In automata theory, a branch of theoretical computer science, an ω-automaton (or stream automaton) is a variation of a finite automaton that runs on infinite, rather than finite, strings as input. Since ω-automata do not stop, they have a variety of acceptance conditions rather than simply a set of accepting states. ω-automata are useful for specifying behavior of systems that are not expected to terminate, such as hardware, operating systems and control systems. For such systems, one may want to specify a property such as "for every request, an acknowledge eventually follows", or its negation "there is a request that is not followed by an acknowledge". The former is a property of infinite words: one cannot say of a finite sequence that it satisfies this property. Classes of ω-automata include the Büchi automata, Rabin automata, Streett automata, parity automata and Muller automata, each deterministic or non-deterministic. These classes of ω-automata differ only in terms of acceptance condition. They all recognize precisely the regular ω-languages except for the deterministic Büchi automata, which is strictly weaker than all the others. Although all these types of automata recognize the same set of ω-languages, they nonetheless differ in succinctness of representation for a given ω-language. == Deterministic ω-automata == Formally, a deterministic ω-automaton is a tuple A = ( Q , Σ , δ , q 0 , A a c c ) {\textstyle A=(Q,\Sigma ,\delta ,q_{0},A_{acc})} , that consists of the following components: Q {\textstyle Q} , is a finite set. The elements of Q {\textstyle Q} are called the states of A {\textstyle A} . Σ {\textstyle \Sigma } , is a finite set called the alphabet of A {\textstyle A} . δ : Q × Σ → Q {\textstyle \delta \colon Q\times \Sigma \rightarrow Q} is a function, called the transition function of A {\textstyle A} . Q 0 {\textstyle Q_{0}} is an element of Q {\textstyle Q} , called the initial state. A a c c {\textstyle A_{acc}} is a set of accepting states of A {\textstyle A} , formally a subset of Q ω {\textstyle Q^{\omega }} . An input for A {\textstyle A} is an infinite string over the alphabet Σ {\textstyle \Sigma } , i.e. it is an infinite sequence α = ( a 1 , a 2 , a 3 , … ) {\textstyle \alpha =(a_{1},a_{2},a_{3},\ldots )} . The run of A {\textstyle A} on such an input is an infinite sequence ρ = ( r 0 , r 1 , r 2 , … ) {\textstyle \rho =(r_{0},r_{1},r_{2},\ldots )} of states, defined as follows: r 0 = q 0 {\textstyle r_{0}=q_{0}} . r 1 = δ ( r 0 , a 1 ) {\textstyle r_{1}=\delta (r_{0},a_{1})} . r 2 = δ ( r 1 , a 2 ) {\textstyle r_{2}=\delta (r_{1},a_{2})} . ... that is, for every i {\textstyle i} : r i = δ ( r i − 1 , a i ) {\textstyle r_{i}=\delta (r_{i-1},a_{i})} . The main purpose of an ω-automaton is to define a subset of the set of all inputs: The set of accepted inputs. Whereas in the case of an ordinary finite automaton every run ends with a state r n {\textstyle r_{n}} and the input is accepted if and only if r n {\textstyle r_{n}} is an accepting state, the definition of the set of accepted inputs is more complicated for ω-automata. Here we must look at the entire run ρ {\textstyle \rho } . The input is accepted if the corresponding run is in Acc {\textstyle {\text{Acc}}} . The set of accepted input ω-words is called the recognized ω-language by the automaton, which is denoted as L ( A ) {\textstyle L(A)} . The definition of Acc {\textstyle {\text{Acc}}} as a subset of Q ω {\textstyle Q^{\omega }} is purely formal and not suitable for practice because normally such sets are infinite. The difference between various types of ω-automata (Büchi, Rabin etc.) consists in how they encode certain subsets Acc {\textstyle {\text{Acc}}} of Q ω {\textstyle Q^{\omega }} as finite sets, and therefore in which such subsets they can encode. == Nondeterministic ω-automata == Formally, a nondeterministic ω-automaton is a tuple A = ( Q , Σ , Δ , Q 0 , Acc ) {\textstyle A=(Q,\Sigma ,\Delta ,Q_{0},{\text{Acc}})} that consists of the following components: Q {\textstyle Q} is a finite set. The elements of Q {\textstyle Q} are called the states of A {\textstyle A} . Σ {\textstyle \Sigma } is a finite set called the alphabet of A {\textstyle A} . Δ {\textstyle \Delta } is a subset of Q × Σ × Q {\textstyle Q\times \Sigma \times Q} and is called the transition relation of A {\textstyle A} . Q 0 {\textstyle Q_{0}} is a subset of Q {\textstyle Q} , called the initial set of states. Acc {\textstyle {\text{Acc}}} is the acceptance condition, a subset of Q ω {\textstyle Q^{\omega }} . Unlike a deterministic ω-automaton, which has a transition function δ {\textstyle \delta } , the non-deterministic version has a transition relation Δ {\textstyle \Delta } . Note that Δ {\textstyle \Delta } can be regarded as a function Q × Σ → P ( Q ) {\textstyle Q\times \Sigma \rightarrow {\mathcal {P}}(Q)} from Q × Σ {\textstyle Q\times \Sigma } to the power set P ( Q ) {\textstyle {\mathcal {P}}(Q)} . Thus, given a state q n {\textstyle q_{n}} and a symbol a n {\textstyle a_{n}} , the next state q n + 1 {\textstyle q_{n+1}} is not necessarily determined uniquely, rather there is a set of possible next states. A run of A {\textstyle A} on the input α = ( a 1 , a 2 , a 3 , … ) {\textstyle \alpha =(a_{1},a_{2},a_{3},\ldots )} is any infinite sequence ρ = ( r 0 , r 1 , r 2 , … ) {\textstyle \rho =(r_{0},r_{1},r_{2},\ldots )} of states that satisfies the following conditions: r 0 {\textstyle r_{0}} is an element of Q 0 {\textstyle Q_{0}} . r 1 {\textstyle r_{1}} is an element of Δ ( r 0 , a 1 ) {\textstyle \Delta (r_{0},a_{1})} . r 2 {\textstyle r_{2}} is an element of Δ ( r 1 , a 2 ) {\textstyle \Delta (r_{1},a_{2})} . ... that is, for every i {\textstyle i} : r i {\textstyle r_{i}} is an element of Δ ( r i − 1 , a i ) {\textstyle \Delta (r_{i-1},a_{i})} . A nondeterministic ω-automaton may admit many different runs on any given input, or none at all. The input is accepted if at least one of the possible runs is accepting. Whether a run is accepting depends only on Acc {\textstyle {\text{Acc}}} , as for deterministic ω-automata. Every deterministic ω-automaton can be regarded as a nondeterministic ω-automaton by taking Δ {\textstyle \Delta } to be the graph of δ {\textstyle \delta } . The definitions of runs and acceptance for deterministic ω-automata are then special cases of the nondeterministic cases. == Acceptance conditions == Acceptance conditions may be infinite sets of ω-words. However, people mostly study acceptance conditions that are finitely representable. The following lists a variety of popular acceptance conditions. Before discussing the list, let's make the following observation. In the case of infinitely running systems, one is often interested in whether certain behavior is repeated infinitely often. For example, if a network card receives infinitely many ping requests, then it may fail to respond to some of the requests but should respond to an infinite subset of received ping requests. This motivates the following definition: For any run ρ {\textstyle \rho } , let Inf ( ρ ) {\textstyle {\text{Inf}}(\rho )} be the set of states that occur infinitely often in ρ {\textstyle \rho } . This notion of certain states being visited infinitely often will be helpful in defining the following acceptance conditions. A Büchi automaton is an ω-automaton A {\textstyle A} that uses the following acceptance condition, for some subset F {\textstyle F} of Q {\textstyle Q} : Büchi condition A {\textstyle A} accepts exactly those runs ρ {\textstyle \rho } for which Inf ( ρ ) ∩ F ≠ ∅ {\textstyle {\text{Inf}}(\rho )\cap F\neq \emptyset } , i.e. there is an accepting state that occurs infinitely often in ρ {\textstyle \rho } . A Rabin automaton is an ω-automaton A {\textstyle A} that uses the following acceptance condition, for some set Ω {\textstyle \Omega } of pairs ( B i , G i ) {\textstyle (B_{i},G_{i})} of sets of states: Rabin condition A {\textstyle A} accepts exactly those runs ρ {\textstyle \rho } for which there exists a pair ( B i , G i ) {\textstyle (B_{i},G_{i})} in Ω {\textstyle \Omega } such that B i ∩ Inf ( ρ ) = ∅ {\textstyle B_{i}\cap {\text{Inf}}(\rho )=\emptyset } and G i ∩ Inf ( ρ ) ≠ ∅ {\textstyle G_{i}\cap {\text{Inf}}(\rho )\neq \emptyset } . A Streett automaton is an ω-automaton A {\textstyle A} that uses the following acceptance condition, for some set Ω {\textstyle \Omega } of pairs ( B i , G i ) {\textstyle (B_{i},G_{i})} of sets of states: Streett condition A {\textstyle A} accepts exactly those runs ρ {\textstyle \rho } such that for all pairs ( B i , G i ) {\textstyle (B_{i},G_{i})} in Ω {\textstyle \Omega } , B i ∩ Inf ( ρ ) ≠ ∅ {\textstyle B_{i}\cap {\text{Inf}}(\rho )\neq \emptyset } or G i ∩ Inf ( ρ ) = ∅ {\textstyle G_{i}\cap {\text{Inf}}(\rho )=\emptyset } . A parity automaton is an automaton A {\textstyle A} whose set of states is Q = { 0 , 1 , 2 , … , k } {\textstyle Q=\{0,1,2,\ldots ,k\}} for some natural number k {\textst
Macromedia FreeHand
Macromedia FreeHand (formerly Aldus FreeHand) is a discontinued computer application for creating two-dimensional vector graphics oriented primarily to professional illustration, desktop publishing and content creation for the Web. FreeHand was similar in scope, intended market, and functionality to Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW and Xara Designer Pro. Because of FreeHand's dedicated page layout and text control features, it also compares to Adobe InDesign and QuarkXPress. Professions using FreeHand include graphic design, illustration, cartography, fashion and textile design, product design, architects, scientific research, and multimedia production. FreeHand was created by Altsys Corporation in 1988 and licensed to Aldus Corporation, which released versions 1 through 4. In 1994, Aldus merged with Adobe Systems and because of the overlapping market with Adobe Illustrator, FreeHand was returned to Altsys by order of the Federal Trade Commission. Altsys was later bought by Macromedia, which released FreeHand versions 5 through 11 (FreeHand MX). In 2005, Adobe Systems acquired Macromedia and its product line which included FreeHand MX, under whose ownership it presently resides. Since 2003, FreeHand development has been discontinued; in the Adobe Systems catalog, FreeHand has been replaced by Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand MX continues to run under Windows 11 and under Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) within Rosetta, a PowerPC code emulator, and requires a registration patch supplied by Adobe. FreeHand 10 runs without problems on Mac OS X Snow Leopard with Rosetta enabled, and does not require a registration patch. Later versions of macOS can use a Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server virtual machine to emulate the required PowerPC support. == History == === Altsys and Aldus FreeHand === In 1984, James R. Von Ehr founded Altsys Corporation to develop graphics applications for personal computers. Based in Plano, Texas, the company initially produced font editing and conversion software; Fontastic Plus, Metamorphosis, and the Art Importer. Their premier PostScript font-design package, Fontographer, was released in 1986 and was the first such program on the market. With the PostScript background having been established by Fontographer, Altsys also developed FreeHand (originally called Masterpiece) as a Macintosh Postscript-based illustration program that used Bézier curves for drawing and was similar to Adobe Illustrator. FreeHand was announced as "... a Macintosh graphics program described as having all the features of Adobe's Illustrator plus drawing tools such as those in Mac Paint and Mac Draft and special effects similar to those in Cricket Draw." Seattle's Aldus Corporation acquired a licensing agreement with Altsys Corporation to release FreeHand along with their flagship product, Pagemaker, and Aldus FreeHand 1.0 was released in 1988. FreeHand's product name used intercaps; the F and H were capitalized. The partnership between the two companies continued with Altsys developing FreeHand and with Aldus controlling marketing and sales. After 1988, a competitive exchange between Aldus FreeHand and Adobe Illustrator ensued on the Macintosh platform with each software advancing new tools, achieving better speed, and matching significant features. Windows PC development also allowed Illustrator 2 (aka, Illustrator 88 on the Mac) and FreeHand 3 to release Windows versions to the graphics market. FreeHand 1.0 sold for $495 in 1988. It included the standard drawing tools and features as other draw programs including special effects in fills and screens, text manipulation tools, and full support for CMYK color printing. It was also possible to create and insert PostScript routines anywhere within the program. FreeHand performed in preview mode instead of keyline mode but performance was slower. FreeHand 2.0 sold for $495 in 1989. Besides improving on the features of FreeHand 1.0, FreeHand 2 added faster operation, Pantone colors, stroked text, flexible fill patterns and automatically import graphic assets from other programs. It added accurate control over a color monitor screen display, limited only by its resolution. FreeHand 3.0 sold for $595 in 1991. New features included resizable color, style, and layer panels including an Attributes menu. Also tighter precision of both the existing tools and aligning of objects. FH3 created compound Paths. Text could be converted to paths, applied to an ellipse, or made vertical. Carried over from version 1.0, FreeHand 3 suffered by having text entered into a dialog box instead of directly to the page. In October 1991, a 3.1 upgrade made FreeHand work with System 7 but additionally, it supported pressure-sensitive drawing which offered varying line widths with a users stroke. It improved element manipulation and added more import/export options. FreeHand 4.0 sold for $595 in 1994. Altsys ported FreeHand 3.0 to the NeXT system creating a new program named Virtuoso. Virtuoso continued its development at Altsys and version 2.0 of Virtuoso was feature-equivalent to FreeHand 4 (with the addition of NeXT-specific features such as Services and Display PostScript) and file compatible, with Virtuoso 2 able to open FreeHand 4 files and vice versa. A prominent feature of this version was the ability to type directly into the page and wrap inside or outside any shape. It also included drag-and-drop color imaging, a larger pasteboard, and a user interface that featured floating, rollup panels. The colors palette included a color mixer for adding new colors to the swatch list. Speed increases were made. In the same year of FreeHand 4 release, Adobe Systems announced merger plans with Aldus Corporation for $525 million. Fear about the end of competition between these two leading applications was reported in the media and expressed by customers (Illustrator versus FreeHand and Adobe Photoshop versus Aldus PhotoStyler.) Because of this overlapping of the market, Altsys stepped in by suing Aldus, saying that the merger deal was "a prima facie violation of a non-compete clause within the FreeHand licensing agreement." Altsys CEO Jim Von Ehr explained, "No one loves FreeHand more than we do. We will do whatever it takes to see it survive." The Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against Adobe Systems on October 18, 1994, ordering a divestiture of FreeHand to "remedy the lessening of competition resulting from the acquisition as alleged in the Commission's complaint," and further, the FTC ordering, "That for a period of ten (10) years from the date on which this order becomes final, respondents shall not, without the prior approval of the Commission, directly or indirectly, through subsidiaries, partnerships, or otherwise .. Acquire any Professional Illustration Software or acquire or enter into any exclusive license to Professional Illustration Software;" (referring to FreeHand.) FreeHand was returned to Altsys with all licensing and marketing rights as well as Aldus FreeHand's customer list. === Macromedia Freehand === By late 1994, Altsys still retained all rights to FreeHand. Despite brief plans to keep it in-house to sell it along with Fontographer and Virtuoso, Altsys reached an agreement with the multimedia software company, Macromedia, to be acquired. This mutual agreement provided FreeHand and Fontographer a new home with ample resources for marketing, sales, and competition against the newly merged Adobe-Aldus company. Altsys would remain in Richardson, Texas, but would be renamed as the Digital Arts Group of Macromedia and was responsible for the continued development of FreeHand. Macromedia received FreeHand's 200,000 customers and expanded its traditional product line of multimedia graphics software to illustration and design graphics software. CEO James Von Ehr became a Macromedia vice-president until 1997 when he left to start another venture. FreeHand 5.0 sold for $595 in 1995. This version featured a more customizable and expanded workspace, multiple views, stronger design and editing tools, a report generator, spell check, paragraph styles, multicolor gradient fills up to 64 colors, speed improvements, and it accepted Illustrator plugins. In September 1995, a 5.5 upgrade added Photoshop plug-in support, PDF import capabilities, the Extract feature, inline graphics to text, improved auto-expanding text containers, the Crop feature, and the Create PICT Image feature. A FreeHand 5.5 upgrade was part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (a suite that included Fontographer, Macromedia xRes image editing application, and Extreme 3D animation and modeling application). FreeHand 6.0 in 1996. This version only existed in beta. Some Freehand 7 prerelease versions were released under the Freehand 6 tag. FreeHand 7.0 sold for $399 in 1996, or $449 as part of the FreeHand Graphics Studio (see above.) Features included a redesigned user interface that allowed recombining Inspectors, Panel Tabs, Dockable Panels, Smart Cursors,
Modulation error ratio
The modulation error ratio (MER) is a measure used to quantify the performance of a digital radio (or digital TV) transmitter or receiver in a communications system using digital modulation (such as QAM). A signal sent by an ideal transmitter or received by a receiver would have all constellation points precisely at the ideal locations, however various imperfections in the implementation (such as noise, low image rejection ratio, phase noise, carrier suppression, distortion, etc.) or signal path cause the actual constellation points to deviate from the ideal locations. Transmitter MER can be measured by specialized equipment, which demodulates the received signal in a similar way to how a real radio demodulator does it. Demodulated and detected signal can be used as a reasonably reliable estimate for the ideal transmitted signal in MER calculation. == Definition == An error vector is a vector in the I-Q plane between the ideal constellation point and the point received by the receiver. The Euclidean distance between the two points is its magnitude. The modulation error ratio is equal to the ratio of the root mean square (RMS) power (in Watts) of the reference vector to the power (in Watts) of the error. It is defined in dB as: M E R ( d B ) = 10 log 10 ( P s i g n a l P e r r o r ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {MER(dB)} =10\log _{10}\left({P_{\mathrm {signal} } \over P_{\mathrm {error} }}\right)} where Perror is the RMS power of the error vector, and Psignal is the RMS power of ideal transmitted signal. MER is defined as a percentage in a compatible (but reciprocal) way: M E R ( % ) = P e r r o r P s i g n a l × 100 % {\displaystyle \mathrm {MER(\%)} ={\sqrt {P_{\mathrm {error} } \over P_{\mathrm {signal} }}}\times 100\%} with the same definitions. MER is closely related to error vector magnitude (EVM), but MER is calculated from the average power of the signal. MER is also closely related to signal-to-noise ratio. MER includes all imperfections including deterministic amplitude imbalance, quadrature error and distortion, while noise is random by nature.
Web testing
Web testing is software testing that focuses on web applications. Complete testing of a web-based system before going live can help address issues before the system is revealed to the public. Issues may include the security of the web application, the basic functionality of the site, its accessibility to disabled and fully able users, its ability to adapt to the multitude of desktops, devices, and operating systems, as well as readiness for expected traffic and number of users and the ability to survive a massive spike in user traffic, both of which are related to load testing. == Web application performance tool == A web application performance tool (WAPT) is used to test web applications and web related interfaces. These tools are used for performance, load and stress testing of web applications, web sites, web API, web servers and other web interfaces. WAPT tends to simulate virtual users which will repeat either recorded URLs or specified URL and allows the users to specify number of times or iterations that the virtual users will have to repeat the recorded URLs. By doing so, the tool is useful to check for bottleneck and performance leakage in the website or web application being tested. A WAPT faces various challenges during testing and should be able to conduct tests for: Browser compatibility Operating System compatibility Windows application compatibility where required WAPT allows a user to specify how virtual users are involved in the testing environment.ie either increasing users or constant users or periodic users load. Increasing user load, step by step is called RAMP where virtual users are increased from 0 to hundreds. Constant user load maintains specified user load at all time. Periodic user load tends to increase and decrease the user load from time to time. == Web security testing == Web security testing tells us whether Web-based applications requirements are met when they are subjected to malicious input data. There is a web application security testing plug-in collection for Fire Fox == Web API testing == An application programming interface API exposes services to other software components, which can query the API. The API implementation is in charge of computing the service and returning the result to the component that send the query. A part of web testing focuses on testing these web API implementations. GraphQL is a specific query and API language. It is the focus of tailored testing techniques. Search-based test generation yields good results to generate test cases for GraphQL APIs.
Web performance
Web performance refers to the speed in which web pages are downloaded and displayed on the user's web browser. Web performance optimization (WPO), or website optimization is the field of knowledge about increasing web performance. Faster website download speeds have been shown to increase visitor retention and loyalty and user satisfaction, especially for users with slow internet connections and those on mobile devices. Web performance also leads to less data travelling across the web, which in turn lowers a website's power consumption and environmental impact. Some aspects which can affect the speed of page load include browser/server cache, image optimization, and encryption (for example SSL), which can affect the time it takes for pages to render. The performance of the web page can be improved through techniques such as multi-layered cache, light weight design of presentation layer components and asynchronous communication with server side components. == History == In the first decade or so of the web's existence, web performance improvement was focused mainly on optimizing website code and pushing hardware limitations. According to the 2002 book Web Performance Tuning by Patrick Killelea, some of the early techniques used were to use simple servlets or CGI, increase server memory, and look for packet loss and retransmission. Although these principles now comprise much of the optimized foundation of internet applications, they differ from current optimization theory in that there was much less of an attempt to improve the browser display speed. Steve Souders coined the term "web performance optimization" in 2004. At that time Souders made several predictions regarding the impact that WPO as an "emerging industry" would bring to the web, such as websites being fast by default, consolidation, web standards for performance, environmental impacts of optimization, and speed as a differentiator. One major point that Souders made in 2007 is that at least 80% of the time that it takes to download and view a website is controlled by the front-end structure. This lag time can be decreased through awareness of typical browser behavior, as well as of how HTTP works. == Optimization techniques == Web performance optimization improves user experience (UX) when visiting a website and therefore is highly desired by web designers and web developers. They employ several techniques that streamline web optimization tasks to decrease web page load times. This process is known as front end optimization (FEO) or content optimization. FEO concentrates on reducing file sizes and "minimizing the number of requests needed for a given page to load." In addition to the techniques listed below, the use of a content delivery network—a group of proxy servers spread across various locations around the globe—is an efficient delivery system that chooses a server for a specific user based on network proximity. Typically the server with the quickest response time is selected. The following techniques are commonly used web optimization tasks and are widely used by web developers: Web browsers open separate Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) connections for each Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) request submitted when downloading a web page. These requests total the number of page elements required for download. However, a browser is limited to opening only a certain number of simultaneous connections to a single host. To prevent bottlenecks, the number of individual page elements are reduced using resource consolidation whereby smaller files (such as images) are bundled together into one file. This reduces HTTP requests and the number of "round trips" required to load a web page. Web pages are constructed from code files such JavaScript and Hypertext Markup Language (HTML). As web pages grow in complexity, so do their code files and subsequently their load times. File compression can reduce code files by about 40 percent, thereby improving site responsiveness. Web Caching Optimization reduces server load, bandwidth usage and latency. CDNs use dedicated web caching software to store copies of documents passing through their system. Many website platforms, such as SiteGround, IONOS, Wix, and Hostinger, rely on global CDNs and caching technologies to deliver faster page loads across different geographical regions. Subsequent requests from the cache may be fulfilled should certain conditions apply. Web caches are located on either the client side (forward position) or web-server side (reverse position) of a CDN. Web browsers are also able to store content for re-use through the HTTP cache or web cache. Requests web browsers make are typically routed to the HTTP cache to validate if a cached response may be used to fulfill a request. If such a match is made, the response is fulfilled from the cache. This can be helpful for reducing network latency and costs associated with data-transfer. The HTTP cache is configured using request and response headers. Code minification distinguishes discrepancies between codes written by web developers and how network elements interpret code. Minification removes comments and extra spaces as well as crunch variable names in order to minimize code, decreasing files sizes by as much as 60%. In addition to caching and compression, lossy compression techniques (similar to those used with audio files) remove non-essential header information and lower original image quality on many high resolution images. These changes, such as pixel complexity or color gradations, are transparent to the end-user and do not noticeably affect perception of the image. Another technique is the replacement of raster graphics with resolution-independent vector graphics. Vector substitution is best suited for simple geometric images. Lazy loading of images and video reduces initial page load time, initial page weight, and system resource usage, all of which have positive impacts on website performance. It is used to defer initialization of an object right until the point at which it is needed. The browser loads the images in a page or post when they are needed such as when the user scrolls down the page and not all images at once, which is the default behavior, and naturally, takes more time. == HTTP/1.x and HTTP/2 == Since web browsers use multiple TCP connections for parallel user requests, congestion and browser monopolization of network resources may occur. Because HTTP/1 requests come with associated overhead, web performance is impacted by limited bandwidth and increased usage. Compared to HTTP/1, HTTP/2 is binary instead of textual is fully multiplexed instead of ordered and blocked can therefore use one connection for parallelism uses header compression to reduce overhead allows servers to "push" responses proactively into client caches Instead of a website's hosting server, CDNs are used in tandem with HTTP/2 in order to better serve the end-user with web resources such as images, JavaScript files and Cascading Style Sheet (CSS) files since a CDN's location is usually in closer proximity to the end-user. == Metrics == In recent years, several metrics have been introduced that help developers measure various aspects of the performance of their websites. In 2019, Google introduced metrics such as Time to First Byte (TTFB), First Contentful Paint (FCP), First Paint (FP), First Input Delay (FID), Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) and Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) allow for website owner to gain insights into issues that might hurt the performance of their websites making it seem sluggish or slow to the user. Other metrics including Request Count (number of requests required to load a page), DOMContentLoaded (time when HTML document is completely loaded and parsed excluding CSS style sheets, images, etc.), Above The Fold Time (content that is visible without scrolling), Round Trip Time, number of Render Blocking Resources (such as scripts, stylesheets), Onload Time, Connection Time, Total Page Size help provide an accurate picture of latencies and slowdowns occurring at the networking level which might slow down a site. Modules to measure metrics such as TTFB, FCP, LCP, FP etc are provided with major frontend JavaScript libraries such as React, NuxtJS and Vue. Google publishes a library, the core-web-vitals library that allows for easy measurement of these metrics in frontend applications. In addition to this, Google also provides the Lighthouse, a Chrome dev-tools component and PageSpeed Insight a site that allows developers to measure and compare the performance of their website with Google's recommended minimums and maximums. In addition to this, tools such as the Network Monitor by Mozilla Firefox help provide insight into network-level slowdowns that might occur during transmission of data.
TipTop Technologies
TipTop Technologies is a real-time web and social search engine with a platform for semantic analysis of natural language. Tip-Top Search provides results capturing individual and group sentiment, opinions, and experiences there from the content of various sorts such as real-time messages from Twitter or consumer product reviews on Amazon.com. TipTop Technologies and ITC Infotech collaborated to create a search interface suitable for both enterprise and consumer applications. Tip-Top's products are part of the "emerging Web 3.0 applications which use semantic technologies to augment the underlying Web system's functionalities." Their main product is 360, an AI tool that incorporates multiple AI applications under one wing. Jonathan AlBright professor at Elon University, found videos generated by TipTop Technologies software on YouTube in his research into artificial intelligence, described it as AI-generated "fake news". Through semantic analysis of large data sets, TipTop gleaned behavioral insights from Tweets around events like Halloween, Thanksgiving, Holiday Gifting, the Super Bowl, and the Oscar Nominees for the Academy Awards coverage. Sentiment analysis, concept trend tracking, and real-time market research are other applications included in the TipTop Search product. TipTop's insight engine solves the problem of real-time data noise, and its ability to "sort the 'good tweets' from the 'bad tweets' when it comes to a product, service, or a region..." In addition, products like TipTop Shopping with customizable search widgets bring together consumer reviews, social search, and sentiment analysis enabling product comparisons across attributes like the overall value and aiding purchasing decisions through user-driven product tips and pits. TipTop Finance adds another complexity to real-time search results by incorporating corporate sentiment, company stock tickers, and social media into TipTop's existing social search platform. Additional success applying semantic technologies has been with polling, "if you compare these Gallup results with TipTop, a sentiment engine based on Twitter, the results are not way off. It does surprise you but it tells me that sentiment analysis in case of public opinion about a burning social issue or a famous personality is relatively easier." With the increasing amount of unstructured, opinion-oriented, and user-generated content available on the Web, TipTop's technology aims to make sense of all this data, and deliver it in a useful way for consumer and enterprise users alike. TipTop Technologies is a privately held company with its headquarters in the San Francisco Bay Area, and team members are located globally.
Hardware security
Hardware security is a discipline originated from the cryptographic engineering and involves hardware design, access control, secure multi-party computation, secure key storage, ensuring code authenticity, measures to ensure that the supply chain that built the product is secure among other things. A hardware security module (HSM) is a physical computing device that safeguards and manages digital keys for strong authentication and provides cryptoprocessing. These modules traditionally come in the form of a plug-in card or an external device that attaches directly to a computer or network server. Some providers in this discipline consider that the key difference between hardware security and software security is that hardware security is implemented using "non-Turing-machine" logic (raw combinatorial logic or simple state machines). One approach, referred to as "hardsec", uses FPGAs to implement non-Turing-machine security controls as a way of combining the security of hardware with the flexibility of software. Hardware backdoors are backdoors in hardware. Conceptionally related, a hardware Trojan (HT) is a malicious modification of electronic system, particularly in the context of integrated circuit. A physical unclonable function (PUF) is a physical entity that is embodied in a physical structure and is easy to evaluate but hard to predict. Further, an individual PUF device must be easy to make but practically impossible to duplicate, even given the exact manufacturing process that produced it. In this respect it is the hardware analog of a one-way function. The name "physical unclonable function" might be a little misleading as some PUFs are clonable, and most PUFs are noisy and therefore do not achieve the requirements for a function. Today, PUFs are usually implemented in integrated circuits and are typically used in applications with high security requirements. Many attacks on sensitive data and resources reported by organizations occur from within the organization itself.