OpenVINO is an open-source software toolkit developed by Intel for optimizing and deploying deep learning models. It supports several popular model formats and categories, such as large language models, computer vision, and generative AI. OpenVINO is optimized for Intel hardware, but offers support for ARM/ARM64 processors. It sees great use in AI Sound Processing drivers when tied with Intel's Gaussian & Neural Accelerator (GNA). Based in C++, it extends API support for C and Python, as well as Node.js (in early preview). OpenVINO is cross-platform and free for use under Apache License 2.0. == Workflow == The simplest OpenVINO usage involves obtaining a model and running it as is. Yet for the best results, a more complete workflow is suggested: obtain a model in one of supported frameworks, convert the model to OpenVINO IR using the OpenVINO Converter tool, optimize the model, using training-time or post-training options provided by OpenVINO's NNCF. execute inference, using OpenVINO Runtime by specifying one of several inference modes. == OpenVINO model format == OpenVINO IR is the default format used to run inference. It is saved as a set of two files, .bin and .xml, containing weights and topology, respectively. It is obtained by converting a model from one of the supported frameworks, using the application's API or a dedicated converter. Models of the supported formats may also be used for inference directly, without prior conversion to OpenVINO IR. Such an approach is more convenient but offers fewer optimization options and lower performance, since the conversion is performed automatically before inference. Some pre-converted models can be found in the Hugging Face repository. The supported model formats are: PyTorch TensorFlow TensorFlow Lite ONNX (including formats that may be serialized to ONNX) PaddlePaddle JAX/Flax == OS support == OpenVINO runs on Windows, Linux and MacOS.
17LIVE
17LIVE is an international entertainment platform. As of 2024, 17LIVE is the #3 live broadcasting platform globally, formed by its flagship live stream app 17LIVE (LIVIT in English markets), MEME Live and live stream e-commerce platforms HandsUP and OrderPally. == History == 17LIVE was first founded in Taiwan in 2015 by Jeffery Huang. The company has maintained its leading position since its entry into the Japan market in 2017, becoming the biggest platform for live entertainment in Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and other countries. In 2017, 17 closed out US$33M in series B round to merge with dating software Paktor, with Joseph Phua (Co-founder of Paktor) taking over the leadership of 17LIVE as CEO and Co-founder, as well as to enter the Japan and Hong Kong market. Within one year, 17 Media became the #1 market leader in Japan. In 2018, the company raised $25M in series C round as it got ready for US IPO, which failed to materialize. 17LIVE had an unsuccessful US IPO attempt in 2018. Since then, the company reformed and transformed the business. Some key initiatives include the hiring of current CEO Hirofumi Ono, spin-off of Paktor (dating software business unit), full buy-out of founder Jeffery Huang, acquisition of MEME and HandsUp, and more. Despite the failed IPO attempt, the company continued to push for international expansion, including creating ‘LIVIT’ for the English-speaking markets to enter US, India, and North Africa. In 2019, 17's flagship live streaming app reached 10M downloads in Japan, and the business continues to push for both organic and inorganic expansion. Some key M&A highlights in the year include the acquisition of MEME Live in Southeast Asia, as well as HandsUp, a live e-commerce platform. In 2020, M17 closed out $26.5M in Series D round to continue organic growth in Japan, US and Middle East. In the same year, the company also sold its dating app business, Parktor, to rationalise M17 into a live-stream pure play business, followed by the appointment of its current Chairman, Joseph Phua, and previous Global CEO, Hirofumi Ono. With the buy-out and departure of founder Jeff Huang, the parent holding company M17 Entertainment Limited was officially renamed as 17 LIVE Group. An estimated 60 million users registered in 154 countries and territories in April 2022. In 2022, September, 17LIVE announced Group CEO Hirofumi Ono steps down. Alex Lien takes over the leadership as new Group COO; Jing Shen Ng appointed Group CTO. In 2023, March, 17LIVE announced Alex Lien promoted to Global CEO. Kenta Masuda appointed as Global CFO. === Collaboration with Ayumi Hamasaki === To celebrate its 4th anniversary, 17LIVE collaborated with Japanese singer-songwriter Ayumi Hamasaki, who led the 17LIVE 4th Anniversary meets Ayumi Hamasaki series starting October 18, 2021. Along with composer and arranger Yuta Nakano, Hamasaki judged auditioning artists competing for the chance to work with her and her production team for a debut single. The series was streamed live on the 17LIVE website, the final airing on November 11. The eventual winner was named as Yoshitaka_song. When asked why she collaborated with 17LIVE as a producer, Hamasaki commented: "Although the world has become like this (during COVID-19), I believe that the art of entertainment can give people dreams, hope, courage, and strength. I hope that kind of light will continue to shine through the entertainment industry." == Features == On 17LIVE, artists (LIVERs) are able to broadcast live, and post photos and videos from their album. The app has been designed for LIVERs to simply open the App, and start sharing contents without the need to edit or professionally curate their videos. The platform cultivates LIVERs, supports them with a local content management team, and provides artists with various functions, such as real time chatting, gifting, fan clubs, interactive competition and events. Today, 17LIVE has 46 thousands contracted artists and more than 2.3 million MAU, who spend 44 minutes on the platform every day. 17LIVE continues to advocate content-driven philosophy and delivers diverse topics, from politics and music to entertainment, to broaden its audience groups. 17LIVE also hosts offline flash events and concerts to attract new users and support LIVERs better connect with their fans. == Operation == 17LIVE has over 700 employees globally. The app provides few monetization models for LIVERs on the platform, including: Gifting: user / fans buy virtual gifts on the app to send to their favored LIVERs. Subscription: monthly subscription fan club service for access to exclusive content Pay-per-view: ticket service for online streaming concerts E-commerce: live e-commerce platform In the past, 17LIVE has encountered some regulatory headwinds with reported incidents of inappropriate livestream content on the platform. The incidents were direct results of the lack of oversight and supervision capability in place in the business at the time. Over the years, 17LIVE claims to have put in tremendous manpower and effort into improving, monitoring and maintaining control over both the live stream content and the KYC procedures and systems.
Example-based machine translation
Example-based machine translation (EBMT) is a method of machine translation often characterized by its use of a bilingual corpus with parallel texts as its main knowledge base at run-time. It is essentially a translation by analogy and can be viewed as an implementation of a case-based reasoning approach to machine learning. == Translation by analogy == At the foundation of example-based machine translation is the idea of translation by analogy. When applied to the process of human translation, the idea that translation takes place by analogy is a rejection of the idea that people translate sentences by doing deep linguistic analysis. Instead, it is founded on the belief that people translate by first decomposing a sentence into certain phrases, then by translating these phrases, and finally by properly composing these fragments into one long sentence. Phrasal translations are translated by analogy to previous translations. The principle of translation by analogy is encoded to example-based machine translation through the example translations that are used to train such a system. Other approaches to machine translation, including statistical machine translation, also use bilingual corpora to learn the process of translation. == History == Example-based machine translation was first suggested by Makoto Nagao in 1984. He pointed out that it is especially adapted to translation between two totally different languages, such as English and Japanese. In this case, one sentence can be translated into several well-structured sentences in another language, therefore, it is no use to do the deep linguistic analysis characteristic of rule-based machine translation. == Example == Example-based machine translation systems are trained from bilingual parallel corpora containing sentence pairs like the example shown in the table above. Sentence pairs contain sentences in one language with their translations into another. The particular example shows an example of a minimal pair, meaning that the sentences vary by just one element. These sentences make it simple to learn translations of portions of a sentence. For example, an example-based machine translation system would learn three units of translation from the above example: How much is that X ? corresponds to Ano X wa ikura desu ka. red umbrella corresponds to akai kasa small camera corresponds to chiisai kamera Composing these units can be used to produce novel translations in the future. For example, if we have been trained using some text containing the sentences: President Kennedy was shot dead during the parade. and The convict escaped on July 15th., then we could translate the sentence The convict was shot dead during the parade. by substituting the appropriate parts of the sentences. == Phrasal verbs == Example-based machine translation is best suited for sub-language phenomena like phrasal verbs. Phrasal verbs have highly context-dependent meanings. They are common in English, where they comprise a verb followed by an adverb and/or a preposition, which are called the particle to the verb. Phrasal verbs produce specialized context-specific meanings that may not be derived from the meaning of the constituents. There is almost always an ambiguity during word-to-word translation from source to the target language. As an example, consider the phrasal verb "put on" and its Hindustani translation. It may be used in any of the following ways: Ram put on the lights. (Switched on) (Hindustani translation: Jalana) Ram put on a cap. (Wear) (Hindustani translation: Pahenna)
Kleene star
In formal language theory, the Kleene star (or Kleene operator or Kleene closure) refers to two related unary operations, that can be applied either to an alphabet of symbols or to a formal language, a set of strings (finite sequences of symbols). The Kleene star operator on an alphabet V generates the set V of all finite-length strings over V, that is, finite sequences whose elements belong to V; in mathematics, it is more commonly known as the free monoid construction. The Kleene star operator on a language L generates another language L, the set of all strings that can be obtained as a concatenation of zero or more members of L. In both cases, repetitions are allowed. The Kleene star operators are named after American mathematician Stephen Cole Kleene, who first introduced and widely used it to characterize automata for regular expressions. == Of an alphabet == Given an alphabet V {\displaystyle V} , define V 0 = { ε } {\displaystyle V^{0}=\{\varepsilon \}} (the set consists only of the empty string), V 1 = V , {\displaystyle V^{1}=V,} and define recursively the set V i + 1 = { w v : w ∈ V i and v ∈ V } {\displaystyle V^{i+1}=\{wv:w\in V^{i}{\text{ and }}v\in V\}} for each i > 0 , {\displaystyle i>0,} where w v {\displaystyle wv} denotes the string obtained by appending the single character v {\displaystyle v} to the end of w {\displaystyle w} . Here, V i {\displaystyle V^{i}} can be understood to be the set of all strings of length exactly i {\displaystyle i} , with characters from V {\displaystyle V} . The definition of Kleene star on V {\displaystyle V} is V ∗ = ⋃ i ≥ 0 V i = V 0 ∪ V 1 ∪ V 2 ∪ V 3 ∪ V 4 ∪ ⋯ . {\displaystyle V^{}=\bigcup _{i\geq 0}V^{i}=V^{0}\cup V^{1}\cup V^{2}\cup V^{3}\cup V^{4}\cup \cdots .} == Of a language == Given a language L {\displaystyle L} (any finite or infinite set of strings), define L 0 = { ε } {\displaystyle L^{0}=\{\varepsilon \}} (the language consisting only of the empty string), L 1 = L , {\displaystyle L^{1}=L,} and define recursively the set L i + 1 = { w v : w ∈ L i and v ∈ L } {\displaystyle L^{i+1}=\{wv:w\in L^{i}{\text{ and }}v\in L\}} for each i > 0 , {\displaystyle i>0,} where w v {\displaystyle wv} denotes the string obtained by concatenating w {\displaystyle w} and v {\displaystyle v} . Here, L i {\displaystyle L^{i}} can be understood to be the set of all strings that can be obtained by concatenating exactly i {\displaystyle i} strings from L {\displaystyle L} , allowing repetitions. The definition of Kleene star on L {\displaystyle L} is L ∗ = ⋃ i ≥ 0 L i = L 0 ∪ L 1 ∪ L 2 ∪ L 3 ∪ L 4 ∪ ⋯ . {\displaystyle L^{}=\bigcup _{i\geq 0}L^{i}=L^{0}\cup L^{1}\cup L^{2}\cup L^{3}\cup L^{4}\cup \cdots .} == Kleene plus == In some formal language studies, (e.g. AFL theory) a variation on the Kleene star operation called the Kleene plus is used. The Kleene plus omits the V 0 {\displaystyle V^{0}} or L 0 {\displaystyle L^{0}} term in the above unions. In other words, the Kleene plus on V {\displaystyle V} is V + = ⋃ i ≥ 1 V i = V 1 ∪ V 2 ∪ V 3 ∪ ⋯ , {\displaystyle V^{+}=\bigcup _{i\geq 1}V^{i}=V^{1}\cup V^{2}\cup V^{3}\cup \cdots ,} or V + = V ∗ V . {\displaystyle V^{+}=V^{}V.} == Examples == Example of Kleene star applied to a set of strings: {"ab","c"} = { ε, "ab", "c", "abab", "abc", "cab", "cc", "ababab", "ababc", "abcab", "abcc", "cabab", "cabc", "ccab", "ccc", ...}. Example of Kleene star applied to a set of strings without the prefix property: {"a","ab","b"} = { ε, "a", "ab", "b", "aa", "aab", "aba", "abab", "abb", "ba", "bab", "bb", ...};In this example, the string "aab" can be obtained in two different ways. The Sardinas-Patterson algorithm can be used to check for a given V whether any member of V can be obtained in more than one way. Example of Kleene and Kleene plus applied to a set of characters (following the C programming language convention where a character is denoted by single quotes and a string is denoted by double quotes): {'a', 'b', 'c'} = { ε, "a", "b", "c", "aa", "ab", "ac", "ba", "bb", "bc", "ca", "cb", "cc", "aaa", "aab", ...}. {'a', 'b', 'c'}+ = { "a", "b", "c", "aa", "ab", "ac", "ba", "bb", "bc", "ca", "cb", "cc", "aaa", "aab", ...}. == Properties == If V {\displaystyle V} is any finite or countably infinite set of characters, then V ∗ {\displaystyle V^{}} is a countably infinite set. As a result, each formal language over a finite or countably infinite alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is countable, since it is a subset of the countably infinite set Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} . ( L ∗ ) ∗ = L ∗ {\displaystyle (L^{})^{}=L^{}} , which means that the Kleene star operator is an idempotent unary operator, as ( L ∗ ) i = L ∗ {\displaystyle (L^{})^{i}=L^{}} for every i ≥ 1 {\displaystyle i\geq 1} . V ∗ = { ε } {\displaystyle V^{}=\{\varepsilon \}} , if V {\displaystyle V} is the empty set ∅. For the version of the Kleene star operator on languages, L ∗ = { ε } {\displaystyle L^{}=\{\varepsilon \}} when L {\displaystyle L} is either the empty set ∅ or the singleton set { ε } {\displaystyle \{\varepsilon \}} . == Generalization == Strings form a monoid with concatenation as the binary operation and ε the identity element. In addition to strings, the Kleene star is defined for any monoid. More precisely, let (M, ⋅) be a monoid, and S ⊆ M. Then S is the smallest submonoid of M containing S; that is, S contains the neutral element of M, the set S, and is such that if x,y ∈ S, then x⋅y ∈ S. Furthermore, the Kleene star is generalized by including the -operation (and the union) in the algebraic structure itself by the notion of complete star semiring.
Huawei Member Center
Huawei Member Center is a benefits app which runs using Huawei Mobile Services. Originally launched in China, Huawei Member Center is now being developed primarily around devices such as P40 Pro and the Nova 7. == Membership Levels == The Huawei Member Center provides rewards in two primary ways, 1) device-specific & promotions and 2) via frequent use of Huawei products and apps, using points to redeem additional benefits. In China, Huawei members are already classified into three levels, the highest being “elite”. Membership level determines the level of perks received, from priority access to the service hotline, new device events & proprietary early-access opportunities. Huawei ran a number of member events in 2019 called "Huawei Member Day" to promote the Member Center including providing tips for the Mate 30 Pro and offering a 50Gb cloud storage upgrade to users. == HMC in China == Huawei Member Center Has seen significant adoption in China and the east, the rewards for use on the app have ranged from free book coupons, discounted travel and exclusive gifts of new devices, such as the Huawei Enjoy Z.
Autocommit
In the context of data management, autocommit is a mode of operation of a database connection. Each individual database interaction (i.e., each SQL statement) submitted through the database connection in autocommit mode will be executed in its own transaction that is implicitly committed. A SQL statement executed in autocommit mode cannot be rolled back. Autocommit mode incurs per-statement transaction overhead and can often lead to undesirable performance or resource utilization impact on the database. Nonetheless, in systems such as Microsoft SQL Server, as well as connection technologies such as ODBC and Microsoft OLE DB, autocommit mode is the default for all statements that change data, in order to ensure that individual statements will conform to the ACID (atomicity-consistency-isolation-durability) properties of transactions. The alternative to autocommit mode (non-autocommit) means that the SQL client application itself is responsible for ending transactions explicitly via the commit or rollback SQL commands. Non-autocommit mode enables grouping of multiple data manipulation SQL commands into a single atomic transaction. Some DBMS (e.g. MariaDB) force autocommit for every DDL statement, even in non-autocommit mode. In this case, before each DDL statement, previous DML statements in transaction are autocommitted. Each DDL statement is executed in its own new autocommit transaction.
Ugly duckling theorem
The ugly duckling theorem is an argument showing that classification is not really possible without some sort of bias. More particularly, it assumes finitely many properties combinable by logical connectives, and finitely many objects; it asserts that any two different objects share the same number of (extensional) properties. The theorem is named after Hans Christian Andersen's 1843 story "The Ugly Duckling", because it shows that a duckling is just as similar to a swan as two swans are to each other. It was derived by Satosi Watanabe in 1969. == Mathematical formula == Suppose there are n things in the universe, and one wants to put them into classes or categories. One has no preconceived ideas or biases about what sorts of categories are "natural" or "normal" and what are not. So one has to consider all the possible classes that could be, all the possible ways of making a set out of the n objects. There are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such ways, the size of the power set of n objects. One can use that to measure the similarity between two objects, and one would see how many sets they have in common. However, one cannot. Any two objects have exactly the same number of classes in common if we can form any possible class, namely 2 n − 1 {\displaystyle 2^{n-1}} (half the total number of classes there are). To see this is so, one may imagine each class is represented by an n-bit string (or binary encoded integer), with a zero for each element not in the class and a one for each element in the class. As one finds, there are 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} such strings. As all possible choices of zeros and ones are there, any two bit-positions will agree exactly half the time. One may pick two elements and reorder the bits so they are the first two, and imagine the numbers sorted lexicographically. The first 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} numbers will have bit #1 set to zero, and the second 2 n / 2 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/2} will have it set to one. Within each of those blocks, the top 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have bit #2 set to zero and the other 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} will have it as one, so they agree on two blocks of 2 n / 4 {\displaystyle 2^{n}/4} or on half of all the cases, no matter which two elements one picks. So if we have no preconceived bias about which categories are better, everything is then equally similar (or equally dissimilar). The number of predicates simultaneously satisfied by two non-identical elements is constant over all such pairs. Thus, some kind of inductive bias is needed to make judgements to prefer certain categories over others. === Boolean functions === Let x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n}} be a set of vectors of k {\displaystyle k} booleans each. The ugly duckling is the vector which is least like the others. Given the booleans, this can be computed using Hamming distance. However, the choice of boolean features to consider could have been somewhat arbitrary. Perhaps there were features derivable from the original features that were important for identifying the ugly duckling. The set of booleans in the vector can be extended with new features computed as boolean functions of the k {\displaystyle k} original features. The only canonical way to do this is to extend it with all possible Boolean functions. The resulting completed vectors have 2 k {\displaystyle 2^{k}} features. The ugly duckling theorem states that there is no ugly duckling because any two completed vectors will either be equal or differ in exactly half of the features. Proof. Let x and y be two vectors. If they are the same, then their completed vectors must also be the same because any Boolean function of x will agree with the same Boolean function of y. If x and y are different, then there exists a coordinate i {\displaystyle i} where the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of x {\displaystyle x} differs from the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate of y {\displaystyle y} . Now the completed features contain every Boolean function on k {\displaystyle k} Boolean variables, with each one exactly once. Viewing these Boolean functions as polynomials in k {\displaystyle k} variables over GF(2), segregate the functions into pairs ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} where f {\displaystyle f} contains the i {\displaystyle i} -th coordinate as a linear term and g {\displaystyle g} is f {\displaystyle f} without that linear term. Now, for every such pair ( f , g ) {\displaystyle (f,g)} , x {\displaystyle x} and y {\displaystyle y} will agree on exactly one of the two functions. If they agree on one, they must disagree on the other and vice versa. (This proof is believed to be due to Watanabe.) == Discussion == A possible way around the ugly duckling theorem would be to introduce a constraint on how similarity is measured by limiting the properties involved in classification, for instance, between A and B. However Medin et al. (1993) point out that this does not actually resolve the arbitrariness or bias problem since in what respects A is similar to B: "varies with the stimulus context and task, so that there is no unique answer, to the question of how similar is one object to another". For example, "a barberpole and a zebra would be more similar than a horse and a zebra if the feature striped had sufficient weight. Of course, if these feature weights were fixed, then these similarity relations would be constrained". Yet the property "striped" as a weight 'fix' or constraint is arbitrary itself, meaning: "unless one can specify such criteria, then the claim that categorization is based on attribute matching is almost entirely vacuous". Stamos (2003) remarked that some judgments of overall similarity are non-arbitrary in the sense they are useful: "Presumably, people's perceptual and conceptual processes have evolved that information that matters to human needs and goals can be roughly approximated by a similarity heuristic... If you are in the jungle and you see a tiger but you decide not to stereotype (perhaps because you believe that similarity is a false friend), then you will probably be eaten. In other words, in the biological world stereotyping based on veridical judgments of overall similarity statistically results in greater survival and reproductive success." Unless some properties are considered more salient, or 'weighted' more important than others, everything will appear equally similar, hence Watanabe (1986) wrote: "any objects, in so far as they are distinguishable, are equally similar". In a weaker setting that assumes infinitely many properties, Murphy and Medin (1985) give an example of two putative classified things, plums and lawnmowers: "Suppose that one is to list the attributes that plums and lawnmowers have in common in order to judge their similarity. It is easy to see that the list could be infinite: Both weigh less than 10,000 kg (and less than 10,001 kg), both did not exist 10,000,000 years ago (and 10,000,001 years ago), both cannot hear well, both can be dropped, both take up space, and so on. Likewise, the list of differences could be infinite… any two entities can be arbitrarily similar or dissimilar by changing the criterion of what counts as a relevant attribute." According to Woodward, the ugly duckling theorem is related to Schaffer's Conservation Law for Generalization Performance, which states that all algorithms for learning of boolean functions from input/output examples have the same overall generalization performance as random guessing. The latter result is generalized by Woodward to functions on countably infinite domains.