A Very Fatal Murder is a podcast produced by the satirical publication The Onion. A parody of true crime podcasts, A Very Fatal Murder is hosted by fictional New York City reporter David Pascall, who travels to the small town Bluff Springs, Nebraska to investigate the murder of prom queen Hayley Price. Pascall is voiced by David Sidorov, who also wrote for the podcast. The podcast premiered on January 23, 2018, and consists of 7 episodes. Season 2 was released in its entirety on May 11, 2019. == Production == A Very Fatal Murder satirizes popular true crime podcasts such as Serial, S-Town, and My Favorite Murder. According to head writer Katy Yeiser, the podcast is not meant as a take down of any particular podcast, but rather an ode to the genre. == Synopsis == The podcast follows fictional investigative reporter David Pascall (voiced by David Sidorov) who is searching for the perfect murder to create an award-winning podcast about. He is assisted by ETHL (the Extremely Timely Homicide Locator), an MIT-created computer programmed to find "the most interesting, violent, culturally relevant murder cases in America". == Episodes == === Season 1 === === Season 2 === == Reception == The podcast received mostly positive reviews, and was largely praised for attacking true-crime tropes such as the "hot dead girl" and the romanticization of small-town America. === Awards ===
Spike (application)
Spike is a cross-platform email client and AI-powered communication app, available on Windows, MacOS, iOS, Android and the web. It has a chat-like, conversational view for emails with AI-powered inbox management and integrated collaboration features. Depending on the selected plan, it can be used solely as an email application or as a full suite of business communication tools. == History == Founded in 2013 by Erez Pilosof and Dvir Ben-Aroya, Spike is a software application that puts existing e-mails into a multimedia messaging, chat-like interface enhanced with video and voice calls. The application was initially named Hop. In 2019, the developers completed a $5 million funding round including investment from Wix.com and NFX Capital. In 2020, Spike raised $8m in a Series A funding round led by Insight Partners with the participation from previous rounds' investors. In 2021 Spike announced a collaboration with Meta to launch on the Oculus Store and would become one of the first productivity apps to launch in Meta's new virtual world, known as the Metaverse. In June 2023, the company introduced its corporate offering — Teamspace, a corporate communication platform for teams with features such as company-wide channels for broad conversations, private groups for specific topics or projects, direct one-on-one conversations, video meetings, file collaboration, AI-powered email messaging, and custom email domain. It supports file management, search capabilities, and project management. Built on open-protocol technology, Spike Teamspace enables users to send and receive messages from all email providers. Regardless of whether the other party is using Spike. == Company operations == Spike is developed and operated by SpikeNow LTD. Dvir Ben Aroya serves as Spike’s CEO and Erez Pilosof is the CTO. The company is headquartered in Tel Aviv, Israel. == Mode of use == The app enables users to organize email into three types of "conversations,"a traditional inbox/sent format, by subject, or by people. Spike users can also make audio and video calls to each other, and other features include a calendar, contact list, and Groups. Spike is available for Microsoft Windows, MacOS, iOS and Android, and as a web version, and works with Gmail, Outlook, Exchange, iCloud, Yahoo! Mail and IMAP email providers. == Features == Since 2023, the platform features an AI-driven assistant, Magic AI, for customized email creation, document summarization, research, content generation, advanced note-taking, project management, and real-time translation. Since 2023, Spike offers custom email domain management. It supports team collaboration through Channels, uniting members globally with access to historical messages, and combines email with real-time messaging via Conversational Email. The Shared Inbox allows team collaboration on emails, while Groups support private conversations and invitations. It also features integrated video meetings, real-time collaboration on documents and notes, and email hosting with custom domains. Super Search enables retrieval of various content, and the Priority Inbox organizes emails by priority. Collaborative Tasks offer real-time updates and tracking. The platform allows voice message sending from mobile devices and integrates multiple calendar platforms into a unified schedule. File Management optimizes attachment handling, and the Unified Inbox consolidates emails from multiple accounts. Spike ensures data security with AES-256 encryption and private keys. The platform features AI-powered inbox management and communication tools. In May 2025, Spike launched its AI Feed feature, which automatically summarizes unread messages in a unified stream and enables bulk email actions. Additional AI capabilities include email composition assistance, document summarization, content generation, note-taking enhancement, and real-time translation.
Bernard Vauquois
Bernard Vauquois ((1929-06-14)June 14, 1929 — (1985-09-30)September 30, 1985) was a French mathematician and computer scientist. He was a pioneer of computer science and machine translation (MT) in France. An astronomer-turned-computer scientist, he is known for his work on the programming language ALGOL 60, and later for extensive work on the theoretical and practical problems of MT, of which the eponymous Vauquois triangle is one of the most widely-known contributions. He was a professor at what would become the Grenoble Alpes University. == Biography == Bernard Vauquois was initially a researcher at French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) from 1952 to 1958 at the Astrophysics Institute of the Meudon Observatory, after completing studies in mathematics, physics, and astronomy. Since 1957, his research program has also focused on methods applied to physics from the perspective of electronic computers, and he has taught programming to physicists. This double interest in astrophysics and electronic computers is reflected in the subject of his thesis and that of the complementary thesis in physical sciences that he defended in 1958. In 1960, at 31 years old, he was appointed professor of computer science at Grenoble University, where, alongside professors Jean Kuntzmann and Noël Gastinel, he began work in the field. At that time, he was also contributing to the definition of the language ALGOL 60. Also in 1960, he founded the Centre d'Étude pour la Traduction Automatique (CETA), later renamed as Groupe d'Étude pour la Traduction Automatique (GETA) and currently known as GETALP, a team at the Laboratoire d'informatique de Grenoble, and soon showed his gift for rapid understanding, synthesis, and innovation, and his taste for personal communication across linguistic borders and barriers. After visiting a number of centers, mainly in the United States, where machine translation research was conducted, he analyzed the shortcomings of the "first-generation" approach and evaluated the potential of a new generation based on grammar and formal language theory, and proposed a new approach based on a representational "pivot" and the use of (declarative) rule systems that transform a sequential sentence from one level of representation to another. He led the GETA in constructing the first large second-generation system, applied to Russian–French, from 1962 to 1971. At the end of this period, the accumulated experience led him to correct some defects of the "pure" declarative and interlingual approach, and to use heuristic programming methods, implemented with procedural grammars written in LSPLs ("specialized languages for linguistic programming", langages spécialisés pour la programmation linguistique) that were developed under his direction, and integrated into the ARIANE-78 machine translation system. In 1974, when he cofounded the Leibniz laboratory, he proposed "multilevel structure descriptors" (descripteurs de structures multiniveaux) for units larger than sentence translation. This idea, premonitory of later theoretical work (Ray Jackendoff, Gerald Gazdar) is still the cornerstone of all machine translation software built by GETA and the French national TA project. Bernard Vauquois' last contribution was "static grammar" (grammaire statique) in 1982–83, during the ESOPE project, the preparatory phase of the French national MT project. He was a key figure in the field of computational linguistics in France. At CNRS, he was a member of section 22 of the National Committee in 1963: "General Linguistics, Modern Languages and Comparative Literature", and then, in 1969, of section 28: "General Linguistics, Foreign Languages and Literature". Since 1965, he has been vice-president of the Association for Natural Language Processing (ATALA). He was its president from 1966 to 1971. He was also one of the founders, in 1965, of the ICCL (International Committee on Computational Linguistics), which organizes COLING conferences. He was its president from 1969 to 1984. From France, he often collaborated with other countries (notably Canada, the United States, the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Japan, China, Brazil, Malaysia, and Thailand), working on the specification and implementation of grammars and dictionaries. He began cooperating with Malaysia, for example, in 1979, which led to the creation of the Automatic Terjemaan Project, with a first prototype of an English-Malay MT system demonstrated in 1980. == Vauquois triangle == The Vauquois triangle is a conceptual model and diagram illustrating possible approaches to the design of machine translation systems, first proposed in 1968. == Legacy == Bernard Vauquois is regarded as a pioneer of machine translation in France. He played a key role in developing the first large-scale second-generation machine translation system, and his work influenced the field of machine translation for many years. He supervised some twenty doctoral theses, most of them concerning formal aspects of natural and artificial languages, with an emphasis on machine translation. The Center for Studies on Automatic Translation, which Vauquois founded in 1960, later became the Group for the Study of Machine Translation and Automated Processing of Languages and Speech (GETALP). It is still a research institution in natural language processing. Vauquois was a prolific writer and speaker, disseminating knowledge about machine translation and related topics. His papers and presentations were instrumental in establishing the field of machine translation in France and beyond. == Publications == Vauquois, Bernard (1973). Traduction automatique (in French). Paris: Gauthier-Villars. Vauquois, Bernard (1967). Introduction à la traduction automatique (in French). Paris: Gauthier-Villars.
Bernhard Schölkopf
Bernhard Schölkopf (born 20 February 1968) is a German computer scientist known for his work in machine learning, especially on kernel methods and causality. He is a director at the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems in Tübingen, Germany, where he heads the Department of Empirical Inference. He is also an affiliated professor at ETH Zürich, honorary professor at the University of Tübingen and Technische Universität Berlin, and chairman of the European Laboratory for Learning and Intelligent Systems (ELLIS). == Research == === Kernel methods === Schölkopf developed SVM methods achieving world record performance on the MNIST pattern recognition benchmark at the time. With the introduction of kernel PCA, Schölkopf and coauthors argued that SVMs are a special case of a much larger class of methods, and all algorithms that can be expressed in terms of dot products can be generalized to a nonlinear setting by means of what is known as reproducing kernels. Another significant observation was that the data on which the kernel is defined need not be vectorial, as long as the kernel Gram matrix is positive definite. Both insights together led to the foundation of the field of kernel methods, encompassing SVMs and many other algorithms. Kernel methods are now textbook knowledge and one of the major machine learning paradigms in research and applications. Developing kernel PCA, Schölkopf extended it to extract invariant features and to design invariant kernels and showed how to view other major dimensionality reduction methods such as LLE and Isomap as special cases. In further work with Alex Smola and others, he extended the SVM method to regression and classification with pre-specified sparsity and quantile/support estimation. He proved a representer theorem implying that SVMs, kernel PCA, and most other kernel algorithms, regularized by a norm in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, have solutions taking the form of kernel expansions on the training data, thus reducing an infinite dimensional optimization problem to a finite dimensional one. He co-developed kernel embeddings of distributions methods to represent probability distributions in Hilbert Spaces, with links to Fraunhofer diffraction as well as applications to independence testing. === Causality === Starting in 2005, Schölkopf turned his attention to causal inference. Causal mechanisms in the world give rise to statistical dependencies as epiphenomena, but only the latter are exploited by popular machine learning algorithms. Knowledge about causal structures and mechanisms is useful by letting us predict not only future data coming from the same source, but also the effect of interventions in a system, and by facilitating transfer of detected regularities to new situations. Schölkopf and co-workers addressed (and in certain settings solved) the problem of causal discovery for the two-variable setting and connected causality to Kolmogorov complexity. Around 2010, Schölkopf began to explore how to use causality for machine learning, exploiting assumptions of independence of mechanisms and invariance. His early work on causal learning was exposed to a wider machine learning audience during his Posner lecture at NeurIPS 2011, as well as in a keynote talk at ICML 2017. He assayed how to exploit underlying causal structures in order to make machine learning methods more robust with respect to distribution shifts and systematic errors, the latter leading to the discovery of a number of new exoplanets including K2-18b, which was subsequently found to contain water vapour in its atmosphere, a first for an exoplanet in the habitable zone. == Education and employment == Schölkopf studied mathematics, physics, and philosophy in Tübingen and London. He was supported by the Studienstiftung and won the Lionel Cooper Memorial Prize for the best M.Sc. in Mathematics at the University of London. He completed a Diplom in Physics, and then moved to Bell Labs in New Jersey, where he worked with Vladimir Vapnik, who became co-adviser of his PhD thesis at TU Berlin (with Stefan Jähnichen). His thesis, defended in 1997, won the annual award of the German Informatics Association. In 2001, following positions in Berlin, Cambridge and New York, he founded the Department for Empirical Inference at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, which grew into a leading center for research in machine learning. In 2011, he became founding director at the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems. With Alex Smola, Schölkopf co-founded the series of Machine Learning Summer Schools. He also co-founded a Cambridge-Tübingen PhD Programme and the Max Planck-ETH Center for Learning Systems. In 2016, he co-founded the Cyber Valley research consortium. He participated in the IEEE Global Initiative on "Ethically Aligned Design". Schölkopf is co-editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Machine Learning Research, a journal he helped found, being part of a mass resignation of the editorial board of Machine Learning (journal). He is among the world’s most cited computer scientists. Alumni of his lab include Ulrike von Luxburg, Carl Rasmussen, Matthias Hein, Arthur Gretton, Gunnar Rätsch, Matthias Bethge, Stefanie Jegelka, Jason Weston, Olivier Bousquet, Olivier Chapelle, Joaquin Quinonero-Candela, and Sebastian Nowozin. As of late 2023, Schölkopf is also a scientific advisor to French research group Kyutai which is being funded by Xavier Niel, Rodolphe Saadé, Eric Schmidt, and others. == Awards and recognition == Schölkopf’s awards include the Royal Society Milner Award and, shared with Isabelle Guyon and Vladimir Vapnik, the BBVA Foundation Frontiers of Knowledge Award in the Information and Communication Technologies category. He was the first scientist working in Europe to receive this award. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 2026.
Moore machine
In the theory of computation, a Moore machine is a finite-state machine whose current output values are determined only by its current state. This is in contrast to a Mealy machine, whose output values are determined both by its current state and by the values of its inputs. Like other finite state machines, in Moore machines, the input typically influences the next state. Thus the input may indirectly influence subsequent outputs, but not the current or immediate output. The Moore machine is named after Edward F. Moore, who presented the concept in a 1956 paper, “Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines.” == Formal definition == A Moore machine can be defined as a 6-tuple ( S , s 0 , Σ , Λ , δ , G ) {\displaystyle (S,s_{0},\Sigma ,\Lambda ,\delta ,G)} consisting of the following: A finite set of states S {\displaystyle S} A start state (also called initial state) s 0 {\displaystyle s_{0}} which is an element of S {\displaystyle S} A finite set called the input alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } A finite set called the output alphabet Λ {\displaystyle \Lambda } A transition function δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} mapping a state and the input alphabet to the next state An output function G : S → Λ {\displaystyle G:S\rightarrow \Lambda } mapping each state to the output alphabet "Evolution across time" is realized in this abstraction by having the state machine consult the time-changing input symbol at discrete "timer ticks" t 0 , t 1 , t 2 , . . . {\displaystyle t_{0},t_{1},t_{2},...} and react according to its internal configuration at those idealized instants, or else having the state machine wait for a next input symbol (as on a FIFO) and react whenever it arrives. A Moore machine can be regarded as a restricted type of finite-state transducer. == Visual representation == === Table === A state transition table is a table listing all the triples in the transition relation δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} . === Diagram === The state diagram for a Moore machine, or Moore diagram, is a state diagram that associates an output value with each state. == Relationship with Mealy machines == As Moore and Mealy machines are both types of finite-state machines, they are equally expressive: either type can be used to parse a regular language. The difference between Moore machines and Mealy machines is that in the latter, the output of a transition is determined by the combination of current state and current input ( S × Σ {\displaystyle S\times \Sigma } as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ), as opposed to just the current state ( S {\displaystyle S} as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ). When represented as a state diagram, for a Moore machine, each node (state) is labeled with an output value; for a Mealy machine, each arc (transition) is labeled with an output value. Every Moore machine M {\displaystyle M} is equivalent to the Mealy machine with the same states and transitions and the output function G ( s , σ ) = G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G(s,\sigma )=G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , which takes each state-input pair ( s , σ ) {\displaystyle (s,\sigma )} and yields G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , where G M {\displaystyle G_{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's output function and δ M {\displaystyle \delta _{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's transition function. However, not every Mealy machine can be converted to an equivalent Moore machine. Some can be converted only to an almost equivalent Moore machine, with outputs shifted in time. This is due to the way that state labels are paired with transition labels to form the input/output pairs. Consider a transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} from state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} to state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} . The input causing the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} labels the edge ( s i , s j ) {\displaystyle (s_{i},s_{j})} . The output corresponding to that input, is the label of state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} . Notice that this is the source state of the transition. So for each input, the output is already fixed before the input is received, and depends solely on the present state. This is the original definition by E. Moore. It is a common mistake to use the label of state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} as output for the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} . == Examples == Types according to number of inputs/outputs. === Simple === Simple Moore machines have one input and one output: edge detector using XOR binary adding machine clocked sequential systems (a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes) Most digital electronic systems are designed as clocked sequential systems. Clocked sequential systems are a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes. Typically the current state is stored in flip-flops, and a global clock signal is connected to the "clock" input of the flip-flops. Clocked sequential systems are one way to solve metastability problems. A typical electronic Moore machine includes a combinational logic chain to decode the current state into the outputs (lambda). The instant the current state changes, those changes ripple through that chain, and almost instantaneously the output gets updated. There are design techniques to ensure that no glitches occur on the outputs during that brief period while those changes are rippling through the chain, but most systems are designed so that glitches during that brief transition time are ignored or are irrelevant. The outputs then stay the same indefinitely (LEDs stay bright, power stays connected to the motors, solenoids stay energized, etc.), until the Moore machine changes state again. ==== Worked example ==== A sequential network has one input and one output. The output becomes 1 and remains 1 thereafter when at least two 0's and two 1's have occurred as inputs. A Moore machine with nine states for the above description is shown on the right. The initial state is state A, and the final state is state I. The state table for this example is as follows: === Complex === More complex Moore machines can have multiple inputs as well as multiple outputs. == Gedanken-experiments == In Moore's 1956 paper "Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines", the ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} automata (or machines) S {\displaystyle S} are defined as having n {\displaystyle n} states, m {\displaystyle m} input symbols and p {\displaystyle p} output symbols. Nine theorems are proved about the structure of S {\displaystyle S} , and experiments with S {\displaystyle S} . Later, " S {\displaystyle S} machines" became known as "Moore machines". At the end of the paper, in Section "Further problems", the following task is stated: Another directly following problem is the improvement of the bounds given at the theorems 8 and 9. Moore's Theorem 8 is formulated as: Given an arbitrary ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine S {\displaystyle S} , such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists an experiment of length n ( n − 1 ) 2 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {n(n-1)}{2}}} which determines the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. In 1957, A. A. Karatsuba proved the following two theorems, which completely solved Moore's problem on the improvement of the bounds of the experiment length of his "Theorem 8". Theorem A. If S {\displaystyle S} is an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists a branched experiment of length at most ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} through which one may determine the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. Theorem B. There exists an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, every two states of which are distinguishable from one another, such that the length of the shortest experiments establishing the state of the machine at the end of the experiment is equal to ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} . Theorems A and B were used for the basis of the course work of a student of the fourth year, A. A. Karatsuba, "On a problem from the automata theory", which was distinguished by testimonial reference at the competition of student works of the faculty of mechanics and mathematics of Moscow State University in 1958. The paper by Karatsuba was given to the journal Uspekhi Mat. Nauk on 17 December 1958 and was published there in June 1960. Until the present day (2011), Karatsuba's result on the length of experiments is the only exact nonlinear result, both in automata theory, and in similar problems of computational complexity theory.
Computer audition
Computer audition (CA) or machine listening is the general field of study of algorithms and systems for audio interpretation by machines. Since the notion of what it means for a machine to "hear" is very broad and somewhat vague, computer audition attempts to bring together several disciplines that originally dealt with specific problems or had a concrete application in mind. The engineer Paris Smaragdis, interviewed in Technology Review, talks about these systems — "software that uses sound to locate people moving through rooms, monitor machinery for impending breakdowns, or activate traffic cameras to record accidents." Inspired by models of human audition, CA deals with questions of representation, transduction, grouping, use of musical knowledge and general sound semantics for the purpose of performing intelligent operations on audio and music signals by the computer. Technically this requires a combination of methods from the fields of signal processing, auditory modelling, music perception and cognition, pattern recognition, and machine learning, as well as more traditional methods of artificial intelligence for musical knowledge representation. == Applications == Like computer vision versus image processing, computer audition versus audio engineering deals with understanding of audio rather than processing. It also differs from problems of speech understanding by machine since it deals with general audio signals, such as natural sounds and musical recordings. Applications of computer audition are widely varying, and include search for sounds, genre recognition, acoustic monitoring, music transcription, score following, audio texture, music improvisation, emotion in audio and so on. == Related disciplines == Computer Audition overlaps with the following disciplines: Music information retrieval: methods for search and analysis of similarity between music signals. Auditory scene analysis: understanding and description of audio sources and events. Computational musicology and mathematical music theory: use of algorithms that employ musical knowledge for analysis of music data. Computer music: use of computers in creative musical applications. Machine musicianship: audition driven interactive music systems. == Areas of study == Since audio signals are interpreted by the human ear–brain system, that complex perceptual mechanism should be simulated somehow in software for "machine listening". In other words, to perform on par with humans, the computer should hear and understand audio content much as humans do. Analyzing audio accurately involves several fields: electrical engineering (spectrum analysis, filtering, and audio transforms); artificial intelligence (machine learning and sound classification); psychoacoustics (sound perception); cognitive sciences (neuroscience and artificial intelligence); acoustics (physics of sound production); and music (harmony, rhythm, and timbre). Furthermore, audio transformations such as pitch shifting, time stretching, and sound object filtering, should be perceptually and musically meaningful. For best results, these transformations require perceptual understanding of spectral models, high-level feature extraction, and sound analysis/synthesis. Finally, structuring and coding the content of an audio file (sound and metadata) could benefit from efficient compression schemes, which discard inaudible information in the sound. Computational models of music and sound perception and cognition can lead to a more meaningful representation, a more intuitive digital manipulation and generation of sound and music in musical human-machine interfaces. The study of CA could be roughly divided into the following sub-problems: Representation: signal and symbolic. This aspect deals with time-frequency representations, both in terms of notes and spectral models, including pattern playback and audio texture. Feature extraction: sound descriptors, segmentation, onset, pitch and envelope detection, chroma, and auditory representations. Musical knowledge structures: analysis of tonality, rhythm, and harmonies. Sound similarity: methods for comparison between sounds, sound identification, novelty detection, segmentation, and clustering. Sequence modeling: matching and alignment between signals and note sequences. Source separation: methods of grouping of simultaneous sounds, such as multiple pitch detection and time-frequency clustering methods. Auditory cognition: modeling of emotions, anticipation and familiarity, auditory surprise, and analysis of musical structure. Multi-modal analysis: finding correspondences between textual, visual, and audio signals. === Representation issues === Computer audition deals with audio signals that can be represented in a variety of fashions, from direct encoding of digital audio in two or more channels to symbolically represented synthesis instructions. Audio signals are usually represented in terms of analogue or digital recordings. Digital recordings are samples of acoustic waveform or parameters of audio compression algorithms. One of the unique properties of musical signals is that they often combine different types of representations, such as graphical scores and sequences of performance actions that are encoded as MIDI files. Since audio signals usually comprise multiple sound sources, then unlike speech signals that can be efficiently described in terms of specific models (such as source-filter model), it is hard to devise a parametric representation for general audio. Parametric audio representations usually use filter banks or sinusoidal models to capture multiple sound parameters, sometimes increasing the representation size in order to capture internal structure in the signal. Additional types of data that are relevant for computer audition are textual descriptions of audio contents, such as annotations, reviews, and visual information in the case of audio-visual recordings. === Features === Description of contents of general audio signals usually requires extraction of features that capture specific aspects of the audio signal. Generally speaking, one could divide the features into signal or mathematical descriptors such as energy, description of spectral shape etc., statistical characterization such as change or novelty detection, special representations that are better adapted to the nature of musical signals or the auditory system, such as logarithmic growth of sensitivity (bandwidth) in frequency or octave invariance (chroma). Since parametric models in audio usually require very many parameters, the features are used to summarize properties of multiple parameters in a more compact or salient representation. === Musical knowledge === Finding specific musical structures is possible by using musical knowledge as well as supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods. Examples of this include detection of tonality according to distribution of frequencies that correspond to patterns of occurrence of notes in musical scales, distribution of note onset times for detection of beat structure, distribution of energies in different frequencies to detect musical chords and so on. === Sound similarity and sequence modeling === Comparison of sounds can be done by comparison of features with or without reference to time. In some cases an overall similarity can be assessed by close values of features between two sounds. In other cases when temporal structure is important, methods of dynamic time warping need to be applied to "correct" for different temporal scales of acoustic events. Finding repetitions and similar sub-sequences of sonic events is important for tasks such as texture synthesis and machine improvisation. === Source separation === Since one of the basic characteristics of general audio is that it comprises multiple simultaneously sounding sources, such as multiple musical instruments, people talking, machine noises or animal vocalization, the ability to identify and separate individual sources is very desirable. Unfortunately, there are no methods that can solve this problem in a robust fashion. Existing methods of source separation rely sometimes on correlation between different audio channels in multi-channel recordings. The ability to separate sources from stereo signals requires different techniques than those usually applied in communications where multiple sensors are available. Other source separation methods rely on training or clustering of features in mono recording, such as tracking harmonically related partials for multiple pitch detection. Some methods, before explicit recognition, rely on revealing structures in data without knowing the structures (like recognizing objects in abstract pictures without attributing them meaningful labels) by finding the least complex data representations, for instance describing audio scenes as generated by a few tone patterns and their trajectories (polyphonic voices) and acoustical contours drawn by a tone (c
MRF optimization via dual decomposition
In dual decomposition a problem is broken into smaller subproblems and a solution to the relaxed problem is found. This method can be employed for MRF optimization. Dual decomposition is applied to markov logic programs as an inference technique. == Background == Discrete MRF Optimization (inference) is very important in Machine Learning and Computer vision, which is realized on CUDA graphical processing units. Consider a graph G = ( V , E ) {\displaystyle G=(V,E)} with nodes V {\displaystyle V} and Edges E {\displaystyle E} . The goal is to assign a label l p {\displaystyle l_{p}} to each p ∈ V {\displaystyle p\in V} so that the MRF Energy is minimized: (1) min Σ p ∈ V θ p ( l p ) + Σ p q ∈ ε θ p q ( l p ) ( l q ) {\displaystyle \min \Sigma _{p\in V}\theta _{p}(l_{p})+\Sigma _{pq\in \varepsilon }\theta _{pq}(l_{p})(l_{q})} Major MRF Optimization methods are based on Graph cuts or Message passing. They rely on the following integer linear programming formulation (2) min x E ( θ , x ) = θ . x = ∑ p ∈ V θ p . x p + ∑ p q ∈ ε θ p q . x p q {\displaystyle \min _{x}E(\theta ,x)=\theta .x=\sum _{p\in V}\theta _{p}.x_{p}+\sum _{pq\in \varepsilon }\theta _{pq}.x_{pq}} In many applications, the MRF-variables are {0,1}-variables that satisfy: x p ( l ) = 1 {\displaystyle x_{p}(l)=1} ⇔ {\displaystyle \Leftrightarrow } label l {\displaystyle l} is assigned to p {\displaystyle p} , while x p q ( l , l ′ ) = 1 {\displaystyle x_{pq}(l,l^{\prime })=1} , labels l , l ′ {\displaystyle l,l^{\prime }} are assigned to p , q {\displaystyle p,q} . == Dual Decomposition == The main idea behind decomposition is surprisingly simple: decompose your original complex problem into smaller solvable subproblems, extract a solution by cleverly combining the solutions from these subproblems. A sample problem to decompose: min x Σ i f i ( x ) {\displaystyle \min _{x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x)} where x ∈ C {\displaystyle x\in C} In this problem, separately minimizing every single f i ( x ) {\displaystyle f^{i}(x)} over x {\displaystyle x} is easy; but minimizing their sum is a complex problem. So the problem needs to get decomposed using auxiliary variables { x i } {\displaystyle \{x^{i}\}} and the problem will be as follows: min { x i } , x Σ i f i ( x i ) {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{i}\},x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x^{i})} where x i ∈ C , x i = x {\displaystyle x^{i}\in C,x^{i}=x} Now we can relax the constraints by multipliers { λ i } {\displaystyle \{\lambda ^{i}\}} which gives us the following Lagrangian dual function: g ( { λ i } ) = min { x i ∈ C } , x Σ i f i ( x i ) + Σ i λ i . ( x i − x ) = min { x i ∈ C } , x Σ i [ f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i ] − ( Σ i λ i ) x {\displaystyle g(\{\lambda ^{i}\})=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\},x}\Sigma _{i}f^{i}(x^{i})+\Sigma _{i}\lambda ^{i}.(x^{i}-x)=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\},x}\Sigma _{i}[f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}]-(\Sigma _{i}\lambda ^{i})x} Now we eliminate x {\displaystyle x} from the dual function by minimizing over x {\displaystyle x} and dual function becomes: g ( { λ i } ) = min { x i ∈ C } Σ i [ f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i ] {\displaystyle g(\{\lambda ^{i}\})=\min _{\{x^{i}\in C\}}\Sigma _{i}[f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}]} We can set up a Lagrangian dual problem: (3) max { λ i } ∈ Λ g ( λ i ) = Σ i g i ( x i ) , {\displaystyle \max _{\{\lambda ^{i}\}\in \Lambda }g({\lambda ^{i}})=\Sigma _{i}g^{i}(x^{i}),} The Master problem (4) g i ( x i ) = m i n x i f i ( x i ) + λ i . x i {\displaystyle g^{i}(x^{i})=min_{x^{i}}f^{i}(x^{i})+\lambda ^{i}.x^{i}} where x i ∈ C {\displaystyle x^{i}\in C} The Slave problems == MRF optimization via Dual Decomposition == The original MRF optimization problem is NP-hard and we need to transform it into something easier. τ {\displaystyle \tau } is a set of sub-trees of graph G {\displaystyle G} where its trees cover all nodes and edges of the main graph. And MRFs defined for every tree T {\displaystyle T} in τ {\displaystyle \tau } will be smaller. The vector of MRF parameters is θ T {\displaystyle \theta ^{T}} and the vector of MRF variables is x T {\displaystyle x^{T}} , these two are just smaller in comparison with original MRF vectors θ , x {\displaystyle \theta ,x} . For all vectors θ T {\displaystyle \theta ^{T}} we'll have the following: (5) ∑ T ∈ τ ( p ) θ p T = θ p , ∑ T ∈ τ ( p q ) θ p q T = θ p q . {\displaystyle \sum _{T\in \tau (p)}\theta _{p}^{T}=\theta _{p},\sum _{T\in \tau (pq)}\theta _{pq}^{T}=\theta _{pq}.} Where τ ( p ) {\displaystyle \tau (p)} and τ ( p q ) {\displaystyle \tau (pq)} denote all trees of τ {\displaystyle \tau } than contain node p {\displaystyle p} and edge p q {\displaystyle pq} respectively. We simply can write: (6) E ( θ , x ) = ∑ T ∈ τ E ( θ T , x T ) {\displaystyle E(\theta ,x)=\sum _{T\in \tau }E(\theta ^{T},x^{T})} And our constraints will be: (7) x T ∈ χ T , x T = x | T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T},x^{T}=x_{|T},\forall T\in \tau } Our original MRF problem will become: (8) min { x T } , x Σ T ∈ τ E ( θ T , x T ) {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{T}\},x}\Sigma _{T\in \tau }E(\theta ^{T},x^{T})} where x T ∈ χ T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T},\forall T\in \tau } and x T ∈ x | T , ∀ T ∈ τ {\displaystyle x^{T}\in x_{|T},\forall T\in \tau } And we'll have the dual problem we were seeking: (9) max { λ T } ∈ Λ g ( { λ T } ) = ∑ T ∈ τ g T ( λ T ) , {\displaystyle \max _{\{\lambda ^{T}\}\in \Lambda }g(\{\lambda ^{T}\})=\sum _{T\in \tau }g^{T}(\lambda ^{T}),} The Master problem where each function g T ( . ) {\displaystyle g^{T}(.)} is defined as: (10) g T ( λ T ) = min x T E ( θ T + λ T , x T ) {\displaystyle g^{T}(\lambda ^{T})=\min _{x^{T}}E(\theta ^{T}+\lambda ^{T},x^{T})} where x T ∈ χ T {\displaystyle x^{T}\in \chi ^{T}} The Slave problems == Theoretical Properties == Theorem 1. Lagrangian relaxation (9) is equivalent to the LP relaxation of (2). min { x T } , x { E ( x , θ ) | x p T = s p , x T ∈ CONVEXHULL ( χ T ) } {\displaystyle \min _{\{x^{T}\},x}\{E(x,\theta )|x_{p}^{T}=s_{p},x^{T}\in {\text{CONVEXHULL}}(\chi ^{T})\}} Theorem 2. If the sequence of multipliers { α t } {\displaystyle \{\alpha _{t}\}} satisfies α t ≥ 0 , lim t → ∞ α t = 0 , ∑ t = 0 ∞ α t = ∞ {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}\geq 0,\lim _{t\to \infty }\alpha _{t}=0,\sum _{t=0}^{\infty }\alpha _{t}=\infty } then the algorithm converges to the optimal solution of (9). Theorem 3. The distance of the current solution { θ T } {\displaystyle \{\theta ^{T}\}} to the optimal solution { θ ¯ T } {\displaystyle \{{\bar {\theta }}^{T}\}} , which decreases at every iteration. Theorem 4. Any solution obtained by the method satisfies the WTA (weak tree agreement) condition. Theorem 5. For binary MRFs with sub-modular energies, the method computes a globally optimal solution.