BiP is a freeware instant messaging application developed by Lifecell Ventures Cooperatief U.A., a subsidiary of Turkcell incorporated in the Netherlands. It allows users to send text messages, voice messages and video calling, and it can be downloaded from the App Store, Google Play, and Huawei AppGallery. BiP has over 53 million users worldwide, and was first released in 2013. == Functions == BiP is a secure, and free communication platform. BiP allows making video and audio calls, allows sharing images, videos and location. BiP includes instant translations to 106 languages and exchange rates. President Erdoğan's Communications Office opposed WhatsApp's enforcement of its updated privacy policy and announced that Erdoğan left WhatsApp and opened an account in Telegram and BiP. The Turkish Ministry of National Defense has announced that it will move information groups to BiP for the same reason. == Others == Banglalink announced a BiP messenger partnership in Bangladesh The Communications Office of President Erdoğan opposed WhatsApp's enforcement of its updated privacy policy and announced that Erdoğan left WhatsApp and opened an account in Telegram and BiP. The Turkish Ministry of National Defense has announced that it will move information groups to BiP for the same reason. The CEO of BiP is Burak Akinci. The number of downloads of the app is 80 million globally.
Meta AI
Meta AI is a research division of Meta (formerly Facebook) that develops artificial intelligence and augmented reality technologies. == History == Meta AI was founded in 2013 as Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research (FAIR). It has workspaces in Menlo Park, London, New York City, Paris, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Tel Aviv, and Montreal as of 2025. In 2016, FAIR partnered with Google, Amazon, IBM, and Microsoft in creating the Partnership on Artificial Intelligence to Benefit People and Society. Meta AI was directed by Yann LeCun until 2018, when Jérôme Pesenti succeeded the role. Pesenti is formerly the CTO of IBM's big data group. FAIR's research includes self-supervised learning, generative adversarial networks, document classification and translation, and computer vision. FAIR released Torch deep-learning modules as well as PyTorch in 2017, an open-source machine learning framework, which was subsequently used in several deep learning technologies, such as Tesla's autopilot and Uber's Pyro. That same year, a pair of chatbots were falsely rumored to be discontinued for developing a language that was unintelligible to humans. FAIR clarified that the research had been shut down because they had accomplished their initial goal to understand how languages are generated by their models, rather than out of fear. FAIR was renamed Meta AI following the rebranding that changed Facebook, Inc. to Meta Platforms Inc. On October 1, 2025, Facebook announced "We will soon use your interactions with AI at Meta to personalize the content and ads you see". == Virtual assistant == Meta AI is also the name of the virtual assistant developed by the team, now integrated as a chatbot into Meta's social networking products. It is also available as a subscription-based stand-alone app. The virtual assistant was pre-installed on the second generation of Ray-Ban Meta smartglasses, and can incorporate inputs from the glasses' cameras after an update. It is also available on Quest 2 and newer HMDs. Since May 2024, the chatbot has summarized news from various outlets without linking directly to original articles, including in Canada, where news links are banned on its platforms. This use of news content without compensation and attribution has raised ethical and legal concerns, especially as Meta continues to reduce news visibility on its platforms. == Current research == === Natural language processing and chatbot === Natural language processing is the ability for machines to understand and generate natural language. The team is also researching unsupervised machine translation and multilingual chatbots. ==== Galactica ==== Galactica is a large language model (LLM) designed for generating scientific text. It was available for three days from 15 November 2022, before being withdrawn for generating racist and inaccurate content. ==== Llama ==== Llama is an LLM released in February 2023. As of January 2026, the most recent release is the Llama 4. === Hardware === Meta used CPUs and in-house custom chips before 2022; they switched to Nvidia GPUs since then. MTIA v1, one of their early chips, is designed for the company's content recommendation algorithms. It was fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process technology and consumed 25W, capable of 51.2 TFlops FP16. == Controversy == The French media outlet Mediapart reports that in 2022, Facebook's parent company illegally used works accumulated by the pirate site LibGen to train its artificial intelligence.
Markov switching multifractal
In financial econometrics (the application of statistical methods to economic data), the Markov-switching multifractal (MSM) is a model of asset returns developed by Laurent E. Calvet and Adlai J. Fisher that incorporates stochastic volatility components of heterogeneous durations. MSM captures the outliers, log-memory-like volatility persistence and power variation of financial returns. In currency and equity series, MSM compares favorably with standard volatility models such as GARCH(1,1) and FIGARCH both in- and out-of-sample. MSM is used by practitioners in the financial industry for different types of forecasts. == MSM specification == The MSM model can be specified in both discrete time and continuous time. === Discrete time === Let P t {\displaystyle P_{t}} denote the price of a financial asset, and let r t = ln ( P t / P t − 1 ) {\displaystyle r_{t}=\ln(P_{t}/P_{t-1})} denote the return over two consecutive periods. In MSM, returns are specified as r t = μ + σ ¯ ( M 1 , t M 2 , t . . . M k ¯ , t ) 1 / 2 ϵ t , {\displaystyle r_{t}=\mu +{\bar {\sigma }}(M_{1,t}M_{2,t}...M_{{\bar {k}},t})^{1/2}\epsilon _{t},} where μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ {\displaystyle \sigma } are constants and { ϵ t {\displaystyle \epsilon _{t}} } are independent standard Gaussians. Volatility is driven by the first-order latent Markov state vector: M t = ( M 1 , t M 2 , t … M k ¯ , t ) ∈ R + k ¯ . {\displaystyle M_{t}=(M_{1,t}M_{2,t}\dots M_{{\bar {k}},t})\in R_{+}^{\bar {k}}.} Given the volatility state M t {\displaystyle M_{t}} , the next-period multiplier M k , t + 1 {\displaystyle M_{k,t+1}} is drawn from a fixed distribution M with probability γ k {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}} , and is otherwise left unchanged. The transition probabilities are specified by γ k = 1 − ( 1 − γ 1 ) ( b k − 1 ) {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}=1-(1-\gamma _{1})^{(b^{k-1})}} . The sequence γ k {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}} is approximately geometric γ k ≈ γ 1 b k − 1 {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}\approx \gamma _{1}b^{k-1}} at low frequency. The marginal distribution M has a unit mean, has a positive support, and is independent of k. ==== Binomial MSM ==== In empirical applications, the distribution M is often a discrete distribution that can take the values m 0 {\displaystyle m_{0}} or 2 − m 0 {\displaystyle 2-m_{0}} with equal probability. The return process r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} is then specified by the parameters θ = ( m 0 , μ , σ ¯ , b , γ 1 ) {\displaystyle \theta =(m_{0},\mu ,{\bar {\sigma }},b,\gamma _{1})} . Note that the number of parameters is the same for all k ¯ > 1 {\displaystyle {\bar {k}}>1} . === Continuous time === MSM is similarly defined in continuous time. The price process follows the diffusion: d P t P t = μ d t + σ ( M t ) d W t , {\displaystyle {\frac {dP_{t}}{P_{t}}}=\mu dt+\sigma (M_{t})\,dW_{t},} where σ ( M t ) = σ ¯ ( M 1 , t … M k ¯ , t ) 1 / 2 {\displaystyle \sigma (M_{t})={\bar {\sigma }}(M_{1,t}\dots M_{{\bar {k}},t})^{1/2}} , W t {\displaystyle W_{t}} is a standard Brownian motion, and μ {\displaystyle \mu } and σ ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {\sigma }}} are constants. Each component follows the dynamics: The intensities vary geometrically with k: γ k = γ 1 b k − 1 . {\displaystyle \gamma _{k}=\gamma _{1}b^{k-1}.} When the number of components k ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {k}}} goes to infinity, continuous-time MSM converges to a multifractal diffusion, whose sample paths take a continuum of local Hölder exponents on any finite time interval. == Inference and closed-form likelihood == When M {\displaystyle M} has a discrete distribution, the Markov state vector M t {\displaystyle M_{t}} takes finitely many values m 1 , . . . , m d ∈ R + k ¯ {\displaystyle m^{1},...,m^{d}\in R_{+}^{\bar {k}}} . For instance, there are d = 2 k ¯ {\displaystyle d=2^{\bar {k}}} possible states in binomial MSM. The Markov dynamics are characterized by the transition matrix A = ( a i , j ) 1 ≤ i , j ≤ d {\displaystyle A=(a_{i,j})_{1\leq i,j\leq d}} with components a i , j = P ( M t + 1 = m j | M t = m i ) {\displaystyle a_{i,j}=P\left(M_{t+1}=m^{j}|M_{t}=m^{i}\right)} . Conditional on the volatility state, the return r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} has Gaussian density f ( r t | M t = m i ) = 1 2 π σ 2 ( m i ) exp [ − ( r t − μ ) 2 2 σ 2 ( m i ) ] . {\displaystyle f(r_{t}|M_{t}=m^{i})={\frac {1}{\sqrt {2\pi \sigma ^{2}(m^{i})}}}\exp \left[-{\frac {(r_{t}-\mu )^{2}}{2\sigma ^{2}(m^{i})}}\right].} === Conditional distribution === === Closed-form Likelihood === The log likelihood function has the following analytical expression: ln L ( r 1 , … , r T ; θ ) = ∑ t = 1 T ln [ ω ( r t ) . ( Π t − 1 A ) ] . {\displaystyle \ln L(r_{1},\dots ,r_{T};\theta )=\sum _{t=1}^{T}\ln[\omega (r_{t}).(\Pi _{t-1}A)].} Maximum likelihood provides reasonably precise estimates in finite samples. === Other estimation methods === When M {\displaystyle M} has a continuous distribution, estimation can proceed by simulated method of moments, or simulated likelihood via a particle filter. == Forecasting == Given r 1 , … , r t {\displaystyle r_{1},\dots ,r_{t}} , the conditional distribution of the latent state vector at date t + n {\displaystyle t+n} is given by: Π ^ t , n = Π t A n . {\displaystyle {\hat {\Pi }}_{t,n}=\Pi _{t}A^{n}.\,} MSM often provides better volatility forecasts than some of the best traditional models both in and out of sample. Calvet and Fisher report considerable gains in exchange rate volatility forecasts at horizons of 10 to 50 days as compared with GARCH(1,1), Markov-Switching GARCH, and Fractionally Integrated GARCH. Lux obtains similar results using linear predictions. == Applications == === Multiple assets and value-at-risk === Extensions of MSM to multiple assets provide reliable estimates of the value-at-risk in a portfolio of securities. === Asset pricing === In financial economics, MSM has been used to analyze the pricing implications of multifrequency risk. The models have had some success in explaining the excess volatility of stock returns compared to fundamentals and the negative skewness of equity returns. They have also been used to generate multifractal jump-diffusions. == Related approaches == MSM is a stochastic volatility model with arbitrarily many frequencies. MSM builds on the convenience of regime-switching models, which were advanced in economics and finance by James D. Hamilton. MSM is closely related to the Multifractal Model of Asset Returns. MSM improves on the MMAR's combinatorial construction by randomizing arrival times, guaranteeing a strictly stationary process. MSM provides a pure regime-switching formulation of multifractal measures, which were pioneered by Benoit Mandelbrot.
Noisy channel model
The noisy channel model is a framework used in spell checkers, question answering, speech recognition, and machine translation. In this model, the goal is to find the intended word given a word where the letters have been scrambled in some manner. == In spell-checking == See Chapter B of. Given an alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , let Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} be the set of all finite strings over Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } . Let the dictionary D {\displaystyle D} of valid words be some subset of Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} , i.e., D ⊆ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle D\subseteq \Sigma ^{}} . The noisy channel is the matrix Γ w s = Pr ( s | w ) {\displaystyle \Gamma _{ws}=\Pr(s|w)} , where w ∈ D {\displaystyle w\in D} is the intended word and s ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle s\in \Sigma ^{}} is the scrambled word that was actually received. The goal of the noisy channel model is to find the intended word given the scrambled word that was received. The decision function σ : Σ ∗ → D {\displaystyle \sigma :\Sigma ^{}\to D} is a function that, given a scrambled word, returns the intended word. Methods of constructing a decision function include the maximum likelihood rule, the maximum a posteriori rule, and the minimum distance rule. In some cases, it may be better to accept the scrambled word as the intended word rather than attempt to find an intended word in the dictionary. For example, the word schönfinkeling may not be in the dictionary, but might in fact be the intended word. === Example === Consider the English alphabet Σ = { a , b , c , . . . , y , z , A , B , . . . , Z , . . . } {\displaystyle \Sigma =\{a,b,c,...,y,z,A,B,...,Z,...\}} . Some subset D ⊆ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle D\subseteq \Sigma ^{}} makes up the dictionary of valid English words. There are several mistakes that may occur while typing, including: Missing letters, e.g., leter instead of letter Accidental letter additions, e.g., misstake instead of mistake Swapping letters, e.g., recieved instead of received Replacing letters, e.g., fimite instead of finite To construct the noisy channel matrix Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } , we must consider the probability of each mistake, given the intended word ( Pr ( s | w ) {\displaystyle \Pr(s|w)} for all w ∈ D {\displaystyle w\in D} and s ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle s\in \Sigma ^{}} ). These probabilities may be gathered, for example, by considering the Damerau–Levenshtein distance between s {\displaystyle s} and w {\displaystyle w} or by comparing the draft of an essay with one that has been manually edited for spelling. == In machine translation == One naturally wonders if the problem of translation could conceivably be treated as a problem in cryptography. When I look at an article in Russian, I say: 'This is really written in English, but it has been coded in some strange symbols. I will now proceed to decode. See chapter 1, and chapter 25 of. Suppose we want to translate a foreign language to English, we could model P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle P(E|F)} directly: the probability that we have English sentence E given foreign sentence F, then we pick the most likely one E ^ = arg max E P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle {\hat {E}}=\arg \max _{E}P(E|F)} . However, by Bayes law, we have the equivalent equation: E ^ = argmax E ∈ English P ( F ∣ E ) ⏞ translation model P ( E ) ⏞ language model {\displaystyle {\hat {E}}={\underset {E\in {\text{ English }}}{\operatorname {argmax} }}\overbrace {P(F\mid E)} ^{\text{translation model }}\overbrace {P(E)} ^{\text{language model}}} The benefit of the noisy-channel model is in terms of data: If collecting a parallel corpus is costly, then we would have only a small parallel corpus, so we can only train a moderately good English-to-foreign translation model, and a moderately good foreign-to-English translation model. However, we can collect a large corpus in the foreign language only, and a large corpus in the English language only, to train two good language models. Combining these four models, we immediately get a good English-to-foreign translator and a good foreign-to-English translator. The cost of noisy-channel model is that using Bayesian inference is more costly than using a translation model directly. Instead of reading out the most likely translation by arg max E P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle \arg \max _{E}P(E|F)} , it would have to read out predictions by both the translation model and the language model, multiply them, and search for the highest number. == In speech recognition == Speech recognition can be thought of as translating from a sound-language to a text-language. Consequently, we have T ^ = argmax T ∈ Text P ( S ∣ T ) ⏞ speech model P ( T ) ⏞ language model {\displaystyle {\hat {T}}={\underset {T\in {\text{ Text }}}{\operatorname {argmax} }}\overbrace {P(S\mid T)} ^{\text{speech model }}\overbrace {P(T)} ^{\text{language model}}} where P ( S | T ) {\displaystyle P(S|T)} is the probability that a speech sound S is produced if the speaker is intending to say text T. Intuitively, this equation states that the most likely text is a text that's both a likely text in the language, and produces the speech sound with high probability. The utility of the noisy-channel model is not in capacity. Theoretically, any noisy-channel model can be replicated by a direct P ( T | S ) {\displaystyle P(T|S)} model. However, the noisy-channel model factors the model into two parts which are appropriate for the situation, and consequently it is generally more well-behaved. When a human speaks, it does not produce the sound directly, but first produces the text it wants to speak in the language centers of the brain, then the text is translated into sound by the motor cortex, vocal cords, and other parts of the body. The noisy-channel model matches this model of the human, and so it is appropriate. This is justified in the practical success of noisy-channel model in speech recognition. === Example === Consider the sound-language sentence (written in IPA for English) S = aɪ wʊd laɪk wʌn tuː. There are three possible texts T 1 , T 2 , T 3 {\displaystyle T_{1},T_{2},T_{3}} : T 1 = {\displaystyle T_{1}=} I would like one to. T 2 = {\displaystyle T_{2}=} I would like one too. T 3 = {\displaystyle T_{3}=} I would like one two. that are equally likely, in the sense that P ( S | T 1 ) = P ( S | T 2 ) = P ( S | T 3 ) {\displaystyle P(S|T_{1})=P(S|T_{2})=P(S|T_{3})} . With a good English language model, we would have P ( T 2 ) > P ( T 1 ) > P ( T 3 ) {\displaystyle P(T_{2})>P(T_{1})>P(T_{3})} , since the second sentence is grammatical, the first is not quite, but close to a grammatical one (such as "I would like one to [go]."), while the third one is far from grammatical. Consequently, the noisy-channel model would output T 2 {\displaystyle T_{2}} as the best transcription.
Ancient text corpora
Ancient text corpora are the entire collection of texts from the period of ancient history, defined in this article as the period from the beginning of writing up to 300 AD. These corpora are important for the study of literature, history, linguistics, and other fields, and are a fundamental component of the world's cultural heritage. Chinese, Latin, and Greek are examples of ancient languages with significant text corpora, although much of these corpora are known to us via transmission (frequently via medieval manuscript copies) rather than in their original form. These texts – both transmitted and original – provide valuable insights into the history and culture of different regions of the world, and have been studied for centuries by scholars and researchers. Other ancient texts – particularly stone inscriptions and papyrus scrolls – have been published following archaeological research, notably the cuneiform corpus of c.10 million words and the c.5 million words in ancient Egyptian. Through advances in technology and digitization, ancient text corpora are more accessible than ever before. Tools such as the Perseus Digital Library and the Digital Corpus of Sanskrit have made it easier for researchers to access and analyze these texts. == Quantifying the corpora == Two types of ancient texts are known to modern scholars – those that have only survived in younger manuscripts, but whose great age is undisputed (this applies to the bulk of the Chinese, Brahmi, Greek, Latin, Hebrew and Avestan tradition), and those known from original inscriptions, papyri and other manuscripts. Counting of the words in each corpus presents significant methodological challenges – in principle, every single occurrence of a word in the text is counted separately, but in the case of parallel transmission of literary texts, only a single transmission is taken into account. Just as the Book of the Dead and the coffin texts are only included once in the number given for the Egyptian, the Greek and Latin literary works should only be counted according to one manuscript. If, on the other hand, tombs, royal inscriptions or economic documents of certain ancient languages often show a more or less identical form, this is not evaluated as a purely "parallel tradition". Attached prepositions are counted as separate words, except in the case of the definite article in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek since it has no equivalent in most languages, so its frequency would significantly affect the comparability of numbers. === Languages with known size estimates === === South Asian === Sanskrit (Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit) Indus script (3,800 items, c.20,000 characters) Brahmi script Old Tamil Early Indian epigraphy and Indian epic poetry Kharosthi Pali literature List of historic Indian texts === Mesoamerican === Olmec hieroglyphs Maya script === East Asian === Old Chinese Chinese classics The pre-Qin corpus: a collection of ancient Chinese texts written before the Qin dynasty (221 BCE). The corpus includes texts from Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism, and other schools of thought. The pre-Han corpus: a collection of ancient Chinese texts written before the Han dynasty (202 BCE). The corpus includes texts from Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism, and other schools of thought. See the Chinese Text Project Chinese bronze inscriptions, Oracle bone script, Seal script, Clerical script === Central Iranian languages === Prior to 300 AD, the Central Iranian languages are mainly in the form of Sassanid stone inscriptions in the two closely related idioms Middle Persian (Pahlavi scripts and Inscriptional Parthian), there are 5000 for the corpus of Middle Persian (mostly 3rd, but also 4th/5th centuries) and for the corpus of Parthian (3rd century) 3000 words. To what extent some of the Manichaean Middle Persian literary texts may date back to the 3rd century is difficult to estimate; Mani is said to have personally written the Shabuhragan totaling about 5000 words. In any case, if we combine Middle Persian and Parthian, we come to over 10,000 words. === Proto-Sinaitic === Proto-Sinaitic script has no more than about 400 letters (number of words is unknown since the script has not been fully interpreted). To a similar extent, there are probably approximately contemporaneous Proto-Canaanite inscriptions (ibid.). === Anatolian === Luwian cuneiform, approx. 3000 words the Palaic language few hundred words. Hieroglyphic Luwian the Lycian alphabet (the best attested Anatolian successor language written in alphabetic script) with about 5000 words The Lydian alphabet 109 inscriptions comprising about 1500 words The Phrygian alphabet the in-tomb inscriptions from the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD (approx. 1000 words) and in the so-called "old Phrygian" inscriptions less than 300 words The Carian alphabets whose texts, mainly from Egypt, contain around 600 words. === Old Italic === the Umbrian language attested essentially by the sacrificial instructions of the Iguvinian Tables with 5000 words the Oscan language (ibid.) with 2000 words the Messapic language with probably a good 1000 words (the estimate is difficult because most texts in this hardly understandable language do not use word separators) the Venetic language a few hundred words the Faliscan language a few hundred words Cisalpine Celtic inscriptions amount to approximately 2000 words, to which are added a number of glosses by classical authors === Iberia === Iberian scripts, more rarely written in Greek or Latin script, approx. 2500 words Celtiberian script, which refers to Celtic language testimonies in Iberian, but also in Latin script from Spain (approx. 1000 words) Southwest Paleohispanic script, 78 inscriptions, a few hundred words Lusitanian language, three monuments in Latin script, approx. 60 words === Germanic Northern Europe === Runic inscriptions dated before the 4th century amount to about 30 pieces, which contain no more than 50 words in total === Africa === Geʽez script: comparatively few inscriptions with a total of around 1,000 words before 300 AD. Following Christianization in the 4th century, more extensive texts are known. Libyco-Berber alphabet: over 1,000 inscriptions from the Maghreb, which are dated to Roman times. Most texts do not use a word separator; Peust estimates that the total number of words could be around 5,000 Meroitic script (Ancient Nubian): about 900 texts are known, which Peust estimates may contain approximately 10,000 words, albeit with uncertainty from the fact that the word separator is not used consistently in the Meroitic script. === Aegean === The Cretan Linear A inscriptions that have not yet been deciphered are available in about 2500 texts, which contain a total of around 20,000 characters. The total number of words can hardly be determined; Peust tentatively put it in the same order of magnitude as in Meroitic. In addition to the Linear A texts, there are also inscriptions Cretan hieroglyphs of a few hundred characters and texts written in the Greek alphabet, but not in Greek, with a few dozen words Cypriot syllabary in the first millennium BC, in which mostly Greek texts were recorded. The relevant texts comprise around 100 to 200 words. === Micro corpora === There are a significant number of ancient micro-corpus languages. Estimating the total number of attested ancient languages may be as difficult as estimating their corpus size. For example, Greek and Latin sources hand down an enormous amount of foreign-language glosses, the seriousness of which is not always certain. == Preservation and curation == Historic preservation and maintaining ancient text corpora presents several challenges, including issues with preservation, translation, and digitization. Many ancient texts have been lost over time, and those that survive may be damaged or fragmented. Translating ancient languages and scripts requires specialized expertise, and digitizing texts can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. == Corpus linguistics == The field of corpus linguistics studies language as expressed in text corpora. This includes the analysis of word frequency, collocations, grammar, and semantics. Ancient text corpora provide a valuable resource for corpus linguistics research, enabling scholars to explore the evolution of language and culture over time.
Vulnerabilities Equities Process
The Vulnerabilities Equities Process (VEP) is a process used by the U.S. federal government to determine on a case-by-case basis how it should treat zero-day computer security vulnerabilities: whether to disclose them to the public to help improve general computer security, or to keep them secret for offensive use against the government's adversaries. The VEP was first developed during the period 2008–2009, but only became public in 2016, when the government released a redacted version of the VEP in response to a FOIA request by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Following public pressure for greater transparency in the wake of the Shadow Brokers affair, the U.S. government made a more public disclosure of the VEP process in November 2017. == Participants == According to the VEP plan published in 2017, the Equities Review Board (ERB) is the primary forum for interagency deliberation and determinations concerning the VEP. The ERB meets monthly, but may also be convened sooner if an immediate need arises. The ERB consists of representatives from the following agencies: Office of Management and Budget Office of the Director of National Intelligence (including the Intelligence Community-Security Coordination Center) United States Department of the Treasury United States Department of State United States Department of Justice (including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force) Department of Homeland Security (including the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center and the United States Secret Service) United States Department of Energy United States Department of Defense (to include the National Security Agency, including Information Assurance and Signals Intelligence elements), United States Cyber Command, and DoD Cyber Crime Center) United States Department of Commerce Central Intelligence Agency The National Security Agency serves as the executive secretariat for the VEP. == Process == According to the November 2017 version of the VEP, the process is as follows: === Submission and notification === When an agency finds a vulnerability, it will notify the VEP secretariat as soon as is possible. The notification will include a description of the vulnerability and the vulnerable products or systems, together with the agency's recommendation to either disseminate or restrict the vulnerability information. The secretariat will then notify all participants of the submission within one business day, requesting them to respond if they have an relevant interest. === Equity and discussions === An agency expressing an interest must indicate whether it concurs with the original recommendation to disseminate or restrict within five business days. If it does not, it will hold discussions with the submitting agency and the VEP secretariat within seven business days to attempt to reach consensus. If no consensus is reached, the participants will suggest options for the Equities Review Board. === Determination to disseminate or restrict === Decisions whether to disclose or restrict a vulnerability should be made quickly, in full consultation with all concerned agencies, and in the overall best interest of the competing interests of the missions of the U.S. government. As far as possible, determinations should be based on rational, objective methodologies, taking into account factors such as prevalence, reliance, and severity. If the review board members cannot reach consensus, they will vote on a preliminary determination. If an agency with an equity disputes that decision, they may, by providing notice to the VEP secretariat, elect to contest the preliminary determination. If no agency contests a preliminary determination, it will be treated as a final decision. === Handling and follow-on actions === If vulnerability information is released, this will be done as quickly as possible, preferably within seven business days. Disclosure of vulnerabilities will be conducted according to guidelines agreed on by all members. The submitting agency is presumed to be most knowledgeable about the vulnerability and, as such, will be responsible for disseminating vulnerability information to the vendor. The submitting agency may elect to delegate dissemination responsibility to another agency on its behalf. The releasing agency will promptly provide a copy of the disclosed information to the VEP secretariat for record keeping. Additionally, the releasing agency is expected to follow up so the ERB can determine whether the vendor's action meets government requirements. If the vendor chooses not to address a vulnerability, or is not acting with urgency consistent with the risk of the vulnerability, the releasing agency will notify the secretariat, and the government may take other mitigation steps. == Criticism == The VEP process has been criticized for a number of deficiencies, including restriction by non-disclosure agreements, lack of risk ratings, special treatment for the NSA, and less than whole-hearted commitment to disclosure as the default option. == UK equivalent == British intelligence agencies—GCHQ in particular—follow a similar approach, also known as the Equities Process, to determine whether to disclose or retain security vulnerabilities. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 was amended in 2022 to bring oversight of the operation of the process within the remit of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner. Details of the process were made public in 2018.
Separating words problem
In theoretical computer science, the separating words problem is the problem of finding the smallest deterministic finite automaton that behaves differently on two given strings, meaning that it accepts one of the two strings and rejects the other string. It is an open problem how large such an automaton must be, in the worst case, as a function of the length of the input strings. == Example == The two strings 0010 and 1000 may be distinguished from each other by a three-state automaton in which the transitions from the start state go to two different states, both of which are terminal in the sense that subsequent transitions from these two states always return to the same state. The state of this automaton records the first symbol of the input string. If one of the two terminal states is accepting and the other is rejecting, then the automaton will accept only one of the strings 0010 and 1000. However, these two strings cannot be distinguished by any automaton with fewer than three states. == Simplifying assumptions == For proving bounds on this problem, it may be assumed without loss of generality that the inputs are strings over a two-letter alphabet. For, if two strings over a larger alphabet differ then there exists a string homomorphism that maps them to binary strings of the same length that also differ. Any automaton that distinguishes the binary strings can be translated into an automaton that distinguishes the original strings, without any increase in the number of states. It may also be assumed that the two strings have equal length. For strings of unequal length, there always exists a prime number p whose value is logarithmic in the smaller of the two input lengths, such that the two lengths are different modulo p. An automaton that counts the length of its input modulo p can be used to distinguish the two strings from each other in this case. Therefore, strings of unequal lengths can always be distinguished from each other by automata with few states. == History and bounds == The problem of bounding the size of an automaton that distinguishes two given strings was first formulated by Goralčík & Koubek (1986), who showed that the automaton size is always sublinear. Later, Robson (1989) proved the upper bound O(n2/5(log n)3/5) on the automaton size that may be required. This was improved by Chase (2020) to O(n1/3(log n)7). There exist pairs of inputs that are both binary strings of length n for which any automaton that distinguishes the inputs must have size Ω(log n). Closing the gap between this lower bound and Chase's upper bound remains an open problem. Jeffrey Shallit has offered a prize of 100 British pounds for any improvement to Robson's upper bound. == Special cases == Several special cases of the separating words problem are known to be solvable using few states: If two binary words have differing numbers of zeros or ones, then they can be distinguished from each other by counting their Hamming weights modulo a prime of logarithmic size, using a logarithmic number of states. More generally, if a pattern of length k appears a different number of times in the two words, they can be distinguished from each other using O(k log n) states. If two binary words differ from each other within their first or last k positions, they can be distinguished from each other using k + O(1) states. This implies that almost all pairs of binary words can be distinguished from each other with a logarithmic number of states, because only a polynomially small fraction of pairs have no difference in their initial O(log n) positions. If two binary words have Hamming distance d, then there exists a prime p with p = O(d log n) and a position i at which the two strings differ, such that i is not equal modulo p to the position of any other difference. By computing the parity of the input symbols at positions congruent to i modulo p, it is possible to distinguish the words using an automaton with O(d log n) states.