Negobot also referred to as Lolita or Lolita chatbot is a chatterbot that was introduced to the public in 2013, designed by researchers from the University of Deusto and Optenet to catch online pedophiles. It is a conversational agent that utilizes natural language processing (NLP), information retrieval (IR) and Automatic Learning. Because the bot poses as a young female in order to entice and track potential predators, it became known in media as the "virtual Lolita", in reference to Vladimir Nabokov's novel. == Background == In 2013, the University of Deusto researchers published a paper on their work with Negobot and disclosed the text online. In their abstract, the researchers addressed the issue that an increasing number of children are using the internet and that these young users are more susceptible to existing internet risks. Their main objective was to create a chatterbot with the ability to trap online predators that posed a threat to children. They intended to deploy the bot into sites frequented by predators such as social networks and chatrooms. The university researchers used information provided by anti-pedophilia activist organization Perverted-Justice, including examples of online encounters and conversations with sexual predators, to supplement the program's artificial intelligence system. == Features == === Programmed persona === The chatterbot takes the guise of a naive and vulnerable 14-year-old girl. The bot's programmers used methods of artificial intelligence and natural language processing to create a conversational agent fluent in typical teenage slang, misspellings, and knowledge of pop culture. Through these linguistic features, the bot is able to mimic the conversational style of young teenagers. It also features split personalities and seven different patterns of conversation. Negobot's primary creator, Dr. Carlos Laorden, expressed the significance of the bot's distinguishable style of communication, stating that normally, "chatbots tend to be very predictable. Their behavior and interest in a conversation are flat, which is a problem when attempting to detect untrustworthy targets like paedophiles." What makes Negobot different is its game theory feature, which makes it able to "maintain a much more realistic conversation." Apart from being able to imitate a stereotypical teenager, the program is also able to translate messages into different languages. === Game theory === Negobot's designers programmed it with the ability to treat conversations with potential predators as if it were a game, the objective being to collect as much information on the suspect as possible that could provide evidence of pedophilic characteristics and motives. The use of game theory shapes the decisions the bot makes and the overall direction of the conversation. The bot initiates its undercover operations by entering a chat as a passive participant, waiting to be chatted by a user. Once a user elicits conversation, the bot will frame the conversation in such a way that keeps the target engaged, extracting personal information and discouraging it from leaving the chat. The information is then recorded to be potentially sent to the police. If the target seems to lose interest, the bot attempts to make it feel guilty by expressing sentiments of loneliness and emotional need through strategic, formulated responses, ultimately prolonging interaction. In addition, the bot may provide fake information about itself in attempt to lure the target into physical meetings. === Limitations === Despite being able to carry out a realistic conversation, Negobot is still unable to detect linguistic subtleties in the messages of others, including sarcasm. == Controversy == John Carr, a specialist in online child safety, expressed his concern to BBC over the legality of this undercover investigation. He claimed that using the bot on unsuspecting internet users could be considered a form of entrapment or harassment. The type of information that Negobot collects from potential online predators, he said, is unlikely to be upheld in court. Furthermore, he warned that relying on only software without any real-world policing risks enticing individuals to do or say things that they would not have if real-world policing were a factor.
Scan line
A scan line (also scanline) is one line, or row, in a raster scanning pattern, such as a line of video on a cathode-ray tube (CRT) display of a television set or computer monitor. On CRT screens the horizontal scan lines are visually discernible, even when viewed from a distance, as alternating colored lines and black lines, especially when a progressive scan signal with below maximum vertical resolution is displayed. This is sometimes used today as a visual effect in computer graphics. The term is used, by analogy, for a single row of pixels in a raster graphics image. Scan lines are important in representations of image data, because many image file formats have special rules for data at the end of a scan line. For example, there may be a rule that each scan line starts on a particular boundary (such as a byte or word; see for example BMP file format). This means that even otherwise compatible raster data may need to be analyzed at the level of scan lines in order to convert between formats.
Preferential entailment
Preferential entailment is a non-monotonic logic based on selecting only models that are considered the most plausible. The plausibility of models is expressed by an ordering among models called a preference relation, hence the name preference entailment. Formally, given a propositional formula F {\displaystyle F} and an ordering over propositional models ≤ {\displaystyle \leq } , preferential entailment selects only the models of F {\displaystyle F} that are minimal according to ≤ {\displaystyle \leq } . This selection leads to a non-monotonic inference relation: F ⊨ pref G {\displaystyle F\models _{\text{pref}}G} holds if and only if all minimal models of F {\displaystyle F} according to ≤ {\displaystyle \leq } are also models of G {\displaystyle G} . Circumscription can be seen as the particular case of preferential entailment when the ordering is based on containment of the sets of variables assigned to true (in the propositional case) or containment of the extensions of predicates (in the first-order logic case).
ICAD (software)
ICAD (Corporate history: ICAD, Inc., Concentra (name change at IPO in 1995), KTI (name change in 1998), Dassault Systèmes (purchase in 2001) () is a knowledge-based engineering (KBE) system that enables users to encode design knowledge using a semantic representation that can be evaluated for Parasolid output. ICAD has an open architecture that can utilize all the power and flexibility of the underlying language. KBE, as implemented via ICAD, received a lot of attention due to the remarkable results that appeared to take little effort. ICAD allowed one example of end-user computing that in a sense is unparalleled. Most ICAD developers were degreed engineers. Systems developed by ICAD users were non-trivial and consisted of highly complicated code. In the sense of end-user computing, ICAD was the first to allow the power of a domain tool to be in the hands of the user, at the same time being open to allow extensions as identified and defined by the domain expert or subject-matter expert (SME). A COE article looked at the resulting explosion of expectations (see AI winter), which were not sustainable. However, such a bubble burst does not diminish the existence of ability that would exist were expectations and use reasonable or properly managed. == History == The original implementation of ICAD was on a Lisp machine (Symbolics). Some of the principals involved with the development were Larry Rosenfeld, Avrum Belzer, Patrick M. O'Keefe, Philip Greenspun, and David F. Place. The time frame was 1984–85. ICAD started on special-purpose Symbolics Lisp hardware and was then ported to Unix when Common Lisp became portable to general-purpose workstations. The original domain for ICAD was mechanical design with many application successes. However, ICAD has found use in other domains, such as electrical design, shape modeling, etc. An example project could be wind tunnel design or the development of a support tool for aircraft multidisciplinary design. Further examples can be found in the presentations at the annual IIUG (International ICAD Users Group) that have been published in the KTI Vault (1999 through 2002). Boeing and Airbus used ICAD extensively to develop various components in the 1990s and early 21st century. As of 2003, ICAD was featured strongly in several areas as evidenced by the Vision & Strategy Product Vision and Strategy presentation. After 2003, ICAD use diminished. At the end of 2001, the KTI Company faced financial difficulties and laid off most of its best staff. They were eventually bought out by Dassault who effectively scuppered the ICAD product. See IIUG at COE, 2003 (first meeting due to Dassault by KTI) The ICAD system was very expensive, relatively, and was in the price range of high-end systems. Market dynamics couldn't support this as there may not have been sufficient differentiating factors between ICAD and the lower-end systems (or the promises from Dassault). KTI was absorbed by Dassault Systèmes and ICAD is no longer considered the go-forward tool for knowledge-based engineering (KBE) applications by that company. Dassault Systèmes is promoting a suite of tools oriented around version 5 of their popular CATIA CAD application, with Knowledgeware the replacement for ICAD. As of 2005, things were still a bit unclear. ICAD 8.3 was delivered. The recent COE Aerospace Conference had a discussion about the futures of KBE. One issue involves the stacking of 'meta' issues within a computer model. How this is resolved, whether by more icons or the availability of an external language, remains to be seen. The Genworks GDL product (including kernel technology from the Gendl Project) is the nearest functional equivalent to ICAD currently available. == Particulars == ICAD provided a declarative language (IDL) using New Flavors (never converted to Common Lisp Object System (CLOS)) that supported a mechanism for relating parts (defpart) via a hierarchical set of relationships. Technically, the ICAD Defpart was a Lisp macro; the ICAD defpart list was a set of generic classes that can be instantiated with specific properties depending upon what was represented. This defpart list was extendible via composited parts that represented domain entities. Along with the part-subpart relations, ICAD supported generic relations via the object modeling abilities of Lisp. Example applications of ICAD range from a small collection of defparts that represents a part or component to a larger collection that represents an assembly. In terms of power, an ICAD system, when fully specified, can generate thousands of instances of parts on a major assembly design. One example of an application driving thousands of instances of parts is that of an aircraft wing – where fastener type and placement may number in the thousands, each instance requiring evaluation of several factors driving the design parameters. == Futures (KBE, etc.) == One role for ICAD may be serving as the defining prototype for KBE which would require that we know more about what occurred the past 15 years (much information is tied up behind corporate firewalls and under proprietary walls). With the rise of functional programming languages (an example is Haskell) in the markets, perhaps some of the power attributable to Lisp may be replicated.
OpenL Tablets
OpenL Tablets is a business rule management system (BRMS) and a business rules engine (BRE) based on table representation of rules. Engine implements optimized sequential algorithm. OpenL includes such table types as decision table, decision tree, spreadsheet-like calculator. == History == The OpenL Tablets project was started as an in-house development project in 2003 and later in 2006 was uploaded to SourceForge. Initially it was an open-source business rule engine for Java. Starting from version 5 it became a BRMS. == Technology == OpenL Tablets engine is specially designed for business rules and uses table rules presentation. Table format enforces rules to be structured and format itself is close to tables found in various business documents. OpenL Tablets is based on OpenL framework for creating custom languages running on Java VM. The engine is designed to allow pluggable language implementations. Currently, it uses 2 languages: table structure for rules format and java-like for code snippets in rules. Java-like language is Java 5.0 implementation with Business User Extensions. OpenL Tablets rules are mixture of declarative programming for rules logic and imperative programming for workflow control. Table formats are flexible enough to match the semantics of the problem domain. Tests, traces, benchmarks are integral part of the engine. It also provides powerful type definition capabilities to handle rules domain model inside rules files. The project is written in Java, but can be used at any platform using Service-oriented architecture approach, e.g. via web service. === Patents === The OpenL Tablets engine has patent pending validation feature. There are usages of OpenL Tablets which may be patented. == BRMS == OpenL Tablets includes several productivity tools and applications addressing BRMS related capabilities. They include web application to edit rules called OpenL WebStudio, web application to deploy rules as web services, Rules Repository to store and manage rules, Eclipse plug-ins to work with rules projects. == Related systems == CLIPS: public domain software tool for building expert systems. ILOG rules: a business rule management system. JBoss Drools: a business rule management system (BRMS). JESS: a rule engine for the Java platform - it is a superset of CLIPS programming language. Prolog: a general purpose logic programming language. DTRules: a Decision Table-based, open-sourced rule engine for Java.
Gradient vector flow
Gradient vector flow (GVF), a computer vision framework introduced by Chenyang Xu and Jerry L. Prince, is the vector field that is produced by a process that smooths and diffuses an input vector field. It is usually used to create a vector field from images that points to object edges from a distance. It is widely used in image analysis and computer vision applications for object tracking, shape recognition, segmentation, and edge detection. In particular, it is commonly used in conjunction with active contour model. == Background == Finding objects or homogeneous regions in images is a process known as image segmentation. In many applications, the locations of object edges can be estimated using local operators that yield a new image called an edge map. The edge map can then be used to guide a deformable model, sometimes called an active contour or a snake, so that it passes through the edge map in a smooth way, therefore defining the object itself. A common way to encourage a deformable model to move toward the edge map is to take the spatial gradient of the edge map, yielding a vector field. Since the edge map has its highest intensities directly on the edge and drops to zero away from the edge, these gradient vectors provide directions for the active contour to move. When the gradient vectors are zero, the active contour will not move, and this is the correct behavior when the contour rests on the peak of the edge map itself. However, because the edge itself is defined by local operators, these gradient vectors will also be zero far away from the edge and therefore the active contour will not move toward the edge when initialized far away from the edge. Gradient vector flow (GVF) is the process that spatially extends the edge map gradient vectors, yielding a new vector field that contains information about the location of object edges throughout the entire image domain. GVF is defined as a diffusion process operating on the components of the input vector field. It is designed to balance the fidelity of the original vector field, so it is not changed too much, with a regularization that is intended to produce a smooth field on its output. Although GVF was designed originally for the purpose of segmenting objects using active contours attracted to edges, it has been since adapted and used for many alternative purposes. Some newer purposes including defining a continuous medial axis representation, regularizing image anisotropic diffusion algorithms, finding the centers of ribbon-like objects, constructing graphs for optimal surface segmentations, creating a shape prior, and much more. == Theory == The theory of GVF was originally described by Xu and Prince. Let f ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \textstyle f(x,y)} be an edge map defined on the image domain. For uniformity of results, it is important to restrict the edge map intensities to lie between 0 and 1, and by convention f ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \textstyle f(x,y)} takes on larger values (close to 1) on the object edges. The gradient vector flow (GVF) field is given by the vector field v ( x , y ) = [ u ( x , y ) , v ( x , y ) ] {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} (x,y)=[u(x,y),v(x,y)]} that minimizes the energy functional In this equation, subscripts denote partial derivatives and the gradient of the edge map is given by the vector field ∇ f = ( f x , f y ) {\displaystyle \textstyle \nabla f=(f_{x},f_{y})} . Figure 1 shows an edge map, the gradient of the (slightly blurred) edge map, and the GVF field generated by minimizing E {\displaystyle \textstyle {\mathcal {E}}} . Equation 1 is a variational formulation that has both a data term and a regularization term. The first term in the integrand is the data term. It encourages the solution v {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} } to closely agree with the gradients of the edge map since that will make v − ∇ f {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} -\nabla f} small. However, this only needs to happen when the edge map gradients are large since v − ∇ f {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} -\nabla f} is multiplied by the square of the length of these gradients. The second term in the integrand is a regularization term. It encourages the spatial variations in the components of the solution to be small by penalizing the sum of all the partial derivatives of v {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} } . As is customary in these types of variational formulations, there is a regularization parameter μ > 0 {\displaystyle \textstyle \mu >0} that must be specified by the user in order to trade off the influence of each of the two terms. If μ {\displaystyle \textstyle \mu } is large, for example, then the resulting field will be very smooth and may not agree as well with the underlying edge gradients. Theoretical Solution. Finding v ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} (x,y)} to minimize Equation 1 requires the use of calculus of variations since v ( x , y ) {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} (x,y)} is a function, not a variable. Accordingly, the Euler equations, which provide the necessary conditions for v {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} } to be a solution can be found by calculus of variations, yielding where ∇ 2 {\displaystyle \textstyle \nabla ^{2}} is the Laplacian operator. It is instructive to examine the form of the equations in (2). Each is a partial differential equation that the components u {\displaystyle u} and v {\displaystyle v} of v {\displaystyle \mathbf {v} } must satisfy. If the magnitude of the edge gradient is small, then the solution of each equation is guided entirely by Laplace's equation, for example ∇ 2 u = 0 {\displaystyle \textstyle \nabla ^{2}u=0} , which will produce a smooth scalar field entirely dependent on its boundary conditions. The boundary conditions are effectively provided by the locations in the image where the magnitude of the edge gradient is large, where the solution is driven to agree more with the edge gradients. Computational Solutions. There are two fundamental ways to compute GVF. First, the energy function E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}} itself (1) can be directly discretized and minimized, for example, by gradient descent. Second, the partial differential equations in (2) can be discretized and solved iteratively. The original GVF paper used an iterative approach, while later papers introduced considerably faster implementations such as an octree-based method, a multi-grid method, and an augmented Lagrangian method. In addition, very fast GPU implementations have been developed in Extensions and Advances. GVF is easily extended to higher dimensions. The energy function is readily written in a vector form as which can be solved by gradient descent or by finding and solving its Euler equation. Figure 2 shows an illustration of a three-dimensional GVF field on the edge map of a simple object (see ). The data and regularization terms in the integrand of the GVF functional can also be modified. A modification described in , called generalized gradient vector flow (GGVF) defines two scalar functions and reformulates the energy as While the choices g ( ∇ f | ) = μ {\displaystyle \textstyle g(\nabla f|)=\mu } and h ( | ∇ f | ) = | ∇ f | 2 {\displaystyle \textstyle h(|\nabla f|)=|\nabla f|^{2}} reduce GGVF to GVF, the alternative choices g ( | ∇ f | ) = exp { − | ∇ f | / K } {\displaystyle \textstyle g(|\nabla f|)=\exp\{-|\nabla f|/K\}} and h ( ∇ f | ) = 1 − g ( | ∇ f | ) {\displaystyle \textstyle h(\nabla f|)=1-g(|\nabla f|)} , for K {\displaystyle K} a user-selected constant, can improve the tradeoff between the data term and its regularization in some applications. The GVF formulation has been further extended to vector-valued images in where a weighted structure tensor of a vector-valued image is used. A learning based probabilistic weighted GVF extension was proposed in to further improve the segmentation for images with severely cluttered textures or high levels of noise. The variational formulation of GVF has also been modified in motion GVF (MGVF) to incorporate object motion in an image sequence. Whereas the diffusion of GVF vectors from a conventional edge map acts in an isotropic manner, the formulation of MGVF incorporates the expected object motion between image frames. An alternative to GVF called vector field convolution (VFC) provides many of the advantages of GVF, has superior noise robustness, and can be computed very fast. The VFC field v V F C {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {v} _{\mathrm {VFC} }} is defined as the convolution of the edge map f {\displaystyle f} with a vector field kernel k {\displaystyle \mathbf {k} } where The vector field kernel k {\displaystyle \textstyle \mathbf {k} } has vectors that always point toward the origin but their magnitudes, determined in detail by the function m {\displaystyle m} , decrease to zero with increasing distance from the origin. The beauty of VFC is that it can be computed very rapidly using a fast Fourier tra
Ratio Club
The Ratio Club was a small British informal dining club from 1949 to 1958 of young psychiatrists, psychologists, physiologists, mathematicians and engineers who met to discuss issues in cybernetics. == History == The idea of the club arose from a symposium on animal behaviour held in July 1949 by the Society of Experimental Biology in Cambridge. The club was founded by the neurologist John Bates, with other notable members such as W. Ross Ashby. The name Ratio was suggested by Albert Uttley, it being the Latin root meaning "computation or the faculty of mind which calculates, plans and reasons". He pointed out that it is also the root of rationarium, meaning a statistical account, and ratiocinatius, meaning argumentative. The use was probably inspired by an earlier suggestion by Donald Mackay of the 'MR club', from Machina ratiocinatrix, a term used by Norbert Wiener in the introduction to his then recently published book Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Wiener used the term in reference to calculus ratiocinator, a calculating machine constructed by Leibniz. The initial membership was W. Ross Ashby, Horace Barlow, John Bates, George Dawson, Thomas Gold, W. E. Hick, Victor Little, Donald MacKay, Turner McLardy, P. A. Merton, John Pringle, Harold Shipton, Donald Sholl, Eliot Slater, Albert Uttley, W. Grey Walter and John Hugh Westcott. Alan Turing joined after the first meeting with I. J. Good, Philip Woodward and William Rushton added soon after. Giles Brindley attended several meetings as a guest. Warren McCulloch made presentations to the club twice, the first time at its inaugural meeting (a talk which the members found disappointing), and became a correspondent with and supporter of a number of its members. Others who attended at least one Ratio Club event as guests included Walter Pitts, Claude Shannon, J.Z. Young, C.H. Waddington, Peter Elias, J. C. R. Licklider, Oliver Selfridge, Benoît Mandelbrot, Colin Cherry and Anthony Oettinger. One one occasion I.J. Good brought along the then director of the USA's National Security Agency (presumably either Ralph Canine or John Samford given the dates). Several members admired the work of psychologist and philosopher Kenneth Craik and considered him an important influence; according to Husbands and Holland "there is no doubt Craik would have been a leading member of the club" had he not died young in 1945. The club has been considered the most influential cybernetics group in the UK, and many of its members went on to become prominent scientists.