The computer game bot Turing test is a variant of the Turing test, where a human judge viewing and interacting with a virtual world must distinguish between other humans and video game bots, both interacting with the same virtual world. This variant was first proposed in 2008 by Associate Professor Philip Hingston of Edith Cowan University, and implemented through a tournament called the 2K BotPrize. == History == The computer game bot Turing test was proposed to advance the fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and computational intelligence with respect to video games. It was considered that a poorly implemented bot implied a subpar game, so a bot that would be capable of passing this test, and therefore might be indistinguishable from a human player, would directly improve the quality of a game. It also served to debunk a flawed notion that "game AI is a solved problem." Emphasis is placed on a game bot that interacts with other players in a multiplayer environment. Unlike a bot that simply needs to make optimal human-like decisions to play or beat a game, this bot must make the same decisions while also convincing another in-game player of its human-likeness. == Implementation == The computer game bot Turing test was designed to test a bot's ability to interact with a game environment in comparison with a human player; simply 'winning' was insufficient. This evolved into a contest with a few important goals in mind: There are three participants: a human player, a computer-game bot, and a judge. The bot needs to appear more human-like than the human player. Judge scores are not bipolar — both human and bot can be scored anywhere on a scale from 1 to 5 (1=not humanlike, 5=human). All three participants are to be indistinguishable in the arena, with the exception of a randomly generated name tag, so as to reduce the chance of random elements such as name or appearance influencing the judges. Chat is disabled throughout the match. Bots were not given omniscient powers as they may be in other games. Bots must react only to the data that might be reasonably available to a human player. Human participants were of a moderate skill range, with no participant either ignorant to the game or capable of playing at a professional level. In 2008, the first 2K BotPrize tournament took place. The contest was held with the game Unreal Tournament 2004 as the platform. Contestants created their bots in advance using the GameBots interface. GameBots had some modifications made so as to adhere to the above conditions, such as removing data about vantage points or weapon damage that unfairly informed the bots of relevant strengths/weaknesses that a human would otherwise need to learn. == Tournament == The first BotPrize Tournament was held on 17 December 2008, as part of the 2008 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Games in Australia. Each competing team was given time to set up and adjust their bots to the modified game client, although no coding changes were allowed at that point. The tournament was run in rounds, each a 10-minute death match. Judges were the last to join the server and every judge observed every player and every bot exactly once, although the pairing of players and bots did change. When the tournament ended, no bot was rated as more human than any player. In subsequent tournaments, run during 2009–2011, bots achieved scores that were increasingly human-like, but no contestant had won the BotPrize in any of these contests. In 2012, the 2K BotPrize was held once again, and two teams programmed bots that achieved scores greater than those of human players. == Successful bots == To date, there have been two successfully programmed bots that passed the computer game bot Turing test: UT^2, a team from the University of Texas at Austin, emphasized a bot that adjusted its behaviour based on previously observed human behaviour and neuroevolution. The team has made their bot available, although a copy of Unreal Tournament 2004 is required. Mihai Polceanu, a doctoral student from Romania, focused on creating a bot that would mimic opponent reactions, in a sense 'borrowing' the human-like nature of the opponent. These victors succeeded in the year 2012, Alan Turing's centenary year. == Aftermath == The outcome of a bot that appears more human-like than a human player is possibly overstated, since in the tournament in which the bots succeeded, the average 'humanness' rating of the human players was only 41.4%. This showcases some limits of this Turing test, since the results demonstrate that human behaviour is more complicated and quantitative than was accounted for. In light of this, the BotPrize competition organizers will increase the difficulty in upcoming years with new challenges, forcing competitors to improve their bots. It is also believed that methods and techniques developed for the computer game bot Turing test will be useful in fields other than video games, such as virtual training environments and in improving Human–robot interaction. == Contrasts to the Turing test == The computer game bot Turing test differs from the traditional or generic Turing test in a number of ways: Unlike the traditional Turing test, for example the Chatterbot-style contest held annually by the Loebner Prize competition, the humans who played against the Computer Game Bots are not trying to convince judges they are the human; rather, they want to win the game (i.e., by achieving the highest kill score). Judges are not restricted to awarding only one participant in a match as the 'human' and the other as the 'non-human.' This emphasizes more qualitative rather than polarized findings. With regards to a successful video game bot, this is not to be confused with a claim that the bot is 'intelligent,' whereas a machine that 'passed' the Turing test would arguably have some evidence for its Chatterbot's 'intelligence.' The game Unreal Tournament 2004 was chosen for its commercial availability and its interface for creating bots, GameBots. This limitation on medium is a sharp contrast to the Turing test, which emphasizes a conversation, where possible questions are vastly more numerous than the set of possible actions available in any specific video game. The available information to the participants, humans and bots, is not equal. Humans interact through vision and sound, whereas bots interact with data and events. The judges cannot introduce new events (e.g., a lava pit) to aid in differentiating between human and bot, whereas in a Chatterbot designed system, judges may theoretically ask any question in any manner. The two participants and the judge take part in a three-way interaction, unlike, for example, the paired two-way interaction of the Loebner Prize Contest.
MovieRide FX
MovieRide FX is a patented automated special visual effects video compositing engine used in the MovieRide FX mobile application for Android (requires Android 2.3 or later) and iOS (compatible with iPhone 4 and up, iPad, and iPod Touch (new generation), requires iOS 7 or later). MovieRide FX allows the user to personalize a "Hollywood-style" movie clip by inserting themself into the clip as the "actor". == Features == The MovieRide FX app uses the relevant mobile device's camera to record a video of the user and insert it into a pre-packaged "Hollywood style" movie clip. The "actor" is extracted from their recorded video clip through various known effects such as masking, keying, and motion tracking. The "actor" is then inserted into one of the pre-packaged movie clips created by the MovieRide FX visual effects artists. This is done through an automated process requiring little or no artistic or technical skill from the user. The custom movie clips pre-packaged with MovieRide FX offer the user a variety of movie scenarios. Additional clips based on popular television and movie themes are continually being developed and are available on a freemium basis. == Sharing == Once the user's footage has automatically been composited into a movie clip and rendered as an .mp4 file, it can be shared via social media, such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, and by e-mail. == History == === 2012 === MovieRide FX was created by Grant Waterston and Johann Mynhardt, who started development in 2012. === 2013 === The beta version was released on Google Play in July 2013. In August 2013 MovieRide FX was a New Media Award winner in the "New Media" category of the Accolade International Awards in Los Angeles. In October 2013 MovieRide FX was awarded exhibitor space in the ‘start-up village’ at the Apps-World Expo in London. === 2014 === MovieRide FX reached the 100 000 – 500 000 downloads category on the Google Play Store in June 2014. The official Android version was launched in July 2014. iOS version released in August 2014. MovieRide FX was selected as one of the "Top 150" startups at the Pioneer Festival in Vienna in September 2014. In November 2014 MovieRide FX was shortlisted for the Appster Awards in the "Best Entertainment App" and "Most Innovative App" categories and was awarded exhibitor space at the ‘start-up village’ at the Apps-World Expo in London. Patent applications were filed in South Africa, the EU and USA in April 2014. === 2015 === In September 2015 MovieRide FX was shortlisted for "Best Software innovation" at The Technology Expo Awards in London. === 2016 === In April 2016 MovieRide FX was nominated for a National Science and Technology Forum (NSTF) award for 'Research leading to Innovation by a corporate organization' In August 2016 Movie Ride FX won two Gold Awards at the 2016 Mobile Marketing Awards (MMA Smarties SA). These two Gold awards were for the 'Innovation' and 'Best in Show’ categories. In December 2016 FlicJam Inc. was formed in the US to access the larger global market. EU patent application was published in March 2016. === 2017 === South African patent was granted in February 2017. === 2018 === US patent was granted in March 2018.
ISO/IEC 11801
International standard ISO/IEC 11801 Information technology — Generic cabling for customer premises specifies general-purpose telecommunication cabling systems (structured cabling) that are suitable for a wide range of applications (analog and ISDN telephony, various data communication standards, building control systems, factory automation). It is published by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25/WG 3 of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). It covers both balanced copper cabling and optical fibre cabling. The standard was designed for use within commercial premises that may consist of either a single building or of multiple buildings on a campus. It was optimized for premises that span up to 3 km, up to 1 km2 office space, with between 50 and 50,000 persons, but can also be applied for installations outside this range. A major revision was released in November 2017, unifying requirements for commercial, home and industrial networks. == Classes and categories == The standard defines several link/channel classes and cabling categories of twisted-pair copper interconnects, which differ in the maximum frequency for which a certain channel performance is required: Class A: Up to 100 kHz using Category 1 cable and connectors Class B: Up to 1 MHz using Category 2 cable and connectors Class C: Up to 16 MHz using Category 3 cable and connectors Class D: Up to 100 MHz using Category 5e cable and connectors Class E: Up to 250 MHz using Category 6 cable and connectors Class EA: Up to 500 MHz using category 6A cable and connectors (Amendments 1 and 2 to ISO/IEC 11801, 2nd Ed.) Class F: Up to 600 MHz using Category 7 cable and connectors Class FA: Up to 1 GHz (1000 MHz) using Category 7A cable and connectors (Amendments 1 and 2 to ISO/IEC 11801, 2nd Ed.) Class BCT-B: Up to 1 GHz (1000 MHz) using with coaxial cabling for BCT applications. (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) Class I: Up to 2 GHz (2000 MHz) using Category 8.1 cable and connectors (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) Class II: Up to 2 GHz (2000 MHz) using Category 8.2 cable and connectors (ISO/IEC 11801-1, Edition 1.0 2017-11) The standard link impedance is 100 Ω. (The older 1995 version of the standard also permitted 120 Ω and 150 Ω in Classes A−C, but this was removed from the 2002 edition.) The standard defines several classes of optical fiber interconnect: OM1: Multimode, 62.5 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 200 MHz·km at 850 nm OM2: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 500 MHz·km at 850 nm OM3: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 2000 MHz·km at 850 nm OM4: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 4700 MHz·km at 850 nm OM5: Multimode, 50 μm core; minimum modal bandwidth of 4700 MHz·km at 850 nm and 2470 MHz·km at 953 nm OS1: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 1 dB/km at 1310 and 1550 nm OS1a: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 1 dB/km at 1310, 1383, and 1550 nm OS2: Single-mode, maximum attenuation 0.4 dB/km at 1310, 1383, and 1550 nm Grandfathered === OM5 === OM5 fiber is designed for wideband applications using SWDM multiplexing of 4–16 carriers (40G=4λ×10G, 100G=4λ×25G, 400G=4×4λ×25G) in the 850–953 nm range. === Category 7 === Class F channel and Category 7 cable are backward compatible with Class D/Category 5e and Class E/Category 6. Class F features even stricter specifications for crosstalk and system noise than Class E. To achieve this, shielding was added for individual wire pairs and the cable as a whole. Unshielded cables rely on the quality of the twists to protect from EMI. This involves a tight twist and carefully controlled design. Cables with individual shielding per pair such as Category 7 rely mostly on the shield and therefore have pairs with longer twists. The Category 7 cable standard was ratified in 2002, and primarily introduced to support 10 gigabit Ethernet over 100 m of copper cabling. Like the earlier standards, it contains four twisted copper wire pairs rated for transmission frequencies of up to 600 MHz. However, in 2006, Category 6A was ratified for Ethernet to allow 10 Gbit/s while still using the conventional 8P8C connector. Care is required to avoid signal degradation by mixing cable and connectors not designed for that use, however similar. Most manufacturers of active equipment and network cards have chosen to support the 8P8C for their 10 gigabit Ethernet products on copper and not GG45, ARJ45, or TERA connectors as Class F would have originally called for. Therefore, the Category 6 specification was revised to Category 6A to permit this use; products therefore require a Class EA channel (ie, Cat 6A). As of 2019, some equipment has been introduced which has connectors supporting the Class F (Category 7) channel. Note, however, that Category 7 is not recognized by the TIA/EIA. === Category 7A === Class FA (Class F Augmented) channels and Category 7A cables, introduced by ISO 11801 Edition 2 Amendment 2 (2010), are defined at frequencies up to 1000 MHz. The intent of the Class FA was to possibly support the future 40 gigabit Ethernet: 40GBASE-T. Simulation results have shown that 40 gigabit Ethernet may be possible at 50 meters and 100 gigabit Ethernet at 15 meters. In 2007, researchers at Pennsylvania State University predicted that either 32 nm or 22 nm circuits would allow for 100 gigabit Ethernet at 100 meters. However, in 2016, the IEEE 802.3bq working group ratified the amendment 3 which defines 25GBASE-T and 40GBASE-T on Category 8 cabling specified to 2000 MHz. The Class FA therefore does not support 40G Ethernet. As of 2025, there is no equipment that has connectors supporting the Class FA (Category 7A) channel. Category 7A is not recognized in TIA/EIA. === Category 8 === Category 8 was ratified by the TR43 working group under ANSI/TIA 568-C.2-1. It is defined up to 2000 MHz and only for distances up to 30 m or 36 m, depending on the patch cords used. ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25/WG 3 developed the equivalent standard ISO/IEC 11801-1:2017/COR 1:2018, with two options: Class I channel (Category 8.1 cable): minimum cable design U/FTP or F/UTP, fully backward compatible and interoperable with Class EA (Category 6A) using 8P8C connectors; Class II channel (Category 8.2 cable): F/FTP or S/FTP minimum, interoperable with Class FA (Category 7A) using TERA or GG45. == Abbreviations for twisted pairs == Annex E, Acronyms for balanced cables, provides a system to specify the exact construction for both unshielded and shielded balanced twisted pair cables. It uses three letters—U for unshielded, S for braided shielding, and F for foil shielding—to form a two-part abbreviation in the form of xx/xTP, where the first part specifies the type of overall cable shielding, and the second part specifies shielding for individual cable elements. Common cable types include U/UTP (unshielded cable); U/FTP (individual pair shielding without the overall screen); F/UTP, S/UTP, or SF/UTP (overall screen without individual shielding); and F/FTP, S/FTP, or SF/FTP (overall screen with individual foil shielding). == 2017 edition == In November 2017, a new edition was released by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 25 "Interconnection of information technology equipment" subcommittee. It is a major revision of the standard which has unified several prior standards for commercial, home, and industrial networks, as well as data centers, and defines requirements for generic cabling and distributed building networks. The new series of standards replaces the former 11801 standard and includes six parts: == Versions == ISO/IEC 11801:1995 (Ed. 1) ISO/IEC 11801:2000 (Ed. 1.1) – Edition 1, Amendment 1 ISO/IEC 11801:2002 (Ed. 2) ISO/IEC 11801:2008 (Ed. 2.1) – Edition 2, Amendment 1 ISO/IEC 11801:2010 (Ed. 2.2) – Edition 2, Amendment 2 ISO/IEC 11801-1:2017, -1:2017/Cor 1:2018, -2:2017, -3:2017, -3:2017/Amd 1:2021, -3:2017/Cor 1:2018, -4:2017, -4:2017/Cor 1:2018, -5:2017, -5:2017/Cor 1:2018, -6:2017, -6:2017/Cor 1:2018 (As of September 2023, this set is current.)
Zero-overhead looping
In computer architecture, zero-overhead looping is a hardware feature found in some processors that enables loops to execute without the performance cost of traditional loop control instructions. Instead of software managing loop iterations, the processor's hardware handles repetition automatically, saving clock cycles and improving efficiency. This technique is commonly employed in digital signal processors (DSPs) and certain complex instruction set computer (CISC) architectures. == Background == In many instruction sets, a loop must be implemented by using instructions to increment or decrement a counter, check whether the end of the loop has been reached, and if not jump to the beginning of the loop so it can be repeated. Although this typically only represents around 3–16 bytes of space for each loop, even that small amount could be significant depending on the size of the CPU caches. More significant is that those instructions each take time to execute, time which is not spent doing useful work. The overhead of such a loop is apparent compared to a completely unrolled loop, in which the body of the loop is duplicated exactly as many times as it will execute. In that case, no space or execution time is wasted on instructions to repeat the body of the loop. However, the duplication caused by loop unrolling can significantly increase code size, and the larger size can even impact execution time due to cache misses. (For this reason, it's common to only partially unroll loops, such as transforming it into a loop which performs the work of four iterations in one step before repeating. This balances the advantages of unrolling with the overhead of repeating the loop.) Moreover, completely unrolling a loop is only possible for a limited number of loops: those whose number of iterations is known at compile time. For example, the following C code could be compiled and optimized into the following x86 assembly code: == Implementation == Processors with zero-overhead looping have machine instructions and registers to automatically repeat one or more instructions. Depending on the instructions available, these may only be suitable for count-controlled loops ("for loops") in which the number of iterations can be calculated in advance, or only for condition-controlled loops ("while loops") such as operations on null-terminated strings. === Examples === ==== PIC ==== In the PIC instruction set, the REPEAT and DO instructions implement zero-overhead loops. REPEAT only repeats a single instruction, while DO repeats a specified number of following instructions. ==== Blackfin ==== Blackfin offers two zero-overhead loops. The loops can be nested; if both hardware loops are configured with the same "loop end" address, loop 1 will behave as the inner loop and repeat, and loop 0 will behave as the outer loop and repeat only if loop 1 would not repeat. Loops are controlled using the LTx and LBx registers (x either 0 to 1) to set the top and bottom of the loop — that is, the first and last instructions to be executed, which can be the same for a loop with only one instruction — and LCx for the loop count. The loop repeats if LCx is nonzero at the end of the loop, in which case LCx is decremented. The loop registers can be set manually, but this would typically consume 6 bytes to load the registers, and 8–16 bytes to set up the values to be loaded. More common is to use the loop setup instruction (represented in assembly as either LOOP with pseudo-instruction LOOP_BEGIN and LOOP_END, or in a single line as LSETUP), which optionally initializes LCx and sets LTx and LBx to the desired values. This only requires 4–6 bytes, but can only set LTx and LBx within a limited range relative to where the loop setup instruction is located. ==== x86 ==== The x86 assembly language REP prefixes implement zero-overhead loops for a few instructions (namely MOVS/STOS/CMPS/LODS/SCAS). Depending on the prefix and the instruction, the instruction will be repeated a number of times with (E)CX holding the repeat count, or until a match (or non-match) is found with AL/AX/EAX or with DS:[(E)SI]. This can be used to implement some types of searches and operations on null-terminated strings.
Computer aided transceiver
Computer aided transceiver (CAT) is a non-generic serial protocol used by radio amateurs for (remotely) controlling a transceiver radio receiver equipment using a computer. Conventional transmitters are manually controlled and used to transmit voice using buttons, dials, etc. However, advances in electronics have come to market devices that can be controlled by a computer and allow digital modes such as packet radio and also the use of satellite tracking, because it can continuously change the device's frequency according to the Doppler effect. This is done by connecting a Radio receiver and a PC using a CAT interface and a CAT Program Additionally, CAT interfaces can also be used to position tracking antennas, in controllers. As a satellite moves overhead. A CAT interface is a piece of hardware that connects the PC and radio that provides a connection to allows the radio and the PC to communicate with each other. The CAT interface provides the signals to and fro via correct voltage levels and in the case of a Universal Serial Bus (USB) CAT interface it requires a "protocol" for communication but communication itself is down to the radio and the software on the PC. Software that may be called a CAT program allows a radio to be controlled through the PC. Changes made on the radio through user interactions on the CAT Program are (generally) shown on the PC's screen. The functionality of CAT equipment (software & interface) depends on the radio and what features the software writers included in the CAT software. Modern radio systems do have more CAT functionality If you run a logging program that supports CAT, then that software may take advantage of the CAT system by retrieving information from the radio to help fill in log details, such as the frequency that the contact was made. CAT is also useful on many radios where there are many sub-menus in the radios menu system, and many of the sub-menu items can be easily changed via the PC. On many HF radios, the CAT system is also used to program the memories on the radio, but you would need to use appropriate programming software. A CAT interface does not receive or transmit any DATA mode, that is the purpose of a DATA interface. Although, both may be used at the same time with the correct CAT Equipment. DATA modes, and getting audio to and from the PC is the function of a DATA interface. A completely different thing but it is easier and more useful when CAT and DATA are used at the same time. Wouldn't it be nice to have an interface that could operate Frequency-shift keying (FSK), Audio FSK (AFSK), (real) Morse Code (CW), with a CAT interface and its own sound card..... (eg. The DigiMaster Pro3).
Gapo
Gapo is a Vietnamese social networking service based in Hanoi, Vietnam. Users are able to create a personal profile and share text, photos and videos with others on the platform. Users can also use Gapo for live streaming, instant messaging, blogging, and online payments. Gapo was launched in July 2019 by Hà Trung Kiên and Duong Vi Khoa. == History == Gapo was founded in response to calls for Vietnam's Communist-led government to produce a domestic alternative to social media giants like Facebook and Google. Gapo officially launched on July 23, 2019 at an event in Hanoi. The company received 500 billion đồng (US$22 million) in funding from technology corporation G-Group to be utilized in the first phase of development. They also partnered with Sony Music Entertainment to provide music content to its services. == Features == Gapo features a news feed for posting content, livestreaming, instant messaging, and blogging. It also allows users to pay online and access public services. == Reception == Within two days of launch, Gapo received about 200,000 registrations. By September 2019, the user base increased to one million. Upon launch, Gapo experienced significant technical difficulties. Users complained about the inability to sign up for a new account and said that certain functions were not available for use at launch. This issue caused Gapo to temporarily suspend their services in order to perform upgrades and bug fixes. Gapo relaunched the next day, though many users reported that the access speed decreased. The mobile app also received mixed reviews from users in both the App Store and the Google Play Store, with an average rating of 3.1 and 3.5, respectively. Most users found the app to be a knockoff of Facebook, although some users praised the app for being locally developed. === Expert opinions on platform viability === Le Hong Hiep of the ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute was doubtful that a Vietnamese-owned social network service could be as powerful as a foreign-based service, stating that Vietnam might not be able to develop a viable social media network to compete with the likes of Facebook or Google. Others, like blogger Ann Chi, said that, due to local players complying with local censorship policy, there is a chance that locals might not trust Gapo and other local services in light of possible surveillance. Regarding the targeted user base figure for the end of 2019 and 2021, experts cautioned that the company might need an additional trillion đồng of funding to reach its planned user base targets. In response, the company stated that Gapo was never meant to compete with Facebook, but instead noted that the main difference between Gapo and Facebook is that Gapo provides a personalized user experience through customization. == Censorship == Gapo has the right to censor posts and news that are deemed offensive and inaccurate by users or not approved by the censorship curators.
Temporal resolution
Temporal resolution (TR) refers to the discrete resolution of a measurement with respect to time. It is defined as the amount of time needed to revisit and acquire data for the same location. When applied to remote sensing, this amount of time is influenced by the sensor platform's orbital characteristics and the features of the sensor itself. The temporal resolution is low when the revisiting delay is high and vice versa. Temporal resolution is typically expressed in days. == Physics == Often there is a trade-off between the temporal resolution of a measurement and its spatial resolution, due to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. In some contexts, such as particle physics, this trade-off can be attributed to the finite speed of light and the fact that it takes a certain period of time for the photons carrying information to reach the observer. In this time, the system might have undergone changes itself. Thus, the longer the light has to travel, the lower the temporal resolution. == Technology == === Computing === In another context, there is often a tradeoff between temporal resolution and computer storage. A transducer may be able to record data every millisecond, but available storage may not allow this, and in the case of 4D PET imaging the resolution may be limited to several minutes. === Electronic displays === In some applications, temporal resolution may instead be equated to the sampling period, or its inverse, the refresh rate, or update frequency in Hertz, of a TV, for example. The temporal resolution is distinct from temporal uncertainty. This would be analogous to conflating image resolution with optical resolution. One is discrete, the other, continuous. The temporal resolution is a resolution somewhat the 'time' dual to the 'space' resolution of an image. In a similar way, the sample rate is equivalent to the pixel pitch on a display screen, whereas the optical resolution of a display screen is equivalent to temporal uncertainty. Note that both this form of image space and time resolutions are orthogonal to measurement resolution, even though space and time are also orthogonal to each other. Both an image or an oscilloscope capture can have a signal-to-noise ratio, since both also have measurement resolution. === Oscilloscopy === An oscilloscope is the temporal equivalent of a microscope, and it is limited by temporal uncertainty the same way a microscope is limited by optical resolution. A digital sampling oscilloscope has also a limitation analogous to image resolution, which is the sample rate. A non-digital non-sampling oscilloscope is still limited by temporal uncertainty. The temporal uncertainty can be related to the maximum frequency of continuous signal the oscilloscope could respond to, called the bandwidth and given in Hertz. But for oscilloscopes, this figure is not the temporal resolution. To reduce confusion, oscilloscope manufacturers use 'Sa/s' instead of 'Hz' to specify the temporal resolution. Two cases for oscilloscopes exist: either the probe settling time is much shorter than the real time sampling rate, or it is much larger. The case where the settling time is the same as the sampling time is usually undesirable in an oscilloscope. It is more typical to prefer a larger ratio either way, or if not, to be somewhat longer than two sample periods. In the case where it is much longer, the most typical case, it dominates the temporal resolution. The shape of the response during the settling time also has as strong effect on the temporal resolution. For this reason probe leads usually offer an arrangement to 'compensate' the leads to alter the trade off between minimal settling time, and minimal overshoot. If it is much shorter, the oscilloscope may be prone to aliasing from radio frequency interference, but this can be removed by repeatedly sampling a repetitive signal and averaging the results together. If the relationship between the 'trigger' time and the sample clock can be controlled with greater accuracy than the sampling time, then it is possible to make a measurement of a repetitive waveform with much higher temporal resolution than the sample period by upsampling each record before averaging. In this case the temporal uncertainty may be limited by clock jitter.