazarbaiev Khan (ナザルバイエフ・カーン, Nazarubaiefu Kān) Colonel Khan is an old soldier from Azerbaijan. He leads the Nomad group (including Kenji and Sophia) fleeing Propater at the start of the series. Khan became Kenji's mentor after killing his brother, and the two share a slightly strained, but at the same time, trusting, relationship. Sophia Theódores (ソフィア・テオドレス, Sofia Teodoresu) A powerful Greek computer hacker, and full-body cyborg. Maya (マーヤ, Māya) A nearly godlike AI, which seems to roughly correspond to the savior of Gnostic mythology. Kenji Asai (ケンジ・アサイ) The brother of a low-level yakuza boss. Helena Montoya (ヘレナ・モントーヤ, Herena Montōya) A prostitute now working in a brothel. Has a complex relationship with Elijah and acts as a surrogate big sister. == Media == === Manga === Eden: It's an Endless World! was written and illustrated by Hiroki Endo. The series ran in Kodansha's Monthly Afternoon magazine from September 25, 1997, to June 25, 2008. Kodansha collected its chapters into 18 tankōbon volumes, released from April 21, 1998, to July 23, 2008. In July 2005, Dark Horse Comics announced in San Diego Comic-Con that it has licensed Eden for North American distribution, with publication to begin in November of that year. As of March 2014, 14 volumes were released in total. ==== Volumes ==== == Reception == Eden was named Wizard magazine's best manga of 2007. In his review of another work by Hiroki Endo titled Hiroki Endo's Tanpenshu, David F. Smith of Newtype USA has called Eden one of the best manga American money can buy.
Read more →