AGROVOC is a multilingual controlled vocabulary covering areas of interest of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), aiming to promote the visibility of research produced among FAO members. By March 2024, AGROVOC consisted of over 42 000 concepts and up to 1 000 000 terms in more than 42 different languages. It is a collaborative effort, the outcome of consensus among a community of experts coordinated by FAO. == History == FAO first published AGROVOC at the beginning of the 1980s in English, Spanish and French to serve as a controlled vocabulary to index publications in agricultural science and technology, especially for the International System for Agricultural Science and Technology (AGRIS). In the 1990s, AGROVOC shifted from paper printing to a digital format opting for data storage handled by a relational database. In 2004, preliminary experiments with expressing AGROVOC into the Web Ontology Language (OWL) took place. At the same time a web based editing tool was developed, then called WorkBench, nowadays VocBench. In 2009 AGROVOC became an SKOS resource. == Usage == Today, AGROVOC is available in different languages. It is employed for tagging resources, allowing searches in a specific language while providing results in many others, enhancing their visibility worldwide. Additionally, it serves for organizing knowledge to facilitate subsequent data retrieval, tagging website content for search engine discovery, standardizing agricultural information data and acting as a reference for translations. Moreover, it finds applications in fields such as data mining, big data, or artificial intelligence. Updated AGROVOC content is released once a month and is available for public use. == Maintenance == FAO coordinates the editorial activities related to the maintenance of AGROVOC. Content curation is carried out by a community of editors and institutions responsible for each of the language versions. VocBench, is the tool used to edit and maintain AGROVOC in a distributed way. FAO also facilitates the technical maintenance of AGROVOC. == Copyright and license == Copyright for AGROVOC content in FAO languages (English, French, Spanish, Arabic, Russian and Chinese) is held by FAO, while content in other languages stays with the institutions that authored it. AGROVOC thesaurus content in English, Russian, French, Spanish, Arabic and Chinese is licensed under the international Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY-4.0).
Research software engineering
Research software engineering is the application of software engineering practices, methods and techniques for research software, i.e. software that was made for and is mainly used within research projects. As usual for software engineering, this also includes knowledge of other (and in this case varying) research fields as well as open science that need to be incorporated into a software development process. The term was proposed in a research paper in 2010 in response to an empirical survey on tools used for software development in research projects. It started to be used in United Kingdom in 2012, when it was needed to define the type of software development needed in research. This focuses on reproducibility, reusability, and accuracy of data analysis and applications created for research. == Support == Various type of associations and organisations have been created around this role to support the creation of posts in universities and research institutes. In 2014 a Research Software Engineer Association was created in UK, which attracted 160 members in the first three months and which lead to the creation of the Society of Research Software Engineering in 2019. Other countries like the Netherlands, Germany, and the USA followed creating similar communities and there are similar efforts being pursued in Asia, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the Nordic countries, and Belgium. In January 2021 the International Council of RSE Associations was introduced. UK counts over 40 universities and institutes with groups that provide access to software expertise to different areas of research. Additionally, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council created a Research Software Engineer fellowship to promote this role and help the creation of RSE groups across UK, with calls in 2015, 2017, and 2020. The world first RSE conference took place in UK in September 2016 and it has been repeated annually (except for a gap in 2020) since. In 2019 the first national RSE conferences in Germany and the Netherlands were held, next editions were planned for 2020 and then cancelled. US-RSE held its first national conference in 2023. The Research Software Alliance was formed in 2019 to advance the global research software ecosystem by collaborating with decision makers and key influencers. The SORSE (A Series of Online Research Software Events) community was established in late‑2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and ran its first online event in September 2020.
PCVC Speech Dataset
The PCVC (Persian Consonant Vowel Combination) Speech Dataset is a Modern Persian speech corpus for speech recognition and also speaker recognition. The dataset contains sound samples of Modern Persian combination of vowel and consonant phonemes from different speakers. Every sound sample contains just one consonant and one vowel So it is somehow labeled in phoneme level. This dataset consists of 23 Persian consonants and 6 vowels. The sound samples are all possible combinations of vowels and consonants (138 samples for each speaker). The sample rate of all speech samples is 48000 which means there are 48000 sound samples in every 1 second. Every sound sample starts with consonant then continues with vowel. In each sample, in average, 0.5 second of each sample is speech and the rest is silence. Each sound sample ends with silence. All of sound samples are denoised with "Adaptive noise reduction" algorithm. Compared to Farsdat speech dataset and Persian speech corpus it is more easy to use because it is prepared in .mat data files. Also it is more based on phoneme based separation and all samples are denoised. == Contents == The corpus is downloadable from its Kaggle web page, and contains the following: .mat data files of sound samples in a 23630000 matrix, in which 23 is number of consonants, 6 is the number of vowels and 30000 is the length of sound sample.
Spherical basis
In pure and applied mathematics, particularly quantum mechanics and computer graphics and their applications, a spherical basis is the basis used to express spherical tensors. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. While spherical polar coordinates are one orthogonal coordinate system for expressing vectors and tensors using polar and azimuthal angles and radial distance, the spherical basis are constructed from the standard basis and use complex numbers. == In three dimensions == A vector A in 3D Euclidean space R3 can be expressed in the familiar Cartesian coordinate system in the standard basis ex, ey, ez, and coordinates Ax, Ay, Az: or any other coordinate system with associated basis set of vectors. From this extend the scalars to allow multiplication by complex numbers, so that we are now working in C 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{3}} rather than R 3 {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{3}} . === Basis definition === In the spherical bases denoted e+, e−, e0, and associated coordinates with respect to this basis, denoted A+, A−, A0, the vector A is: where the spherical basis vectors can be defined in terms of the Cartesian basis using complex-valued coefficients in the xy plane: in which i {\displaystyle i} denotes the imaginary unit, and one normal to the plane in the z direction: e 0 = e z {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{0}=\mathbf {e} _{z}} The inverse relations are: === Commutator definition === While giving a basis in a 3-dimensional space is a valid definition for a spherical tensor, it only covers the case for when the rank k {\displaystyle k} is 1. For higher ranks, one may use either the commutator, or rotation definition of a spherical tensor. The commutator definition is given below, any operator T q ( k ) {\displaystyle T_{q}^{(k)}} that satisfies the following relations is a spherical tensor: [ J ± , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ ( k ∓ q ) ( k ± q + 1 ) T q ± 1 ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{\pm },T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar {\sqrt {(k\mp q)(k\pm q+1)}}T_{q\pm 1}^{(k)}} [ J z , T q ( k ) ] = ℏ q T q ( k ) {\displaystyle [J_{z},T_{q}^{(k)}]=\hbar qT_{q}^{(k)}} === Rotation definition === Analogously to how the spherical harmonics transform under a rotation, a general spherical tensor transforms as follows, when the states transform under the unitary Wigner D-matrix D ( R ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)} , where R is a (3×3 rotation) group element in SO(3). That is, these matrices represent the rotation group elements. With the help of its Lie algebra, one can show these two definitions are equivalent. D ( R ) T q ( k ) D † ( R ) = ∑ q ′ = − k k T q ′ ( k ) D q ′ q ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {D}}(R)T_{q}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}^{\dagger }(R)=\sum _{q'=-k}^{k}T_{q'}^{(k)}{\mathcal {D}}_{q'q}^{(k)}} === Coordinate vectors === For the spherical basis, the coordinates are complex-valued numbers A+, A0, A−, and can be found by substitution of (3B) into (1), or directly calculated from the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5): A 0 = ⟨ e 0 , A ⟩ = ⟨ e z , A ⟩ = A z {\displaystyle A_{0}=\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{z},\mathbf {A} \right\rangle =A_{z}} with inverse relations: In general, for two vectors with complex coefficients in the same real-valued orthonormal basis ei, with the property ei·ej = δij, the inner product is: where · is the usual dot product and the complex conjugate must be used to keep the magnitude (or "norm") of the vector positive definite. == Properties (three dimensions) == === Orthonormality === The spherical basis is an orthonormal basis, since the inner product ⟨, ⟩ (5) of every pair vanishes meaning the basis vectors are all mutually orthogonal: ⟨ e + , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e 0 ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e + ⟩ = 0 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =0} and each basis vector is a unit vector: ⟨ e + , e + ⟩ = ⟨ e − , e − ⟩ = ⟨ e 0 , e 0 ⟩ = 1 {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {e} _{+},\mathbf {e} _{+}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{-},\mathbf {e} _{-}\right\rangle =\left\langle \mathbf {e} _{0},\mathbf {e} _{0}\right\rangle =1} hence the need for the normalizing factors of 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/\!{\sqrt {2}}} . === Change of basis matrix === The defining relations (3A) can be summarized by a transformation matrix U: ( e + e − e 0 ) = U ( e x e y e z ) , U = ( − 1 2 − i 2 0 + 1 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} with inverse: ( e x e y e z ) = U − 1 ( e + e − e 0 ) , U − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 + i 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{x}\\\mathbf {e} _{y}\\\mathbf {e} _{z}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf {e} _{+}\\\mathbf {e} _{-}\\\mathbf {e} _{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} It can be seen that U is a unitary matrix, in other words its Hermitian conjugate U† (complex conjugate and matrix transpose) is also the inverse matrix U−1. For the coordinates: ( A + A − A 0 ) = U ∗ ( A x A y A z ) , U ∗ = ( − 1 2 + i 2 0 + 1 2 + i 2 0 0 0 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}=\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }{\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad \mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} }={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,,} and inverse: ( A x A y A z ) = ( U ∗ ) − 1 ( A + A − A 0 ) , ( U ∗ ) − 1 = ( − 1 2 + 1 2 0 − i 2 − i 2 0 0 0 1 ) . {\displaystyle {\begin{pmatrix}A_{x}\\A_{y}\\A_{z}\end{pmatrix}}=(\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}{\begin{pmatrix}A_{+}\\A_{-}\\A_{0}\end{pmatrix}}\,,\quad (\mathbf {U} ^{\mathrm {} })^{-1}={\begin{pmatrix}-{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&+{\frac {1}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&-{\frac {i}{\sqrt {2}}}&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}\,.} === Cross products === Taking cross products of the spherical basis vectors, we find an obvious relation: e q × e q = 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{q}\times \mathbf {e} _{q}={\boldsymbol {0}}} where q is a placeholder for +, −, 0, and two less obvious relations: e ± × e ∓ = ± i e 0 {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{\mp }=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{0}} e ± × e 0 = ± i e ± {\displaystyle \mathbf {e} _{\pm }\times \mathbf {e} _{0}=\pm i\mathbf {e} _{\pm }} === Inner product in the spherical basis === The inner product between two vectors A and B in the spherical basis follows from the above definition of the inner product: ⟨ A , B ⟩ = A + B + ⋆ + A − B − ⋆ + A 0 B 0 ⋆ {\displaystyle \left\langle \mathbf {A} ,\mathbf {B} \right\rangle =A_{+}B_{+}^{\star }+A_{-}B_{-}^{\star }+A_{0}B_{0}^{\star }}
Pandemonium architecture
Pandemonium architecture is a theory in cognitive science that describes how visual images are processed by the brain. It has applications in artificial intelligence and pattern recognition. The theory was introduced by the artificial intelligence pioneer Oliver Selfridge in his 1959 paper "Pandemonium - A Paradigm for Learning". It describes the process of object recognition as the exchange of signals within a hierarchical system of detection and association, the elements of which Selfridge metaphorically termed "demons". This model is now recognized as the basis of visual perception in cognitive science. Pandemonium architecture arose in response to the inability of template matching theories to offer a biologically plausible explanation of the image constancy phenomenon. Contemporary researchers praise this architecture for its elegancy and creativity; that the idea of having multiple independent systems (e.g., feature detectors) working in parallel to address the image constancy phenomena of pattern recognition is powerful yet simple. The basic idea of the pandemonium architecture is that a pattern is first perceived in its parts before the "whole". Pandemonium architecture was one of the first computational models in pattern recognition. Although not perfect, the pandemonium architecture influenced the development of modern connectionist, artificial intelligence, and word recognition models. == History == Most research in perception has been focused on the visual system, investigating the mechanisms of how we see and understand objects. A critical function of our visual system is its ability to recognize patterns, but the mechanism by which this is achieved is unclear. The earliest theory that attempted to explain how we recognize patterns is the template matching model. According to this model, we compare all external stimuli against an internal mental representation. If there is "sufficient" overlap between the perceived stimulus and the internal representation, we will "recognize" the stimulus. Although some machines follow a template matching model (e.g., bank machines verifying signatures and accounting numbers), the theory is critically flawed in explaining the phenomena of image constancy: we can easily recognize a stimulus regardless of the changes in its form of presentation (e.g., T and T are both easily recognized as the letter T). It is highly unlikely that we have a stored template for all of the variations of every single pattern. As a result of the biological plausibility criticism of the template matching model, feature detection models began to rise. In a feature detection model, the image is first perceived in its basic individual elements before it is recognized as a whole object. For example, when we are presented with the letter A, we would first see a short horizontal line and two slanted long diagonal lines. Then we would combine the features to complete the perception of A. Each unique pattern consists of different combination of features, which means those that are formed with the same features will generate the same recognition. That is, regardless of how we rotate the letter A, is still perceived as the letter A. It is easy for this sort of architecture to account for the image constancy phenomena because you only need to "match" at the basic featural level, which is presumed to be limited and finite, thus biologically plausible. The best known feature detection model is called the pandemonium architecture. == Pandemonium architecture == The pandemonium architecture was originally developed by Oliver Selfridge in the late 1950s. The architecture is composed of different groups of "demons" working independently to process the visual stimulus. Each group of demons is assigned to a specific stage in recognition, and within each group, the demons work in parallel. There are four major groups of demons in the original architecture. The concept of feature demons, that there are specific neurons dedicated to perform specialized processing is supported by research in neuroscience. Hubel and Wiesel found there were specific cells in a cat's brain that responded to specific lengths and orientations of a line. Similar findings were discovered in frogs, octopuses and a variety of other animals. Octopuses were discovered to be only sensitive to verticality of lines, whereas frogs demonstrated a wider range of sensitivity. These animal experiments demonstrate that feature detectors seem to be a very primitive development. That is, it did not result from the higher cognitive development of humans. Not surprisingly, there is also evidence that the human brain possesses these elementary feature detectors as well. Moreover, this architecture is capable of learning, similar to a back-propagation styled neural network. The weight between the cognitive and feature demons can be adjusted in proportion to the difference between the correct pattern and the activation from the cognitive demons. To continue with our previous example, when we first learned the letter R, we know is composed of a curved, long straight, and a short angled line. Thus when we perceive those features, we perceive R. However, the letter P consists of very similar features, so during the beginning stages of learning, it is likely for this architecture to mistakenly identify R as P. But through constant exposure of confirming R's features to be identified as R, the weights of R's features to P are adjusted so the P response becomes inhibited (e.g., learning to inhibit the P response when a short angled line is detected). In principle, a pandemonium architecture can recognize any pattern. As mentioned earlier, this architecture makes error predictions based on the amount of overlapping features. Such as, the most likely error for R should be P. Thus, in order to show this architecture represents the human pattern recognition system we must put these predictions into test. Researchers have constructed scenarios where various letters are presented in situations that make them difficult to identify; then types of errors were observed, which was used to generate confusion matrices: where all of the errors for each letter are recorded. Generally, the results from these experiments matched the error predictions from the pandemonium architecture. Also as a result of these experiments, some researchers have proposed models that attempted to list all of the basic features in the Roman alphabet. == Criticism == A major criticism of the pandemonium architecture is that it adopts a completely bottom-up processing: recognition is entirely driven by the physical characteristics of the targeted stimulus. This means that it is unable to account for any top-down processing effects, such as context effects (e.g., pareidolia), where contextual cues can facilitate (e.g., word superiority effect: it is relatively easier to identify a letter when it is part of a word than in isolation) processing. However, this is not a fatal criticism to the overall architecture, because is relatively easy to add a group of contextual demons to work along with the cognitive demons to account for these context effects. Although the pandemonium architecture is built on the fact that it can account for the image constancy phenomena, some researchers have argued otherwise; and pointed out that the pandemonium architecture might share the same flaws from the template matching models. For example, the letter H is composed of 2 long vertical lines and a short horizontal line; but if we rotate the H 90 degrees in either direction, it is now composed of 2 long horizontal lines and a short vertical line. In order to recognize the rotated H as H, we would need a rotated H cognitive demon. Thus we might end up with a system that requires a large number of cognitive demons in order to produce accurate recognition, which would lead to the same biological plausibility criticism of the template matching models. However, it is rather difficult to judge the validity of this criticism because the pandemonium architecture does not specify how and what features are extracted from incoming sensory information, it simply outlines the possible stages of pattern recognition. But of course that raises its own questions, to which it is almost impossible to criticize such a model if it does not include specific parameters. Also, the theory appears to be rather incomplete without defining how and what features are extracted, which proves to be especially problematic with complex patterns (e.g., extracting the weight and features of a dog). Some researchers have also pointed out that the evidence supporting the pandemonium architecture has been very narrow in its methodology. Majority of the research that supports this architecture has often referred to its ability to recognize simple schematic drawings that are selected from a small finite set (e.g., letters in the Roman alphabet). Evidence from these types of exper
Psychology of reasoning
The psychology of reasoning (also known as the cognitive science of reasoning) is the study of how people reason, often broadly defined as the process of drawing conclusions to inform how people solve problems and make decisions. It overlaps with psychology, philosophy, linguistics, cognitive science, artificial intelligence, logic, and probability theory. Psychological experiments on how humans and other animals reason have been carried out for over 100 years. An enduring question is whether or not people have the capacity to be rational. Current research in this area addresses various questions about reasoning, rationality, judgments, intelligence, relationships between emotion and reasoning, and development. == Everyday reasoning == One of the most obvious areas in which people employ reasoning is with sentences in everyday language. Most experimentation on deduction has been carried out on hypothetical thought, in particular, examining how people reason about conditionals, e.g., If A then B. Participants in experiments make the modus ponens inference, given the indicative conditional If A then B, and given the premise A, they conclude B. However, given the indicative conditional and the minor premise for the modus tollens inference, not-B, about half of the participants in experiments conclude not-A and the remainder concludes that nothing follows. The ease with which people make conditional inferences is affected by context, as demonstrated in the well-known selection task developed by Peter Wason. Participants are better able to test a conditional in an ecologically relevant context, e.g., if the envelope is sealed then it must have a 50 cent stamp on it compared to one that contains symbolic content, e.g., if the letter is a vowel then the number is even. Background knowledge can also lead to the suppression of even the simple modus ponens inference Participants given the conditional if Lisa has an essay to write then she studies late in the library and the premise Lisa has an essay to write make the modus ponens inference 'she studies late in the library', but the inference is suppressed when they are also given a second conditional if the library stays open then she studies late in the library. Interpretations of the suppression effect are controversial Other investigations of propositional inference examine how people think about disjunctive alternatives, e.g., A or else B, and how they reason about negation, e.g., It is not the case that A and B. Many experiments have been carried out to examine how people make relational inferences, including comparisons, e.g., A is better than B. Such investigations also concern spatial inferences, e.g. A is in front of B and temporal inferences, e.g. A occurs before B. Other common tasks include categorical syllogisms, used to examine how people reason about quantifiers such as All or Some, e.g., Some of the A are not B. For example if all A are B and some B are C, what (if anything) follows? == Theories of reasoning == There are several alternative theories of the cognitive processes that human reasoning is based on. One view is that people rely on a mental logic consisting of formal (abstract or syntactic) inference rules similar to those developed by logicians in the propositional calculus. Another view is that people rely on domain-specific or content-sensitive rules of inference. A third view is that people rely on mental models, that is, mental representations that correspond to imagined possibilities. A fourth view is that people compute probabilities. One controversial theoretical issue is the identification of an appropriate competence model, or a standard against which to compare human reasoning. Initially classical logic was chosen as a competence model. Subsequently, some researchers opted for non-monotonic logic and Bayesian probability. Research on mental models and reasoning has led to the suggestion that people are rational in principle but err in practice. Connectionist approaches towards reasoning have also been proposed. Despite the ongoing debate about the cognitive processes involved in human reasoning, recent research has shown that multiple approaches can be useful in modeling human thinking. For instance, studies have found that people's reasoning is often influenced by their prior beliefs, which can be modeled using Bayesian probability theory. Additionally, research on mental models has shown that people tend to reason about problems by constructing multiple mental representations of the situation, which can help them to identify relevant features and make inferences based on their understanding of the problem. Moreover, connectionist approaches to reasoning have also gained attention, which focus on the neural network models that can learn from data and generalize to new situations. == Development of reasoning == It is an active question in psychology how, why, and when the ability to reason develops from infancy to adulthood. Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development posited general mechanisms and stages in the development of reasoning from infancy to adulthood. According to the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, changes in reasoning with development come from increasing working memory capacity, increasing speed of processing, and enhanced executive functions and control. Increasing self-awareness is also an important factor. In their book The Enigma of Reason, the cognitive scientists Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber put forward an "argumentative" theory of reasoning, claiming that humans evolved to reason primarily to justify our beliefs and actions and to convince others in a social environment. Key evidence for their theory includes the errors in reasoning that solitary individuals are prone to when their arguments are not criticized, such as logical fallacies, and how groups become much better at performing cognitive reasoning tasks when they communicate with one another and can evaluate each other's arguments. Sperber and Mercier offer one attempt to resolve the apparent paradox that the confirmation bias is so strong despite the function of reasoning naively appearing to be to come to veridical conclusions about the world. The study of the development of reasoning abilities is an ongoing area of research in psychology, and multiple factors have been proposed to explain how, why, and when reasoning develops from infancy to adulthood. Recent research has suggested that early experiences and social interactions play a critical role in the development of reasoning abilities. For example, studies have shown that infants as young as six months old can engage in basic logical reasoning, such as reasoning about the relationship between objects and their properties. Furthermore, research has highlighted the importance of parental interaction and cognitive stimulation in the development of children's reasoning abilities. Additionally, studies have suggested that cultural factors, such as educational practices and the emphasis on critical thinking, can also influence the development of reasoning skills across different populations. == Different sorts of reasoning == Philip Johnson-Laird trying to taxonomize thought, distinguished between goal-directed thinking and thinking without goal, noting that association was involved in unrelated reading. He argues that goal directed reasoning can be classified based on the problem space involved in a solution, citing Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific cases or observations. In this process of reasoning, general assertions are made based on past specific pieces of evidence. This kind of reasoning allows the conclusion to be false even if the original statement is true. For example, if one observes a college athlete, one makes predictions and assumptions about other college athletes based on that one observation. Scientists use inductive reasoning to create theories and hypotheses. Philip Johnson-Laird distinguished inductive from deductive reasoning, in that the former creates semantic information while the later does not . In opposition, deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. In this reasoning process a person starts with a known claim or a general belief and from there asks what follows from these foundations or how will these premises influence other beliefs. In other words, deduction starts with a hypothesis and examines the possibilities to reach a conclusion. Deduction helps people understand why their predictions are wrong and indicates that their prior knowledge or beliefs are off track. An example of deduction can be seen in the scientific method when testing hypotheses and theories. Although the conclusion usually corresponds and therefore proves the hypothesis, there are some cases where the conclusion is logical, but the generalization is not. For example, the argument, "All young girls wear skirts; Julie is a young
Kuwahara filter
The Kuwahara filter is a non-linear smoothing filter used in image processing for adaptive noise reduction. Most filters that are used for image smoothing are linear low-pass filters that effectively reduce noise but also blur out the edges. However the Kuwahara filter is able to apply smoothing on the image while preserving the edges. It is named after Michiyoshi Kuwahara, Ph.D., who worked at Kyoto and Osaka Sangyo Universities in Japan, developing early medical imaging of dynamic heart muscle in the 1970s and 80s. == The Kuwahara operator == Suppose that I ( x , y ) {\displaystyle I(x,y)} is a grey scale image and that we take a square window of size 2 a + 1 {\displaystyle 2a+1} centered around a point ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} in the image. This square can be divided into four smaller square regions Q i = 1 ⋯ 4 {\displaystyle Q_{i=1\cdots 4}} each of which will be Q i ( x , y ) = { [ x , x + a ] × [ y , y + a ] if i = 1 [ x − a , x ] × [ y , y + a ] if i = 2 [ x − a , x ] × [ y − a , y ] if i = 3 [ x , x + a ] × [ y − a , y ] if i = 4 {\displaystyle Q_{i}(x,y)={\begin{cases}\left[x,x+a\right]\times \left[y,y+a\right]&{\mbox{ if }}i=1\\\left[x-a,x\right]\times \left[y,y+a\right]&{\mbox{ if }}i=2\\\left[x-a,x\right]\times \left[y-a,y\right]&{\mbox{ if }}i=3\\\left[x,x+a\right]\times \left[y-a,y\right]&{\mbox{ if }}i=4\\\end{cases}}} where × {\displaystyle \times } is the cartesian product. Pixels located on the borders between two regions belong to both regions so there is a slight overlap between subregions. The arithmetic mean m i ( x , y ) {\displaystyle m_{i}(x,y)} and standard deviation σ i ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}(x,y)} of the four regions centered around a pixel (x,y) are calculated and used to determine the value of the central pixel. The output of the Kuwahara filter Φ ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \Phi (x,y)} for any point ( x , y ) {\displaystyle (x,y)} is then given by Φ ( x , y ) = m i ( x , y ) {\textstyle \Phi (x,y)=m_{i}(x,y)} where i = a r g min j σ j ( x , y ) {\displaystyle i=\operatorname {arg\min } _{j}\sigma _{j}(x,y)} . This means that the central pixel will take the mean value of the area that is most homogenous. The location of the pixel in relation to an edge plays a great role in determining which region will have the greater standard deviation. If for example the pixel is located on a dark side of an edge it will most probably take the mean value of the dark region. On the other hand, should the pixel be on the lighter side of an edge it will most probably take a light value. On the event that the pixel is located on the edge it will take the value of the more smooth, least textured region. The fact that the filter takes into account the homogeneity of the regions ensures that it will preserve the edges while using the mean creates the blurring effect. Similarly to the median filter, the Kuwahara filter uses a sliding window approach to access every pixel in the image. The size of the window is chosen in advance and may vary depending on the desired level of blur in the final image. Bigger windows typically result in the creation of more abstract images whereas small windows produce images that retain their detail. Typically windows are chosen to be square with sides that have an odd number of pixels for symmetry. However, there are variations of the Kuwahara filter that use rectangular windows. Additionally, the subregions do not need to overlap or have the same size as long as they cover all of the window. == Color images == For color images, the filter should not be performed by applying the filter to each RGB channel separately, and then recombining the three filtered color channels to form the filtered RGB image. The main problem with that is that the quadrants will have different standard deviations for each of the channels. For example, the upper left quadrant may have the lowest standard deviation in the red channel, but the lower right quadrant may have the lowest standard deviation in the green channel. This situation would result in the color of the central pixel to be determined by different regions, which might result in color artifacts or blurrier edges. To overcome this problem, for color images a slightly modified Kuwahara filter must be used. The image is first converted into another color space, the HSV color space. The modified filter then operates on only the "brightness" channel, the Value coordinate in the HSV model. The variance of the "brightness" of each quadrant is calculated to determine the quadrant from which the final filtered color should be taken from. The filter will produce an output for each channel which will correspond to the mean of that channel from the quadrant that had the lowest standard deviation in "brightness". This ensures that only one region will determine the RGB values of the central pixel. ImageMagick uses a similar approach, but using the Rec. 709 Luma as the brightness metric. === Julia Implementation === == Applications == Originally the Kuwahara filter was proposed for use in processing RI-angiocardiographic images of the cardiovascular system. The fact that any edges are preserved when smoothing makes it especially useful for feature extraction and segmentation and explains why it is used in medical imaging. The Kuwahara filter however also finds many applications in artistic imaging and fine-art photography due to its ability to remove textures and sharpen the edges of photographs. The level of abstraction helps create a desirable painting-like effect in artistic photographs especially in the case of the colored image version of the filter. These applications have known great success and have encouraged similar research in the field of image processing for the arts. Although the vast majority of applications have been in the field of image processing there have been cases that use modifications of the Kuwahara filter for machine learning tasks such as clustering. The Kuwahara filter has been implemented in CVIPtools. The Kuwahara filter is present as a shader node in Blender. == Drawbacks and restrictions == The Kuwahara filter despite its capabilities in edge preservation has certain drawbacks. At a first glance it is noticeable that the Kuwahara filter does not take into account the case where two regions have equal standard deviations. This is not often the case in real images since it is rather hard to find two regions with exactly the same standard deviation due to the noise that is always present. In cases where two regions have similar standard deviations the value of the center pixel could be decided at random by the noise in these regions. Again this would not be a problem if the regions had the same mean. However, it is not unusual for regions of very different means to have the same standard deviation. This makes the Kuwahara filter susceptible to noise. Different ways have been proposed for dealing with this issue, one of which is to set the value of the center pixel to ( m 1 + m 2 ) / 2 {\textstyle (m_{1}+m_{2})/2} in cases where the standard deviation of two regions do not differ more than a certain value D {\displaystyle D} . The Kuwahara filter is also known to create block artifacts in the images especially in regions of the image that are highly textured. These blocks disrupt the smoothness of the image and are considered to have a negative effect in the aesthetics of the image. This phenomenon occurs due to the division of the window into square regions. A way to overcome this effect is to take windows that are not rectangular(i.e. circular windows) and separate them into more non-rectangular regions. There have also been approaches where the filter adapts its window depending on the input image. == Extensions of the Kuwahara filter == The success of the Kuwahara filter has spurred an increase the development of edge-enhancing smoothing filters. Several variations have been proposed for similar use most of which attempt to deal with the drawbacks of the original Kuwahara filter. The "Generalized Kuwahara filter" proposed by P. Bakker considers several windows that contain a fixed pixel. Each window is then assigned an estimate and a confidence value. The value of the fixed pixel then takes the value of the estimate of the window with the highest confidence. This filter is not characterized by the same ambiguity in the presence of noise and manages to eliminate the block artifacts. The "Mean of Least Variance"(MLV) filter, proposed by M.A. Schulze also produces edge-enhancing smoothing results in images. Similarly to the Kuwahara filter it assumes a window of size 2 d − 1 × 2 d − 1 {\displaystyle 2d-1\times 2d-1} but instead of searching amongst four subregions of size d × d {\displaystyle d\times d} for the one with minimum variance it searches amongst all possible d × d {\displaystyle d\times d} subregions. This means the central pixel of the window will be assigned the mean of the one subregion out of a poss