The AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence is a leading international academic conference in artificial intelligence held annually. It ranks 4th in terms of H5 Index in Google Scholar's list of top AI publications, after ICLR, NeurIPS, and ICML. It is supported by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), after which it is named. Precise dates vary from year to year, but paper submissions are generally due at the end of August to beginning of September, and the conference is generally held during the following February. The first AAAI was held in 1980 at Stanford University, Stanford California. During AAAI-20 conference, AI pioneers and 2018 Turing Award winners (often referred to as the Nobel Prize of Computing) Yann LeCun and Yoshua Bengio, among eight other researchers, were honored as the AAAI 2020 Fellows. Along with other conferences such as NeurIPS and ICML, AAAI uses an artificial-intelligence algorithm to assign papers to reviewers. == Sponsors == Many leading technology companies, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon (company), IBM, Baidu, Bytedance, and Huawei, generously sponsor and participate in AAAI to publish and showcase their latest theoretical and applied research. Sponsoring companies also actively recruit AI talents at the conference. == Locations == AAAI-2026 Singapore Expo, Singapore AAAI-2025 Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2024 Vancouver Convention Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada AAAI-2023 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-2022 Virtual Conference AAAI-2021 Virtual Conference AAAI-2020 Hilton New York Midtown, New York, New York, United States AAAI-2019 Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States AAAI-2018 Hilton New Orleans Riverside, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States AAAI-2017 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2016 Phoenix, Arizona, United States AAAI-2015 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-2014 Québec Convention Center, Québec City, Québec, Canada AAAI-2013 Bellevue, Washington, United States AAAI-2012 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2011 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2010 Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, Georgia, United States AAAI-2008 Chicago, Illinois, United States AAAI-2007 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2006 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-2005 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2004 San Jose, California, United States AAAI-2002 Shaw conference center in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada AAAI-2000 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1999 Orlando, Florida, United States AAAI-1998 Madison, Wisconsin, United States AAAI-1997 Providence, Rhode Island, United States AAAI-1996 Portland, Oregon, United States AAAI-1994 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1993 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1992 San Jose Convention Center, San Jose, California, United States AAAI-1991 Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim, California, United States AAAI-1990 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-1988 Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States AAAI-1987 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1986 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1984 University of Texas, Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1983 Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1982 Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1980 Stanford, California, United States
Box blur
A box blur (also known as a box linear filter) is a spatial domain linear filter in which each pixel in the resulting image has a value equal to the average value of its neighboring pixels in the input image. It is a form of low-pass ("blurring") filter. A 3 by 3 box blur ("radius 1") can be written as matrix 1 9 [ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ] . {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{9}}{\begin{bmatrix}1&1&1\\1&1&1\\1&1&1\end{bmatrix}}.} Due to its property of using equal weights, it can be implemented using a much simpler accumulation algorithm, which is significantly faster than using a sliding-window algorithm. Box blurs are frequently used to approximate a Gaussian blur. By the central limit theorem, repeated application of a box blur will approximate a Gaussian blur. In the frequency domain, a box blur has zeros and negative components. That is, a sine wave with a period equal to the size of the box will be blurred away entirely, and wavelengths shorter than the size of the box may be phase-reversed, as seen when two bokeh circles touch to form a bright spot where there would be a dark spot between two bright spots in the original image. == Extensions == Gwosdek, et al. has extended Box blur to take a fractional radius: the edges of the 1-D filter are expanded with a fraction. It makes slightly better gaussian approximation possible due to the elimination of integer-rounding error. Mario Klingemann has a "stack blur" that tries to better emulate gaussian's look in one pass by stacking weights: 1 9 [ 1 2 3 2 1 ] {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{9}}{\begin{bmatrix}1&2&3&2&1\end{bmatrix}}} The triangular impulse response it forms decomposes to two rounds of box blur. Stacked Integral Image by Bhatia et al. takes the weighted average of a few box blurs to fit the gaussian response curve. == Implementation == The following pseudocode implements a 3x3 box blur. The example does not handle the edges of the image, which would not fit inside the kernel, so that these areas remain unblurred. In practice, the issue is better handled by: Introducing an alpha channel to represent the absence of colors; Extending the boundary by filling in values, ranked by quality: Fill in a mirrored image at the border Fill in a constant color extending from the last pixel Pad in a fixed color A number of optimizations can be applied when implementing the box blur of a radius r and N pixels: The box blur is a separable filter, so that only two 1D passes of averaging 2 r + 1 pixels will be needed, one horizontal and one vertical, for each pixel. This lowers the complexity from O(Nr2) to O(Nr). In digital signal processing terminology, each pass is a moving-average filter. Accumulation. Instead of discarding the sum for each pixel, the algorithm re-uses the previous sum, and updates it by subtracting away the old pixel and adding the new pixel in the blurring range. A summed-area table can be used similarly. This lowers the complexity from O(Nr) to O(N). When being used in multiple passes to approximate a Gaussian blur, the cascaded integrator–comb filter construction allows for doing the equivalent operation in a single pass.
Nicholas Carlini
Nicholas Carlini is an American researcher affiliated with Anthropic and previously with Google DeepMind who has published research in the fields of computer security and machine learning. He is known for his work on adversarial machine learning, particularly his work on the Carlini & Wagner attack in 2016. This attack was particularly useful in defeating defensive distillation, a method used to increase model robustness, and has since been effective against other defenses against adversarial input. In 2018, Carlini demonstrated an attack on Mozilla's DeepSpeech model, showing that hidden commands could be embedded in speech inputs, which the model would execute even if they were inaudible to humans. He also led a team at UC Berkeley that successfully broke seven out of nine defenses against adversarial attacks presented at the 2018 International Conference on Learning Representations. In addition to his work on adversarial attacks, Carlini has made significant contributions to understanding the privacy risks of machine learning models. In 2020, he revealed that large language models, like GPT-2, could memorize and output personally identifiable information. His research demonstrated that this issue worsened with larger models, and he later showed similar vulnerabilities in generative image models, such as Stable Diffusion. == Life and career == Nicholas Carlini obtained his Bachelor of Arts in Computer Science and Mathematics from the University of California, Berkeley, in 2013. He then continued his studies at the same university, where he pursued a PhD under the supervision of David Wagner, completing it in 2018. Carlini became known for his work on adversarial machine learning. In 2016, he worked alongside Wagner to develop the Carlini & Wagner attack, a method of generating adversarial examples against machine learning models. The attack was proved to be useful against defensive distillation, a popular mechanism where a student model is trained based on the features of a parent model to increase the robustness and generalizability of student models. The attack gained popularity when it was shown that the methodology was also effective against most other defenses, rendering them ineffective. In 2018, Carlini demonstrated an attack against Mozilla Foundation's DeepSpeech model where he showed that by hiding malicious commands inside normal speech input the speech model would respond to the hidden commands even when the commands were not discernible by humans. In the same year, Carlini and his team at UC Berkeley showed that out of the 11 papers presenting defenses to adversarial attacks accepted in that year's ICLR conference, seven of the defenses could be broken. Since 2021, he and his team have been working on large language models, creating a questionnaire where humans typically scored 35% whereas AI models scored in the 40%, with GPT-3 getting 38% which could be improved to 40% through few shot prompting. The best performer in the test was UnifiedQA, a model developed by Google specifically for answer questions and answer sets. Carlini has also developed methods to cause large language models like ChatGPT to answer harmful questions like how to construct bombs. He is also known for his work studying the privacy of machine learning models. In 2020, he showed for the first time that large language models would memorize some of the text data that they were trained on. For example, he found that GPT-2 could output personally identifiable information. He then led an analysis of larger models and studied how memorization increased with model size. Then, in 2022 he showed the same vulnerability in generative image models, and specifically diffusion models, by showing that Stable Diffusion could output images of people's faces that it was trained on. Following on this, Carlini then showed that ChatGPT would also sometimes output exact copies of webpages it was trained on, including personally identifiable information. Some of these studies have since been referenced by the courts in debating the copyright status of AI models. == Other work == Carlini received the Best of Show award at the 2020 IOCCC for implementing a tic-tac-toe game entirely with calls to printf, expanding on work from a research paper of his from 2015. The judges commented on his submission "This year's Best of Show (carlini) is such a novel way of obfuscation that it would be worth of a special mention in the (future) Best of IOCCC list!". [sic] == Awards == Best Student Paper Award, IEEE S&P 2017 ("Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks") Best Paper Award, ICML 2018 ("Obfuscated Gradients Give a False Sense of Security: Circumventing Defenses to Adversarial Examples") Distinguished Paper Award, USENIX 2021 ("Poisoning the Unlabeled Dataset of Semi-Supervised Learning") Distinguished Paper Award, USENIX 2023 ("Tight Auditing of Differentially Private Machine Learning") Best Paper Award, ICML 2024 ("Stealing Part of a Production Language Model") Best Paper Award, ICML 2024 ("Considerations for Differentially Private Learning with Large-Scale Public Pretraining")
Markov chain Monte Carlo
In statistics, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is a class of algorithms used to draw samples from a probability distribution. Given a probability distribution, one can construct a Markov chain whose elements' distribution approximates it, i.e. the Markov chain's equilibrium distribution matches the target distribution. The more steps that are included, the more closely the distribution of the sample matches the actual desired distribution. Markov chain Monte Carlo methods are used to study probability distributions that are too complex or too high dimensional to study with analytic techniques alone. Various algorithms exist for constructing such Markov chains, including the Metropolis–Hastings algorithm. == General explanation == Markov chain Monte Carlo methods create samples from a continuous random variable, with probability density proportional to a known function. These samples can be used to evaluate an integral over that variable, as its expected value or variance. Practically, an ensemble of chains is generally developed, starting from a set of points arbitrarily chosen and sufficiently distant from each other. These chains are stochastic processes of "walkers" which move around randomly according to an algorithm that looks for places with a reasonably high contribution to the integral to move into next, assigning them higher probabilities. Random walk Monte Carlo methods are a kind of random simulation or Monte Carlo method. However, whereas the random samples of the integrand used in a conventional Monte Carlo integration are statistically independent, those used in MCMC are autocorrelated. Correlations of samples introduces the need to use the Markov chain central limit theorem when estimating the error of mean values. These algorithms create Markov chains such that they have an equilibrium distribution which is proportional to the function given. == History == The development of MCMC methods is deeply rooted in the early exploration of Monte Carlo (MC) techniques in the mid-20th century, particularly in physics. These developments were marked by the Metropolis algorithm proposed by Nicholas Metropolis, Arianna W. Rosenbluth, Marshall Rosenbluth, Augusta H. Teller, and Edward Teller in 1953, which was designed to tackle high-dimensional integration problems using early computers. Then in 1970, W. K. Hastings generalized this algorithm and inadvertently introduced the component-wise updating idea, later known as Gibbs sampling. Simultaneously, the theoretical foundations for Gibbs sampling were being developed, such as the Hammersley–Clifford theorem from Julian Besag's 1974 paper. Although the seeds of MCMC were sown earlier, including the formal naming of Gibbs sampling in image processing by Stuart Geman and Donald Geman (1984) and the data augmentation method by Martin A. Tanner and Wing Hung Wong (1987), its "revolution" in mainstream statistics largely followed demonstrations of the universality and ease of implementation of sampling methods (especially Gibbs sampling) for complex statistical (particularly Bayesian) problems, spurred by increasing computational power and software like BUGS. This transformation was accompanied by significant theoretical advancements, such as Luke Tierney's (1994) rigorous treatment of MCMC convergence, and Jun S. Liu, Wong, and Augustine Kong's (1994, 1995) analysis of Gibbs sampler structure. Subsequent developments further expanded the MCMC toolkit, including particle filters (Sequential Monte Carlo) for sequential problems, Perfect sampling aiming for exact simulation (Jim Propp and David B. Wilson, 1996), RJMCMC (Peter J. Green, 1995) for handling variable-dimension models, and deeper investigations into convergence diagnostics and the central limit theorem. Overall, the evolution of MCMC represents a paradigm shift in statistical computation, enabling the analysis of numerous previously intractable complex models and continually expanding the scope and impact of statistics. == Mathematical setting == Suppose (Xn) is a Markov Chain in the general state space X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {X}}} with specific properties. We are interested in the limiting behavior of the partial sums: S n ( h ) = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n h ( X i ) {\displaystyle S_{n}(h)={\dfrac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}h(X_{i})} as n goes to infinity. Particularly, we hope to establish the Law of Large Numbers and the Central Limit Theorem for MCMC. In the following, we state some definitions and theorems necessary for the important convergence results. In short, we need the existence of invariant measure and Harris recurrent to establish the Law of Large Numbers of MCMC (Ergodic Theorem). And we need aperiodicity, irreducibility and extra conditions such as reversibility to ensure the Central Limit Theorem holds in MCMC. === Irreducibility and aperiodicity === Recall that in the discrete setting, a Markov chain is said to be irreducible if it is possible to reach any state from any other state in a finite number of steps with positive probability. However, in the continuous setting, point-to-point transitions have zero probability. In this case, φ-irreducibility generalizes irreducibility by using a reference measure φ on the measurable space ( X , B ( X ) ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}))} . Definition (φ-irreducibility) Given a measure φ {\displaystyle \varphi } defined on ( X , B ( X ) ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}))} , the Markov chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} with transition kernel K ( x , y ) {\displaystyle K(x,y)} is φ-irreducible if, for every A ∈ B ( X ) {\displaystyle A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}})} with φ ( A ) > 0 {\displaystyle \varphi (A)>0} , there exists n {\displaystyle n} such that K n ( x , A ) > 0 {\displaystyle K^{n}(x,A)>0} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in {\mathcal {X}}} (Equivalently, P x ( τ A < ∞ ) > 0 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{A}<\infty )>0} , here τ A = inf { n ≥ 1 ; X n ∈ A } {\displaystyle \tau _{A}=\inf\{n\geq 1;X_{n}\in A\}} is the first n {\displaystyle n} for which the chain enters the set A {\displaystyle A} ). This is a more general definition for irreducibility of a Markov chain in non-discrete state space. In the discrete case, an irreducible Markov chain is said to be aperiodic if it has period 1. Formally, the period of a state ω ∈ X {\displaystyle \omega \in {\mathcal {X}}} is defined as: d ( ω ) := g c d { m ≥ 1 ; K m ( ω , ω ) > 0 } {\displaystyle d(\omega ):=\mathrm {gcd} \{m\geq 1\,;\,K^{m}(\omega ,\omega )>0\}} For the general (non-discrete) case, we define aperiodicity in terms of small sets: Definition (Cycle length and small sets) A φ-irreducible Markov chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} has a cycle of length d if there exists a small set C {\displaystyle C} , an associated integer M {\displaystyle M} , and a probability distribution ν M {\displaystyle \nu _{M}} such that d is the greatest common divisor of: { m ≥ 1 ; ∃ δ m > 0 such that C is small for ν m ≥ δ m ν M } . {\displaystyle \{m\geq 1\,;\,\exists \,\delta _{m}>0{\text{ such that }}C{\text{ is small for }}\nu _{m}\geq \delta _{m}\nu _{M}\}.} A set C {\displaystyle C} is called small if there exists m ∈ N ∗ {\displaystyle m\in \mathbb {N} ^{}} and a nonzero measure ν m {\displaystyle \nu _{m}} such that: K m ( x , A ) ≥ ν m ( A ) , ∀ x ∈ C , ∀ A ∈ B ( X ) . {\displaystyle K^{m}(x,A)\geq \nu _{m}(A),\quad \forall x\in C,\,\forall A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}}).} === Harris recurrent === Definition (Harris recurrence) A set A {\displaystyle A} is Harris recurrent if P x ( η A = ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\eta _{A}=\infty )=1} for all x ∈ A {\displaystyle x\in A} , where η A = ∑ n = 1 ∞ I A ( X n ) {\displaystyle \eta _{A}=\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }\mathbb {I} _{A}(X_{n})} is the number of visits of the chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} to the set A {\displaystyle A} . The chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} is said to be Harris recurrent if there exists a measure ψ {\displaystyle \psi } such that the chain is ψ {\displaystyle \psi } -irreducible and every measurable set A {\displaystyle A} with ψ ( A ) > 0 {\displaystyle \psi (A)>0} is Harris recurrent. A useful criterion for verifying Harris recurrence is the following: Proposition If for every A ∈ B ( X ) {\displaystyle A\in {\mathcal {B}}({\mathcal {X}})} , we have P x ( τ A < ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{A}<\infty )=1} for every x ∈ A {\displaystyle x\in A} , then P x ( η A = ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\eta _{A}=\infty )=1} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\in {\mathcal {X}}} , and the chain ( X n ) {\displaystyle (X_{n})} is Harris recurrent. This definition is only needed when the state space X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {X}}} is uncountable. In the countable case, recurrence corresponds to E x [ η x ] = ∞ {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{x}[\eta _{x}]=\infty } , which is equivalent to P x ( τ x < ∞ ) = 1 {\displaystyle P_{x}(\tau _{x}<\infty )=1} for all x ∈ X {\displaystyle x\i
Amebis
Amebis from Kamnik is a company in Slovenia in the field of language technologies. The company has published several electronic dictionaries and encyclopedic dictionaries (e.g. ASP (32) dictionaries) and developed spell checkers, grammar checker Besana, hyphenators and lemmatizers for Slovene, Serbian and Albanian languages. The company maintains and edits the largest Slovenian dictionary portal Termania, which contains more than 135 dictionaries. The most used terminological dictionary on Termania is the Slovenian medical dictionary. In co-operation with company Alpineon and the Jožef Stefan Institute they have developed a speech synthesizer and screen reader Govorec (Speaker). They have also provided technical support for the largest text corpus of Slovene, called FidaPLUS, Fran and Franček. Amebis also developed the system of machine translation Amebis Presis, which incorporates the Slovenian language. On 11 October 2023 Amebis received award of the Father Stanislav Škrabec Foundation for special achievements in Slovene linguistics.
Reconstruction from projections
The problem of reconstructing a multidimensional signal from its projection is uniquely multidimensional, having no 1-D counterpart. It has applications that range from computer-aided tomography to geophysical signal processing. It is a problem which can be explored from several points of view—as a deconvolution problem, a modeling problem, an estimation problem, or an interpolation problem. == Motivation and applications == Many fields in science and engineering use reconstruction from projections, especially in imaging. It is widely applied geophysical tomography, medical imaging and industrial radiography. For example, in a CT scanner, the 3D structure of the patient’s body being scanned is measured with beams going through the tissue and hitting a detector, giving a flat projection of the body from that angle. Multiple projections are put together to get an image of the position and shape of structures inside in 3D. == Problem statement and basics == A projection is a linear mapping of an M {\displaystyle M} dimensional signal into an N {\displaystyle N} dimensional one, where N ≤ M {\displaystyle N\leq M} . And the objective of reconstruction is to restore the M {\displaystyle M} dimensional signal based on the N {\displaystyle N} dimensional signal. The following case is a 2-D signal projected into 1D signal. The signal in the original coordinate is denoted as d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} . Now consider a collimated beam of radiation coming from the opposite orientation of v ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {v}}} , producing a projection along u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} . v ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {v}}} and u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} are normal to each other, and the angle between u {\displaystyle u} and u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} is theta. The signal obtained along u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} axis is defined to be p θ ( u ^ ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})} . The relationship between the original coordinate and the rotated coordinate is given by [ u ^ v ^ ] = [ cos θ sin θ − sin θ cos θ ] [ u v ] {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}{\hat {u}}\\{\hat {v}}\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}\cos \theta &\sin \theta \\-\sin \theta &\cos \theta \end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}u\\v\end{bmatrix}}} or inversely, [ u v ] = [ cos θ − sin θ sin θ cos θ ] [ u ^ v ^ ] {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}u\\v\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}\cos \theta &-\sin \theta \\\sin \theta &\cos \theta \end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}{\hat {u}}\\{\hat {v}}\end{bmatrix}}} Then we have p θ ( u ^ ) = ∫ − ∞ ∞ d ( u , v ) d v ^ = ∫ − ∞ ∞ d ( u ^ cos ( θ ) − v ^ sin ( θ ) , u ^ sin ( θ ) + v ^ cos ( θ ) ) d v ^ {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }d(u,v)\,\mathrm {d} {\hat {v}}=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }d({\hat {u}}\cos(\theta )-{\hat {v}}\sin(\theta ),{\hat {u}}\sin(\theta )+{\hat {v}}\cos(\theta ))\,\mathrm {d} {\hat {v}}} By varying theta, a large number of projections can be obtained. Given the projection-slice theorem, D ( Ω , θ ) {\displaystyle D(\Omega ,\theta )} ,the slice of the Fourier transform of d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} at angle theta, is equivalent to P θ ( Ω ) {\displaystyle P_{\theta }(\Omega )} , the Fourier Transform of the projection p θ ( u ^ ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})} . Therefore, the unknown d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} can be obtained from its Fourier transform by means of the Fourier transform inversion integral d ( u , v ) = 1 4 π 2 ∫ − ∞ ∞ ∫ − ∞ ∞ D ( Ω 1 , Ω 2 ) e j Ω 1 u e j Ω 2 v d Ω 1 , Ω 2 {\displaystyle \mathrm {d} (u,v)={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }D(\Omega _{1},\Omega _{2})e^{j\Omega _{1}u}e^{j\Omega _{2}v}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega _{1},\Omega _{2}} = 1 4 π 2 ∫ 0 ∞ ∫ − π π D ( Ω , θ ) e j Ω u cos ( θ ) e j Ω v s i n θ | Ω | d Ω d θ {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{0}^{\infty }\int _{-\pi }^{\pi }D(\Omega ,\theta )e^{j\Omega u\cos(\theta )}e^{j\Omega vsin\theta }{\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega \mathrm {d} \theta } = 1 4 π 2 ∫ − π π ∫ 0 ∞ P θ ( Ω ) e j Ω ( u cos θ + v sin θ ) | Ω | d Ω d θ {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{-\pi }^{\pi }\int _{0}^{\infty }P_{\theta }(\Omega )e^{j}\Omega (u\cos \theta +v\sin \theta ){\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega \mathrm {d} \theta } = 1 4 π 2 ∫ 0 π ( ∫ − ∞ ∞ P θ ( Ω ) | Ω | {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{0}^{\pi }(\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }P_{\theta }(\Omega ){\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}} e j Ω u ^ d Ω ) d θ {\displaystyle e^{j\Omega {\hat {u}}}\mathrm {d} \Omega )\mathrm {d} \theta } By taking the inverse Fourier Transform and assuming g ( u ^ ) = F − 1 ( | Ω | 2 ) {\displaystyle g({\hat {u}})={\mathcal {F}}^{-1}({{\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}^{2}})} , we get d ( u , v ) = ∑ i △ θ i [ p θ ( u ^ ) ∗ g θ i ( u ^ ) ] {\displaystyle d(u,v)=\sum _{i}\vartriangle \theta _{i}[p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})g_{\theta i}({\hat {u}})]} == Approaches == In practice, there are a wide variety of methods that are utilized, most of which are reconstruct 3-D information (volume) from 2-D signals (image). Typically used methods are CT, MRI, PET and SPECT. And the filtered back projection based on the principles introduced above are commonly applied. === Computed Tomography (CT) === In CT, a volume is formed by stacking the axial slices. The software cuts the volume in a different plane (usually orthogonal). Commonly, slice data is generated using an X-ray source that rotates around the object. X-ray sensors are positioned on the opposite side of the circle from the X-ray source. === Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) === In MRI, energy from an oscillating magnetic field is temporarily applied to the patient at the appropriate resonance frequency. The protons (hydrogen atoms) emit a radio frequency signal which is measured by a receiving coil. The radio signal can be made to encode position information by varying the main magnetic field using gradient coils. === Positron emission tomography (PET) === The system detects pairs of gamma rays emitted indirectly by a positron-emitting radionuclide (tracer), which is introduced into the body on a biologically active molecule. Three-dimensional images of tracer concentration within the body are then constructed by computer analysis. In modern PET-CT scanners, three dimensional imaging is often accomplished with the aid of a CT X-ray scan performed on the patient during the same session, in the same machine. === Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) === SPECT imaging is performed by using a gamma camera to acquire multiple 2-D images (projections) from multiple angles. Multiple projections are used to yield a 3-D data set. This data set may then be manipulated to show thin slices along any chosen axis of the body. SPECT is similar to PET in its use of radioactive tracer material and detection of gamma rays, while the tracers used in SPECT emit gamma radiation that is measured more directly.
AI Voice Assistants Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026
In search of the best AI voice assistant? An AI voice assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI voice assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.