Versata

Versata is a privately held software company, one of several business units under the ESW Capital umbrella. Versata acquires underperforming or financially struggling enterprise software companies, integrates them into their portfolio, and makes operational changes to improve the viability and performance of the companies. == History == === Early years (1991–2000) === This company was founded in 1991 with the name Image Innovations; Naren Bakshi was co-founder and president, Kevin Fletcher Tweedy was vice president of technology, and they sold a development tool set named Image Application WorkBench that worked with Plexus Software's imaging platform. In 1997, the company name changed to Vision Software. They sold a small suite of software: Vision Builder for accelerated coding; and Vision StoryBoard Pro for creating software documentation. In 1998, their flagship product was a Java development tool named Vision JADE. In January 2000, the company changed names again, this time to Versata, and their e-business automation system, Versata Logic Suite, had three components: Versata Logic Server to host business rules written in Java, Versata Studio for developing the business rules, and Versata Connectors for connecting the logic server to IBM database servers. === Public company (2000–2006) === They went public in March 2000 during the dot-com bubble, raising about $94 million and reaching a market capitalization of over $2.5 billion despite reporting just $13 million in revenue and a $21 million loss in the prior year. In November 2000, Versata expanded into the business workflow area with the acquisition of Verve, Inc. and its workflow management system by the same name. From early 2001 through mid-2003, Versata's revenues were in quarter-over-quarter decline until Alan Baratz took over as CEO. Five consecutive quarters of growth followed until early 2005, when revenues once again took a downward plunge. In mid-2005, the company was notified by NASDAQ that it no longer met NASDAQ's requirements for continued listing, related to maintenance of a minimum amount of shareholder's equity, market value, or net income. In July 2005, Versata was delisted from NASDAQ and publicly traded on the OTC (also known as the Pink Sheets). == Versata, a business unit of ESW Capital == In January 2006, Austin-based Trilogy, Inc. acquired the company and took it private. Trilogy then proceeded to merge portions of Trilogy, specifically, Trilogy Technology Group, into Versata and began acquiring further companies, reorganizing dramatically and offshoring most technical positions to its office in Bangalore, India. From 2006 to 2008, Versata continued to make acquisitions mostly in US. Most of the employees in the acquired companies were laid -off with the majority work being offshored to its India office in Bangalore. In early 2009, Versata made another major overhaul of its business model when it asked all its employees in India to work as contractors through oDesk for a gDev which is an entity incorporated by Trilogy to manage its outsourcing activities. The only employees left in Versata were the ones in US. == Acquisitions == a Corizon was acquired by Metatomix, while Metatomix was part of Versata. b Infopia was acquired by Everest Software, while Everest Software was part of Versata. c Symphony Commerce was acquired by Quantum Retail, while Quantum Retail was part of Versata. == Legal disputes == === Patent infringement and "poison pill" lawsuits with Selectica === The legal disputes with Selectica began in 2004 (before Trilogy acquired Versata in January 2006) and lasted until 2010. While there were many suits and counter-suits, they largely centered around three issues: 2004–2006: Patent infringement in configure, price, and quote (CPQ) software 2005–2007: Patent infringement in contract lifecycle management (CLM) software 2008–2010: The "poison pill" lawsuit In 2004, Selectica and Trilogy had competing CPQ software: Selectica sold Solutions Advisor and Deal Optimization, while Trilogy sold Selling Chain. In April of that year, Trilogy Software sued Selectica for patent infringement. In 2005, before the court ruling, Trilogy made several offers to buy Selectica, but the board rejected them. In January 2006, the court ordered Selectica to pay Trilogy $7.5 million in damages. Four days after the January 2006 judgment in the first lawsuit, Trilogy announced its acquisition of Versata for an undisclosed amount. In 2005, Selectica had acquired the Determine CLM software platform, which included features that overlapped with some offered by Versata. In October 2006, Versata filed a second patent infringement lawsuit. The case was settled in 2007, with Selectica agreeing to pay Trilogy and Versata $10 million, plus up to $7.5 million in additional contingent payments. In 2008, Versata began acquiring Selectica stock. By December, Selectica's board amended its shareholder rights plan to adopt a "poison pill" with an unusually low trigger threshold: if any shareholder acquired more than 4.99% of company stock, their ownership would be diluted. The board explained that the move was meant to protect Selectica's net operating losses (NOLs), which were tax-deductible if the company returned to profitability. Under IRS Section 382, a significant change in stock ownership could cause those NOLs to be disqualified. Versata intentionally triggered the poison pill and also offered to sell back the stocks at a profit (greenmailing them), which prompted a legal dispute over whether Selectica's board had the authority to set such a low threshold and whether defending NOLs justified triggering shareholder dilution. The case ultimately reached the Delaware Supreme Court, which upheld the poison pill in October 2010, ruling in favor of Selectica. === Intellectual property lawsuit over joint development with Sun Microsystems === In 1998, Sun Microsystems hired Trilogy to help Sun's developers in California create a software configurator (later named the WC5 Configurator) that Sun's customers could use to modify products they wanted to buy, customizing products to have the features they wanted. Trilogy worked on the WC5 Configurator for several years, then Sun transferred the work to Oracle to finish. Trilogy believed that they owned the copyright to the work they'd done for Sun, and in 2006 after the merger with Versata they sued Sun for more than $100 million in damages. In April 2009, a jury ruled in favor of Sun and rejected Versata's claims. === Patent lawsuit and ruling on patents of abstract ideas with SAP === SAP developed Pricing Engine, a component in their enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. It competed with an older Trilogy product called Pricer, which was part of Trilogy's Selling Chain platform in the mid-1990s before they merged with Versata. In April 2007—the year after Trilogy acquired Versata—Versata filed a lawsuit against SAP for patent infringement. In August 2009, the jury agreed with Versata and awarded them $139 million. The court granted a new trial on damages and in September 2011, in the retrial, the jury awarded Versata $345 million. This then went to the US Court of Appeals, which in May 2013 affirmed the $345 million damages award, plus interest that had accumulated. In October 2014, Versata and SAP settled their litigation for an undisclosed amount of money. With the dispute between Versata and SAP settled, in June 2013 the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reviewed the validity of the patent itself, and issued a decision in a Covered Business Method (CBM) review, stating that the disputed items were abstract ideas and thus under the US patent law not patentable. In July 2015, the Federal Circuit agreed with PTAB's decision that the challenged items were not patentable. === Trade secrets and damages dispute with Internet Brands === Internet Brands was formerly known as CarsDirect and AutoData Solutions. Like Trilogy, they made software for automakers that helped customers compare vehicles online. In the late 1990s, Trilogy and Internet Brands tried to combine their products but failed to do so, and after a December 1999 lawsuit they made a settlement agreement in May 2001. In 2008, Versata sued Internet Brands claiming they had violated the settlement agreement by making presentations to potential clients stating they had a license from Versata to use and sell Versata technical solutions; and doing so had cost Versata business with Chrysler. Internet Brands' countersuit argued that Versata had misappropriated trade secrets and asked the jury to use Versata's business relationship with Toyota—including revenue from Toyota contracts—as a benchmark to calculate damages. The jury agreed and used that data to determine a $2 million damages award in favor of Internet Brands’ subsidiary, AutoData Solutions. Versata appealed the decision, and in January 2014 the court upheld the $2 million award to Internet Brands. === Patent challenges a

24SevenOffice

24SevenOffice is a Norwegian software company headquartered in Oslo, Norway, with offices in Stockholm, Sweden and London, United Kingdom. Founded in 1997, the company specializes in web-based (SaaS) ERP and CRM systems. == Company history == 24SevenOffice was founded in 1997 in Porsgrunn, Norway, as IKT Interactive AS and marketed as kontorplassen.no. The name "24SevenOffice" was introduced for the company's London branch when the company entered the British market in 2003. The company changed its name to 24SevenOffice in February 2005. Originally based in Skien, the company later moved to Oslo Innovation Center, then to Tjuvholmen in the waterfront Fjord City of Oslo, and now the headquarters are located in Inkognitogaten 33, Solli plass, Oslo. The idea for the company's product was developed in 1996, and 24SevenOffice was an early innovator in the Scandinavian market in web-based enterprise resource planning solutions (ERP). A British office was established at Surrey Business Park in May 2003, with the company launching its web-based (SaaS) utility computing system to the UK SME market in 2004. An office in Chennai, India, was established in 2005, and 24SevenOffice entered the Swedish market when they acquired the leading competitor and ERP-provider Start & Run in a cash deal. In August 2005, the company had an initial public offering that raised NOK 15 million, and the company entered The Norwegian Over the Counter Market list as of 5 October 2005 (the ticker was 24SO), reaching a market value of NOK 175 million, with 5000 customers in Norway. In 2006, the company signed a deal to sponsor rally driver Petter Solberg, at the time the largest private sponsorship in Norwegian sport. Instead of receiving NOK 5 million in cash, Solberg received a 2.9 per cent ownership in the company. The company entered the German-speaking market in April 2006 when an office in Frankfurt am Main was opened. In late August/early September, they established an office with ten sales agents plus a general manager in Stockholm for the Swedish market. 24SevenOffice initiated strategic cooperation with Active 24 in early 2006 to develop a common platform. During the summer, Active 24 was bought by 24SevenOffice's ERP/CRM competitor Mamut (company), and 24SevenOffice terminated the contract with Active 24 in October demanding NOK 200 million in compensation for lost revenue. After a breakdown of settlement negotiations in the Forliksråd in January 2007, 24SevenOffice filed a case against Active 24 for breach of agreement in the Oslo District Court in March. 24SevenOffice lost on all counts in the District Court in December 2007. In January 2008, 24SevenOffice appealed the case to the Borgarting Court of Appeal, reducing the cause of action from NOK 250 to 30 million. 24SevenOffice lost on all counts in the Court of Appeal in December 2008, and was ordered to cover the costs incurred by Active 24 in connection with the dispute totaling NOK 6.91 million. 24SevenOffice appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Norway, but the Supreme Court Appeals Committee in March 2008 unanimously rejected the appeal from 24SevenOffice over the Borgarting Appeal Court's unanimous judgment of December 2008. On a counterclaim from Active 24 and Mamut against 24SevenOffice, the Oslo District Court in May 2010 found, that 24SevenOffice should pay Active 24 NOK 12 million in compensation for wrongfully having terminated the agreement, and a further NOK 360.000 of the opponent's legal costs. 24SevenOffice disagreed with the court ruling, and appealed once again. The Borgarting Court of Appeal in November 2011, ruled to reduce the amount of damages to NOK 4.4 million plus NOK 900.000 in penal interest. With several scrip issues, 24SevenOffice raised 25 million NOK (about $4 million at the time) between October 2005 and July 2006. They entered into a strategic partnership with Bluegarden, who for 30 years had delivered digital services for payroll, human resource planning, recruitment and training, in March 2006, and they made a large-scale agreement in April 2006, with US telecommunications software company Webex, a competitor to Norwegian Tandberg videoconferencing equipment manufacturer. In September 2006, 24SevenOffice signed an agreement with Fokus Bank to provide their customers with extended functionality in Internet banking. 24SevenOffice had by 2007 reportedly 9000 customers, joined the OpenAjax Alliance, and entered into a strategic partnership with Dun & Bradstreet in May 2007, but despite getting listed on Oslo Axess on 22 June (ticker: TFSO), reaching a market capitalization of NOK 120 million, the company was still losing money. The company ended 2007 with a revenue of NOK 21.7 million. In 2008, 24SevenOffice bought 50% of the stocks in telecommunication company Oyatel, partnered with Nets Group to facilitate invoicing for businesses, and telecommunications company Telipol chose 24SevenOffice's second-generation Internet platform for its 8,000 users. They announced an increase in revenues in Q2 to 11.1 million, up from 4.7 million in the same period the year before. 24SevenOffice had a turnover of NOK 37 million in the first half of 2009, a doubling compared to the same period the previous year, and presented its first positive EBITDA in Q2. The Norwegian Association of Auditors signed an agreement with 24SevenOffice in 2011, whereby they only recommend 24SevenOffice as a system for their members to use. On 27 June 2013, the shareholders of 24SevenOffice took off from the stock exchange and privatized the company. In recent years, the company has invested heavily in finance and accounting – and got leading auditing companies such as PwC and KPMG on the customer list. == Products == 24SevenOffice is a web-based (SaaS) ERP system. It includes modules for CRM, accounting, invoicing, e-mail, file/document management and project management. == Awards == 24SevenOffice won the Seal of Excellence in Multimedia Award at the 2004 CeBIT, became Norwegian Gazelle Company of the year 2004, chosen by Dagens Næringsliv and Dun & Bradstreet, won Product of the Year in the Norwegian finance magazine Kapital, and the IKT Grenland Innovation Award in 2008.

Ross Quinlan

John Ross Quinlan is a computer science researcher in data mining and decision theory. He has contributed extensively to the development of decision tree algorithms, including inventing the canonical C4.5 and ID3 algorithms. He also contributed to early ILP literature with First Order Inductive Learner (FOIL). He is currently running the company RuleQuest Research which he founded in 1997. == Education == He received his BSc degree in Physics and Computing from the University of Sydney in 1965 and his computer science doctorate at the University of Washington in 1968. He has held positions at the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, University of Technology Sydney, and RAND Corporation. == Artificial intelligence == Quinlan is a specialist in artificial intelligence, particularly in the aspect involving machine learning and its application to data mining. He is a Founding Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. === ID3 === Ross Quinlan invented the Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) algorithm which is used to generate decision trees. ID3 follows the principle of Occam's razor in attempting to create the smallest decision tree possible. === C4.5 === He then expanded upon the principles used in ID3 to create C4.5. C4.5 improved: discrete and continuous attributes, missing attribute values, attributes with differing costs, pruning trees (replacing irrelevant branches with leaf nodes). === C5.0 === C5.0, which Quinlan is commercially selling (single-threaded version is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License), is an improvement on C4.5. The advantages are speed (several orders of magnitude faster), memory efficiency, smaller decision trees, boosting (more accuracy), ability to weight different attributes, and winnowing (reducing noise). == Selected works == === Books === 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. ISBN 1-55860-238-0. === Articles === Quinlan, J. R. (1982) Semi-autonomous acquisition of pattern-based knowledge, In Machine intelligence 10 (eds J. E. Hayes, D. Michie, and Y.-H. Pao). Ellis Norwood,Chichester. Quinlan, J.R. (1985). Decision trees and multi-valued attributes, In J.E. Hayes & D. Michie (Eds.), Machine intelligence 11. Oxford University Press. Quinlan, J. R. (1986). Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1(1):81-106 2008. (with Qiang Yang, Philip S. Yu, Zhou Zhihua, and David Hand et al). Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowledge and Information Systems 14.1: 1-37 Quinlan, J. R. (1990). Learning logical definitions from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239-266.

Regularization perspectives on support vector machines

Within mathematical analysis, Regularization perspectives on support-vector machines provide a way of interpreting support-vector machines (SVMs) in the context of other regularization-based machine-learning algorithms. SVM algorithms categorize binary data, with the goal of fitting the training set data in a way that minimizes the average of the hinge-loss function and L2 norm of the learned weights. This strategy avoids overfitting via Tikhonov regularization and in the L2 norm sense and also corresponds to minimizing the bias and variance of our estimator of the weights. Estimators with lower Mean squared error predict better or generalize better when given unseen data. Specifically, Tikhonov regularization algorithms produce a decision boundary that minimizes the average training-set error and constrain the Decision boundary not to be excessively complicated or overfit the training data via a L2 norm of the weights term. The training and test-set errors can be measured without bias and in a fair way using accuracy, precision, Auc-Roc, precision-recall, and other metrics. Regularization perspectives on support-vector machines interpret SVM as a special case of Tikhonov regularization, specifically Tikhonov regularization with the hinge loss for a loss function. This provides a theoretical framework with which to analyze SVM algorithms and compare them to other algorithms with the same goals: to generalize without overfitting. SVM was first proposed in 1995 by Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik, and framed geometrically as a method for finding hyperplanes that can separate multidimensional data into two categories. This traditional geometric interpretation of SVMs provides useful intuition about how SVMs work, but is difficult to relate to other machine-learning techniques for avoiding overfitting, like regularization, early stopping, sparsity and Bayesian inference. However, once it was discovered that SVM is also a special case of Tikhonov regularization, regularization perspectives on SVM provided the theory necessary to fit SVM within a broader class of algorithms. This has enabled detailed comparisons between SVM and other forms of Tikhonov regularization, and theoretical grounding for why it is beneficial to use SVM's loss function, the hinge loss. == Theoretical background == In the statistical learning theory framework, an algorithm is a strategy for choosing a function f : X → Y {\displaystyle f\colon \mathbf {X} \to \mathbf {Y} } given a training set S = { ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) } {\displaystyle S=\{(x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{n},y_{n})\}} of inputs x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} and their labels y i {\displaystyle y_{i}} (the labels are usually ± 1 {\displaystyle \pm 1} ). Regularization strategies avoid overfitting by choosing a function that fits the data, but is not too complex. Specifically: f = argmin f ∈ H { 1 n ∑ i = 1 n V ( y i , f ( x i ) ) + λ ‖ f ‖ H 2 } , {\displaystyle f={\underset {f\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\operatorname {argmin} }}\left\{{\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}V(y_{i},f(x_{i}))+\lambda \|f\|_{\mathcal {H}}^{2}\right\},} where H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} is a hypothesis space of functions, V : Y × Y → R {\displaystyle V\colon \mathbf {Y} \times \mathbf {Y} \to \mathbb {R} } is the loss function, ‖ ⋅ ‖ H {\displaystyle \|\cdot \|_{\mathcal {H}}} is a norm on the hypothesis space of functions, and λ ∈ R {\displaystyle \lambda \in \mathbb {R} } is the regularization parameter. When H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, there exists a kernel function K : X × X → R {\displaystyle K\colon \mathbf {X} \times \mathbf {X} \to \mathbb {R} } that can be written as an n × n {\displaystyle n\times n} symmetric positive-definite matrix K {\displaystyle \mathbf {K} } . By the representer theorem, f ( x i ) = ∑ j = 1 n c j K i j , and ‖ f ‖ H 2 = ⟨ f , f ⟩ H = ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 n c i c j K ( x i , x j ) = c T K c . {\displaystyle f(x_{i})=\sum _{j=1}^{n}c_{j}\mathbf {K} _{ij},{\text{ and }}\|f\|_{\mathcal {H}}^{2}=\langle f,f\rangle _{\mathcal {H}}=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}c_{i}c_{j}K(x_{i},x_{j})=c^{T}\mathbf {K} c.} == Special properties of the hinge loss == The simplest and most intuitive loss function for categorization is the misclassification loss, or 0–1 loss, which is 0 if f ( x i ) = y i {\displaystyle f(x_{i})=y_{i}} and 1 if f ( x i ) ≠ y i {\displaystyle f(x_{i})\neq y_{i}} , i.e. the Heaviside step function on − y i f ( x i ) {\displaystyle -y_{i}f(x_{i})} . However, this loss function is not convex, which makes the regularization problem very difficult to minimize computationally. Therefore, we look for convex substitutes for the 0–1 loss. The hinge loss, V ( y i , f ( x i ) ) = ( 1 − y f ( x ) ) + {\displaystyle V{\big (}y_{i},f(x_{i}){\big )}={\big (}1-yf(x){\big )}_{+}} , where ( s ) + = max ( s , 0 ) {\displaystyle (s)_{+}=\max(s,0)} , provides such a convex relaxation. In fact, the hinge loss is the tightest convex upper bound to the 0–1 misclassification loss function, and with infinite data returns the Bayes-optimal solution: f b ( x ) = { 1 , p ( 1 ∣ x ) > p ( − 1 ∣ x ) , − 1 , p ( 1 ∣ x ) < p ( − 1 ∣ x ) . {\displaystyle f_{b}(x)={\begin{cases}1,&p(1\mid x)>p(-1\mid x),\\-1,&p(1\mid x)

Collostructional analysis

Collostructional analysis is a family of methods developed by (in alphabetical order) Stefan Th. Gries (University of California, Santa Barbara) and Anatol Stefanowitsch (Free University of Berlin). Collostructional analysis aims at measuring the degree of attraction or repulsion that words exhibit to constructions, where the notion of construction has so far been that of Goldberg's construction grammar. == Collostructional methods == Collostructional analysis so far comprises three different methods: collexeme analysis, to measure the degree of attraction/repulsion of a lemma to a slot in one particular construction; distinctive collexeme analysis, to measure the preference of a lemma to one particular construction over another, functionally similar construction; multiple distinctive collexeme analysis extends this approach to more than two alternative constructions; covarying collexeme analysis, to measure the degree of attraction of lemmas in one slot of a construction to lemmas in another slot of the same construction. == Input frequencies == Collostructional analysis requires frequencies of words and constructions and is similar to a wide variety of collocation statistics. It differs from raw frequency counts by providing not only observed co-occurrence frequencies of words and constructions, but also (i) a comparison of the observed frequency to the one expected by chance; thus, collostructional analysis can distinguish attraction and repulsion of words and constructions; (ii) a measure of the strength of the attraction or repulsion; this is usually the log-transformed p-value of a Fisher-Yates exact test. == Versus other collocation statistics == Collostructional analysis differs from most collocation statistics such that (i) it measures not the association of words to words, but of words to syntactic patterns or constructions; thus, it takes syntactic structure more seriously than most collocation-based analyses; (ii) it has so far only used the most precise statistics, namely the Fisher-Yates exact test based on the hypergeometric distribution; thus, unlike t-scores, z-scores, chi-square tests etc., the analysis is not based on, and does not violate, any distributional assumptions.

VGACAD

VGACAD was the parent of a suite of shareware graphic utilities made for the MS-DOS operating system used in the IBM PC and clones. It was popular for editing and capturing images using BSAVE (graphics image format) and provided an early graphic editing suite compatible with multiple graphic cards and resolutions, used on the IBM PC. == Usage == Written by Lawrence Gozum in 1987, it was the genesis of multiple versions and improvements over 10 years. Ran with his brother, Marvin initially helped with design ideas, strategic focus, technical support calls, and managing the early shareware business. The growth of the VGACAD suite grew quickly to preoccupy most of their time. Lawrence then focused more of his efforts on software and formed Applied Insights, to manage VGACAD and its offspring, VidFun, and Ai Picture Explorer. At its peak, its users ranged from individuals, Federal government offices, museums and major newspapers. == Features == VGACAD was a misnomer, and meant VGA-Computer Assisted Drawing, rather than computer-aided design, as CAD is commonly referred to today. Its longevity was due to its color accuracy, speed, small size, and that its suite of small utilities often worked stand-alone. One called VGACAP, for 'capture', dumped video memory into a file that could later be converted to popular graphic image formats, later made commonplace when Microsoft Windows programmed the print screen key to dump graphics into the clipboard. However, VGACAP ran insulated apart from early versions of Windows, and thus could capture screens were applications prohibited such function.

Yun Sing Koh

Yun Sing Koh (born 1978) is a New Zealand computer science academic, and is a full professor at the University of Auckland, specialising in machine learning and artificial intelligence. She is a co-director of the Centre of Machine Learning for Social Good, and the Advanced Machine Learning and Data Analytics Research (MARS) Lab at Auckland. == Academic career == Koh earned a Bachelor of Science with Honours and a Master of Software Engineering at the University of Malaya. She then completed a PhD titled Generating sporadic association rules at the University of Otago in 2007. Koh joined the faculty of the University of Auckland in 2010, rising to full professor. As of 2024, she is director of the Centre of Machine Learning for Social Good at Auckland, alongside Gillian Dobbie and Daniel Wilson, and is director of the Master of AI course at the university. Koh also co-directs the Advanced Machine Learning and Data Analytics Research (MARS) Lab. Koh's research covers machine learning and artificial intelligence. She is especially interested in designing machine learning algorithms for data streams, and has led research using AI systems to identify individual stoats for pest population research. In 2018 she was awarded a Marsden grant for a research project "An Adaptive Predictive System for Life-long Learning on Data Streams", and has been part of three MBIE projects. In 2025 the stoat identification project Koh co-leads with Daniel Wilson was awarded $1 million per annum by the MBIE Smart Ideas fund. Koh was a finalist in the AI in Climate section of the Women in AI Australia and New Zealand Awards in 2022. She was a 2023 Fellow at the United States National Science Foundation-funded Convergence Research (CORE) Institute. Koh has chaired a number of sessions at international conferences on data mining. In March 2026 it was announced that Koh would be a member of the New Zealand Human Rights Commission's Expert Advisory Group on Artificial Intelligence, Emerging Digital Technologies and Human Rights. == Selected works == Philippe Fournier-Viger; Jerry Chun-Wei Lin; Rage Uday Kiran; Yun Sing Koh; Rincy Thomas (2017). "A Survey of Sequential Pattern Mining". Data Science and Pattern Recognition. 1 (1): 54–77. Wikidata Q138719481. Yun Sing Koh; Nathan Rountree; Richard O’Keefe (1 April 2006). "Finding Non-Coincidental Sporadic Rules Using Apriori-Inverse". International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining (in Ndonga). 2 (2): 38–54. doi:10.4018/JDWM.2006040102. ISSN 1548-3924. Wikidata Q125185222. Russel Pears; Sripirakas Sakthithasan; Yun Sing Koh (11 January 2014). "Detecting concept change in dynamic data streams". Machine Learning. 97 (3): 259–293. doi:10.1007/S10994-013-5433-9. ISSN 1573-0565. Zbl 1319.68186. Wikidata Q125185156. David Tse Jung Huang; Yun Sing Koh; Gillian Dobbie; Russel Pears (December 2014), Detecting Volatility Shift in Data Streams, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, doi:10.1109/ICDM.2014.50, Wikidata Q125185151 Sidney Tsang; Yun Sing Koh; Gillian Dobbie (2011). "RP-Tree: Rare Pattern Tree Mining". Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 277–288. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23544-3_21. ISSN 0302-9743. Wikidata Q125185206. Yun Sing Koh; Sri Devi Ravana (24 May 2016). "Unsupervised Rare Pattern Mining". ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data. 10 (4): 1–29. doi:10.1145/2898359. ISSN 1556-4681. Wikidata Q125185136. Jack Julian; Yun Sing Koh; Albert Bifet (1 October 2025), Building adaptive knowledge bases for evolving continual learning models (PDF), vol. 1, doi:10.1038/S44387-025-00028-4, Wikidata Q138719496