Instance selection (or dataset reduction, or dataset condensation) is an important data pre-processing step that can be applied in many machine learning (or data mining) tasks. Approaches for instance selection can be applied for reducing the original dataset to a manageable volume, leading to a reduction of the computational resources that are necessary for performing the learning process. Algorithms of instance selection can also be applied for removing noisy instances, before applying learning algorithms. This step can improve the accuracy in classification problems. Algorithm for instance selection should identify a subset of the total available data to achieve the original purpose of the data mining (or machine learning) application as if the whole data had been used. Considering this, the optimal outcome of IS would be the minimum data subset that can accomplish the same task with no performance loss, in comparison with the performance achieved when the task is performed using the whole available data. Therefore, every instance selection strategy should deal with a trade-off between the reduction rate of the dataset and the classification quality. == Instance selection algorithms == The literature provides several different algorithms for instance selection. They can be distinguished from each other according to several different criteria. Considering this, instance selection algorithms can be grouped in two main classes, according to what instances they select: algorithms that preserve the instances at the boundaries of classes and algorithms that preserve the internal instances of the classes. Within the category of algorithms that select instances at the boundaries it is possible to cite DROP3, ICF and LSBo. On the other hand, within the category of algorithms that select internal instances, it is possible to mention ENN and LSSm. In general, algorithm such as ENN and LSSm are used for removing harmful (noisy) instances from the dataset. They do not reduce the data as the algorithms that select border instances, but they remove instances at the boundaries that have a negative impact on the data mining task. They can be used by other instance selection algorithms, as a filtering step. For example, the ENN algorithm is used by DROP3 as the first step, and the LSSm algorithm is used by LSBo. There is also another group of algorithms that adopt different selection criteria. For example, the algorithms LDIS, CDIS and XLDIS select the densest instances in a given arbitrary neighborhood. The selected instances can include both, border and internal instances. The LDIS and CDIS algorithms are very simple and select subsets that are very representative of the original dataset. Besides that, since they search by the representative instances in each class separately, they are faster (in terms of time complexity and effective running time) than other algorithms, such as DROP3 and ICF. Besides that, there is a third category of algorithms that, instead of selecting actual instances of the dataset, select prototypes (that can be synthetic instances). In this category it is possible to include PSSA, PSDSP and PSSP. The three algorithms adopt the notion of spatial partition (a hyperrectangle) for identifying similar instances and extract prototypes for each set of similar instances. In general, these approaches can also be modified for selecting actual instances of the datasets. The algorithm ISDSP adopts a similar approach for selecting actual instances (instead of prototypes).
Orleans (software framework)
Orleans is a cross-platform software framework for building scalable and robust distributed interactive applications based on the .NET Framework or on the more recent .NET. == Overview == Orleans was originally created by the eXtreme Computing Group at Microsoft Research and introduced the virtual actor model as a new approach to building distributed systems for the cloud. Orleans scales from a single on-premises server to highly-available and globally distributed applications in the cloud. The virtual actor model is based on the actor model but has several differences: A virtual actor always exists, it cannot be explicitly created or destroyed. Virtual actors are automatically instantiated. If a server hosting an actor crashes, the next message sent to the actor causes it to be reinstantiated automatically. The server that an actor is on is transparent to the application code. Orleans can automatically create multiple instances of the same stateless actor. Starting with cloud services for the Halo franchise, the framework has been used by a number of cloud services at Microsoft and other companies since 2011. The core Orleans technology was transferred to 343 Industries and is available as open source since January 2015. The source code is licensed under MIT License and hosted on GitHub. Orleans runs on Microsoft Windows, Linux, and macOS and is compatible with .NET Standard 2.0 and above. == Features == Some Orleans features include: Persistence Distributed ACID transactions Streams Timers & Reminders Fault tolerance == Related implementations == The Electronic Arts BioWare division created Project Orbit. It is a Java implementation of virtual actors that was heavily inspired by the Orleans project.
Tabnine
Tabnine is a code completion tool which uses generative artificial intelligence to assist users by autocompleting code. It was created in 2018 by Jacob Jackson, a student at the University of Waterloo. It is now developed by Tabnine, a software company founded under the name Codota by Dror Weiss and Eran Yahav in Tel Aviv, Israel, in 2013, and renamed to Tabnine in 2021. Initially established under the name Codota, the company underwent a rebranding in May 2021 following the release of the company’s first large language model based AI coding assistant, adopting the name Tabnine. == History == Tabnine was established as Codota in 2013 by Dror Weiss and Eran Yahav in Tel Aviv, Israel. Tabnine, initially founded under the name Codota, was created to develop tools based on over a decade of academic research at the Technion. Codota, the predecessor of Tabnine, secured $2 million in seed investment in June 2017. Following this, in June 2018, the company introduced the first AI-based code completion for Java IDE. In 2019, Codota acquired a product called Tabnine, which used the newly available large-language model technology to provide generative AI for software code across a broader range of programming languages across five IDEs. Codota replaced its earlier approach to code generation with this new approach to generative AI. The company secured a Series A round of funding in April 2020, raising $12 million. On May 26, 2021, Codota changed its name to Tabnine and underwent a corresponding rebranding. By April 2022, Tabnine reached over one million users. In June of the same year, Tabnine launched models that could predict full lines and snippets of code. The same year it raised $15.5 mln in a funding round led co-led by Qualcomm Ventures. In June 2023, Tabnine introduced an AI-powered chat agent, enabling developers to use natural language to generate code, to explain code, to generate tests and documentation, and to propose fixes to code. In November 2023, Tabnine closed a Series B round of funding, raising $25 million to scale the company’s operations. == Operations == Tabnine's headquarters is located in Tel Aviv, Israel, with an additional corporate entity in the United States. As of November 2023, Tabnine generative AI for software development is used by a million developers. It has 10 million installations across VS Code and JetBrains. Since its founding, Dror Weiss has served as CEO, with Eran Yahav as CTO.
Moral Machine
Moral Machine is an online platform, developed by Iyad Rahwan's Scalable Cooperation group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that generates moral dilemmas and collects information on the decisions that people make between two destructive outcomes. The platform is the idea of Iyad Rahwan and social psychologists Azim Shariff and Jean-François Bonnefon, who conceived of the idea ahead of the publication of their article about the ethics of self-driving cars. The key contributors to building the platform were MIT Media Lab graduate students Edmond Awad and Sohan Dsouza. The presented scenarios are often variations of the trolley problem, and the information collected would be used for further research regarding the decisions that machine intelligence must make in the future. For example, as artificial intelligence plays an increasingly significant role in autonomous driving technology, research projects like Moral Machine help to find solutions for challenging life-and-death decisions that will face self-driving vehicles. Moral Machine was active from January 2016 to July 2020. The Moral Machine continues to be available on their website for people to experience. == The experiment == The Moral Machine was an ambitious project; it was the first attempt at using such an experimental design to test a large number of humans in over 200 countries worldwide. The study was approved by the Institute Review Board (IRB) at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The setup of the experiment asks the viewer to make a decision on a single scenario in which a self-driving car is about to hit pedestrians. The user can decide to have the car either swerve to avoid hitting the pedestrians or keep going straight to preserve the lives it is transporting. Participants can complete as many scenarios as they want to, however the scenarios themselves are generated in groups of thirteen. Within this thirteen, a single scenario is entirely random while the other twelve are generated from a space in a database of 26 million different possibilities. They are chosen with two dilemmas focused on each of six dimensions of moral preferences: character gender, character age, character physical fitness, character social status, character species, and character number. The experiment setup remains the same throughout multiple scenarios but each scenario tests a different set of factors. Most notably, the characters involved in the scenario are different in each one. Characters may include ones such as: Stroller, girl, boy, pregnant, Male Doctor, Female Doctor, Female Athlete, Executive Female, Male Athlete, Executive Male, Large Woman, Large Man, homeless, old man, old woman, dog, criminal, and a cat. Through these different characters researchers were able to understand how a wide variety of people will judge scenarios based on those involved. == Analysis == The Moral Machine collected 40 million moral decisions from 4 million participants in 233 countries, analysis of which revealed trends within individual countries and humanity as a whole. It tested for nine factors: preference for sparing humans versus pets, passengers versus pedestrians, men versus women, young versus elderly, fit versus overweight, higher versus lower social status, jaywalkers versus law abiders, larger versus smaller groups, and inaction (i.e. staying on course) versus swerving. Globally, participants favored human lives over lives of animals like dogs and cats. They preferred to spare more lives if possible, and younger lives as opposed to older. Babies were most often spared with cats being the least spared. In terms of gender variations, people tended to spare men over women for doctors and the elderly. All countries generally shared the preference to spare pedestrians over passengers and law-abiders over criminals. Participants from less wealthy countries showed a higher tendency of sparing pedestrians who crossed illegally compared to those from more wealthy and developed countries. This is most likely due to their experience living in a society where individuals are more likely to deviate from rules due to less stringent enforcement of laws. Countries of higher economic inequality overwhelmingly prefer to save wealthier individuals over poorer ones. === Cultural differences === Researchers subdivided 130 countries with similar results into three ‘cultural clusters’. North America and European countries with significant Christian populations had a higher preference for inaction on the part of the driver and thus had less of a preference for sparing pedestrians as compared to other clusters. East Asian and Islamic countries, together constituting the second cluster, did not have as much preference to spare younger humans compared to the other two clusters and had a higher preference for sparing law-abiding humans. Latin America and Francophone countries had a higher preference for sparing women, the young, the fit, and those of higher status, but a lower preference for sparing humans over pets or other animals. Individualistic cultures tended to spare larger groups, and collectivist cultures had a stronger preference for sparing the lives of older people. For instance, China ranked far below the world average for preference to spare the younger over elderly, while the average respondent from the US exhibited a much higher tendency to save younger lives and larger groups. == Applications of the data == The findings from the moral machine can help decision makers when designing self-driving automotive systems. Designers must make sure that these vehicles are able to solve problems on the road that aligns with the moral values of humans around it. This is a challenge because of the complex nature of humans who may all make different decisions based on their personal values. However, by collecting a large amount of decisions from humans all over the world, researchers can begin to understand patterns in the context of a particular culture, community, and people. == Other features == The Moral Machine was deployed in June 2016. In October 2016, a feature was added that offered users the option to fill a survey about their demographics, political views, and religious beliefs. Between November 2016 and March 2017, the website was progressively translated into nine languages in addition to English (Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish). Overall, the Moral Machine offers four different modes, with the focus being on the data-gathering feature of the website, called the Judge mode. This means that the Moral Machine, in addition to providing their own scenarios for users to judge, also invites users to create their own scenarios to be submitted and approved so that other people may also judge those scenarios. Data is also open sourced for anyone to explore via an interactive map that is featured on the Moral Machine website. == In the literature == Studies and research on the Moral Machine have taken a wide variety of approaches. However, theological examinations of the topic are still scarce where two bodies of work that examine such perspective currently exist in this regard: One is Buddhist while the other is Christian.
Geoffrey Hinton
Geoffrey Everest Hinton (born 6 December 1947) is a British-Canadian computer scientist, cognitive scientist, cognitive psychologist and Nobel Prize laureate known for his work on artificial neural networks, which earned him the title "the Godfather of AI". He is University Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto. From 2013 to 2023, he divided his time working for Google Brain and the University of Toronto before publicly announcing his departure from Google in May 2023, citing concerns about the many risks of artificial intelligence (AI) technology. In 2017, he co-founded and became the chief scientific advisor of the Vector Institute in Toronto. With David Rumelhart and Ronald J. Williams, Hinton was co-author of a highly cited paper published in 1986 that popularised the backpropagation algorithm for training multi-layer neural networks, although they were not the first to propose the approach. Hinton is viewed as a leading figure in the deep learning community. The image-recognition milestone of the AlexNet designed in collaboration with his students Alex Krizhevsky and Ilya Sutskever for the ImageNet challenge 2012 was a breakthrough in the field of computer vision. Hinton received the 2018 Turing Award, together with Yoshua Bengio and Yann LeCun for their work on deep learning. They are sometimes referred to as the "Godfathers of Deep Learning" and have continued to give public talks together. He was also awarded, along with John Hopfield, the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics for "foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks". In May 2023, Hinton announced his resignation from Google to be able to "freely speak out about the risks of AI". He has voiced concerns about deliberate misuse by malicious actors, technological unemployment, and existential risk from artificial general intelligence. He noted that establishing safety guidelines will require cooperation among those competing in use of AI in order to avoid the worst outcomes. After receiving the Nobel Prize, he called for urgent research into AI safety to figure out how to control AI systems smarter than humans. == Education == Hinton was born on 6 December 1947 in Wimbledon in the United Kingdom and was educated at Clifton College in Bristol. In 1967, he matriculated as an undergraduate student at King's College, Cambridge and, after switching between different fields such as natural sciences, history of art, and philosophy, eventually graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in experimental psychology in 1970. He spent a year apprenticing carpentry before returning to academic studies. From 1972 to 1975, he continued his study at the University of Edinburgh, where he was awarded a PhD in artificial intelligence in 1978 for research supervised by Christopher Longuet-Higgins, who favored the symbolic AI approach over the neural network approach. == Career == After his PhD, Hinton initially worked at the University of Sussex and at the MRC Applied Psychology Unit. After having difficulty getting funding in Britain, he worked in the US at the University of California, San Diego, and Carnegie Mellon University. He was the founding director of the Gatsby Charitable Foundation Computational Neuroscience Unit at University College London. He is currently University Professor Emeritus in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Toronto, where he has been affiliated since 1987. Upon arrival in Canada, Geoffrey Hinton was appointed at the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR) in 1987 as a Fellow in CIFAR's first research program, Artificial Intelligence, Robotics & Society. In 2004, Hinton and collaborators successfully proposed the launch of a new program at CIFAR, "Neural Computation and Adaptive Perception" (NCAP), which today is named "Learning in Machines & Brains". Hinton would go on to lead NCAP for ten years. Among the members of the program are Yoshua Bengio and Yann LeCun, with whom Hinton would go on to win the ACM A.M. Turing Award in 2018. All three Turing winners continue to be members of the CIFAR Learning in Machines & Brains program. Hinton taught a free online course on Neural Networks on the education platform Coursera in 2012. He co-founded DNNresearch Inc. in 2012 with his two graduate students, Alex Krizhevsky and Ilya Sutskever, at the University of Toronto's department of computer science. In March 2013, Google acquired DNNresearch Inc. for $44 million, and Hinton planned to "divide his time between his university research and his work at Google". In May 2023, Hinton publicly announced his resignation from Google. He explained his decision, saying he wanted to "freely speak out about the risks of AI" and added that part of him now regrets his life's work. Notable former PhD students and postdoctoral researchers from his group include Peter Dayan, Sam Roweis, Max Welling, Richard Zemel, Brendan Frey, Radford M. Neal, Yee Whye Teh, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Ilya Sutskever, Yann LeCun, Alex Graves, Zoubin Ghahramani, and Peter Fitzhugh Brown. == Research == Hinton's research concerns the use of neural networks for machine learning, memory, perception, and symbol processing. He has written or co-written more than 200 peer-reviewed publications. In the 1980s, Hinton was part of the "Parallel Distributed Processing" group at Carnegie Mellon University, which included notable scientists like Terrence Sejnowski, Francis Crick, David Rumelhart, and James McClelland. This group favoured the connectionist approach during the AI winter. Their findings were published in a two-volume set. The connectionist approach adopted by Hinton suggests that capabilities in areas like logic and grammar can be encoded into the parameters of neural networks, and that neural networks can learn them from data. Symbolists on the other side advocated for explicitly programming knowledge and rules into AI systems. In 1985, Hinton co-invented Boltzmann machines with David Ackley and Terry Sejnowski. His other contributions to neural network research include distributed representations, time delay neural network, mixtures of experts, Helmholtz machines and product of experts. An accessible introduction to Geoffrey Hinton's research can be found in his articles in Scientific American in September 1992 and October 1993. In 1995, Hinton and colleagues proposed the wake-sleep algorithm, involving a neural network with separate pathways for recognition and generation, being trained with alternating "wake" and "sleep" phases. In 2007, Hinton coauthored an unsupervised learning paper titled Unsupervised learning of image transformations. In 2008, he developed the visualization method t-SNE with Laurens van der Maaten.While Hinton was a postdoc at UC San Diego, David Rumelhart, Hinton and Ronald J. Williams applied the backpropagation algorithm to multi-layer neural networks. Their experiments showed that such networks can learn useful internal representations of data. In a 2018 interview, Hinton said that "David Rumelhart came up with the basic idea of backpropagation, so it's his invention." Although this work was important in popularising backpropagation, it was not the first to suggest the approach. Reverse-mode automatic differentiation, of which backpropagation is a special case, was proposed by Seppo Linnainmaa in 1970, and Paul Werbos proposed to use it to train neural networks in 1974. In 2017, Hinton co-authored two open-access research papers about capsule neural networks, extending the concept of "capsule" introduced by Hinton in 2011. The architecture aims to better model part-whole relationships within objects in visual data. In 2021, Hinton presented GLOM, a speculative architecture idea also aiming to improve image understanding by modeling part-whole relationships in neural networks. In 2021, Hinton co-authored a widely cited paper proposing a framework for contrastive learning in computer vision. The technique involves pulling together representations of augmented versions of the same image, and pushing apart dissimilar representations. At the 2022 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Hinton introduced a new learning algorithm for neural networks that he calls the "Forward-Forward" algorithm. The idea is to replace the traditional forward-backwards passes of backpropagation with two forward passes, one with positive (i.e. real) data and the other with negative data that could be generated solely by the network. The Forward-Forward algorithm is well-suited for what Hinton calls "mortal computation", where the knowledge learned is not transferable to other systems and thus dies with the hardware, as can be the case for certain analog computers used for machine learning. == Honours and awards == Hinton is a Fellow of the US Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (FAAAI) since 1990. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada (FRSC) in 1996, and then a
OpenPipeline
openPipeline is an open-source plug-in for Autodesk Maya that is designed to assist in a Production Pipeline structure and Computer animation. == Development == Created in Maya Embedded Language, openPipeline was initiated at Eyebeam Atelier and further developed at Pratt Institute in the Digital Arts Lab. The initial release date was December 28, 2006. == Contributors == Rob O'Neill (Creator) Paris Mavroidis Meng-Han Ho
Partial-order planning
Partial-order planning is an approach to automated planning that maintains a partial ordering between actions and only commits ordering between actions when forced to, that is, ordering of actions is partial. Also this planning doesn't specify which action will come out first when two actions are processed. By contrast, total-order planning maintains a total ordering between all actions at every stage of planning. Given a problem in which some sequence of actions is needed to achieve a goal, a partial-order plan specifies all actions that must be taken, but specifies an ordering between actions only where needed. Consider the following situation: a person must travel from the start to the end of an obstacle course. The course is composed of a bridge, a see-saw, and a swing-set. The bridge must be traversed before the see-saw and swing-set are reachable. Once reachable, the see-saw and swing-set can be traversed in any order, after which the end is reachable. In a partial-order plan, ordering between these obstacles is specified only when needed. The bridge must be traversed first. Second, either the see-saw or swing-set can be traversed. Third, the remaining obstacle can be traversed. Then the end can be traversed. Partial-order planning relies upon the principle of least commitment for its efficiency. == Partial-order plan == A partial-order plan or partial plan is a plan which specifies all actions that must be taken, but only specifies the order between actions when needed. It is the result of a partial-order planner. A partial-order plan consists of four components: A set of actions (also known as operators). A partial order for the actions. It specifies the conditions about the order of some actions. A set of causal links. It specifies which actions meet which preconditions of other actions. Alternatively, a set of bindings between the variables in actions. A set of open preconditions. It specifies which preconditions are not fulfilled by any action in the partial-order plan. To keep the possible orders of the actions as open as possible, the set of order conditions and causal links must be as small as possible. A plan is a solution if the set of open preconditions is empty. A linearization of a partial order plan is a total order plan derived from the particular partial order plan; in other words, both order plans consist of the same actions, with the order in the linearization being a linear extension of the partial order in the original partial order plan. === Example === For example, a plan for baking a cake might start: go to the store get eggs; get flour; get milk pay for all goods go to the kitchen This is a partial plan because the order for finding eggs, flour and milk is not specified, the agent can wander around the store reactively accumulating all the items on its shopping list until the list is complete. == Partial-order planner == A partial-order planner is an algorithm or program which will construct a partial-order plan and search for a solution. The input is the problem description, consisting of descriptions of the initial state, the goal and possible actions. The problem can be interpreted as a search problem where the set of possible partial-order plans is the search space. The initial state would be the plan with the open preconditions equal to the goal conditions. The final state would be any plan with no open preconditions, i.e. a solution. The initial state is the starting conditions, and can be thought of as the preconditions to the task at hand. For a task of setting the table, the initial state could be a clear table. The goal is simply the final action that needs to be accomplished, for example setting the table. The operators of the algorithm are the actions by which the task is accomplished. For this example there may be two operators: lay (tablecloth), and place (glasses, plates, and silverware). === Plan space === The plan space of the algorithm is constrained between its start and finish. The algorithm starts, producing the initial state and finishes when all parts of the goal have been achieved. In the setting a table example, two types of actions exist that must be addressed: the put-out and lay operators. Four unsolved operators also exist: Action 1, lay-tablecloth, Action 2, Put-out (plates), Action 3, Put-out (silverware), and Action 4, Put-out (glasses). However, a threat arises if Action 2, 3, or 4 comes before Action 1. This threat is that the precondition to the start of the algorithm will be unsatisfied as the table will no longer be clear. Thus, constraints exist that must be added to the algorithm that force Actions 2, 3, and 4 to come after Action 1. Once these steps are completed, the algorithm will finish and the goal will have been completed. === Threats === As seen in the algorithm presented above, partial-order planning can encounter certain threats, meaning orderings that threaten to break connected actions, thus potentially destroying the entire plan. There are two ways to resolve threats: Promotion Demotion Promotion orders the possible threat after the connection it threatens. Demotion orders the possible threat before the connection it threatens. Partial-order planning algorithms are known for being both sound and complete, with sound being defined as the total ordering of the algorithm, and complete being defined as the capability to find a solution, given that a solution does in fact exist. == Partial-order vs. total-order planning == Partial-order planning is the opposite of total-order planning, in which actions are sequenced all at once and for the entirety of the task at hand. The question arises when one has two competing processes, which one is better? Anthony Barret and Daniel Weld have argued in their 1993 book, that partial-order planning is superior to total-order planning, as it is faster and thus more efficient. They tested this theory using Korf’s taxonomy of subgoal collections, in which they found that partial-order planning performs better because it produces more trivial serializability than total-order planning. Trivial serializability facilitates a planner’s ability to perform quickly when dealing with goals that contain subgoals. Planners perform more slowly when dealing with laboriously serializable or nonserializable subgoals. The determining factor that makes a subgoal trivially or laboriously serializable is the search space of different plans. They found that partial-order planning is more adept at finding the quickest path, and is therefore the more efficient of these two main types of planning. == The Sussman anomaly == Partial-order plans are known to easily and optimally solve the Sussman anomaly. Using this type of incremental planning system solves this problem quickly and efficiently. This was a result of partial-order planning that solidified its place as an efficient planning system. == Disadvantages to partial-order planning == One drawback of this type of planning system is that it requires a lot more computational power for each node. This higher per-node cost occurs because the algorithm for partial-order planning is more complex than others. This has important artificial intelligence implications. When coding a robot to do a certain task, the creator needs to take into account how much energy is needed. Though a partial-order plan may be quicker it may not be worth the energy cost for the robot. The creator must be aware of and weigh these two options to build an efficient robot.