Machine unlearning is a branch of machine learning focused on removing specific undesired element, such as private data, wrong or manipulated training data, outdated information, copyrighted material, harmful content, dangerous abilities, or misinformation, without needing to rebuild models from the ground up. Large language models, like the ones powering ChatGPT, may be asked not just to remove specific elements but also to unlearn a "concept," "fact," or "knowledge," which aren't easily linked to specific examples. New terms such as "model editing," "concept editing," and "knowledge unlearning" have emerged to describe this process. == History == Early research efforts were largely motivated by Article 17 of the GDPR, the European Union's privacy regulation commonly known as the "right to be forgotten" (RTBF), introduced in 2014. The GDPR did not anticipate that the development of large language models would make data erasure a complex task. This issue has since led to research on "machine unlearning," with a growing focus on removing copyrighted material, harmful content, dangerous capabilities, and misinformation. Just as early experiences in humans shape later ones, some concepts are more fundamental and harder to unlearn. A piece of knowledge may be so deeply embedded in the model's knowledge graph that unlearning it could cause internal contradictions, requiring adjustments to other parts of the graph to resolve them. Researchers have now also started studying unlearning in the context of removing incorrect or adversarially manipulated training data such as systematically biased labels or poisoning attacks. == Motivations == At present, machine unlearning is motivated by a growing range of concerns that extend well beyond the field's original focus on data privacy. A widely used taxonomy in the literature distinguishes two high-level categories of motivation. Access revocation covers cases where a data subject or rights holder requests the removal of data they own or control. This is most commonly associated with RTBF established by the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and analogous legislation such as the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). These regulations grant individuals the legal right to request erasure of their personal data from any system that has processed it, including models that were trained on it. Access revocation also encompasses the removal of copyrighted or pay-walled content that was incorporated into training corpora without the necessary licenses, a concern that has become prominent with the widespread use of largely web-scraped pre-training datasets. Model correction covers cases where the model exhibits undesirable behavior arising from the training data, regardless of any individual's request. This includes: Removal of toxic, biased, or unsafe outputs introduced by harmful content in the training set Correction of stale or factually incorrect associations, such as outdated knowledge encoded in a deployed model Removal of dangerous capabilities, such as detailed knowledge of the synthesis of chemical or biological agents Correction of the influence of data poisoning or adversarial attacks that have corrupted model behavior This second category has been formalized as corrective machine unlearning, which frames unlearning as a post-training mechanism for repairing the effects of bad or harmful training data. It is closely related to the AI safety literature, where data filtering alone has been found insufficient to prevent hazardous knowledge from being encoded in model weights, motivating unlearning as a complementary risk mitigation strategy. A further distinction has been drawn in the literature between removal {eliminating the influence of specific training data on model parameters) and suppression (preventing the model from generating specific outputs regardless of how that knowledge is encoded). These two goals are not equivalent: removing training data does not guarantee meaningful output suppression, and suppressing outputs does not constitute removal of the underlying training data's influence. == SISA Training == SISA is a training strategy consisting of four mechanisms designed to make machine unlearning more efficient by structuring how models are trained and updated. Its goal is to allow a system to remove the influence of specific data points without retraining an entire model from scratch. By reorganizing training data and workflows, SISA reduces the computational burden of unlearning requests. Sharding divides the training dataset into multiple disjoint subsets, or shards. Each shard is used to train a separate model instance. This ensures that a single data point affects only one shard, so unlearning it requires updating only the corresponding shard rather than the full model. Isolation refers to training each shard independently, with nothing shared across shards during the training process. This separation prevents cross-contamination between shards, ensuring that forgetting data in one shard does not require adjustments to any others. Slicing breaks the data within each shard into sequential slices and stores model states after each slice is trained on. When an unlearning request targets a piece of data, the system can roll back to the checkpoint before the point was seen and retrain only from that slice forward. This reduces retraining time even within a shard. Aggregation occurs at inference, when the model is queried. It combines the outputs of each shard to determine the output of the overall model. This is often through majority voting or averaging. This allows SISA-trained systems to behave like a single model despite being composed of multiple shard-level models. Together, these mechanisms enable machine learning systems to forget specific data points with far lower computational cost than full retraining. The trade-off is that sharding and slicing can lead to reduced model accuracy, worse generalization, and increased storage requirements for the intermediate checkpoints. This can be tolerable based on the needs of the individual or organization to comply with "right to be forgotten" or efficiently recover from backdoor attacks. == Algorithms == Machine unlearning algorithms are broadly categorized into exact and approximate methods, reflecting a fundamental trade-off between formal guarantees and computational tractability. === Exact Unlearning === Exact unlearning methods produce a model that is statistically indistinguishable from one retrained from scratch on the dataset with the forget data removed. The canonical framework for exact unlearning is SISA Training (Sharded, Isolated, Sliced, and Aggregated), introduced by Bourtoule et al. (2021). SISA partitions the training dataset into disjoint shards and trains a separate sub-model on each. At inference time, predictions are aggregated across sub-models. When an unlearning request is received, only the sub-model corresponding to the shard containing the target data requires retraining, reducing computational overhead proportionally to the number of shards. Exact methods provide the strongest guarantees but become prohibitively expensive for large pre-trained neural networks and are generally limited to settings where training can be structured in advance. === Approximate Unlearning === Approximate unlearning methods seek to produce a model whose behavior is sufficiently close to an exactly unlearned model without the cost of full retraining. These methods dominate practical applications. Common approaches include: Gradient Ascent: The model is fine-tuned by maximizing the loss on the forget set, directly degrading its performance on targeted data. This is the most direct approach but risks destabilizing performance on retained data. Random Labelling: The model is fine-tuned on the forget set using randomly shuffled labels, confusing its associations with the targeted data while producing a less aggressive weight shift than pure gradient ascent. Gradient Difference: Combines gradient ascent on the forget set with simultaneous gradient descent on the retain set, using the retain objective as a regularizer to preserve general model utility. KL Divergence Regularization: Minimizes the KL divergence between the outputs of the unlearned model and the original model on the retain set, anchoring behavior on data the model should remember. Weight Pruning and Fine-tuning: Parameters with the smallest L1-norm are pruned — targeting weights most weakly associated with general knowledge and potentially most associated with the forget set — followed by fine-tuning on the retain set to restore utility. Layer Reset and Fine-tuning: The first or last k layers are re-initialized to random weights and the model is subsequently fine-tuned on the retain set. This is a coarse but computationally simple approach. Selective Synaptic Dampening: Uses influence functions to estimate the effect of individual trainin
Pedagogical agent
A pedagogical agent is a concept borrowed from computer science and artificial intelligence and applied to education, usually as part of an intelligent tutoring system (ITS). It is a simulated human-like interface between the learner and the content, in an educational environment. A pedagogical agent is designed to model the type of interactions between a student and another person. Mabanza and de Wet define it as "a character enacted by a computer that interacts with the user in a socially engaging manner". A pedagogical agent can be assigned different roles in the learning environment, such as tutor or co-learner, depending on the desired purpose of the agent. "A tutor agent plays the role of a teacher, while a co-learner agent plays the role of a learning companion". == History == The history of Pedagogical Agents is closely aligned with the history of computer animation. As computer animation progressed, it was adopted by educators to enhance computerized learning by including a lifelike interface between the program and the learner. The first versions of a pedagogical agent were more cartoon than person, like Microsoft's Clippy which helped users of Microsoft Office load and use the program's features in 1997. However, with developments in computer animation, pedagogical agents can now look lifelike. By 2006 there was a call to develop modular, reusable agents to decrease the time and expertise required to create a pedagogical agent. There was also a call in 2009 to enact agent standards. The standardization and re-usability of pedagogical agents is less of an issue since the decrease in cost and widespread availability of animation tools. Individualized pedagogical agents can be found across disciplines including medicine, math, law, language learning, automotive, and armed forces. They are used in applications directed to every age, from preschool to adult. == Learning theories related to pedagogical agent design == === Distributed cognition theory === Distributed cognition theory is the method in which cognition progresses in the context of collaboration with others. Pedagogical agents can be designed to assist the cognitive transfer to the learner, operating as artifacts or partners with collaborative role in learning. To support the performance of an action by the user, the pedagogical agent can act as a cognitive tool as long as the agent is equipped with the knowledge that the user lacks. The interactions between the user and the pedagogical agent can facilitate a social relationship. The pedagogical agent may fulfill the role of a working partner. === Socio-cultural learning theory === Socio-cultural learning theory is how the user develops when they are involved in learning activities in which there is interaction with other agents. A pedagogical agent can: intervene when the user requests, provide support for tasks that the user cannot address, and potentially extend the learners cognitive reach. Interaction with the pedagogical agent may elicit a variety of emotions from the learner. The learner may become excited, confused, frustrated, and/or discouraged. These emotions affect the learners' motivation. === Extraneous Cognitive Load === Extraneous cognitive load is the extra effort being exerted by an individual's working memory due to the way information is being presented. A pedagogical agent can increase the user's cognitive load by distracting them and becoming the focus of their attention, causing split attention between the instructional material and the agent. Agents can reduce the perceived cognitive load by providing narration and personalization that can also promote a user's interest and motivation. While research on the reduction of cognitive load from pedagogical agents is minimal, more studies have shown that agents do not increase it. == Effectiveness == It has been suggested by researchers that pedagogical agents may take on different roles in the learning environment. Examples of these roles are: supplanting, scaffolding, coaching, testing, or demonstrating or modelling a procedure. A pedagogical agent as a tutor has not been demonstrated to add any benefit to an educational strategy in equivalent lessons with and without a pedagogical agent. According to Richard Mayer, there is some support in research for pedagogical agent increasing learning, but only as a presenter of social cues. A co-learner pedagogical agent is believed to increase the student's self-efficacy. By pointing out important features of instructional content, a pedagogical agent can fulfill the signaling function, which research on multimedia learning has shown to enhance learning. Research has demonstrated that human-human interaction may not be completely replaced by pedagogical agents, but learners may prefer the agents to non-agent multimedia systems. This finding is supported by social agency theory. Much like the varying effectiveness of the pedagogical agent roles in the learning environment, agents that take into account the user's affect have had mixed results. Research has shown pedagogical agents that make use of the users’ affect have been found to increase user knowledge retention, motivation, and perceived self-efficacy. However, with such a broad range of modalities in affective expressions, it is often difficult to utilize them. Additionally, having agents detect a user's affective state with precision remains challenging, as displays of affect are different across individuals. == Design == === Attractiveness === The appearance of a pedagogical agent can be manipulated to meet the learning requirements. The attractiveness of a pedagogical agent can enhance student's learning when the users were the opposite gender of the pedagogical agent. Male students prefer a sexy appearance of a female pedagogical agents and dislike the sexy appearance of male agents. Female students were not attracted by the sexy appearance of either male or female pedagogical agents. === Affective Response === Pedagogical agents have reached a point where they can convey and elicit emotion, but also reason about and respond to it. These agents are often designed to elicit and respond to affective actions from users through various modalities such as speech, facial expressions, and body gestures. They respond to the affective state of the given user, and make use of these modalities using a wide array of sensors incorporated into the design of the agent. Specifically in education and training applications, pedagogical agents are often designed to increasingly recognize when users or learners exhibit frustration, boredom, confusion, and states of flow. The added recognition in these agents is a step toward making them more emotionally intelligent, comforting and motivating the users as they interact. === Digital Representation === The design of a pedagogical agent often begins with its digital representation, whether it will be 2D or 3D and static or animated. Several studies have developed pedagogical agents that were both static and animated, then evaluated the relative benefits. Similar to other design considerations, the improved learning from static or animated agents remains questionable. One study showed that the appearance of an agent portrayed using a static image can impact a user's recall, based on the visual appearance. Other research found results that suggest static agent images improve learning outcomes. However, several other studies found user's learned more when the pedagogical agent was animated rather than static. Recently a meta-analysis of such research found a negligible improvement in learning via pedagogical agents, suggesting more work needs to be done in the area to support any claims.
Cloud printing
There are, in essence, three kinds of Cloud printing. == Benefits == 76% of IT teams have moved, or plan to move, their print workflows to the cloud due to its simplicity. Consumers can print easily to any printer from their PC, tablet or smartphone, while the Cloud print service monitors the supplies level. Many printer vendors such as Lexmark propose an automatic supplies shipment based on the real-time analysis of the printer supplies and user behavior to ensure printing will always be possible. For IT department, Cloud Printing eliminates the need for print servers and represents the only way to print from Cloud virtual desktops and servers. For consumers, cloud ready printers eliminate the need for PC connections and print drivers, enabling them to print from mobile devices. As for publishers and content owners, cloud printing allows them to "avoid the cost and complexity of buying and managing the underlying hardware, software and processes" required for the production of professional print products. Leveraging cloud print for print on demand also allows businesses to cut down on the costs associated with mass production. Moreover, cloud printing can be considered more eco-friendly, as it significantly reduces the amount of paper used (13% reduction in print jobs yearly) and lowers carbon emissions from transportation. As many companies move their IT to the Cloud, some adopting the Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop services from Microsoft, the connection from the Cloud environment to the on-premise printers become an issue as opening ports for incoming print flow traffic is not an option. In 2020, at the exact same time Google discontinued its Google Print offer, Microsoft has announced its Universal Print service offer, aimed at making printing compatible with Cloud Desktop environments, making printing driver-free and simple with no client to install on PC. With Universal Print Microsoft has built a disrupting architecture with a value proposition commodifying printers, removing print servers and drivers, allowing to move printers to VLAN for security purpose and printing from anywhere. Clients are free to use any printer from any model as they all work the same, clients are not tied anymore to any printer brand and that gave a significant boost to the Cloud print market. That Microsoft Universal Print architecture provides APIs to third-party developers who can develop add-ons such as Celiveo 365 to extend Microsoft Cloud Print with added features such as access control on printers and copiers, follow-me pull print, data encryption, advanced usage reporting or charge back. == Providers of Consumer Cloud Printing Solutions == Before 2020 only a handful of providers used to work towards a professional cloud print solution, operating in their own niche or focus on mobile devices. In 2020 Microsoft has boosted that market by announcing its Universal Print Cloud printing service and since then many publishers have started to propose solutions for that growing market. The Covid pandemic also created the need for employees to be able to print at home when using the corporate IT software. Closed VPN often prevent accessing home network printers from corporate laptops and Full Public Cloud solutions are meant to be a solution to that problem. After the decision by Google to terminate Google Cloud Print service on 31 December 2020, most printer vendors released their own mobile cloud solution to fill the gap, while Hewlett-Packard implemented its own cloud print with their ePrint solution. Those solutions are often proprietary, only working on printers proposed by the vendor. Google has decided to let third-party developers develop Cloud Print solutions and to limit its scope to certifying the best Print Management offers compatible with its Chrome Enterprise Cloud ecosystem. == Providers of Corporate Cloud Printing solutions == While many print solutions claim to be "Cloud Printing", there are actually three categories: full Private Cloud, full Public Cloud, and Hybrid Cloud. Their differences are real and have an impact on the overall TCO as the more software there is on-site, the more hidden cost there are. In the Full Public Cloud category, independent SaaS vendors like Celiveo, ezeep , Printix , and Y Soft support a wide range of printer brands and models, allowing clients to buy the best printer without being locked on any brand. They are leveraging cloud computing technology to offer cloud-based print infrastructure and cloud-based printing software as a Service (SaaS). These solutions have integrations to cloud enabled printers or provide embedded printer agents. They feature allow users to print to any printer in any network, isolated network or not, even if that printer is otherwise not reachable from the user's computer. This also allows IT departments to move printers to VLAN for maximum security, like what they are doing with IP phones. Google Chrome Enterprise Cloud ecosystem has its own technical particularities and Google certifies Print Management solutions, ensuring they comply with Google technical requirement, yet letting each solution differentiate from others with specific features or security. Many of solutions for Chrome Enterprise are Hybrid, a few are Full Public Cloud. Industry experts believe that as these services become more popular, users will no longer consider printers as necessary assets but rather as devices that they can access on demand when the need to generate a printed page presents itself. == Caveats of Cloud Printing == == Security == Print jobs flow through Public Internet. It is therefore important to verify no Man-in-the-Middle attack can be performed. The only technical solution is to ensure each printer and PC uses a non-self-generated cryptographic token or certificate allowing TLS mutual authentication and specific data encryption. Self-generated printer certificates are unknown from the Cloud and prevent trusted authentication. Microsoft has implemented its Zero Trust Access security in its Universal Print service, it generates a unique certificate on printers compatible with its service. Other Cloud Printing SaaS providers have followed Microsoft on that High Security path. Print jobs data stored on the Cloud is sensitive as it contains user information as well as all information appearing on pages. Good practices require such data is encrypted at rest and in motion, using asymmetric PKI keys instead of fixed encryption keys. Some solutions require to open incoming traffic ports on the firewall to let Cloud services communicate with printers attached behind that firewall (most of the time for IPP/IPPS flows), some other solutions use a pull model where the communication is always initiated by the printer and no firewall port needs to be open. In terms of security the later is to be preferred.
Software construction
Software construction is the process of creating working software via coding and integration. The process includes unit and integration testing although does not include higher level testing such as system testing. Construction is an aspect of the software development lifecycle and is integrated in the various software development process models with varying focus on construction as an activity separate from other activities. In the waterfall model, a software development effort consists of sequential phases including requirements analysis, design, and planning which are prerequisites for starting construction. In an iterative model such as scrum, evolutionary prototyping, or extreme programming, construction as an activity that occurs concurrently or overlapping other activities. Construction planning may include defining the order in which components are created and integrated, the software quality management processes, and the allocation of tasks to teams and developers. To facilitate project management, numerous construction aspects can be measured; these include the amount of code developed, modified, reused, and destroyed, code complexity, code inspection statistics, faults-fixed and faults-found rates, and effort expended. These measurements can be useful for aspects such as ensuring quality and improving the process. == Activities == Construction includes many activities. === Coding === The following are a few of the key aspects of the coding activity: Naming Choice of name for each identifier. One study showed that the effort required to debug a program is minimized when variable names are between 10 and 16 characters. Logic Organization into statements and routines Highly cohesive routines proved to be less error prone than routines with lower cohesion. A study of 450 routines found that 50 percent of the highly cohesive routines were fault free compared to only 18 percent of routines with low cohesion. Another study of a different 450 routines found that routines with the highest coupling-to-cohesion ratios had 7 times as many errors as those with the lowest coupling-to-cohesion ratios and were 20 times as costly to fix. Although studies showed inconclusive results regarding the correlation between routine sizes and the rate of errors in them, but one study found that routines with fewer than 143 lines of code were 2.4 times less expensive to fix than larger routines. Another study showed that the code needed to be changed least when routines averaged 100 to 150 lines of code. Another study found that structural complexity and amount of data in a routine were correlated with errors regardless of its size. Interfaces between routines are some of the most error-prone areas of a program. One study showed that 39 percent of all errors were errors in communication between routines. Unused parameters are correlated with an increased error rate. In one study, only 17 to 29 percent of routines with more than one unreferenced variable had no errors, compared to 46 percent in routines with no unused variables. The number of parameters of a routine should be 7 at maximum as research has found that people generally cannot keep track of more than about seven chunks of information at once. One experiment showed that designs which access arrays sequentially, rather than randomly, result in fewer variables and fewer variable references. One experiment found that loops-with-exit are more comprehensible than other kinds of loops. Regarding the level of nesting in loops and conditionals, studies have shown that programmers have difficulty comprehending more than three levels of nesting. Control flow complexity has been shown to correlate with low reliability and frequent errors. Modularity Structuring and refactoring the code into classes, packages and other structures. When considering containment, the maximum number of data members in a class shouldn't exceed 7±2. Research has shown that this number is the number of discrete items a person can remember while performing other tasks. When considering inheritance, the number of levels in the inheritance tree should be limited. Deep inheritance trees have been found to be significantly associated with increased fault rates. When considering the number of routines in a class, it should be kept as small as possible. A study on C++ programs has found an association between the number of routines and the number of faults. A study by NASA showed that the putting the code into well-factored classes can double the code reusability compared to the code developed using functional design. Error handling Encoding logic to handle both planned and unplanned errors and exceptions. Resource management Managing computational resource use via exclusion mechanisms and discipline in accessing serially reusable resources, including threads or database locks. Security Prevention of code-level security breaches such as buffer overrun and array index overflow. Optimization Optimization while avoiding premature optimization. Documentation Both embedded in the code as comments and as external documents. === Integration === Integration is about combining separately constructed parts. Concerns include planning the sequence in which components will be integrated, creating scaffolding to support interim versions of the software, determining the degree of testing and quality work performed on components before they are integrated, and determining points in the project at which interim versions are tested. === Testing === Testing can reduce the time between when faulty logic is inserted in the code and when it is detected. In some cases, testing is performed after code has been written, but in test-first programming, test cases are created before code is written. Construction includes at least two forms of testing, often performed by the developer who wrote the code: unit testing and integration testing. === Reuse === Software reuse entails more than creating and using libraries. It requires formalizing the practice of reuse by integrating reuse processes and activities into the software life cycle. The tasks related to reuse in software construction during coding and testing may include: selection of the reusable code, evaluation of code or test re-usability, reporting reuse metrics. === Quality assurance === Techniques for ensuring quality as software is constructed include: Testing One study found that the average defect detection rates of Unit testing and integration testing are 30% and 35% respectively. Software inspection With respect to software inspection, one study found that the average defect detection rate of formal code inspections is 60%. Regarding the cost of finding defects, a study found that code reading detected 80% more faults per hour than testing. Another study shown that it costs six times more to detect design defects by using testing than by using inspections. A study by IBM showed that only 3.5 hours were needed to find a defect through code inspections versus 15–25 hours through testing. Microsoft has found that it takes 3 hours to find and fix a defect by using code inspections and 12 hours to find and fix a defect by using testing. In a 700 thousand lines program, it was reported that code reviews were several times as cost-effective as testing. Studies found that inspections result in 20% - 30% fewer defects per 1000 lines of code than less formal review practices and that they increase productivity by about 20%. Formal inspections will usually take 10% - 15% of the project budget and will reduce overall project cost. Researchers found that having more than 2 - 3 reviewers on a formal inspection doesn't increase the number of defects found, although the results seem to vary depending on the kind of material being inspected. Technical review With respect to technical review, one study found that the average defect detection rates of informal code reviews and desk checking are 25% and 40% respectively. Walkthroughs were found to have a defect detection rate of 20% - 40%, but were found also to be expensive especially when project pressures increase. Code reading was found by NASA to detect 3.3 defects per hour of effort versus 1.8 defects per hour for testing. It also finds 20% - 60% more errors over the life of the project than different kinds of testing. A study of 13 reviews about review meetings, found that 90% of the defects were found in preparation for the review meeting while only around 10% were found during the meeting. Static analysis With respect to Static analysis (IEEE1028), studies have shown that a combination of these techniques needs to be used to achieve a high defect detection rate. Other studies showed that different people tend to find different defects. One study found that the extreme programming practices of pair programming, desk checking, unit testing, integration testing, and regression testing can achieve a 90% defect detection rate. An experiment involving exper
Single-page application
A single-page application (SPA) is a web application or website that interacts with the user by dynamically rewriting the current web page with new data from the web server, instead of the default method of loading entire new pages. The goal is faster transitions that make the website feel more like a native app. In a SPA, a page refresh never occurs; instead, all necessary HTML, JavaScript, and CSS code is either retrieved by the browser with a single page load, or the appropriate resources are dynamically loaded and added to the page as necessary, usually in response to user actions. == History == The origins of the term single-page application are unclear, though the concept was discussed at least as early as 2003 by technology evangelists from Netscape. Stuart Morris, a programming student at Cardiff University, Wales, wrote the self-contained website at slashdotslash.com with the same goals and functions in April 2002, and later the same year Lucas Birdeau, Kevin Hakman, Michael Peachey and Clifford Yeh described a single-page application implementation in US patent 8,136,109. Earlier forms were called rich web applications. JavaScript can be used in a web browser to display the user interface (UI), run application logic, and communicate with a web server. Mature free libraries are available that support the building of a SPA, reducing the amount of JavaScript code developers have to write. == Technical approaches == There are various techniques available that enable the browser to retain a single page even when the application requires server communication. === Document hashes === HTML authors can leverage element IDs to show or hide different sections of the HTML document. Then, using CSS, authors can use the :target pseudo-class selector to only show the section of the page which the browser navigated to. === JavaScript frameworks === Web browser JavaScript frameworks and libraries, such as Angular, Ember.js, ExtJS, Knockout.js, Meteor.js, React, Vue.js, and Svelte have adopted SPA principles. Aside from ExtJS, all of these are free. AngularJS is a discontinued fully client-side framework. AngularJS's templating is based on bidirectional UI data binding. Data-binding is an automatic way of updating the view whenever the model changes, as well as updating the model whenever the view changes. The HTML template is compiled in the browser. The compilation step creates pure HTML, which the browser re-renders into the live view. The step is repeated for subsequent page views. In traditional server-side HTML programming, concepts such as controller and model interact within a server process to produce new HTML views. In the AngularJS framework, the controller and model states are maintained within the client browser. Therefore, new pages are capable of being generated without any interaction with a server. Angular 2+ is a SPA Framework developed by Google after AngularJS. There is a strong community of developers using this framework. The framework is updated twice every year. New features and fixes are frequently added in this framework. Ember.js is a client-side JavaScript web application framework based on the model–view–controller (MVC) software architectural pattern. It allows developers to create scalable single-page applications by incorporating common idioms and best practices into a framework that provides a rich object model, declarative two-way data binding, computed properties, automatically updating templates powered by Handlebars.js, and a router for managing application state. ExtJS is also a client side framework that allows creating MVC applications. It has its own event system, window and layout management, state management (stores) and various UI components (grids, dialog windows, form elements etc.). It has its own class system with either dynamic or static loader. The application built with ExtJS can either exist on its own (with state in the browser) or with the server (e.g. with REST API that is used to fill its internal stores). ExtJS has only built in capabilities to use localStorage so larger applications need a server to store state. Knockout.js is a client side framework which uses templates based on the Model-View-ViewModel pattern. Meteor.js is a full-stack (client-server) JavaScript framework designed exclusively for SPAs. It features simpler data binding than Angular, Ember or ReactJS, and uses the Distributed Data Protocol and a publish–subscribe pattern to automatically propagate data changes to clients in real-time without requiring the developer to write any synchronization code. Full stack reactivity ensures that all layers, from the database to the templates, update themselves automatically when necessary. Ecosystem packages such as Server Side Rendering address the problem of search engine optimization. React is a JavaScript library for building user interfaces. It is maintained by Facebook, Instagram and a community of individual developers and corporations. React uses a syntax extension for JavaScript, named JSX, which is a mix of JS and HTML (a subset of HTML). Several companies use React with Redux (JavaScript library) which adds state management capabilities, which (with several other libraries) lets developers create complex applications. Vue.js is a JavaScript framework for building user interfaces. Vue developers also provide Pinia for state management. Svelte is a framework for building user interfaces that compiles Svelte code to JavaScript DOM (Document Object Model) manipulations, avoiding the need to bundle a framework to the client, and allowing for simpler application development syntax. ==== Capabilities and trade-offs in modern frameworks ==== JavaScript-based web application frameworks, such as React and Vue, provide extensive capabilities but come with associated trade-offs. These frameworks often extend or enhance features available through native web technologies, such as routing, component-based development, and state management. While native web standards, including Web Components, modern JavaScript APIs like Fetch and ES Modules, and browser capabilities like Shadow DOM, have advanced significantly, frameworks remain widely used for their ability to enhance developer productivity, offer structured patterns for large-scale applications, simplify handling edge cases, and provide tools for performance optimization. Frameworks can introduce abstraction layers that may contribute to performance overhead, larger bundle sizes, and increased complexity. Modern frameworks, such as React 18 and Vue 3, address these challenges with features like concurrent rendering, tree-shaking, and selective hydration. While these advancements improve rendering efficiency and resource management, their benefits depend on the specific application and implementation context. Lightweight frameworks, such as Svelte and Preact, take different architectural approaches, with Svelte eliminating the virtual DOM entirely in favor of compiling components to efficient JavaScript code, and Preact offering a minimal, compatible alternative to React. Framework choice depends on an application’s requirements, including the team’s expertise, performance goals, and development priorities. A newer category of web frameworks, including enhance.dev, Astro, and Fresh, leverages native web standards while minimizing abstractions and development tooling. These solutions emphasize progressive enhancement, server-side rendering, and optimizing performance. Astro renders static HTML by default while hydrating only interactive parts. Fresh focuses on server-side rendering with zero runtime overhead. Enhance.dev prioritizes progressive enhancement patterns using Web Components. While these tools reduce reliance on client-side JavaScript by shifting logic to build-time or server-side execution, they still use JavaScript where necessary for interactivity. This approach makes them particularly suitable for performance-critical and content-focused applications. === WebAssembly-based frameworks === The following frameworks utilize WebAssembly or can build single-page applications (SPAs) with WebAssembly as a core technology or support mechanism. These frameworks enable high-performance and interactive client-side development, extending the SPA paradigm across languages and ecosystems. Avalonia is primarily a cross-platform desktop UI framework, but experimental support for WebAssembly allows it to be used for SPA development. It has an XAML-based UI design and native-style application features. Blazor WebAssembly is a .NET-based framework that allows developers to build SPAs using C# and Razor syntax. It runs .NET code in the browser via WebAssembly, enabling a full-stack .NET development experience without relying on JavaScript. Flutter on the Web extends Flutter’s cross-platform development capabilities to web-based SPAs. Using Dart and its Skia graphics engine, Flutter allows developers to create visually rich SPAs that
BiP (software)
BiP is a freeware instant messaging application developed by Lifecell Ventures Cooperatief U.A., a subsidiary of Turkcell incorporated in the Netherlands. It allows users to send text messages, voice messages and video calling, and it can be downloaded from the App Store, Google Play, and Huawei AppGallery. BiP has over 53 million users worldwide, and was first released in 2013. == Functions == BiP is a secure, and free communication platform. BiP allows making video and audio calls, allows sharing images, videos and location. BiP includes instant translations to 106 languages and exchange rates. President Erdoğan's Communications Office opposed WhatsApp's enforcement of its updated privacy policy and announced that Erdoğan left WhatsApp and opened an account in Telegram and BiP. The Turkish Ministry of National Defense has announced that it will move information groups to BiP for the same reason. == Others == Banglalink announced a BiP messenger partnership in Bangladesh The Communications Office of President Erdoğan opposed WhatsApp's enforcement of its updated privacy policy and announced that Erdoğan left WhatsApp and opened an account in Telegram and BiP. The Turkish Ministry of National Defense has announced that it will move information groups to BiP for the same reason. The CEO of BiP is Burak Akinci. The number of downloads of the app is 80 million globally.
The Most Dangerous Writing App
The Most Dangerous Writing App is a web application for free writing that combats writer's block by deleting all progress if the user stops typing for five seconds. It is targeted at creative writers who want to write first drafts without worrying about editing or formatting. == Features == The app is designed to "shut down your inner editor and get you into a state of flow", referring to the psychological concept of being in a flow state. Users start a writing session by choosing a time or word limit, and can only save or download their work if they complete the set limit without interruption. An optional "hardcore mode" blurs out everything the user has written so far, making it impossible to edit before finishing the writing session. == History == The Most Dangerous Writing App was created by software engineer Manuel Ebert and was released as free, open source software on February 29, 2016. It was reviewed by Wired, Forbes, Vogue, Huffington Post, The Verge, The Next Web, and others. It has been used in free writing contests and is recommended by NaNoWriMo. In April 2019, The Most Dangerous Writing App was acquired by Squibler, but the original version remains freely accessible.