Galaksija BASIC was the BASIC interpreter of the Galaksija build-it-yourself home computer from Yugoslavia. While being partially based on code taken from TRS-80 Level 1 BASIC, which the creator believed to have been a Microsoft BASIC, the extensive modifications of Galaksija BASIC—such as to include rudimentary array support, video generation code (as the CPU itself did it in absence of dedicated video circuitry) and generally improvements to the programming language—is said to have left not much more than flow-control and floating point code remaining from the original. The core implementation of the interpreter was fully contained in the 4 KiB ROM "A" or "1". The computer's original mainboard had a reserved slot for an extension ROM "B" or "2" that added more commands and features such as a built-in Zilog Z80 assembler. == ROM "A"/"1" symbols and keywords == The core implementation, in ROM "A" or "1", contained 3 special symbols and 32 keywords: ! begins a comment (equivalent of standard BASIC REM command) # Equivalent of standard BASIC DATA statement & prefix for hex numbers ARR$(n) Allocates an array of strings, like DIM, but can allocate only array with name A$ BYTE serves as PEEK when used as a function (e.g. PRINT BYTE(11123)) and POKE when used as a command (e.g. BYTE 11123,123). CALL n Calls BASIC subroutine as GOSUB in most other BASICs (e.g. CALL 100+4X) CHR$(n) converts an ASCII numeric code into a corresponding character (string) DOT x, y draws (command) or inspects (function) a pixel at given coordinates (0<=x<=63, 0<=y<=47). DOT displays the clock or time controlled by content of Y$ variable. Not in standard ROM EDIT n causes specified program line to be edited ELSE standard part of IF-ELSE construct (Galaksija did not use THEN) EQ compare alphanumeric values X$ and Y$ FOR standard FOR loop GOTO standard GOTO command HOME equivalent of standard BASIC CLS command - clears the screen HOME n protects n characters from the top of the screen from being scrolled away IF standard part of IF-ELSE construct (Galaksija did not use THEN) INPUT user entry of variable INT(n) a function that returns the greatest integer value equal to or lesser than n KEY(n) test whether a particular keyboard key is pressed LIST lists the program. Optional numeric argument specifies the first line number to begin listing with. MEM returns memory consumption data (need details here) NEW clears the current BASIC program NEW n clears BASIC program and moves beginning of BASIC area NEXT standard terminator of FOR loop OLD loads a program from tape OLD n loads program to different address PTR Returns address of the variable PRINT Printing numeric or string expression. RETURN Return from BASIC subroutine RND function (takes no arguments) that returns a random number between 0 and 1. RUN runs (executes) BASIC program. Optional numeric argument specifies the line number to begin execution with. SAVE saves a program to tape. Optional two arguments specify memory range to be saved (need details here). STEP standard part of FOR loop STOP stops execution of BASIC program TAKE replacement for READ and RESTORE. If the parameter is variable name, acts as READ, if it is number, acts as RESTORE UNDOT x, y "undraws" (resets) at specified coordinates (see DOT) UNDOT Stops the clock, not part of ROM USR Calls machine code subroutine WORD Double byte PEEK and POKE == ROM "B"/"2" additional symbols and keywords == The extended BASIC features, in ROM "B" or "2", contained one extra reserved symbol and 22 extra keywords: % /LABEL ABS(x) ARCTG(x) COS(x) COSD(x) DEL DUMP EXP(x) INP(x) LDUMP LLIST LN(x) LPRINT OUT PI POW(x,y) REN SIN(x), SIND(x) SQR(x) TG(x) TGD(x)
Graph cuts in computer vision and artificial intelligence
As applied in the field of computer vision, graph cut optimization can be employed to efficiently solve a wide variety of low-level computer vision problems (early vision), such as image smoothing, the stereo correspondence problem, image segmentation, object co-segmentation, numerous military applications (eg Automatic target recognition) and many other problems that can be formulated in terms of energy minimization (eg Climate Science and Environmental modelling). Graph cut techniques are now increasingly being used in combination with more general spatial Artificial intelligence techniques (eg to enforce structure in Large language model output to sharpen tumour boundaries and similarly for various Augmented reality, Self-driving car, Robotics, Google Maps applications etc). Many of these energy minimization problems can be approximated by solving a maximum flow problem in a graph (and thus, by the max-flow min-cut theorem, define a minimal cut of the graph). Under most formulations of such problems in computer vision, the minimum energy solution corresponds to the maximum a posteriori estimate of a solution. Although many computer vision algorithms involve cutting a graph (e.g. normalized cuts), the term "graph cuts" is applied specifically to those models which employ a max-flow/min-cut optimization (other graph cutting algorithms may be considered as graph partitioning algorithms). "Binary" problems (such as denoising a binary image) can be solved exactly using this approach; problems where pixels can be labeled with more than two different labels (such as stereo correspondence, or denoising of a grayscale image) cannot be solved exactly, but solutions produced are usually near the global optimum. == History == The foundational theory of graph cuts in computer vision was first developed by Margaret Greig, Bruce Porteous and Allan Seheult (GPS) of Durham University in a now legendary discussion contribution to Julian Besag's 1986 paper and a more detailed follow on paper in 1989. In the Bayesian statistical context of smoothing noisy images, using a Markov random field as the image prior distribution, they showed with a mathematically beautiful proof how the maximum a posteriori estimate of a binary image can be obtained exactly by maximizing the flow through an associated image network, or graph, involving the introduction of a source and sink and Log-likelihood ratios. The problem was shown to be efficiently solvable exactly, an unexpected result as the problem was believed to be computationally intractable (NP hard). GPS also addressed the computational cost of the max-flow algorithm on large graphs, a significant concern at the time. They proposed a partitioning algorithm (see Section 4 of GPS) involving the recursive amalgamation of non-overlapping blocks, or tiles, which gave a 12X increase in speed. This approach recursively solved and amalgamated independent sub-graphs until the whole graph was solved. While contemporaries like Geman and Geman had advocated Parallel computing in the context of Simulated annealing, the GPS blocking strategy offered a deterministic structure amenable to parallelisation and anticipated modern artificial intelligence design across multiple GPUs. However, until recently, this aspect of the paper was largely ignored and subsequent research focused on Serial computer global search trees, such as the Boykov-Kolmogorov algorithm. Although the general k {\displaystyle k} -colour problem is NP hard for k > 2 , {\displaystyle k>2,} the GPS approach has turned out to have very wide applicability in general computer vision problems. This was first demonstrated by Boykov, Veksler and Zabih who, in a seminal paper published more than 10 years after the original GPS paper, and in other important works, lit the blue touch paper for the general adoption of graph cut techniques in computer vision. They showed that, for general problems, the GPS approach can be applied iteratively to sequences of binary problems, using their now ubiquitous alpha-expansion algorithm, yielding near optimal solutions. Prior to these results, approximate local optimisation techniques such as simulated annealing (as proposed by the Geman brothers) or iterated conditional modes (a type of greedy algorithm suggested by Julian Besag) were used to solve such image smoothing problems. Building on these advancements, GPS graph cut optimization was subsequently adapted for interactive image segmentation, most notably through the "GrabCut" algorithm introduced by Carsten Rother, Vladimir Kolmogorov, and Andrew Blake of Microsoft Research, Cambridge. GrabCut extended earlier interactive graph cut methods by replacing monochrome image histograms with Gaussian mixture models to estimate colour distributions, and by employing an iterative GPS energy minimisation scheme. This approach significantly simplified user interaction, requiring only a rough bounding box around the target object rather than detailed user-drawn strokes, and it quickly became a standard tool in both academic research and commercial image editing software. The GPS paper connected and bridged profound ideas from Mathematical statistics (Bayes' theorem, Markov random field), Physics (Ising model), Optimisation (Energy function) and Computer science (Network flow problem) and led the move away from approximate local and slow optimisation approaches (eg simulated annealing) to more powerful exact, or near exact, faster global optimisation techniques. It is now recognised as seminal as it was well ahead of its time and, in particular, was published years before the computing power revolution of Moore's law and GPUs. Significantly, GPS was published in a mathematical statistics (rather than a computer vision) journal, and this led to it being overlooked by the computer vision community for many years. It is unofficially known as "The Velvet Underground" paper of computer vision (ie although very few computer vision people read the paper [bought the record], those that did, most importantly Boykov, Veksler and Zabih, started new and important research [formed a band]). This is confirmed by GPS' very large amplification ratio (2nd order citations/first order citations), estimated at well in excess of 100. Despite the foundational nature of the GPS work, formal recognition from the computer vision community has predominantly gone to the researchers who followed to extend and popularise the graph cut method. For example, Boykov, Veksler and Zabih deservedly received a Helmholtz Prize from the ICCV in 2011. This prize recognises ICCV papers from 10 or more years earlier that have had a significant impact on computer vision research. In 2011, Couprie et al. proposed a general image segmentation framework, called the "Power Watershed", that minimized a real-valued indicator function from [0,1] over a graph, constrained by user seeds (or unary terms) set to 0 or 1, in which the minimization of the indicator function over the graph is optimized with respect to an exponent p {\displaystyle p} . When p = 1 {\displaystyle p=1} , the Power Watershed is optimized by graph cuts, when p = 0 {\displaystyle p=0} the Power Watershed is optimized by shortest paths, p = 2 {\displaystyle p=2} is optimized by the random walker algorithm and p = ∞ {\displaystyle p=\infty } is optimized by the watershed algorithm. In this way, the Power Watershed may be viewed as a generalization of graph cuts that provides a straightforward connection with other energy optimization segmentation/clustering algorithms. == Binary segmentation of images == === Notation === Image: x ∈ { R , G , B } N {\displaystyle x\in \{R,G,B\}^{N}} Output: Segmentation (also called opacity) S ∈ R N {\displaystyle S\in R^{N}} (soft segmentation). For hard segmentation S ∈ { 0 for background , 1 for foreground/object to be detected } N {\displaystyle S\in \{0{\text{ for background}},1{\text{ for foreground/object to be detected}}\}^{N}} Energy function: E ( x , S , C , λ ) {\displaystyle E(x,S,C,\lambda )} where C is the color parameter and λ is the coherence parameter. E ( x , S , C , λ ) = E c o l o r + E c o h e r e n c e {\displaystyle E(x,S,C,\lambda )=E_{\rm {color}}+E_{\rm {coherence}}} Optimization: The segmentation can be estimated as a global minimum over S: arg min S E ( x , S , C , λ ) {\displaystyle {\arg \min }_{S}E(x,S,C,\lambda )} === Existing methods === Standard Graph cuts: optimize energy function over the segmentation (unknown S value). Iterated Graph cuts: First step optimizes over the color parameters using K-means. Second step performs the usual graph cuts algorithm. These 2 steps are repeated recursively until convergence Dynamic graph cuts:Allows to re-run the algorithm much faster after modifying the problem (e.g. after new seeds have been added by a user). === Energy function === Pr ( x ∣ S ) = K − E {\displaystyle \Pr(x\mid S)=K^{-E}} where the energy E {\displaystyle E} is composed of two different mod
Affordable affluence
Affordable affluence refers to a cultural phenomenon where consumers use accessible luxury goods and lifestyles to project status and align themselves with a higher social class, without requiring substantial wealth. This concept is embodied by brands such as Aritzia and Erewhon, which position themselves as offering high-end, trendy, or health-conscious products that are relatively accessible to the average consumer. A related concept is quiet luxury, where the ultra-wealthy signal wealth through subtle means. Quiet luxury emphasizes the widening gap between the ultra-wealthy and the general public, whereas accessible affluence provides a way for the general public to indulge in the lifestyle of the ultra-wealthy. == Origin of the term == An early use of the phrase in this context in a 2023 article in The Cut called "Meet the People Working 3 Jobs to Afford Erewhon." One of the interviewees used Erewhon as an archetype of affordable affluence. It was described as “a way for regular people to position themselves adjacent to the upper class.” == Background and description == The phenomenon arises due to an individual's desire to showcase status. For years, companies have strategized how to target the average consumers by providing a product that signals an elevated social status. For instance, Aritzia partnered with celebrities and micro-influencers to make it an aspirational brand at an affordable cost. Erewhon similarly has allowed middle class consumers to subtly signal a higher degree of perceived wealth by purchasing higher priced, but still attainable items. It has allowed middle-class individuals to feel as though they are part of an exclusive culture. This phenomenon has been seen particularly with Gen Z and Millennials in the setting of financial hardships in the 2020s. Affordable affluence is an example of the lipstick effect. Because traditional status symbols such as expensive cars became relatively more unattainable, posting clips on social media that showcase affordable affluence become an alternative status symbol. Particularly with food, the perception has evolved from a necessity to a luxury. A McKinsey & Company report demonstrated that these generations place a higher importance on groceries than restaurants, travel, and beauty/fashion.
X2 transceiver
The X2 transceiver format is a 10 gigabit per second modular fiber optic interface intended for use in routers, switches and optical transport platforms. It is an early generation 10 gigabit interface related to the similar XENPAK and XPAK formats. X2 may be used with 10 Gigabit Ethernet or OC-192/STM-64 speed SDH/SONET equipment. X2 modules are smaller and consume less power than first-generation XENPAK modules, but larger and consume more energy than the newer XFP transceiver standard and SFP+ standards. As of 2016 this format is relatively uncommon and has been replaced by 10 Gbit/s SFP+ in most new equipment.
Zero-overhead looping
In computer architecture, zero-overhead looping is a hardware feature found in some processors that enables loops to execute without the performance cost of traditional loop control instructions. Instead of software managing loop iterations, the processor's hardware handles repetition automatically, saving clock cycles and improving efficiency. This technique is commonly employed in digital signal processors (DSPs) and certain complex instruction set computer (CISC) architectures. == Background == In many instruction sets, a loop must be implemented by using instructions to increment or decrement a counter, check whether the end of the loop has been reached, and if not jump to the beginning of the loop so it can be repeated. Although this typically only represents around 3–16 bytes of space for each loop, even that small amount could be significant depending on the size of the CPU caches. More significant is that those instructions each take time to execute, time which is not spent doing useful work. The overhead of such a loop is apparent compared to a completely unrolled loop, in which the body of the loop is duplicated exactly as many times as it will execute. In that case, no space or execution time is wasted on instructions to repeat the body of the loop. However, the duplication caused by loop unrolling can significantly increase code size, and the larger size can even impact execution time due to cache misses. (For this reason, it's common to only partially unroll loops, such as transforming it into a loop which performs the work of four iterations in one step before repeating. This balances the advantages of unrolling with the overhead of repeating the loop.) Moreover, completely unrolling a loop is only possible for a limited number of loops: those whose number of iterations is known at compile time. For example, the following C code could be compiled and optimized into the following x86 assembly code: == Implementation == Processors with zero-overhead looping have machine instructions and registers to automatically repeat one or more instructions. Depending on the instructions available, these may only be suitable for count-controlled loops ("for loops") in which the number of iterations can be calculated in advance, or only for condition-controlled loops ("while loops") such as operations on null-terminated strings. === Examples === ==== PIC ==== In the PIC instruction set, the REPEAT and DO instructions implement zero-overhead loops. REPEAT only repeats a single instruction, while DO repeats a specified number of following instructions. ==== Blackfin ==== Blackfin offers two zero-overhead loops. The loops can be nested; if both hardware loops are configured with the same "loop end" address, loop 1 will behave as the inner loop and repeat, and loop 0 will behave as the outer loop and repeat only if loop 1 would not repeat. Loops are controlled using the LTx and LBx registers (x either 0 to 1) to set the top and bottom of the loop — that is, the first and last instructions to be executed, which can be the same for a loop with only one instruction — and LCx for the loop count. The loop repeats if LCx is nonzero at the end of the loop, in which case LCx is decremented. The loop registers can be set manually, but this would typically consume 6 bytes to load the registers, and 8–16 bytes to set up the values to be loaded. More common is to use the loop setup instruction (represented in assembly as either LOOP with pseudo-instruction LOOP_BEGIN and LOOP_END, or in a single line as LSETUP), which optionally initializes LCx and sets LTx and LBx to the desired values. This only requires 4–6 bytes, but can only set LTx and LBx within a limited range relative to where the loop setup instruction is located. ==== x86 ==== The x86 assembly language REP prefixes implement zero-overhead loops for a few instructions (namely MOVS/STOS/CMPS/LODS/SCAS). Depending on the prefix and the instruction, the instruction will be repeated a number of times with (E)CX holding the repeat count, or until a match (or non-match) is found with AL/AX/EAX or with DS:[(E)SI]. This can be used to implement some types of searches and operations on null-terminated strings.
Pandorabots
Pandorabots, Inc. is an artificial intelligence company that runs a web service for building and deploying chatbots. Pandorabots implements and supports development of the Artificial Intelligence Markup Language and makes portions of its code accessible for free. The Pandorabots Platform is "one of the oldest and largest chatbot hosting services in the world", allowing creation of virtual agents to hold human-like text or voice chats with consumers. The platform is written in Allegro Common LISP. == Use Cases == Common use cases include advertising, virtual assistance, e-learning, entertainment and education. The platform has also been used by academics and universities use the platform for teaching and research.
Errored second
In telecommunications and data communication systems, an errored second is an interval of a second during which any error whatsoever has occurred, regardless of whether that error was a single bit error or a complete loss of communication for that entire second. The type of error is not important for the purpose of counting errored seconds. In communication systems with very low uncorrected bit error rates, such as modern fiber-optic transmission systems, or systems with higher low-level error rates that are corrected using large amounts of forward error correction, errored seconds are often a better measure of the effective user-visible error rate than the raw bit error rate. For many modern packet-switched communication systems, even a single uncorrected bit error is enough to cause the loss of a data packet by causing its CRC check to fail; whether that packet loss was caused by a single bit error or a hundred-bit-long error burst is irrelevant. For systems using large amounts of forward error correction, the reverse applies; a single low-level bit error will almost never occur, since any small errors will almost always be corrected, but any error sufficiently large to cause the forward error correction to fail will almost always result in a large burst error. More specialist and precise definitions of errored seconds exist in standards such as the T1 and DS1 transport systems.