In the United States, age verification laws for social media are ostensibly designed to limit young people's access to content deemed problematic such as pornography and to reduce the negative impact of social media on the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents. The purpose and effects of such laws are highly contested. Critics say that these laws suppress free speech by removing online anonymity. They have also stated the laws undermine safety, even for children, by increasing the exposure of user data to breaches, many sites require government IDs and biometric data (such as photographs), often transmitted or secured insecurely and without encryption. They also note that the measures are easily circumvented with VPNs, prompting some states such as Michigan and Wisconsin to propose legislation banning VPNs. == Laws == Many state legislatures have considered or enacted legislation pertaining to young people and social media. In 2022, California passed the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AB 2273) requiring websites that are likely to be used by minors to estimate visitors' ages. On March 23, 2023, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed SB 152 and HB 311, collectively known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act, which requires age verification; if a user is under 18, they have to get parental consent before making an account on any social media platform. Few laws have gone into effect partially due to court challenges. === Arkansas === On April 11, 2023, Arkansas enacted SB 396, the Social Media Safety Act. The law requires certain social media companies that make over $100 million per year to verify the age of new users using a third party, and to obtain parental consent for users under 18. It excludes social media companies that allow a user to generate short video clips as well as games. The law was set to go in effect in September 2023. On June 29, 2023, NetChoice sued the Attorney General of Arkansas Tim Griffin in The Western District Court of Arkansas to block enforcement of the law, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). On July 7, 2023, NetChoice filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law. On July 27, Griffin and Tony Allen filed briefs in opposition to the preliminary injunction. The preliminary injunction was granted by Judge Timothy L. Brooks on August 31, reasoning that the law was too vague, that NetChoice's members will suffer irreparable harm if the act goes into effect, and that age restrictions were ineffective. === California === ==== Digital Age Assurance Act (AB 1043) ==== On October 13, 2025, Gavin Newsom signed the Digital Age Assurance Act into law, which requires operating system providers to estimate the age of a user and into 4 age categories: Under 13 13 - 15 16 - 17 18 and over It comes into force on January 1, 2027. ==== California Age-Appropriate Design Code (AB 2273) ==== On September 15, 2022, California enacted AB 2273, the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act. Its most controversial provisions required online services that are likely to be used by those under 18 to estimate the age of child users with a "reasonable level of certainty". It also required these services to file Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) certifying whether an online product, service, or feature could harm children, including by exposing them to (potentially) harmful content. The law does not define harmful content. Before the law took effect, EFF sent a veto request to Newsom. On December 14, 2022, NetChoice sued. On September 18, 2023, Federal Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted a preliminary injunction. The 9th Circuit on August 16, 2024, affirmed the injunction against the DPIA section of the law and sent the rest back, because the argument in the 9th circuit was mainly focused on the DPIA. ==== Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act (SB 976) ==== On September 20, 2024, California enacted SB 976, Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction. The law requires online platforms to exclude those under 18 from "addictive" feeds unless parental consent is given. It requires online platforms to not send notifications to someone under 18 between 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM without parental consent or between 8:00 am – 3:00 pm without parental consent from September through May (the law does not define what a "notification" is). The law took effect on January 1, 2025, with age verification required as of December 31, 2026. On November 12, NetChoice sued in the Northern District and before Judge Edward John Davila. On December 31, the judge blocked the sections of SB 976 that required time-of-day restrictions. He also enjoined requirements to report on the number of minor users as well as the number of parental assents to access an addictive feed. He did not block the age assurance requirement or blocking minors from seeing addictive feeds without parental consent. His reasoning was that age assurance that runs in the background does not restrict adult access to speech and that regulating feeds does not violate the first amendment because it was content neutral and did not remove any content. On January 1, 2025, NetChoice filed a motion to fully block the law as part of its appeal to the Ninth Circuit. NetChoice claimed that the court erred in its reading of Supreme Court case Moody v. NetChoice by mainly focusing on the concurring opinions and not the deciding opinion. The same day Davila decreed that California's response to NetChoice was due by 11:59 pm. California responded the same day to NetChoice's motion, claiming that the court should not block the full law, claiming that NetChoice had misread Moody v. NetChoice and that NetChoice's members would not likely face any harm from the act because members such as X (formerly Twitter) already offer their members feeds that were not personalized. On January 2, Davila granted NetChoice's motion to block the full law during the appeals process by delaying the effective date of the law from January 1, 2025, to February 1, 2025. That day NetChoice appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. === Florida === On January 5, 2024, Tyler Sirois introduced HB 1, which would ban anyone under 16 from using any social media platform and would require platforms to verify the age of users. After the bill passed, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) published a blog post opposing the bill for violating the rights of minors and adults. The bill was vetoed by Governor Ron DeSantis on March 1, 2024, claiming that the State Legislature was going to enact a better alternative. HB 3 then decreased the minimum age from 16 to 14, allowing minors aged 14 and 15 to make social media accounts with parental consent. Florida enacted it on March 25, 2024, and took effect on January 1, 2025. A surge of 1,150% in VPN demand in Florida was detected after the law took effect. VPN services provide the ability to circumvent the law. On October 28, 2024, NetChoice and Computer and Communications Industry Association sued. The Judge is Chief Judge Mark E. Walker. On February 28, 2025, arguments were heard on the motion for a preliminary injunction. Walker seemed skeptical of Florida's argument that the law did not violate the first amendment and said the State would have a hard time to justify a complete ban of youth under 14 from social media. On March 13, Walker denied the motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs had not proven that at least one of their members had at least 10 percent of their users under 16 use their platform for at least 2 hours per day. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction which was granted on June 3, for failing First Amendment Intermediate scrutiny. The injunction left in force the provision that allowed parents to request termination of their child's social media account. === Georgia === On April 23, 2024, Georgia enacted SB 351, which became Act 463. Act 463 requires platforms to verify the age of users of social media platforms and require users under 16 years of age to have parental consent before creating an account. It also requires schools to ban all social media platforms, including YouTube. Before the law was signed NetChoice sent a veto request to Kemp claiming the law was unconstitutional and was bad policy. After the bill was enacted, ACLU and NetChoice criticized the bill. NetChoice sued two months before the law's effective date. The Judge is Amy Totenberg. the suit claims that the law violates the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendments. === Louisiana === ==== Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation Act (SB 162) ==== On June 28, 2023, Louisiana enacted SB 162, the Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation Act. It requires social media platforms to verify user age and get parental consent for users under 16, prohibits account holders under 1
NASA AI Assisted-Air Quality Monitoring Project
The NASA Expert-System Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (ES-ITMS) Project was a public-private partnership to develop an artificial intelligence assisted, air quality monitoring system and was qualified for use on the Space Shuttle. The partnership was also the first cost and intellectual property shared public-partnership implemented by NASA, which used the commercial Research and Development Limited Partnership (RDLP) model that had been adopted by the Reagan Administration for Department of Defense semiconductor development, and recommended for use by NASA for space commercialization. The project partners included NASA, the University of Florida and Finnigan MAT Corporation, was organized and administered by the NASA Joint Enterprise Institute (subsequently NASA Joint Sponsored Program) and ran from 1988 through 1990. The partnership concluded final testing in 1991, generating four patents, expert system software and application protocol reports. The system was space qualified for use on the Shuttle and elements of the ES-ITMS system were integrated into the product Improvements for Finnigan MAT corporation. The success of the partnership lead NASA to create a pilot program to develop partnership business models as an ongoing management practice. == Purpose and objectives == The need to monitor air quality in confined spaces represented an increasing challenge for NASA's planned space missions and private sector facility managers facing the increased scrutiny of possible air contaminants. Up to the early 1980's, air quality monitors generally required large spaces and human technicians to interpret readings. This created a need for miniaturized air quality monitors that could generate reliable and accurate analytic results without on-site technician presence. NASA initiated projects to develop..."mobile and/or portable mass spectrometers" that evaluated the "tradeoff between instrumentation capabilities and space, weight and power considerations." NASA selected a "commercial ITMS instrument capable of generating electron ionization, chemical ionization and mass spectrometry data", to develop a linked expert system to accomplish analysis without human intervention. The commercial instrumentation was from Finnigan MAT corporation while the scientific expertise to support expert system development was available at the University of Florida. The project managers at NASA Ames created a single, integrated project using the RDLP model with objectives to: Develop AI/expert system software for instrument control (NASA's role) Expand sensitivity, selectivity and speed of the spectrometer (Univ Florida role) Expand the spectrometer analytic capability and automate the screening (Finnigan role) == Membership == The partnership included seven specialists from five member organizations: Federal Government National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Commercial Finnigan MAT Corporation (Thermo-Fisher Scientific) TGS Technology, Inc. Research Management University of Florida == Organization, management and administration == The technical project was organized into two development teams, one located in at the NASA Ames Research Center covering expert systems and analytic capabilities and one in Florida covering improved sensitivity and testing. The partnership management and administration was provided by a non-profit, partnership support organization: the Joint Enterprise Institute operating through San Francisco State University Foundation (SFSUF) with a NASA employee liaison, Syed Shariq. == Public-private partnership == The partnership structure was as a prototype test of a pilot NASA program to develop public-private partnership business models. The pilot program was known as the NASA Joint Sponsored Research Program (JSRP), which operated as the NASA Joint Enterprise Institute between 1988 and 1991. The partnership was the first public-private, research and development partnership implemented by NASA in response to national policy shifts to increase technology transfer and space commercialization. The partnership structure included a two year technology development and testing plan that cost $610,000, of which NASA funded $310,000, Finnigan $175,000 and the University of Florida $95,000. == Results and commercialization == The project generated patents (4), software (2) and application protocol reports (8). NASA gained use of the patents and jointly development software while Finnigan received commercial utilization rights. The results were commercialized within eighteen months of project completion. == Recognition == NASA recognized the project as a space qualified instrument. Its achievements were reported to the NASA Administrator, directly leading to establishment of the agency-wide Joint Sponsored Research Program.
Campus network
A campus network, campus area network, corporate area network or CAN is a computer network made up of an interconnection of local area networks (LANs) within a limited geographical area. The networking equipments (switches, routers) and transmission media (optical fiber, copper plant, Cat5 cabling etc.) are almost entirely owned by the campus tenant / owner: an enterprise, university, government etc. A campus area network is larger than a local area network but smaller than a metropolitan area network (MAN) or wide area network (WAN). == University campuses == College or university campus area networks often interconnect a variety of buildings, including administrative buildings, academic buildings, laboratories, university libraries, or student centers, residence halls, gymnasiums, and other outlying structures, like conference centers, technology centers, and training institutes. Early examples include the Stanford University Network at Stanford University, Project Athena at MIT, and the Andrew Project at Carnegie Mellon University. == Corporate campuses == Much like a university campus network, a corporate campus network serves to connect buildings. Examples of such are the networks at Googleplex and Microsoft's campus. Campus networks are normally interconnected with high speed Ethernet links operating over optical fiber such as gigabit Ethernet and 10 Gigabit Ethernet. == Area range == The range of CAN is 1 to 5 km (1 to 3 mi). If two buildings have the same domain and they are connected with a network, then it will be considered as CAN only. Though the CAN is mainly used for corporate campuses so the link will be high speed.
Social profiling
Social profiling is the process of constructing a social media user's profile using their social data. In general, profiling refers to the data science process of generating a person's profile with computerized algorithms and technology. There are various platforms for sharing this information with the proliferation of growing popular social networks, including but not limited to LinkedIn, Google+, Facebook and Twitter. == Social profile and social data == A person's social data refers to the personal data that they generate either online or offline (for more information, see social data revolution). A large amount of these data, including one's language, location and interest, is shared through social media and social network. Users join multiple social media platforms and their profiles across these platforms can be linked using different methods to obtain their interests, locations, content, and friend list. Altogether, this information can be used to construct a person's social profile. Meeting the user's satisfaction level for information collection is becoming more challenging. This is because of too much "noise" generated, which affects the process of information collection due to explosively increasing online data. Social profiling is an emerging approach to overcome the challenges faced in meeting user's demands by introducing the concept of personalized search while keeping in consideration user profiles generated using social network data. A study reviews and classifies research inferring users social profile attributes from social media data as individual and group profiling. The existing techniques along with utilized data sources, the limitations, and challenges were highlighted. The prominent approaches adopted include machine learning, ontology, and fuzzy logic. Social media data from Twitter and Facebook have been used by most of the studies to infer the social attributes of users. The literature showed that user social attributes, including age, gender, home location, wellness, emotion, opinion, relation, influence are still need to be explored. === Personalized meta-search engines === The ever-increasing online content has resulted in the lack of proficiency of centralized search engine's results. It can no longer satisfy user's demand for information. A possible solution that would increase coverage of search results would be meta-search engines, an approach that collects information from numerous centralized search engines. A new problem thus emerges, that is too much data and too much noise is generated in the collection process. Therefore, a new technique called personalized meta-search engines was developed. It makes use of a user's profile (largely social profile) to filter the search results. A user's profile can be a combination of a number of things, including but not limited to, "a user's manual selected interests, user's search history", and personal social network data. == Social media profiling == According to Samuel D. Warren II and Louis Brandeis (1890), disclosure of private information and the misuse of it can hurt people's feelings and cause considerable damage in people's lives. Social networks provide people access to intimate online interactions; therefore, information access control, information transactions, privacy issues, connections and relationships on social media have become important research fields and are subjects of concern to the public. Ricard Fogues and other co-authors state that "any privacy mechanism has at its base an access control", that dictate "how permissions are given, what elements can be private, how access rules are defined, and so on". Current access control for social media accounts tend to still be very simplistic: there is very limited diversity in the category of relationships on for social network accounts. User's relationships to others are, on most platforms, only categorized as "friend" or "non-friend" and people may leak important information to "friends" inside their social circle but not necessarily users to they consciously want to share the information to. The below section is concerned with social media profiling and what profiling information on social media accounts can achieve. === Privacy leaks === A lot of information is voluntarily shared on online social networks, such as photos and updates on life activities (new job, hobbies, etc.). People rest assured that different social network accounts on different platforms will not be linked as long as they do not grant permission to these links. However, according to Diane Gan, information gathered online enables "target subjects to be identified on other social networking sites such as Foursquare, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook and Google+, where more personal information was leaked". The majority of social networking platforms use the "opt out approach" for their features. If users wish to protect their privacy, it is user's own responsibility to check and change the privacy settings as a number of them are set to default option. A major social network platforms have developed geo-tag functions and are in popular usage. This is concerning because 39% of users have experienced profiling hacking; 78% burglars have used major social media networks and Google Street-view to select their victims; and an astonishing 54% of burglars attempted to break into empty houses when people posted their status updates and geo-locations. === Facebook === Formation and maintenance of social media accounts and their relationships with other accounts are associated with various social outcomes. In 2015, for many firms, customer relationship management is essential and is partially done through Facebook. Before the emergence and prevalence of social media, customer identification was primarily based upon information that a firm could directly acquire: for example, it may be through a customer's purchasing process or voluntary act of completing a survey/loyalty program. However, the rise of social media has greatly reduced the approach of building a customer's profile/model based on available data. Marketers now increasingly seek customer information through Facebook; this may include a variety of information users disclose to all users or partial users on Facebook: name, gender, date of birth, e-mail address, sexual orientation, marital status, interests, hobbies, favorite sports team(s), favorite athlete(s), or favorite music, and more importantly, Facebook connections. However, due to the privacy policy design, acquiring true information on Facebook is no trivial task. Often, Facebook users either refuse to disclose true information (sometimes using pseudonyms) or setting information to be only visible to friends, Facebook users who "LIKE" your page are also hard to identify. To do online profiling of users and cluster users, marketers and companies can and will access the following kinds of data: gender, the IP address and city of each user through the Facebook Insight page, who "LIKED" a certain user, a page list of all the pages that a person "LIKED" (transaction data), other people that a user follow (even if it exceeds the first 500, which we usually can not see) and all the publicly shared data. === Twitter === First launched on the Internet in March 2006, Twitter is a platform on which users can connect and communicate with any other user in just 280 characters. Like Facebook, Twitter is also a crucial tunnel for users to leak important information, often unconsciously, but able to be accessed and collected by others. According to Rachel Nuwer, in a sample of 10.8 million tweets by more than 5,000 users, their posted and publicly shared information are enough to reveal a user's income range. A postdoctoral researcher from the University of Pennsylvania, Daniel Preoţiuc-Pietro and his colleagues were able to categorize 90% of users into corresponding income groups. Their existing collected data, after being fed into a machine-learning model, generated reliable predictions on the characteristics of each income group. The mobile app called Streamd.in displays live tweets on Google Maps by using geo-location details attached to the tweet, and traces the user's movement in the real world. === Profiling photos on social network === The advent and universality of social media networks have boosted the role of images and visual information dissemination. Many types of visual information on social media transmit messages from the author, location information and other personal information. For example, a user may post a photo of themselves in which landmarks are visible, which can enable other users to determine where they are. In a study done by Cristina Segalin, Dong Seon Cheng and Marco Cristani, they found that profiling user posts' photos can reveal personal traits such as personality and mood. In the study, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) is introduced. It builds on the main characteristics of computational
Feistel cipher
In cryptography, a Feistel cipher (also known as Luby–Rackoff block cipher) is a symmetric structure used in the construction of block ciphers, named after the German-born physicist and cryptographer Horst Feistel, who did pioneering research while working for IBM; it is also commonly known as a Feistel network. A large number of block ciphers use the scheme, including the US Data Encryption Standard, the Soviet/Russian GOST (aka Magma) and the more recent Blowfish and Twofish ciphers. In a Feistel cipher, encryption and decryption are very similar operations, and both consist of iteratively running a function called a "round function" a fixed number of times. == History == Many modern symmetric block ciphers are based on Feistel networks. Feistel networks were first seen commercially in IBM's Lucifer cipher, designed by Horst Feistel and Don Coppersmith in 1973. Feistel networks gained respectability when the U.S. Federal Government adopted the DES (a cipher based on Lucifer, with changes made by the NSA) in 1976. Like other components of the DES, the iterative nature of the Feistel construction makes implementing the cryptosystem in hardware easier (particularly on the hardware available at the time of DES's design). == Design == A Feistel network uses a round function, a function which takes two inputs – a data block and a subkey – and returns one output of the same size as the data block. In each round, the round function is run on half of the data to be encrypted, and its output is XORed with the other half of the data. This is repeated a fixed number of times, and the final output is the encrypted data. An important advantage of Feistel networks compared to other cipher designs such as substitution–permutation networks (SP-networks) is that the entire operation is guaranteed to be invertible (that is, encrypted data can be decrypted), even if the round function is not itself invertible. The round function can be made arbitrarily complicated, since it does not need to be designed to be invertible. Furthermore, the encryption and decryption operations are very similar, even identical in some cases, requiring only a reversal of the key schedule. Therefore, the size of the code or circuitry required to implement such a cipher is nearly halved. Unlike SP-networks, Feistel networks also do not depend on a substitution box that could cause timing side-channels in software implementations. == Theoretical work == The structure and properties of Feistel ciphers have been extensively analyzed by cryptographers. Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff analyzed the Feistel cipher construction and proved that if the round function is a cryptographically secure pseudorandom function, with Ki used as the seed, then 3 rounds are sufficient to make the block cipher a pseudorandom permutation, while 4 rounds are sufficient to make it a "strong" pseudorandom permutation (which means that it remains pseudorandom even to an adversary who gets oracle access to its inverse permutation). Because of this very important result of Luby and Rackoff, Feistel ciphers are sometimes called Luby–Rackoff block ciphers. Further theoretical work has generalized the construction somewhat and given more precise bounds for security. == Construction details == Let F {\displaystyle \mathrm {F} } be the round function and let K 0 , K 1 , … , K n {\displaystyle K_{0},K_{1},\ldots ,K_{n}} be the sub-keys for the rounds 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle 0,1,\ldots ,n} respectively. Then the basic operation is as follows: Split the plaintext block into two equal pieces: ( L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} , R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} ). For each round i = 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=0,1,\dots ,n} , compute L i + 1 = R i , {\displaystyle L_{i+1}=R_{i},} R i + 1 = L i ⊕ F ( R i , K i ) , {\displaystyle R_{i+1}=L_{i}\oplus \mathrm {F} (R_{i},K_{i}),} where ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } means XOR. Then the ciphertext is ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} . Decryption of a ciphertext ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} is accomplished by computing for i = n , n − 1 , … , 0 {\displaystyle i=n,n-1,\ldots ,0} R i = L i + 1 , {\displaystyle R_{i}=L_{i+1},} L i = R i + 1 ⊕ F ( L i + 1 , K i ) . {\displaystyle L_{i}=R_{i+1}\oplus \operatorname {F} (L_{i+1},K_{i}).} Then ( L 0 , R 0 ) {\displaystyle (L_{0},R_{0})} is the plaintext again. The diagram illustrates both encryption and decryption. Note the reversal of the subkey order for decryption; this is the only difference between encryption and decryption. === Unbalanced Feistel cipher === Unbalanced Feistel ciphers use a modified structure where L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} and R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} are not of equal lengths. The Skipjack cipher is an example of such a cipher. The Texas Instruments digital signature transponder uses a proprietary unbalanced Feistel cipher to perform challenge–response authentication. The Thorp shuffle is an extreme case of an unbalanced Feistel cipher in which one side is a single bit. This has better provable security than a balanced Feistel cipher but requires more rounds. There exists Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 Feistel networks, where the Feistel function is one fourth the size of the block but operates a varying number of times within one round. === Other uses === The Feistel construction is also used in cryptographic algorithms other than block ciphers. For example, the optimal asymmetric encryption padding (OAEP) scheme uses a simple Feistel network to randomize ciphertexts in certain asymmetric-key encryption schemes. A generalized Feistel algorithm can be used to create strong permutations on small domains of size not a power of two (see format-preserving encryption). === Feistel networks as a design component === Whether the entire cipher is a Feistel cipher or not, Feistel-like networks can be used as a component of a cipher's design. For example, MISTY1 is a Feistel cipher using a three-round Feistel network in its round function, Skipjack is a modified Feistel cipher using a Feistel network in its G permutation, and Threefish (part of Skein) is a non-Feistel block cipher that uses a Feistel-like MIX function. == List of Feistel ciphers == Feistel or modified Feistel: Generalised Feistel: CAST-256 CLEFIA MacGuffin RC2 RC6 Skipjack SMS4
Enterprise resource planning
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) is the integrated management of main business processes, often in real time and mediated by software and technology. ERP is usually referred to as a category of business management software—typically a suite of integrated applications—that an organization can use to collect, store, manage and interpret data from many business activities. The finance module in particular is essential to a suite of applications meeting the definition of an ERP system. The finance module provides the system of record for the organisation; recording the commercial impact of the business operations in the General Ledger. ERP systems can be local-based or cloud-based. Cloud-based applications have grown rapidly since the early 2010s due to the increased efficiencies arising from information being readily available from any location with Internet access. However, ERP differs from integrated business management systems by including planning all resources that are required in the future to meet business objectives. This includes plans for getting suitable staff and manufacturing capabilities for future needs. ERP provides an integrated and continuously updated view of core business processes, typically using a shared database managed by a database management system. ERP systems track business resources—cash, raw materials, production capacity—and the status of business commitments: orders, purchase orders, and payroll. The applications that make up the system share data across various departments (manufacturing, purchasing, sales, accounting, etc.) that provide the data. ERP facilitates information flow between all business functions and manages connections to outside stakeholders. Estimates of the size of the global ERP market range between USD $78 and $81 billion in 2026 . Though early ERP systems focused on large enterprises, smaller enterprises increasingly use ERP systems. The ERP system integrates varied organizational systems and facilitates error-free transactions and production, thereby enhancing the organization's efficiency. However, developing an ERP system differs from traditional system development. ERP systems run on a variety of computer hardware and network configurations, typically using a database as an information repository. == Origin == Business and technology research and advisory firm Gartner is credited for first using the acronym ERP in the 1990s. The term captured a functional extension of two manufacturing-based concepts, material requirements planning (MRP) and manufacturing resource planning (MRP II). Without replacing these terms, ERP came to represent a larger whole that reflected the evolution of application integration beyond manufacturing. Not all ERP packages are developed from a manufacturing core; ERP vendors variously began assembling their packages with finance-and-accounting, maintenance, and human-resource components. By the mid-1990s ERP systems addressed all core enterprise functions. Governments and non–profit organizations also began to use ERP systems. An "ERP system selection methodology" is a formal process for selecting an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. Existing methodologies include: Kuiper's funnel method, Dobrin's three-dimensional (3D) web-based decision support tool, and the Clarkston Potomac methodology. == Expansion == ERP systems experienced rapid growth in the 1990s. Because of the year 2000 problem many companies took the opportunity to replace their old systems with ERP. ERP systems initially focused on automating back office functions that did not directly affect customers and the public. Front office functions, such as customer relationship management (CRM), dealt directly with customers, or e-business systems such as e-commerce and e-government—or supplier relationship management (SRM) became integrated later, when the internet simplified communicating with external parties. "ERP II" was coined in 2000 in an article by Gartner Publications entitled ERP Is Dead—Long Live ERP II. It describes web–based software that provides real–time access to ERP systems to employees and partners (such as suppliers and customers). The ERP II role expands traditional ERP resource optimization and transaction processing. Rather than just manage buying, selling, etc.—ERP II leverages information in the resources under its management to help the enterprise collaborate with other enterprises. ERP II is more flexible than the first generation ERP. Rather than confine ERP system capabilities within the organization, it goes beyond the corporate walls to interact with other systems. Enterprise application suite is an alternate name for such systems. ERP II systems are typically used to enable collaborative initiatives such as supply chain management (SCM), customer relationship management (CRM) and business intelligence (BI) among business partner organizations through the use of various electronic business technologies. The large proportion of companies are pursuing a strong managerial targets in ERP system instead of acquire an ERP company. Developers now make more effort to integrate mobile devices with the ERP system. ERP vendors are extending ERP to these devices, along with other business applications, so that businesses don't have to rely on third-party applications. As an example, the e-commerce platform Shopify was able to make ERP tools from Microsoft and Oracle available on its app in October 2021. Technical stakes of modern ERP concern integration—hardware, applications, networking, supply chains. ERP now covers more functions and roles—including decision making, stakeholders' relationships, standardization, transparency, globalization, etc. == Functional areas == An ERP system covers the following common functional areas. In many ERP systems, these are called and grouped together as ERP modules: Financial accounting: general ledger, fixed assets, payables including vouchering, matching and payment, receivables and collections, cash management, financial consolidation Management accounting: budgeting, costing, cost management, activity based costing, billing, invoicing (optional) Human resources: recruiting, training, rostering, payroll, benefits, retirement and pension plans, diversity management, retirement, separation Manufacturing: engineering, bill of materials, work orders, scheduling, capacity, workflow management, quality control, manufacturing process, manufacturing projects, manufacturing flow, product life cycle management Order processing: order to cash, order entry, credit checking, pricing, available to promise, inventory, shipping, sales analysis and reporting, sales commissioning Supply chain management: supply chain planning, supplier scheduling, product configurator, order to cash, purchasing, inventory, claim processing, warehousing (receiving, putaway, picking and packing) Project management: project planning, resource planning, project costing, work breakdown structure, billing, time and expense, performance units, activity management Customer relationship management (CRM): sales and marketing, commissions, service, customer contact, call center support – CRM systems are not always considered part of ERP systems but rather business support systems (BSS) Supplier relationship management (SRM): suppliers, orders, payments. Data services: various "self-service" interfaces for customers, suppliers or employees Management of school and educational institutes. Contract management: creating, monitoring, and managing contracts, reducing administrative burdens and minimising legal risks. These modules often feature contract templates, electronic signature capabilities, automated alerts for contract milestones, and advanced search functionality. === GRP – ERP use in government === Government resource planning (GRP) is the equivalent of an ERP for the public sector and an integrated office automation system for government bodies. The software structure, modularization, core algorithms and main interfaces do not differ from other ERPs, and ERP software suppliers manage to adapt their systems to government agencies. Both system implementations, in private and public organizations, are adopted to improve productivity and overall business performance in organizations, but comparisons (private vs. public) of implementations shows that the main factors influencing ERP implementation success in the public sector are cultural. == Best practices == Most ERP systems incorporate best practices. This means the software reflects the vendor's interpretation of the most effective way to perform each business process. Systems vary in how conveniently the customer can modify these practices. Use of best practices eases compliance with requirements such as International Financial Reporting Standards, Sarbanes–Oxley, or Basel II. They can also help comply with de facto industry standards, such as electronic funds transfer. This is because the procedure can be readily
Data Reference Model
The Data Reference Model (DRM) is one of the five reference models of the Federal Enterprise Architecture. == Overview == The DRM is a framework whose primary purpose is to enable information sharing and reuse across the United States federal government via the standard description and discovery of common data and the promotion of uniform data management practices. The DRM describes artifacts which can be generated from the data architectures of federal government agencies. The DRM provides a flexible and standards-based approach to accomplish its purpose. The scope of the DRM is broad, as it may be applied within a single agency, within a community of interest, or cross-community of interest. == Data Reference Model topics == === DRM structure === The DRM provides a standard means by which data may be described, categorized, and shared. These are reflected within each of the DRM's three standardization areas: Data Description: Provides a means to uniformly describe data, thereby supporting its discovery and sharing. Data Context: Facilitates discovery of data through an approach to the categorization of data according to taxonomies. Additionally, enables the definition of authoritative data assets within a community of interest. Data Sharing: Supports the access and exchange of data where access consists of ad hoc requests (such as a query of a data asset), and exchange consists of fixed, re-occurring transactions between parties. Enabled by capabilities provided by both the Data Context and Data Description standardization areas. === DRM Version 2 === The Data Reference Model version 2 released in November 2005 is a 114-page document with detailed architectural diagrams and an extensive glossary of terms. The DRM also make many references to ISO standards specifically the ISO/IEC 11179 metadata registry standard. === DRM usage === The DRM is not technically a published technical interoperability standard such as web services, it is an excellent starting point for data architects within federal and state agencies. Any federal or state agencies that are involved with exchanging information with other agencies or that are involved in data warehousing efforts should use this document as a guide.