The Shorty Awards (also known as "The Shortys") are awards for outstanding and innovative work in digital and social media content by brands, advertising agencies, and creators. The awards, which generally focus on short-term content, honor achievements in content creation on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, and other social networking sites. The Shorty Awards began in 2008 and initially recognized achievements by independent creators on Twitter, with the first formal awards ceremony occurring in February 2009. Since then, the awards, which are now awarded each spring, have shifted their focus to recognize content across numerous platforms. Entrant work is judged on the merits of excellence in creativity, strategy, and engagement by the Real Time Academy, a group of industry professionals selected by the Shorty Awards on the basis of their professional reputations, industry knowledge, and personal achievements (which may include previous Shorty wins). An additional public voting component, known as Audience Honor Voting, is also used to select Shorty Awards contenders. Notable Shorty Award winners include Malala Yousafzai, Trevor Noah, Michelle Obama, Conan O’Brien, Lady Gaga, Bill Nye, Jacob Reed, and Lizzo. Brands and organizations such as Chipotle, Duolingo, Marvel Studios, HBO, Red Bull, Airbnb, Nestle, BMW, UNICEF and the Human Rights Campaign have also been awarded. The Shorty Awards also produces an annual award program called The Shorty Impact Awards, a competition dedicated to showcasing digital and social media-based projects by brands, agencies, and organizations that seek to make the world a better place. == List of ceremonies == == 1st Shorty Awards == The awards were created in 2008 by tech entrepreneurs Greg Galant, Adam Varga, and Lee Semel of Sawhorse Media. They invited Twitter account holders to nominate the best Twitter users in general categories such as humor, news, food, and design. Winners were chosen by more than 30,000 Twitter users during the voting period. The founders of Twitter first heard about the awards after the contest had gotten underway and expressed support for it. The first Shorty Awards ceremony was held on February 11, 2009, at the Galapagos Art Space in Brooklyn, New York. Approximately 300 people attended the event. The event was hosted by CNN anchor Rick Sanchez and featured appearances by prominent Twitter users MC Hammer and Gary Vaynerchuk and a video appearance by Shaquille O'Neal. The awards, in 26 categories, were voted on by Twitter users. == 2nd Shorty Awards == Voting for the second Shorty Awards opened in January 2010 in 26 official categories. A Real-Time Photo of the Year category was added to the list of official categories for the first time, recognizing the best photo posted to services such as Twitpic, Yfrog, or Facebook. The second Shorty Awards competition introduced a panel of judges called the Real-Time Academy of Short Form Arts & Sciences whose members were Craig Newmark, David Pogue, Kurt Andersen, Caterina Fake, Joi Ito, Frank Moss, Alberto Ibargüen, Sreenath Sreenivasan, MC Hammer, Alyssa Milano and Jimmy Wales. After public nominations determined the finalists, the academy decided on the winners. Winners were announced at a ceremony held in the Times Center in The New York Times building in Manhattan that was also streamed online. The ceremony was hosted by CNN anchor Rick Sanchez, who presented awards in the official categories as well as the newly added Real-Time Photo of the Year and a special humanitarian award. == 3rd Shorty Awards == The nomination period for the third annual Shorty Awards opened in January 2011 and ran through February 11, 2011, except for new categories that had extended nomination deadlines. There were 30 official categories and five special categories. In addition to Real-Time Photo of the Year, for the first time the awards accepted nominations for Foursquare Mayor of the Year, Foursquare Location of the Year, Microblog of the Year on Tumblr, and a Connecting People award. The awards also introduced new Shorty Industry Awards to recognize the best uses of social media by brands and agencies. Winners were announced at a ceremony on March 28, 2011, hosted by Aasif Mandvi in the Times Center. Other Shorty Awards presenters were scheduled to include Kiefer Sutherland, Jerry Stiller, Anne Meara, Stephen Wallem, Miss USA Rima Fakih, and Miss Teen USA Kamie Crawford. == 4th Shorty Awards == The 4th Annual Shorty Awards featured Ricky Gervais and Tiffani Thiessen. 1.6 million tweeted nominations were made across all the categories to honor the top users on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Foursquare, YouTube and other internet platforms. == 5th Shorty Awards == The 5th Annual Shorty Awards ceremony featured Felicia Day, James Urbaniak, Kristian Nairn, Hannibal Buress, Carrie Keagan, Chris Hardwick, David Karp and Coco Rocha. 2.4 million tweeted nominations were made across all the categories to honor the top users on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Foursquare, YouTube and other internet sites. == 6th Shorty Awards == The ceremony took place on April 7, 2014, at the New York TimesCenter and was hosted by Comedian Natasha Leggero. The show included appearances by Patton Oswalt, Jamie Oliver, Kristen Bell, Jerry Seinfeld, Moshe Kasher, Julie Klausner, Erin Brady, Guy Kawasaki, Matt Walsh, Retta, Us the Duo, Big Boi, Gilbert Gottfried, Thomas Middleditch, Billie Jean King and Leandra Medine. Winners included Jerry Seinfeld and Will Ferrell. == 7th Shorty Awards == The Seventh Annual Shorty Awards was hosted by comedian Rachel Dratch and took place on April 20, 2015, at The Times Center in NYC. The Real-Time Academy, the judging body of the Shortys, tripled in size for the 7th annual Awards and included Alton Brown, Mamrie Hart, Nikki Glaser, OK Go, The Fine Bros, Debbie Sterling, Dan Savage, Deena Varshavskaya and Palmer Luckey. Panic! at the Disco was the musical guest at the ceremony. On-stage presenters included Kevin Jonas, Bill Nye, Bella Thorne, Wyclef Jean, Emily Kinney and Tyler Oakley. == 8th Shorty Awards == The Eighth Annual Shorty Awards were held in NYC at the TimesCenter on April 11, 2016. They were hosted by YouTuber, Writer and Comedian Mamrie Hart with musical performances from Nico & Vinz. Winners of the night included Bill Wurtz, DJ Khaled, Misty Copeland, Casey Neistat, Dwayne Johnson, Hannah Hart, Troye Sivan, Baddie Winkle, Kevin Hart, Taraji P. Henson, King Bach, and Zach King. == 9th Shorty Awards == The Ninth Annual Shorty Awards were held in NYC at the PlayStation Theater on April 23, 2017. They were hosted by two-time Emmy Award winner Tony Hale with a musical performance by Lizzo. Winners of the night included Bill Nye, Shay Mitchell, Doug the Pug, Gigi Gorgeous, Simone Biles, Mara Wilson, Gaten Matarazzo and Chrissy Teigen. == 10th Shorty Awards == The 10th Annual Shorty Awards, took place on April 15, 2018, at the PlayStation Theater, New York City. The ceremony was hosted by actress, singer, and songwriter Keke Palmer with a musical performance by Betty Who. == 11th Shorty Awards == The 11th Annual Shorty Awards were held on May 5, 2019, in New York City at the PlayStation Theater. The ceremony was hosted by American actress and comedian Kathy Griffin, with a musical performance by Tank and the Bangas. == 12th Shorty Awards == The 12th Annual Shorty Awards were held on May 3, 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the ceremony took place online for the first time, with presenters and award winners filming from their own homes. The ceremony was hosted by actor J.B. Smoove and featured a remixed performance of Trap Queen by Fetty Wap. Award winners included Jack Stauber, Supercar Blondie, Rose and Rosie, and Greta Thunberg. == 13th Shorty Awards == The 13th Annual Shorty Awards took place from April 26 to May 14, 2021. The ceremony was hosted on different social media platforms, such as Instagram and Clubhouse, to create a more tailored experience. Winners were announced from May 11 to May 14, with 10 winners being revealed each hour from 1 to 4 p.m. EST on the Shorty Awards Instagram account. == 14th Shorty Awards == The 14th Annual Shorty Awards were held virtually on May 15, 2022, honoring the best in social media and digital content. Hosted by Jay Shetty, the event recognized influencers, brands, and organizations across various categories, celebrating excellence in digital storytelling and innovative online campaigns. Notable winners included Tabitha Brown for her food content and the D'Amelio Family for their contributions to family and parenting content. The event highlighted the role of digital media in connecting and inspiring audiences during challenging times. == 15th Shorty Awards == The 15th Annual Shorty Awards celebrated the best in social media and digital content on May 24, 2023, at Tribeca 360° in New York City. Hosted by Jay Pharoah, the event honored creators, brands, and organizations ac
Isotropic position
In the fields of machine learning, the theory of computation, and random matrix theory, a probability distribution over vectors is said to be in isotropic position if its covariance matrix is proportional to the identity matrix. == Formal definitions == Let D {\textstyle D} be a distribution over vectors in the vector space R n {\textstyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}} . Then D {\textstyle D} is in isotropic position if, for vector v {\textstyle v} sampled from the distribution, E v v T = I d . {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \,vv^{\mathsf {T}}=\mathrm {Id} .} A set of vectors is said to be in isotropic position if the uniform distribution over that set is in isotropic position. In particular, every orthonormal set of vectors is isotropic. As a related definition, a convex body K {\textstyle K} in R n {\textstyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}} is called isotropic if it has volume | K | = 1 {\textstyle |K|=1} , center of mass at the origin, and there is a constant α > 0 {\textstyle \alpha >0} such that ∫ K ⟨ x , y ⟩ 2 d x = α 2 | y | 2 , {\displaystyle \int _{K}\langle x,y\rangle ^{2}dx=\alpha ^{2}|y|^{2},} for all vectors y {\textstyle y} in R n {\textstyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}} ; here | ⋅ | {\textstyle |\cdot |} stands for the standard Euclidean norm.
Symbolic regression
Symbolic regression (SR) is a type of regression analysis that searches the space of mathematical expressions to find the model that best fits a given dataset, both in terms of accuracy and simplicity. No particular model is provided as a starting point for symbolic regression. Instead, initial expressions are formed by randomly combining mathematical building blocks such as mathematical operators, analytic functions, constants, and state variables. Usually, a subset of these primitives will be specified by the person operating it, but that's not a requirement of the technique. The symbolic regression problem for mathematical functions has been tackled with a variety of methods, including recombining equations most commonly using genetic programming, as well as more recent methods utilizing Bayesian methods and neural networks. Another non-classical alternative method to SR is called Universal Functions Originator (UFO), which has a different mechanism, search-space, and building strategy. Further methods such as Exact Learning attempt to transform the fitting problem into a moments problem in a natural function space, usually built around generalizations of the Meijer-G function. By not requiring a priori specification of a model, symbolic regression isn't affected by human bias, or unknown gaps in domain knowledge. It attempts to uncover the intrinsic relationships of the dataset, by letting the patterns in the data itself reveal the appropriate models, rather than imposing a model structure that is deemed mathematically tractable from a human perspective. The fitness function that drives the evolution of the models takes into account not only error metrics (to ensure the models accurately predict the data), but also special complexity measures, thus ensuring that the resulting models reveal the data's underlying structure in a way that's understandable from a human perspective. This facilitates reasoning and favors the odds of getting insights about the data-generating system, as well as improving generalisability and extrapolation behaviour by preventing overfitting. Accuracy and simplicity may be left as two separate objectives of the regression—in which case the optimum solutions form a Pareto front—or they may be combined into a single objective by means of a model selection principle such as minimum description length. It has been proven that symbolic regression is an NP-hard problem. Nevertheless, if the sought-for equation is not too complex it is possible to solve the symbolic regression problem exactly by generating every possible function (built from some predefined set of operators) and evaluating them on the dataset in question. == Difference from classical regression == While conventional regression techniques seek to optimize the parameters for a pre-specified model structure, symbolic regression avoids imposing prior assumptions, and instead infers the model from the data. In other words, it attempts to discover both model structures and model parameters. This approach has the disadvantage of having a much larger space to search, because not only the search space in symbolic regression is infinite, but there are an infinite number of models which will perfectly fit a finite data set (provided that the model complexity isn't artificially limited). This means that it will possibly take a symbolic regression algorithm longer to find an appropriate model and parametrization, than traditional regression techniques. This can be attenuated by limiting the set of building blocks provided to the algorithm, based on existing knowledge of the system that produced the data; but in the end, using symbolic regression is a decision that has to be balanced with how much is known about the underlying system. Nevertheless, this characteristic of symbolic regression also has advantages: because the evolutionary algorithm requires diversity in order to effectively explore the search space, the result is likely to be a selection of high-scoring models (and their corresponding set of parameters). Examining this collection could provide better insight into the underlying process, and allows the user to identify an approximation that better fits their needs in terms of accuracy and simplicity. == Benchmarking == === SRBench === In 2021, SRBench was proposed as a large benchmark for symbolic regression. In its inception, SRBench featured 14 symbolic regression methods, 7 other ML methods, and 252 datasets from PMLB. The benchmark intends to be a living project: it encourages the submission of improvements, new datasets, and new methods, to keep track of the state of the art in SR. === SRBench Competition 2022 === In 2022, SRBench announced the competition Interpretable Symbolic Regression for Data Science, which was held at the GECCO conference in Boston, MA. The competition pitted nine leading symbolic regression algorithms against each other on a novel set of data problems and considered different evaluation criteria. The competition was organized in two tracks, a synthetic track and a real-world data track. ==== Synthetic Track ==== In the synthetic track, methods were compared according to five properties: re-discovery of exact expressions; feature selection; resistance to local optima; extrapolation; and sensitivity to noise. Rankings of the methods were: QLattice PySR (Python Symbolic Regression) uDSR (Deep Symbolic Optimization) ==== Real-world Track ==== In the real-world track, methods were trained to build interpretable predictive models for 14-day forecast counts of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in New York State. These models were reviewed by a subject expert and assigned trust ratings and evaluated for accuracy and simplicity. The ranking of the methods was: uDSR (Deep Symbolic Optimization) QLattice geneticengine (Genetic Engine) == Non-standard methods == Most symbolic regression algorithms prevent combinatorial explosion by implementing evolutionary algorithms that iteratively improve the best-fit expression over many generations. Recently, researchers have proposed algorithms utilizing other tactics in AI. Silviu-Marian Udrescu and Max Tegmark developed the "AI Feynman" algorithm, which attempts symbolic regression by training a neural network to represent the mystery function, then runs tests against the neural network to attempt to break up the problem into smaller parts. For example, if f ( x 1 , . . . , x i , x i + 1 , . . . , x n ) = g ( x 1 , . . . , x i ) + h ( x i + 1 , . . . , x n ) {\displaystyle f(x_{1},...,x_{i},x_{i+1},...,x_{n})=g(x_{1},...,x_{i})+h(x_{i+1},...,x_{n})} , tests against the neural network can recognize the separation and proceed to solve for g {\displaystyle g} and h {\displaystyle h} separately and with different variables as inputs. This is an example of divide and conquer, which reduces the size of the problem to be more manageable. AI Feynman also transforms the inputs and outputs of the mystery function in order to produce a new function which can be solved with other techniques, and performs dimensional analysis to reduce the number of independent variables involved. The algorithm was able to "discover" 100 equations from The Feynman Lectures on Physics, while a leading software using evolutionary algorithms, Eureqa, solved only 71. AI Feynman, in contrast to classic symbolic regression methods, requires a very large dataset in order to first train the neural network and is naturally biased towards equations that are common in elementary physics.
Hugging Face
Hugging Face, Inc., is an American company based in New York City that develops computation tools for building applications using machine learning. Its transformers library built for natural language processing applications and its platform allow users to share machine learning models and datasets and showcase their work. == History == === Founding === The company was founded in 2016 by French entrepreneurs Clément Delangue, Julien Chaumond, and Thomas Wolf in New York City, originally as a company that developed a chatbot app targeted at teenagers. The company was named after the U+1F917 🤗 HUGGING FACE emoji. After open sourcing the model behind the chatbot, the company pivoted to focus on being a platform for machine learning. === AI boom === On April 28, 2021, the company launched the BigScience Research Workshop in collaboration with several other research groups to release an open large language model. In 2022, the workshop concluded with the announcement of BLOOM, a multilingual large language model with 176 billion parameters. In February 2023, the company announced partnership with Amazon Web Services (AWS) which would allow Hugging Face's products to be available to AWS customers to use them as the building blocks for their custom applications. The company also said the next generation of BLOOM will be run on Trainium, a proprietary machine learning chip created by AWS. In June 2024, the company announced, along with Meta and Scaleway, their launch of a new AI accelerator program for European startups. The initiative aimed to help startups integrate open foundation models into their products, accelerating the EU AI ecosystem. The program, based at STATION F in Paris, ran from September 2024 to February 2025. Selected startups received mentoring, and access to AI models and tools and Scaleway's computing power. On September 23, 2024, to further the International Decade of Indigenous Languages, Hugging Face teamed up with Meta and UNESCO to launch a new online language translator. It was built on Meta's No Language Left Behind open-source AI model, enabling free text translation across 200 languages, including many low-resource languages. In April 2025, Hugging Face announced that they acquired a humanoid robotics startup, Pollen Robotics, based in France and founded by Matthieu Lapeyre and Pierre Rouanet in 2016. In an X tweet, Delangue shared his vision to "make Artificial Intelligence robotics Open Source". === Cyberattacks === In early 2026, hackers hijacked the Hugging Face platform to launch Android-targeted attacks involving "powerful malware" which could completely take over a compromised target.
Competition in artificial intelligence
Competition in artificial intelligence refers to the rivalry among companies, research institutions, and governments to develop and deploy the most capable artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The competition spans multiple domains, including large language models (LLMs), autonomous vehicles, robotics, computer vision systems, natural language processing (NLP), and AI-optimized hardware. == Background == Competition in AI is driven by potential economic, strategic, and scientific advantages. Breakthroughs in AI can enhance productivity, enable new products and services, and provide geopolitical leverage. The field has experienced rapid progress since the mid-2010s, particularly in machine learning and artificial neural networks, leading to intense rivalry among leading actors. == Corporate competition == Major technology companies are among the most visible competitors in AI. In the United States, firms such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Anthropic, and Nvidia compete in building advanced LLMs, generative AI platforms, and AI-optimized graphics processing units (GPUs). In China, companies such as Baidu, Alibaba Group, Tencent, and startups such DeepSeek have become leaders in AI deployment, often with state backing. The "[war for talent]" in AI research has become a defining feature of corporate competition. Leading firms often recruit top AI researchers from rivals, sometimes offering multi-million-dollar compensation packages. == National competition == Governments see leadership in AI as a strategic priority. The United States has funded AI research for military, economic, and societal applications, while China has set a target to lead the world in AI by 2030 through its "New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan". Other nations, including the UK, India, Israel, Russia, South Korea, and members of the European Union, have launched national AI strategies. In February 2026 Anthropic said Chinese companies - DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax - were conducting "distillation attacks" in an attempt to copy their model's capabilities, and warned that business wars were closely tied to geopolitical ones: "foreign labs that illicitly distill American models can remove safeguards, feeding model capabilities into their own military, intelligence, and surveillance systems." == Sectors of competition == === Large language models and chatbots competition === Competition to produce the most capable generative text models, with benchmarks such as MMLU and ARC used to evaluate performance has been on scale since the emergence of AI. These systems leverage deep learning, especially transformer architectures, to understand and generate human-like language. Companies and research groups globally compete to develop chatbots that are more capable, reliable, and context-aware. Among the most well-known chatbots is ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI. Since its public release in 2022, ChatGPT has rapidly gained widespread attention for its ability to engage in coherent and versatile conversations, assist with creative writing, and solve complex problems. In response, technology firms introduced competing chatbots aiming to challenge or surpass ChatGPT's capabilities. Notably, DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company, launched an advanced chatbot integrated with their R1 language model, emphasizing strong natural language understanding and multilingual support. Similarly, Grok, developed by xAI (company), integrates conversational AI into vehicles and digital assistants, combining natural language processing with real-time data for personalized user interaction. These chatbots not only compete in language tasks but also demonstrate strategic reasoning capabilities by playing complex games such as chess and Go. This form of competition is reminiscent of historic AI milestones set by programs such as Deep Blue and AlphaGo. The OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been tested in playing chess at various levels, while DeepSeek’s chatbot showcased its prowess in online chess tournaments in early 2024, winning several matches against human and AI opponents. Grok, leveraging Tesla's vast data infrastructure, has demonstrated real-time strategic decision-making in simulation environments that include chess-like games. The competition pushes rapid innovation, with firms racing to improve chatbot conversational depth, reduce biases, increase factual accuracy, and integrate multimodal inputs like images and videos. At the same time, the competition raises questions about AI safety, ethical use, and the societal impacts of increasingly human-like chatbots. === Autonomous vehicles === Companies such as Waymo, Tesla, and Baidu are racing to deploy safe and reliable self-driving car technology. === AI chips === Rivalry between Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Huawei in designing processors optimized for AI workloads. === Military applications === Development of AI-enabled drones, surveillance systems, and decision-support tools, with associated ethical debates. == Events == In 2023, OpenAI released GPT-4, prompting competitors such as Google DeepMind to accelerate the release of their own models, including Gemini. In 2024, Chinese AI company DeepSeek launched the R1 model, leading OpenAI to release an open-source system, GPT-OSS, as a strategic countermeasure. In 2022, Tesla and Waymo both expanded autonomous taxi services in U.S. cities, competing for regulatory approval and public trust. The U.S. Department of Defense's Project Maven and China's AI-enabled surveillance programs have been cited as examples of military AI rivalry. In 2025, Microsoft hired several senior engineers from Google DeepMind, highlighting the ongoing "talent poaching" competition in the AI sector. == Risks and concerns == Critics warn that unrestrained competition in AI can undermine safety, ethics, and governance. Concerns include the proliferation of biased or unsafe models, escalation in autonomous weapons, and reduced cooperation on safety standards.
Cloud Security Alliance
Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) is a not-for-profit organization with the mission to "promote the use of best practices for providing security assurance within cloud computing, artificial intelligence and to provide education on the uses of cloud computing to help secure all other forms of computing." The CSA has over 80,000 individual members worldwide. The CSA gained significant reputability in 2011 when the American Presidential Administration selected the CSA Summit as the venue for announcing the federal government’s cloud computing strategy. == History == The CSA was formed in December 2008 as a coalition by individuals who saw the need to provide objective enterprise user guidance on the adoption and use of cloud computing. Its initial work product, Security Guidance for Critical Areas of Focus in Cloud Computing, was put together in a Wiki-style by dozens of volunteers. In 2014, the Chairman of the Board of the CSA was Dave Cullinane, VP of Global Security and Privacy for Catalina Marketing, St. Petersburg, Florida, and former CISO for eBay. Cullinane has said, "If you have an application exposed to the Internet that will allow people to make money, it will be probed." == Profile == In 2009, the Cloud Security Alliance incorporated in Nevada as a Corporation and achieved US Federal 501(c)6 non-profit status. It is registered as a Foreign Non-Profit Corporation in Washington. == Policy maker support == The CSA works to support a number of global policy makers in their focus on cloud security initiatives including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), European Commission, Singapore Government, and other data protection authorities. In March 2012, the CSA was selected to partner with three of Europe’s largest research centers (CERN, EMBL and ESA) to launch Helix Nebula – The Science Cloud. == Size == The Cloud Security Alliance employs roughly sixty full-time and contract staff worldwide. It has several thousand active volunteers participating in research, working groups and chapters at any time. == Membership == According to CSA, they are a member-driven organization, chartered with promoting the use of best practices for providing security assurance within Cloud Computing, and providing education on the uses of Cloud Computing to help secure all other forms of computing. === Individuals === Individuals who are interested in cloud computing and have experience to assist in making it more secure receive a complimentary individual membership based on a minimum level of participation. === Chapters === The Cloud Security Alliance has a network of chapters worldwide. Chapters are separate legal entities from the Cloud Security Alliance, but operate within guidelines set down by the Cloud Security Alliance In the United States, Chapters may elect to benefit from the non-profit tax shield that the Cloud Security Alliance has. Chapters are encouraged to hold local meetings and participate in areas of research. Chapter activities are coordinated by the Cloud Security Alliance worldwide. === International scope === There are separate legal entities in Europe and Asia Pacific, called Cloud Security Alliance (Europe), a Scottish company in the United Kingdom, and Cloud Security Alliance Asia Pacific Ltd, in Singapore. Each legal entity is responsible for overseeing all Cloud Security Alliance-related activities in their respective regions. These legal entities operate under an agreement with Cloud Security Alliance that give it oversight power and have separate Boards of Directors. Both are companies Limited By Guarantee. The Managing Directors of each are members of the Executive Team of Cloud Security Alliance. == Areas of research == The Cloud Security Alliance has 25+ active working groups. Key areas of research include cloud standards, certification, education and training, guidance and tools, global reach, and driving innovation. Security Guidance for Critical Areas of Focus in Cloud Computing. Foundational best practices for securing cloud computing. Top Threats to Cloud Computing. Helps organizations make educated risk management decisions regarding their cloud adoption strategies. GRC (Governance, Risk and Compliance) Stack. A toolkit for key stakeholders to instrument and assess clouds against industry established best practices, standards and critical compliance requirements. Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM). Security controls framework for cloud provider and cloud consumers. CloudTrust Protocol. The mechanism by which cloud service consumers ask for and receive information about the elements of transparency as applied to cloud service providers. Consensus Assessments Initiative Research. Tools and processes to perform consistent measurements of cloud providers. Software Defined Perimeter. A proposed security framework that can be deployed to protect application infrastructure from network-based attacks. It will incorporate standards from organizations such as OASIS and NIST and security concepts from organizations like the U.S. DoD into an integrated framework. == Working groups and initiatives == Mobile Working Group Big Data Working Group Security as a Service Working Group Trusted Cloud Initiative CloudAudit CloudCERT CloudSIRT Cloud Metrics Security, Trust and Assurance Registry (STAR) Cloud Data Governance Turbot (business) Blockchain/Distributed Ledger
Empirical risk minimization
In statistical learning theory, the principle of empirical risk minimization defines a family of learning algorithms based on evaluating performance over a known and fixed dataset. The core idea is based on an application of the law of large numbers; more specifically, we cannot know exactly how well a predictive algorithm will work in practice (i.e. the "true risk") because we do not know the true distribution of the data, but we can instead estimate and optimize the performance of the algorithm on a known set of training data. The performance over the known set of training data is referred to as the "empirical risk". == Background == The following situation is a general setting of many supervised learning problems. There are two spaces of objects X {\displaystyle X} and Y {\displaystyle Y} and we would like to learn a function h : X → Y {\displaystyle \ h:X\to Y} (often called hypothesis) which outputs an object y ∈ Y {\displaystyle y\in Y} , given x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in X} . To do so, there is a training set of n {\displaystyle n} examples ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) {\displaystyle \ (x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{n},y_{n})} where x i ∈ X {\displaystyle x_{i}\in X} is an input and y i ∈ Y {\displaystyle y_{i}\in Y} is the corresponding response that is desired from h ( x i ) {\displaystyle h(x_{i})} . To put it more formally, assuming that there is a joint probability distribution P ( x , y ) {\displaystyle P(x,y)} over X {\displaystyle X} and Y {\displaystyle Y} , and that the training set consists of n {\displaystyle n} instances ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) {\displaystyle \ (x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{n},y_{n})} drawn i.i.d. from P ( x , y ) {\displaystyle P(x,y)} . The assumption of a joint probability distribution allows for the modelling of uncertainty in predictions (e.g. from noise in data) because y {\displaystyle y} is not a deterministic function of x {\displaystyle x} , but rather a random variable with conditional distribution P ( y | x ) {\displaystyle P(y|x)} for a fixed x {\displaystyle x} . It is also assumed that there is a non-negative real-valued loss function L ( y ^ , y ) {\displaystyle L({\hat {y}},y)} which measures how different the prediction y ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {y}}} of a hypothesis is from the true outcome y {\displaystyle y} . For classification tasks, these loss functions can be scoring rules. The risk associated with hypothesis h ( x ) {\displaystyle h(x)} is then defined as the expectation of the loss function: R ( h ) = E [ L ( h ( x ) , y ) ] = ∫ L ( h ( x ) , y ) d P ( x , y ) . {\displaystyle R(h)=\mathbf {E} [L(h(x),y)]=\int L(h(x),y)\,dP(x,y).} A loss function commonly used in theory is the 0-1 loss function: L ( y ^ , y ) = { 1 if y ^ ≠ y 0 if y ^ = y {\displaystyle L({\hat {y}},y)={\begin{cases}1&{\mbox{ if }}\quad {\hat {y}}\neq y\\0&{\mbox{ if }}\quad {\hat {y}}=y\end{cases}}} . The ultimate goal of a learning algorithm is to find a hypothesis h ∗ {\displaystyle h^{}} among a fixed class of functions H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} for which the risk R ( h ) {\displaystyle R(h)} is minimal: h ∗ = a r g m i n h ∈ H R ( h ) . {\displaystyle h^{}={\underset {h\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\operatorname {arg\,min} }}\,{R(h)}.} For classification problems, the Bayes classifier is defined to be the classifier minimizing the risk defined with the 0–1 loss function. == Formal definition == In general, the risk R ( h ) {\displaystyle R(h)} cannot be computed because the distribution P ( x , y ) {\displaystyle P(x,y)} is unknown to the learning algorithm. However, given a sample of iid training data points, we can compute an estimate, called the empirical risk, by computing the average of the loss function over the training set; more formally, computing the expectation with respect to the empirical measure: R emp ( h ) = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n L ( h ( x i ) , y i ) . {\displaystyle \!R_{\text{emp}}(h)={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}L(h(x_{i}),y_{i}).} The empirical risk minimization principle states that the learning algorithm should choose a hypothesis h ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {h}}} which minimizes the empirical risk over the hypothesis class H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} : h ^ = a r g m i n h ∈ H R emp ( h ) . {\displaystyle {\hat {h}}={\underset {h\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\operatorname {arg\,min} }}\,R_{\text{emp}}(h).} Thus, the learning algorithm defined by the empirical risk minimization principle consists in solving the above optimization problem. == Properties == Guarantees for the performance of empirical risk minimization depend strongly on the function class selected as well as the distributional assumptions made. In general, distribution-free methods are too coarse, and do not lead to practical bounds. However, they are still useful in deriving asymptotic properties of learning algorithms, such as consistency. In particular, distribution-free bounds on the performance of empirical risk minimization given a fixed function class can be derived using bounds on the VC complexity of the function class. For simplicity, considering the case of binary classification tasks, it is possible to bound the probability of the selected classifier, ϕ n {\displaystyle \phi _{n}} being much worse than the best possible classifier ϕ ∗ {\displaystyle \phi ^{}} . Consider the risk L {\displaystyle L} defined over the hypothesis class C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} with growth function S ( C , n ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}({\mathcal {C}},n)} given a dataset of size n {\displaystyle n} . Then, for every ϵ > 0 {\displaystyle \epsilon >0} : P ( L ( ϕ n ) − L ( ϕ ∗ ) > ϵ ) ≤ 8 S ( C , n ) exp { − n ϵ 2 / 32 } {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} \left(L(\phi _{n})-L(\phi ^{})>\epsilon \right)\leq {\mathcal {8}}S({\mathcal {C}},n)\exp\{-n\epsilon ^{2}/32\}} Similar results hold for regression tasks. These results are often based on uniform laws of large numbers, which control the deviation of the empirical risk from the true risk, uniformly over the hypothesis class. === Impossibility results === It is also possible to show lower bounds on algorithm performance if no distributional assumptions are made. This is sometimes referred to as the No free lunch theorem. Even though a specific learning algorithm may provide the asymptotically optimal performance for any distribution, the finite sample performance is always poor for at least one data distribution. This means that no classifier can improve on the error for a given sample size for all distributions. Specifically, let ϵ > 0 {\displaystyle \epsilon >0} and consider a sample size n {\displaystyle n} and classification rule ϕ n {\displaystyle \phi _{n}} , there exists a distribution of ( X , Y ) {\displaystyle (X,Y)} with risk L ∗ = 0 {\displaystyle L^{}=0} (meaning that perfect prediction is possible) such that: E L n ≥ 1 / 2 − ϵ . {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} L_{n}\geq 1/2-\epsilon .} It is further possible to show that the convergence rate of a learning algorithm is poor for some distributions. Specifically, given a sequence of decreasing positive numbers a i {\displaystyle a_{i}} converging to zero, it is possible to find a distribution such that: E L n ≥ a i {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} L_{n}\geq a_{i}} for all n {\displaystyle n} . This result shows that universally good classification rules do not exist, in the sense that the rule must be low quality for at least one distribution. === Computational complexity === Empirical risk minimization for a classification problem with a 0-1 loss function is known to be an NP-hard problem even for a relatively simple class of functions such as linear classifiers. Nevertheless, it can be solved efficiently when the minimal empirical risk is zero, i.e., data is linearly separable. In practice, machine learning algorithms cope with this issue either by employing a convex approximation to the 0–1 loss function (like hinge loss for SVM), which is easier to optimize, or by imposing assumptions on the distribution P ( x , y ) {\displaystyle P(x,y)} (and thus stop being agnostic learning algorithms to which the above result applies). In the case of convexification, Zhang's lemma majors the excess risk of the original problem using the excess risk of the convexified problem. Minimizing the latter using convex optimization also allow to control the former. == Tilted empirical risk minimization == Tilted empirical risk minimization is a machine learning technique used to modify standard loss functions like squared error, by introducing a tilt parameter. This parameter dynamically adjusts the weight of data points during training, allowing the algorithm to focus on specific regions or characteristics of the data distribution. Tilted empirical risk minimization is particularly useful in scenarios with imbalanced data or when there is a need to emphasize errors in certain parts of the prediction space.