Color gradient

In color science, a color gradient (also known as a color ramp or a color progression) specifies a range of position-dependent colors, usually used to fill a region. In assigning colors to a set of values, a gradient is a continuous colormap, a type of color scheme. In computer graphics, the term swatch has come to mean a palette of active colors. == Definitions == Color gradient is a set of colors arranged in a linear order (ordered) A continuous colormap is a curve through a colorspace === Strict definition === A colormap is a function which associate a real value r with point c in color space C {\displaystyle C} f : [ r m i n , r m a x ] ⊂ R → C {\displaystyle f:[r_{min},r_{max}]\subset \mathbf {R} \to C} which is defined by: a colorspace C an increasing sequence of sampling points r 0 < . . . < r m ∈ [ r m i n , r m a x ] {\displaystyle r_{0}<...

Lesk algorithm

The Lesk algorithm is a classical algorithm for word sense disambiguation introduced by Michael E. Lesk in 1986. It operates on the premise that words within a given context are likely to share a common meaning. This algorithm compares the dictionary definitions of an ambiguous word with the words in its surrounding context to determine the most appropriate sense. Variations, such as the Simplified Lesk algorithm, have demonstrated improved precision and efficiency. However, the Lesk algorithm has faced criticism for its sensitivity to definition wording and its reliance on brief glosses. Researchers have sought to enhance its accuracy by incorporating additional resources like thesauruses and syntactic models. == Overview == The Lesk algorithm is based on the assumption that words in a given "neighborhood" (section of text) will tend to share a common topic. A simplified version of the Lesk algorithm is to compare the dictionary definition of an ambiguous word with the terms contained in its neighborhood. Versions have been adapted to use WordNet. An implementation might look like this: for every sense of the word being disambiguated one should count the number of words that are in both the neighborhood of that word and in the dictionary definition of that sense the sense that is to be chosen is the sense that has the largest number of this count. A frequently used example illustrating this algorithm is for the context "pine cone". The following dictionary definitions are used: PINE 1. kinds of evergreen tree with needle-shaped leaves 2. waste away through sorrow or illness CONE 1. solid body which narrows to a point 2. something of this shape whether solid or hollow 3. fruit of certain evergreen trees As can be seen, the best intersection is Pine #1 ⋂ Cone #3 = 2. == Simplified Lesk algorithm == In Simplified Lesk algorithm, the correct meaning of each word in a given context is determined individually by locating the sense that overlaps the most between its dictionary definition and the given context. Rather than simultaneously determining the meanings of all words in a given context, this approach tackles each word individually, independent of the meaning of the other words occurring in the same context. "A comparative evaluation performed by Vasilescu et al. (2004) has shown that the simplified Lesk algorithm can significantly outperform the original definition of the algorithm, both in terms of precision and efficiency. By evaluating the disambiguation algorithms on the Senseval-2 English all words data, they measure a 58% precision using the simplified Lesk algorithm compared to the only 42% under the original algorithm. Note: Vasilescu et al. implementation considers a back-off strategy for words not covered by the algorithm, consisting of the most frequent sense defined in WordNet. This means that words for which all their possible meanings lead to zero overlap with current context or with other word definitions are by default assigned sense number one in WordNet." Simplified LESK Algorithm with smart default word sense (Vasilescu et al., 2004) The COMPUTEOVERLAP function returns the number of words in common between two sets, ignoring function words or other words on a stop list. The original Lesk algorithm defines the context in a more complex way. == Criticisms == Unfortunately, Lesk’s approach is very sensitive to the exact wording of definitions, so the absence of a certain word can radically change the results. Further, the algorithm determines overlaps only among the glosses of the senses being considered. This is a significant limitation in that dictionary glosses tend to be fairly short and do not provide sufficient vocabulary to relate fine-grained sense distinctions. A lot of work has appeared offering different modifications of this algorithm. These works use other resources for analysis (thesauruses, synonyms dictionaries or morphological and syntactic models): for instance, it may use such information as synonyms, different derivatives, or words from definitions of words from definitions. == Lesk variants == Original Lesk (Lesk, 1986) Adapted/Extended Lesk (Banerjee and Pederson, 2002/2003): In the adaptive lesk algorithm, a word vector is created corresponds to every content word in the wordnet gloss. Concatenating glosses of related concepts in WordNet can be used to augment this vector. The vector contains the co-occurrence counts of words co-occurring with w in a large corpus. Adding all the word vectors for all the content words in its gloss creates the Gloss vector g for a concept. Relatedness is determined by comparing the gloss vector using the Cosine similarity measure. There are a lot of studies concerning Lesk and its extensions: Wilks and Stevenson, 1998, 1999; Mahesh et al., 1997; Cowie et al., 1992; Yarowsky, 1992; Pook and Catlett, 1988; Kilgarriff and Rosensweig, 2000; Kwong, 2001; Nastase and Szpakowicz, 2001; Gelbukh and Sidorov, 2004.

Tridium

Tridium Inc. is an American engineering hardware and software company based in Richmond, Virginia, whose products facilitate and integrate the automation of building and other engineering control systems. Since November 2005, the company has operated as an independent business entity of Honeywell International Inc. == History == Tridium Inc. was founded in 1995. In 1999, Tridium launched the Niagara Framework, a software infrastructure that connects all systems and devices to a central console. In 2002, John Petze became president and CEO, replacing Jerry Frank. The company was acquired by Honeywell International Inc in 2005. == Products == Tridium's products facilitate by integrating building automation using open and proprietary communications protocols such as Modbus, Lonworks and BACnet. Tridium is the developer of Niagara Framework. The Niagara Framework is a universal software infrastructure that allows building controls integrators, HVAC and mechanical contractors to build custom, web-enabled applications for accessing, automating and controlling smart devices real-time via local network or over the Internet.

Serverless computing

Serverless computing is "a cloud service category where the customer can use different cloud capability types without the customer having to provision, deploy and manage either hardware or software resources, other than providing customer application code or providing customer data. Serverless computing represents a form of virtualized computing", according to ISO/IEC 22123-2. Serverless computing is a broad ecosystem that includes the cloud provider, function as a service (FaaS), managed services, tools, frameworks, engineers, stakeholders, and other interconnected elements. == Overview == Serverless is a misnomer in the sense that servers are still used by cloud service providers to execute code for developers. The definition of serverless computing has evolved over time, leading to varied interpretations. According to Ben Kehoe, serverless represents a spectrum rather than a rigid definition. Emphasis should shift from strict definitions and specific technologies to adopting a serverless mindset, focusing on leveraging serverless solutions to address business challenges. Serverless computing does not eliminate complexity but shifts much of it from the operations team to the development team. However, this shift is not absolute, as operations teams continue to manage aspects such as identity and access management (IAM), networking, security policies, and cost optimization. Additionally, while breaking down applications into finer-grained components can increase management complexity, the relationship between granularity and management difficulty is not strictly linear. There is often an optimal level of modularization where the benefits outweigh the added management overhead. According to Yan Cui, serverless techniques should be adopted only when they help to deliver customer value faster. And while adopting, organizations should take small steps and de-risk along the way. == Challenges == Serverless applications are prone to fallacies of distributed computing. In addition, they are prone to the following fallacies: Versioning is simple Compensating transactions always work Observability is optional === Monitoring and debugging === Monitoring and debugging serverless applications can present unique challenges due to their distributed, event-driven nature and proprietary environments. Traditional tools may fall short, making it difficult to track execution flows across services. However, modern solutions such as distributed tracing tools (e.g., AWS X-Ray, Datadog), centralized logging, and cloud-agnostic observability platforms are mitigating these challenges. Emerging technologies like OpenTelemetry, AI-powered anomaly detection, and serverless-specific frameworks are further improving visibility and root cause analysis. While challenges persist, advancements in monitoring and debugging tools are steadily addressing these limitations. === Security === According to OWASP, serverless applications are vulnerable to variations of traditional attacks, insecure code, and some serverless-specific attacks (like denial of wallet). So, the risks have changed and attack prevention requires a shift in mindset. === Vendor lock-in === Serverless computing is provided as a third-party service. Applications and software that run in the serverless environment are by default locked to a specific cloud vendor. This issue is exacerbated in serverless computing, as with its increased level of abstraction, public vendors only allow customers to upload code to a FaaS platform without the authority to configure underlying environments. More importantly, when considering a more complex workflow that includes backend-as-a-service (BaaS), a BaaS offering can typically only natively trigger a FaaS offering from the same provider. This makes the workload migration in serverless computing virtually impossible. Therefore, considering how to design and deploy serverless workflows from a multi-cloud perspective could mitigate this. == High-performance computing == Serverless computing may not be ideal for certain high-performance computing (HPC) workloads due to resource limits often imposed by cloud providers, including maximum memory, CPU, and runtime restrictions. For workloads requiring sustained or predictable resource usage, bulk-provisioned servers can sometimes be more cost-effective than the pay-per-use model typical of serverless platforms. However, serverless computing is increasingly capable of supporting specific HPC workloads, particularly those that are highly parallelizable and event-driven, by leveraging its scalability and elasticity. The suitability of serverless computing for HPC continues to evolve with advancements in cloud technologies. == Anti-patterns == The grain of sand anti-pattern refers to the creation of excessively small components (e.g., functions) within a system, often resulting in increased complexity, operational overhead, and performance inefficiencies. Lambda pinball is a related anti-pattern that can occur in serverless architectures when functions (e.g., AWS Lambda, Azure functions) excessively invoke each other in fragmented chains, leading to latency, debugging and testing challenges, and reduced observability. These anti-patterns are associated with the formation of a distributed monolith. These anti-patterns are often addressed through the application of clear domain boundaries, which distinguish between public and published interfaces. Public interfaces are technically accessible interfaces, such as methods, classes, API endpoints, or triggers, but they do not come with formal stability guarantees. In contrast, published interfaces involve an explicit stability contract, including formal versioning, thorough documentation, a defined deprecation policy, and often support for backward compatibility. Published interfaces may also require maintaining multiple versions simultaneously and adhering to formal deprecation processes when breaking changes are introduced. Fragmented chains of function calls are often observed in systems where serverless components (functions) interact with other resources in complex patterns, sometimes described as spaghetti architecture or a distributed monolith. In contrast, systems exhibiting clearer boundaries typically organize serverless components into cohesive groups, where internal public interfaces manage inter-component communication, and published interfaces define communication across group boundaries. This distinction highlights differences in stability guarantees and maintenance commitments, contributing to reduced dependency complexity. Additionally, patterns associated with excessive serverless function chaining are sometimes addressed through architectural strategies that emphasize native service integrations instead of individual functions, a concept referred to as the functionless mindset. However, this approach is noted to involve a steeper learning curve, and integration limitations may vary even within the same cloud vendor ecosystem. Reporting on serverless databases presents challenges, as retrieving data for a reporting service can either break the bounded contexts, reduce the timeliness of the data, or do both. This applies regardless of whether data is pulled directly from databases, retrieved via HTTP, or collected in batches. Mark Richards refers to this as the reach-in reporting anti-pattern. A possible alternative to this approach is for databases to asynchronously push the necessary data to the reporting service instead of the reporting service pulling it. While this method requires a separate contract between services and the reporting service and can be complex to implement, it helps preserve bounded contexts while maintaining a high level of data timeliness. == Principles == Adopting DevSecOps practices can help improve the use and security of serverless technologies. In serverless applications, the distinction between infrastructure and business logic is often blurred, with applications typically distributed across multiple services. To maximize the effectiveness of testing, integration testing is emphasized for serverless applications. Additionally, to facilitate debugging and implementation, orchestration is used within the bounded context, while choreography is employed between different bounded contexts. Ephemeral resources are typically kept together to maintain high cohesion. However, shared resources with long spin-up times, such as AWS RDS clusters and landing zones, are often managed in separate repositories, deployment pipeline, and stacks.

Too Good To Go

Too Good To Go is a service with a mobile application that connects customers to restaurants and stores that have surplus unsold food. The service covers major European cities, and in October 2020 started operations in North America. As part of the initiatives taken on the International Day of Awareness of Food Loss and Waste to reduce food loss and waste, the app is suggested alongside OLIO among many others. In 2023 Too Good To Go was the fastest-growing sustainable food app startup by number of downloads. As of August 2023, it claimed 164,000 businesses, serving 62 million users, have saved 155 million bags of food. As of March 2023, it claimed to have saved over 200 million meals. == History == The company was created in 2015 in Denmark by Thomas Bjørn Momsen, Klaus Bagge Pedersen, Adam Sigbrand and Brian Christensen. In 2017, Mette Lykke (co-founder of Endomondo) joined as CEO. In February 2019, the company raised an additional 6 million euros in a new round of investment. In August 2019, Too Good To Go was re-launched in Austria. In September 2019, Too Good To Go acquired the Spanish startup weSAVEeat and merged it into its own brand. In November 2019, the offer of Too Good To Go extended to plants through a partnership with the French retail plants company Jardiland. In December 2019, Too Good To Go partnered with the French grocery retail stores Intermarché, and donated 60K euros to the French charity Restaurants du Cœur. In October 2021, Bonnie Wright teamed up with Too Good To Go to drive the initiative to reduce food waste. == Corporate affairs == The key trends for the Danish entity Too Good To Go ApS are (as of the financial year ending December 31): == International expansion == As of March 2026 the company serves the European countries Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, the Faroe Islands, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom. Outside of Europe the service is available in Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and the United States. == Purpose == The purpose of Too Good To Go is to reduce food waste worldwide. It developed a mobile application that connects restaurants and stores that have unsold, surplus food, with customers who can then buy whatever food the outlet considers surplus to requirements—without being able to choose—at a much lower price than normal. The food on the app is priced at one-third its original price. The company claims this reduces the waste of food that would otherwise be discarded; food waste is a global problem that affects the environment. In three years active, the app reached more than 9.5 million users. As of 2022, more than 57.7 million users and 154,000 establishments have signed up, and 139 million meals have been collected. In 2019, the company had 350 employees in Europe. As of June 2023 the company was estimated to have 1,289 employees. == Use == Food outlets must notify the TGTG company about what they have available on each day, stating what sort of food they have (baked foods, meals, produce, vegan food), and the price for a 'surprise bag', whose contents they determine; the user cannot choose, but the original prices will be three or more times the TGTG price. Notification is made early based upon the quantity predicted to be left over, not at the end of a selling period. Users must register to use the service. A mobile phone with an Internet connection running Android or iOS is needed. The user runs the TGTG app, which lists outlets available within a chosen distance and time range. The customer can then order and pay for a 'surprise bag'. The supplier can cancel an order at any time if the expected surplus is not available—the purchaser is notified by text message—and the purchaser can cancel with two hours' notice. The phone must be taken to the food supplier in a specified pickup time window, often 30 or 60 minutes long, and the transaction is finalised by swiping the app—connected to the Internet—to confirm collection.

PCPaint

PCPaint was one of the first IBM PC-based mouse-driven GUI paint programs, released in 1984. It followed after Microsoft Doodle, released in 1983 with the Microsoft Mouse version 1 drivers for DOS, and around the same time as Digital Research’s Draw program. It was developed and created by John Bridges and Doug Wolfgram. It was later developed into Pictor Paint. The hardware manufacturer Mouse Systems bundled PCPaint with millions of computer mice that they sold, making PCPaint one of the best-selling DOS-based paint programs of the mid 1980s. == History == In 1983, Doug Wolfgram bought a Microsoft Mouse and decided to write a drawing program for it. They named it “Mouse Draw”. The interface was primitive but the program functioned well. Wolfgram traveled to SoftCon in New Orleans where he demonstrated the program to Mouse Systems. Mouse Systems was developing an optical mouse and they wanted to bundle a painting program so they agreed to publish Mouse Draw. The original program was written entirely in assembly language with primitive graphics routines developed by Wolfgram. John Bridges worked for an educational software company, Classroom Consortia Media, Inc., developing and writing Apple and IBM graphics libraries for CCM's software. Bridges and Wolfgram were friends who had been connected through a bulletin board system developed and run by Wolfgram. The two collaborated cross country via the BBS, Wolfram in California and Bridges in New York. Mouse Systems wanted the paint program to capture the look and feel of MacPaint. John Bridges and Doug Wolfgram started reworking Mouse Draw into what became PCPaint. The program was completely re-written using Bridge's graphics library and the top-level elements were written in C rather than assembly language. Bridges developed the core graphics code for the first version of PCPaint while Wolfgram worked on the user interface and top-level code. Mouse Systems signed an exclusive agreement with Wolfgram's company, Microtex Industries, Inc., to bundle PCPaint with every mouse they sold. They began publishing PCPaint with their mice in 1984. Microsoft responded in 1985 by bundling a competing product, PC Paintbrush, with version 4 of its DOS drivers for the Microsoft Mouse, replacing its in-house Microsoft Doodle program which it published with version 1 of the DOS drivers in mid-1983. Microsoft’s mouse began to outsell Mouse Systems mouse. In November 1985 Microsoft bundled a cut-down version of PC Paintbrush with Windows 1.0 (called Microsoft Paint), later bundling an updated version of PC Paintbrush with Windows 3.0 (as Paintbrush), impacting PCPaint’s marketshare. In early 1987, Mouse Systems decided that PCPaint wasn't helping to sell mice any longer so they discontinued the bundle deal and returned rights to the code to MicroTex Industries, but retained rights to the name, PCPaint. Wolfgram then combined the paint program with a new animation system he was developing (called GRASP) and Paul Mace Software bought publishing rights to the animation system and PCPaint, which was to be renamed Pictor. Bridges again got involved and took over programming responsibilities for GRASP as well as PCPaint while Wolfgram focused on more of the business details. In creating the first version of PCPaint, Doug had a dual-floppy machine with a Computer Innovations compiler on one disk and source code on the other. John had the "luxury" of a 10MB hard disk in his XT. Data was exchanged daily via 1200, then 2400 baud modems. === Authorship and Ownership === John Bridges and Wolfgram continued to work on PCPaint and GRASP on behalf of Paul Mace Software until 1990. Also in that year, Doug Wolfgram sold his remaining rights to PCPaint (and its animation system, GRASP) to John Bridges. In 1994, GRASP development stopped and so did development of Pictor Paint. John Bridges terminated his GRASP publishing contract with Paul Mace Software, and went off to create GLPro (the next generation of GRASP) with GMEDIA. Along with GLPro, came GLPaint, the successor to PCPaint and Pictor Paint. == Versions == In June 1984, Mouse Systems shipped PCPaint 1.0, the first GUI based Paint program for the IBM PC family of computers. John Bridges and Doug Wolfgram, were the co-authors of PCPaint 1.0. PCPaint 1.0 saved its graphics in a modified BSaved image format with the extension of ".PIC". The release of PCPaint Version 1.5 followed in late 1984, with the additions of graphics image compression for the .PIC format and support for "larger-than-screen" images. PCjr support was also added in this version after overcoming severe memory shortage problems getting PCPaint to run on the 128k PCjr. October 1985 saw the release of PCPaint 2.0. EGA support and publishing features were added to this version. The .PIC format was further refined, offering support for the rapidly expanding graphics capabilities of the PC and efficient image compression. PCPaint 3.1 was released in 1989. Unlike previous versions, it was not bundled with mice but was sold as a stand-alone software product. PCPaint 3.1 offered improved text and image handling, provided 36 types of flood and fill, worked with VGA adapters in hi-res 16-color and 256-color modes, allowed the user to save and retrieve files in a variety of intercompatible formats (.PIC, .GIF, .PCX, .IMG), and printed selected portions of images on color or black-and-white dot matrix, ink jet, and laser printers such as PostScript and HP Laser Jet. PCPaint 3.1 is still in use today by some users of DOS emulation programs like DOSBox and available for free download. Pictor Paint was an improved version, written by John Bridges, and bundled with GRASP GRaphical System for Presentation also written by John Bridges. It was also called "The Painter's Easel". GLPaint, released in 1995, was the last in this series of paint programs written by John Bridges. By 1998 version 7.0 provided support for TrueColor images and the Pictor PIC format was expanded to handle these. == Pictor PIC Image Format == PCPaint 1.0 saved its graphics in a modified BSAVE image format (which was popular at the time) with the file type (extension) of ".PIC". By PCPaint 1.5 this format was extended further to accommodate image compression. With the release of version 2.0 the PICtor PIC image format was developed almost to its present state, with no similarity to the BSAVE format used by earlier versions. Pictor Paint saved its files in a compressed format with the file extension PIC, which was the same format used by PCPaint.

T Layout

The T-Layout is an architectural and design concept for web applications, specifically tailored to improve the user experience on mobile devices. It features a horizontally scrollable container divided into three distinct sections, each spanning the full width of the screen, and was developed to optimise space usage and streamline navigation. == Background == The T-Layout introduces horizontal scrolling as a complementary method to the conventional pop-up-based navigation system in mobile web applications. In this layout, the central section which is visible by default upon accessing the application, facilitates the main content of a URL address and is flanked by two "helper" sections. This approach minimises the need for extensive user movements, in order to reach navigation controls typically located at the top of the screen. It is aimed at enhancing the user experience on mobile devices by providing an easier way to access essential content such as the main navigation, e-commerce related screens, or user account related information, ensuring that those elements are readily accessible while requiring minimal user effort. The T-Layout was first implemented by E (e-streetwear.com) in their mobile web app layout, and it was inspired by the interfaces of well-tested native mobile apps like Instagram and Revolut. A study titled "Mobile Navigation and User Preferences Survey" indicated a preference among mobile app users for one-handed usage, primarily navigating with their thumb. These insights led to the T-Layout Experiment, which compared the efficiency of using swipe gestures to access navigational elements against reaching traditional navigation controls. == Development history == It was first released as the mobile layout of E in early 2023. It was originally developed based on six principles: user-centric functionality, lightweight filesize, HTML and CSS implementation with minimal or no use of JavaScript required, suitable both for browser and server-rendering architectures, intuitive design, and improved SEO. The development of the T-Layout was driven by the necessity for more ergonomic and user-friendly interfaces in mobile web applications. Its design, reminiscent of the letter 'T', emerged as a solution to several usability challenges mobile device users face, emphasising ease of access and efficient screen space utilisation. In July 2023, E formalised the concept and its technical specifications, introducing it to the web design and development community. In October 2023 the "Mobile Navigation and User Preferences Survey" was conducted, establishing that the vast majority of individuals prefer to use mobile applications by holding the phone in a one-handed grip, utilising only the thumb for gestures when possible. The subsequent "T-Layout Experiment", designed to measure the time in seconds and the distance (user effort) in pixels, required to access navigational elements by traditionally tapping on fixed-positioned controls compared to swiping anywhere on the screen. The results proved that swipe gestures require less time and much less effort. == Styling and features == The main characteristic of the T-Layout is its horizontal scrolling feature, which can improve navigation efficiency while preserving the functionality of traditionally structured user interfaces. Its Implementation can be achieved with a combination of HTML and styling with CSS as well as precompiled Scss and Sass, CSS-in-JS, and styled JSX. It can be either a purely HTML/CSS solution but JavaScript can be utilised as well to add more specific functionalities, while It can be implemented to both existing and new applications. Its application in server-side rendering architectures will ensure that all its underlying principles apply. Although principally each section in the layout has a distinct role and facilitates specific types of content, the T-Layout as a concept is versatile, and it is adaptable allowing modifications in the layout or how it's implemented to cater to the specific needs of different applications.