Mentimeter (or Menti for short) is a Swedish company based in Stockholm that develops and maintains an eponymous app used to create presentations with real-time feedback. == Foundation and background == Based in Stockholm, Sweden, the Mentimeter app was started by Swedish entrepreneur Johnny Warström and Niklas Ingvar as a response to unproductive meetings. The initial start-up budget was $500,000 raised by a group of prominent investors, including Per Appelgren in 2014, following the market's tendency to invest in Scandinavia. The app also focuses on online collaboration for the education sector, allowing students or public members to answer questions anonymously. The app enables users to share knowledge and real-time feedback on mobile devices with presentations, polls or brainstorming sessions in classes, meetings, gatherings, conferences and other group activities. == Achievements == By 2021, Mentimeter had over 270 million users and was one of Sweden's fastest-growing startups. The company also ranked #10 on 20 Fastest Growing 500 Startups Batch 16 Companies. It was ranked Stockholm's fastest growing company of the 2018 edition of the DI Gasell Award. Mentimeter has a freemium business model.
Subpixel rendering
Subpixel rendering is a method used to increase the effective resolution of a color display device. It utilizes the composition of each pixel, which consists of three subpixels of which are red, green, and blue that can each be individually addressable on the display matrix. Subpixel rendering is primarily used for text rendering on standard DPI displays. Despite the inherent color anomalies, it can also be used to render general graphics. == History == The origin of subpixel rendering as used today remains controversial. Apple Inc., IBM, and Microsoft patented various implementations that differed in technical details owing to the different purposes for which their technologies were intended. Microsoft held several patents in the United States for subpixel rendering technology used in text rendering on RGB Stripe layouts. The patents 6,219,025; 6,239,783; 6,307,566; 6,225,973; 6,243,070; 6,393,145; 6,421,054; 6,282,327; and 6,624,828 were filed between October 7, 1998, and October 7, 1999, and expired on July 30, 2019. Analysis of the patent by FreeType indicates that the patent does not cover the idea of subpixel rendering, but rather the actual filter used as a last step to balance the color. Microsoft's patent describes the smallest possible filter that distributes each subpixel value equally among the R, G, and B pixels. Any other filter will either be blurrier or will introduce color artifacts. Apple was able to use it in Mac OS X due to a patent cross-licensing agreement. == Characteristics == A single pixel on a color display is made of several subpixels, typically three arranged left-to-right as red, green, and blue (RGB). The components are readily visible with a small magnifying glass, such as a loupe. These pixel components appear as a single color to the human eye because of blurring by optics and spatial integration by nerve cells in the eye. However, the eye is much more sensitive to the location. Therefore, turning on the G and B of one pixel and the R of the next pixel to the right will produce a white dot, but it will appear to be 1/3 of a pixel to the right of the white dot that would be seen from the RGB of only the first pixel. Subpixel rendering leverages this to provide three times the horizontal resolution of the rendered image. However, it has to blur this image to produce the correct color by ensuring the same amount of red, green, and blue are turned on as when no subpixel rendering is being done. Subpixel rendering does not necessitate the use of antialiasing. It gives a smoother result regardless of whether antialiasing is used or not since it artificially increases the resolution. However, it introduces color aliasing since subpixels are colored. Subsequent filtering applied to remove the color artifacts is a form of antialiasing, although its purpose is not smoothing jagged shapes as in conventional antialiasing. Subpixel rendering requires the software to know the layout of the subpixels. The most common reason it is wrong is monitors that can be rotated 90 (or 180) degrees, though monitors are manufactured with other arrangements of the subpixels, such as BGR or in triangles, or with 4 colors like RGBW squares. On any such display the result of incorrect subpixel rendering will be worse than if no subpixel rendering was done at all (it will not produce color artifacts, but it will produce noisy edges). == Implementations == === Apple II === Steve Gibson has claimed that the Apple II, introduced in 1977, supports an early form of subpixel rendering in its high-resolution (280×192) graphics mode. The Wozniak patent only used 2 "sub-pixels". The bytes that comprise the Apple II high-resolution screen buffer contain seven visible bits (each corresponding directly to a pixel) and a flag bit used to select between purple/green or blue/orange color sets. Each pixel, since it is represented by a single bit, is either on or off; there are no bits within the pixel itself for specifying color or brightness. Color is instead created as an artifact of the NTSC color encoding scheme, determined by horizontal position: pixels with even horizontal coordinates are always purple (or blue, if the flag bit is set), and odd pixels are always green (or orange). Two lit pixels next to each other are always white, regardless of whether the pair is even/odd or odd/even, and irrespective of the value of the flag bit. This is an approximation, but it is what most programmers of the time would have in mind while working with the Apple's high-resolution mode. Gibson's example claims that because two adjacent bits form a white block, there are, in fact, two bits per pixel: one that activates the pixel's purple left half and the other that activates its green right half. If the programmer instead activates the green right half of a pixel and the purple left half of the next pixel, the result is a white block 1/2 pixel to the right, which is indeed an instance of subpixel rendering. However, it is not clear whether any programmers of the Apple II have considered the pairs of bits as pixels—instead calling each bit a pixel. The flag bit in each byte affects color by shifting pixels half a pixel-width to the right. This half-pixel shift was exploited by some graphics software, such as HRCG (High-Resolution Character Generator), an Apple utility that displayed text using the high-resolution graphics mode, to smooth diagonals. === ClearType === Microsoft announced its subpixel rendering technology, called ClearType, at COMDEX in 1998. Microsoft published a paper in May 2000, Displaced Filtering for Patterned Displays, describing the filtering behind ClearType. It was then made available in Windows XP. Still, it was not activated by default until Windows Vista, while Windows XP OEMs could and did change the default setting. === FreeType === FreeType, the library used by most current software on the X Window System, contains two open source implementations. The original implementation uses the ClearType antialiasing filters and carries the following notice: "The colour filtering algorithm of Microsoft's ClearType technology for subpixel rendering is covered by patents; for this reason, the corresponding code in FreeType is disabled by default. Note that subpixel rendering per se is prior art; using a different colour filter thus easily circumvents Microsoft's patent claims." FreeType offers a variety of color filters. Since version 2.6.2, the default filter is light, a filter that is both normalized (value sums up to 1) and color-balanced (eliminate color fringes at the cost of resolution). Since version 2.8.1, a second implementation exists, called Harmony, that "offers high quality LCD-optimized output without resorting to ClearType techniques of resolution tripling and filtering". This is the method enabled by default. When using this method, "each color channel is generated separately after shifting the glyph outline, capitalizing on the fact that the color grids on LCD panels are shifted by a third of a pixel. This output is indistinguishable from ClearType with a light 3-tap filter." Since the Harmony method does not require additional filtering, it is not covered by the ClearType patents. === CoolType === Adobe created their own subpixel renderer called CoolType, allowing them to display documents the same way across various operating systems: Windows, MacOS, Linux etc. When it was launched around the year 2001, CoolType supported a wider range of fonts than Microsoft's ClearType, which at the time was limited to TrueType fonts. In contrast, Adobe's CoolType also supported PostScript fonts (and their OpenType equivalents). === macOS === Mac OS X (later OS X, now macOS) also used subpixel rendering, as part of Quartz 2D. However, it was removed after the introduction of Retina displays. Unlike Microsoft's implementation, which favors a tight fit to the grid (font hinting) to maximize legibility, Apple's implementation prioritizes the shape of the glyphs as set out by their designer.
International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence
The International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence was founded in 1987 and is published by World Scientific. The journal covers developments in artificial intelligence, and its sub-field, pattern recognition. This includes articles on image and language processing, robotics and neural networks. == Abstracting and indexing == The journal is abstracted and indexed in: SciSearch ISI Alerting Services CompuMath Citation Index Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology Inspec io-port.net Compendex Computer Abstracts
Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act
The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act, or SB 1047, was a failed 2024 California bill intended to "mitigate the risk of catastrophic harms from AI models so advanced that they are not yet known to exist". Specifically, the bill would have applied to models which cost more than $100 million to train and were trained using a quantity of computing power greater than 1026 integer or floating-point operations. SB 1047 would have applied to all AI companies doing business in California—the location of the company would not matter. The bill would have created protections for whistleblowers and required developers to perform risk assessments of their models prior to release, with guidance from the Government Operations Agency. It would also have established CalCompute, a University of California public cloud computing cluster for startups, researchers and community groups. == Background == The rapid increase in capabilities of AI systems in the 2020s, including the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, caused some researchers and members of the public to become concerned about the existential risks associated with increasingly powerful AI systems. Hundreds of tech executives and AI researchers, including two of the so-called "Godfathers of AI", Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, signed a statement in May 2023 calling for the mitigation of the "risk of extinction from AI" to be a global priority alongside "pandemics and nuclear war". However, the plausibility of these risks is still widely debated. Strong regulation of AI has been criticized for purportedly causing regulatory capture by large AI companies like OpenAI, a phenomenon in which regulation advances the interest of larger companies at the expense of smaller competition and the public in general, although OpenAI ended up opposing the bill. Other advocates of AI regulation aim to prevent bias and privacy violations, rather than existential risks. For example, some experts who view existential concerns as overblown and unrealistic view them as a distraction from near-term harms of AI like discriminatory automated decision making. In the face of existential concerns, technology companies have made voluntary commitments to conduct safety testing, for example at the AI Safety Summit and AI Seoul Summit. In 2023, not long before the bill was proposed, Governor Newsom of California and President Biden issued executive orders on artificial intelligence. State Senator Wiener said SB 1047 draws heavily on the Biden executive order, and is motivated by the absence of unified federal legislation on AI safety. Historically, California has passed regulation on several tech issues itself, including consumer privacy and net neutrality, in the absence of action by Congress. == History == === Proposal and voting === The bill was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener. Wiener first proposed AI legislation for California through an intent bill called SB 294, the Safety in Artificial Intelligence Act, in September 2023. On February 7, 2024, Wiener introduced SB 1047. On May 21, SB 1047 passed the Senate 32–1. The bill was significantly amended by Wiener on August 15, 2024, in response to industry advice. Amendments included adding clarifications, and removing the creation of a "Frontier Model Division" and the penalty of perjury. On August 28, the bill passed the State Assembly 48–16. Then, due to the amendments, the bill was once again voted on by the Senate, passing 30–9. === Veto by governor === On September 29, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill. The deadline for California lawmakers to overrule Newsom's veto was November 30, 2024. Newsom cited concerns over the bill's regulatory framework targeting only large AI models based on their computational size, while not taking into account whether the models are deployed in high-risk environments. Newsom emphasized that this approach could create a false sense of security, overlooking smaller models that might present equally significant risks. He acknowledged the need for AI safety protocols but stressed the importance of adaptability in regulation as AI technology continues to evolve rapidly. Governor Newsom also committed to working with technology experts, federal partners, and research institutions, including the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, led by former California Supreme Court Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar; and Stanford University's Human-Centered AI (HAI) Institute, led by Dr. Fei-Fei Li. He announced plans to collaborate with these entities to advance responsible AI development, aiming to protect the public while fostering innovation. == Provisions == SB 1047 would have covered AI models with training compute over 1026 integer or floating-point operations and a cost of over $100 million. If a covered model is fine-tuned using more than $10 million, the resulting model would also have been covered. The bill would have defined critical harms with respect to four categories: Creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Autonomous crimes causing mass casualties or at least $500 million of damage Other harms of comparable severity Developers would have needed to create a "safety and security protocol" before training covered models. Before deployment, they would have submitted a statement of compliance, confirming they took reasonable care to take measures to prevent covered models that pose an unreasonable risk of critical harms. The statement would have included risk assessments and descriptions of their compliance process. These rules would have applied to both covered models and their derivatives, including post-training modifications, with annual third-party audits required starting in 2026. Safeguards to reduce risk included the ability to shut down the model, which has been variously described as a "kill switch" and "circuit breaker". Whistleblowing provisions would have protected employees who report safety problems and incidents. Additionally, SB 1047 would have created a public cloud computing cluster called CalCompute, associated with the University of California, to support startups, researchers, and community groups that lack large-scale computing resources. === Compliance and supervision === SB 1047 would have required developers, beginning January 1, 2026, to annually retain a third-party auditor to perform an independent audit of compliance with the requirements of the bill, as provided. The Government Operations Agency would have reviewed the results of safety tests and incidents, and issue guidance, standards, and best practices. The bill would have created a Board of Frontier Models to supervise the application of the bill by the Government Operations Agency. It is would be composed of 9 members. == Reception == === Subjects of debate === Proponents of the bill described its provisions as simple and narrowly focused, with Sen. Scott Weiner describing it as a "light-touch, basic safety bill". This was disputed by critics of the bill, who described the bill's language as vague and criticized it as consolidating power in the largest AI companies at the expense of smaller ones. Proponents, in turn, argued that the bill only applies to models trained using more than 1026 FLOPS and with over $100 million, or fine-tuned with more than $10 million, and that the threshold could be increased if needed. The penalty of perjury was also a subject of debate, and was eventually removed through an amendment. The scope of the "kill switch" requirement was also reduced, following concerns from open-source developers. The use of the term "reasonable assurance" in the bill was also controversial, and it was eventually amended to "reasonable care". Critics then argued that "reasonable care" imposed an excessive burden by requiring confidence that models could not be used to cause catastrophic harm; proponents claimed that the standard did not require certainty and that it already applied to AI developers under existing law. === Support and opposition === Individual supporters of the bill included Turing Award recipients Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, Elon Musk, Bill de Blasio, Kevin Esvelt, Dan Hendrycks, Vitalik Buterin, OpenAI whistleblowers Daniel Kokotajlo and William Saunders, Lawrence Lessig, Sneha Revanur, Stuart Russell, Jan Leike, actors Mark Ruffalo, Sean Astin, and Rosie Perez, Scott Aaronson, and Max Tegmark. Over 120 Hollywood celebrities, including Mark Hamill, Jane Fonda, and J. J. Abrams, also signed a statement in support of the bill. Max Tegmark likened the bill's focus on holding companies responsible for the harms caused by their models to the FDA requiring clinical trials before a company can release a drug to the market. Organizations sponsoring the bill included the Center for AI Safety, Economic Security California and Encode. The la
Open Neural Network Exchange
The Open Neural Network Exchange (ONNX) [ˈɒnɪks] is an open-source artificial intelligence ecosystem of technology companies and research organizations that establish open standards for representing machine learning algorithms and software tools to enable a standard format for representing machine learning models. ONNX is available on GitHub. == History == ONNX was originally named Toffee and was developed by the PyTorch team at Facebook. In September 2017 it was renamed to ONNX and announced by Facebook and Microsoft. Later, IBM, Huawei, Intel, AMD, Arm and Qualcomm announced support for the initiative. In October 2017, Microsoft announced that it would add its Cognitive Toolkit and Project Brainwave platform to the initiative. In November 2019 ONNX was accepted as graduate project in Linux Foundation AI. In October 2020 Zetane Systems became a member of the ONNX ecosystem. == Intent == The initiative targets: === Framework interoperability === Enable developers to move machine learning models between different frameworks, which may be used at different stages of the development process, such as training, architecture design, or deployment on mobile devices. === Shared optimization === Provide a common representation that can be used by hardware vendors and other developers to apply optimizations to artificial neural network models across multiple machine learning frameworks. == Contents == ONNX provides definitions of an extensible computation graph model, built-in operators and standard data types, focused on inferencing (evaluation).. The container format is Protocol Buffers. Each computation dataflow graph is a list of nodes that form an acyclic graph. Nodes have inputs and outputs. Each node is a call to an operator. Metadata documents the graph. Built-in operators are to be available on each ONNX-supporting framework. ONNX models can be trained in a single framework, such as PyTorch or TensorFlow, and then exported to ONNX. This format allows models to be transferred from the training framework to other environments for testing or deployment. Once a model is in ONNX format, it can be executed in different runtime systems or on various hardware platforms, such as GPUs or specialized AI accelerators. Using a common format enables the same model representation to be used across multiple systems and frameworks.
Quantum image processing
Quantum image processing (QIMP) is using quantum computing or quantum information processing to create and work with quantum images. Due to some of the properties inherent to quantum computation, notably entanglement and parallelism, it is hoped that QIMP technologies will offer capabilities and performances that surpass their traditional equivalents, in terms of computing speed, security, and minimum storage requirements. == Background == A. Y. Vlasov's work in 1997 focused on using a quantum system to recognize orthogonal images. This was followed by efforts using quantum algorithms to search specific patterns in binary images and detect the posture of certain targets. Notably, more optics-based interpretations for quantum imaging were initially experimentally demonstrated in and formalized in after seven years. In 2003, Salvador Venegas-Andraca and S. Bose presented Qubit Lattice, the first published general model for storing, processing and retrieving images using quantum systems. Later on, in 2005, Latorre proposed another kind of representation, called the Real Ket, whose purpose was to encode quantum images as a basis for further applications in QIMP. Furthermore, in 2010 Venegas-Andraca and Ball presented a method for storing and retrieving binary geometrical shapes in quantum mechanical systems in which it is shown that maximally entangled qubits can be used to reconstruct images without using any additional information. Technically, these pioneering efforts with the subsequent studies related to them can be classified into three main groups: Quantum-assisted digital image processing (QDIP): These applications aim at improving digital or classical image processing tasks and applications. Optics-based quantum imaging (OQI) Classically inspired quantum image processing (QIMP) A survey of quantum image representation has been published in. Furthermore, the recently published book Quantum Image Processing provides a comprehensive introduction to quantum image processing, which focuses on extending conventional image processing tasks to the quantum computing frameworks. It summarizes the available quantum image representations and their operations, reviews the possible quantum image applications and their implementation, and discusses the open questions and future development trends. == Quantum image representations == There are various approaches for quantum image representation, that are usually based on the encoding of color information. A common representation is FRQI (Flexible Representation for Quantum Images), that captures the color and position at every pixel of the image, and defined as: | I ⟩ = 1 2 n ∑ i = 0 2 2 n − 1 | c i ⟩ ⊗ | i ⟩ {\displaystyle \vert I\rangle ={\frac {1}{2^{n}}}\sum _{i=0}^{2^{2n-1}}\vert c_{i}\rangle \otimes \vert i\rangle } where | i ⟩ {\textstyle |i\rangle } is the position and | c i ⟩ = c o s θ i | 0 ⟩ + s i n θ i | 1 ⟩ {\textstyle \vert c_{i}\rangle =cos\theta _{i}\vert 0\rangle +sin\theta _{i}\vert 1\rangle } the color with a vector of angles θ i ∈ [ 0 , π / 2 ] {\textstyle \theta _{i}\in \left[0,\pi /2\right]} . As it can be seen, | c i ⟩ {\textstyle \vert c_{i}\rangle } is a regular qubit state of the form | ψ ⟩ = α | 0 ⟩ + β | 1 ⟩ {\displaystyle \vert \psi \rangle =\alpha \vert 0\rangle +\beta \vert 1\rangle } , with basis states | 0 ⟩ = ( 1 0 ) {\textstyle \vert 0\rangle ={\begin{pmatrix}1\\0\end{pmatrix}}} and | 1 ⟩ = ( 0 1 ) {\textstyle \vert 1\rangle ={\begin{pmatrix}0\\1\end{pmatrix}}} , as well as amplitudes α {\textstyle \alpha } and β {\textstyle \beta } that satisfy | α | 2 + | β | 2 = 1 {\textstyle \left|\alpha \right|^{2}+\left|\beta \right|^{2}=1} . Another common representation is MCQI (Multi-Channel Representation for Quantum Images), that uses the RGB channels with quantum states and following FRQI definition: | I ⟩ = 1 2 n + 1 ∑ i = 0 2 2 n − 1 | C R G B i ⟩ ⊗ | i ⟩ {\displaystyle \vert I\rangle ={\frac {1}{2^{n+1}}}\sum _{i=0}^{2^{2n-1}}\vert C_{RGB}^{i}\rangle \otimes \vert i\rangle } | C R G B i ⟩ = cos θ R i | 000 ⟩ + cos θ G i | 001 ⟩ + cos θ B i | 010 ⟩ + sin θ R i | 100 ⟩ + sin θ G i | 101 ⟩ + sin θ B i | 110 ⟩ + cos θ α | 011 ⟩ + sin θ α | 111 ⟩ {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\begin{aligned}\vert C_{RGB}^{i}\rangle &={\cos \theta _{R}^{i}\vert 000\rangle }+{\cos \theta _{G}^{i}\vert 001\rangle }+{\cos \theta _{B}^{i}\vert 010\rangle }\\&\quad +{\sin \theta _{R}^{i}\vert 100\rangle }+{\sin \theta _{G}^{i}\vert 101\rangle }+{\sin \theta _{B}^{i}\vert 110\rangle }\\&\quad +{\cos {\theta _{\alpha }}\vert 011\rangle }+{\sin \theta _{\alpha }\vert 111\rangle }\end{aligned}}\end{aligned}}} Departing from the angle-based approach of FRQI and MCQI, and using a qubit sequence, NEQR (Novel Enhanced Representation for Quantum Images) is another representation approach, that uses a function f ( y , x ) = C y x q − 1 C y x q − 2 … C y x 1 C y x 0 {\textstyle f\left(y,x\right)=C_{yx}^{q-1}C_{yx}^{q-2}\ldots C_{yx}^{1}C_{yx}^{0}} to encode color values for a 2 n × 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}\times 2^{n}} image: | I ⟩ = 1 2 n ∑ y = 0 2 n − 1 ∑ x = 0 2 n − 1 | f ( y , x ) ⟩ | y x ⟩ {\displaystyle \vert I\rangle ={\frac {1}{2^{n}}}\sum _{y=0}^{2^{n}-1}\sum _{x=0}^{2^{n}-1}\vert f\left(y,x\right)\rangle \vert yx\rangle } == Quantum image manipulations == A lot of the effort in QIMP has been focused on designing algorithms to manipulate the position and color information encoded using flexible representation of quantum images (FRQI) and its many variants. For instance, FRQI-based fast geometric transformations including (two-point) swapping, flip, (orthogonal) rotations and restricted geometric transformations to constrain these operations to a specified area of an image were initially proposed. Recently, NEQR-based quantum image translation to map the position of each picture element in an input image into a new position in an output image and quantum image scaling to resize a quantum image were discussed. While FRQI-based general form of color transformations were first proposed by means of the single qubit gates such as X, Z, and H gates. Later, Multi-Channel Quantum Image-based channel of interest (CoI) operator to entail shifting the grayscale value of the preselected color channel and the channel swapping (CS) operator to swap the grayscale values between two channels have been fully discussed. To illustrate the feasibility and capability of QIMP algorithms and application, researchers always prefer to simulate the digital image processing tasks on the basis of the QIRs that we already have. By using the basic quantum gates and the aforementioned operations, so far, researchers have contributed to quantum image feature extraction, quantum image segmentation, quantum image morphology, quantum image comparison, quantum image filtering, quantum image classification, quantum image stabilization, among others. In particular, QIMP-based security technologies have attracted extensive interest of researchers as presented in the ensuing discussions. Similarly, these advancements have led to many applications in the areas of watermarking, encryption, and steganography etc., which form the core security technologies highlighted in this area. In general, the work pursued by the researchers in this area are focused on expanding the applicability of QIMP to realize more classical-like digital image processing algorithms; propose technologies to physically realize the QIMP hardware; or simply to note the likely challenges that could impede the realization of some QIMP protocols. == Quantum image transform == By encoding and processing the image information in quantum-mechanical systems, a framework of quantum image processing is presented, where a pure quantum state encodes the image information: to encode the pixel values in the probability amplitudes and the pixel positions in the computational basis states. Given an image F = ( F i , j ) M × L {\displaystyle F=(F_{i,j})_{M\times L}} , where F i , j {\displaystyle F_{i,j}} represents the pixel value at position ( i , j ) {\displaystyle (i,j)} with i = 1 , … , M {\displaystyle i=1,\dots ,M} and j = 1 , … , L {\displaystyle j=1,\dots ,L} , a vector f → {\displaystyle {\vec {f}}} with M L {\displaystyle ML} elements can be formed by letting the first M {\displaystyle M} elements of f → {\displaystyle {\vec {f}}} be the first column of F {\displaystyle F} , the next M {\displaystyle M} elements the second column, etc. A large class of image operations is linear, e.g., unitary transformations, convolutions, and linear filtering. In the quantum computing, the linear transformation can be represented as | g ⟩ = U ^ | f ⟩ {\displaystyle |g\rangle ={\hat {U}}|f\rangle } with the input image state | f ⟩ {\displaystyle |f\rangle } and the output image state | g ⟩ {\displaystyle |g\rangle } . A unitary transformation can be implemented as a unitary evolution. Some basic and commonly used image transforms (e.g., the Fourier, Hadamard, an
Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence
The Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law (also called Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence or AI convention) is an international treaty on artificial intelligence. It was adopted under the auspices of the Council of Europe (CoE) and signed on 5 September 2024. The treaty aims to ensure that the development and use of AI technologies align with fundamental human rights, democratic values, and the rule of law, addressing risks such as misinformation, algorithmic discrimination, and threats to public institutions. More than 50 countries, including the EU member states, have endorsed the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence. == Background == The development of the Framework Convention on AI emerged in response to growing concerns over the ethical, legal, and societal impacts of artificial intelligence. The Council of Europe, which has historically played a key role in setting human rights standards across Europe, initiated discussions on AI governance in 2020, leading to the drafting of a binding legal framework. The process of creating the Framework Convention began in 2019 with the ad hoc Committee on Artificial Intelligence (CAHAI) assessing the feasibility of the instrument. In 2022, the Committee on Artificial Intelligence (CAI) took over the process, drafting and negotiating the text of the Convention. The treaty is designed to complement existing international human rights instruments, including the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data. == Structure and content == The Convention establishes fundamental principles for AI governance, including transparency, accountability, non-discrimination, and human rights protection through eight chapters and 26 articles. Adopted in 2024, this landmark treaty addresses AI governance through seven core principles and detailed implementation mechanisms. It mandates risk and impact assessments to mitigate potential harms and provides safeguards such as the right to challenge AI-driven decisions. It applies to public authorities and private entities acting on their behalf but excludes national security and defense activities. Implementation is overseen by a Conference of the Parties, ensuring compliance and international cooperation. Activities within the AI system lifecycle must adhere to seven fundamental principles, ensuring compliance with human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. The treaty also establishes remedies, procedural rights and safeguards, and risk and impact management requirements to promote accountability, transparency, and responsible AI development. The treaty consists of five chapters. Chapter I contains general provisions. Chapter II states the general obligation to protect human rights and the integrity of democratic processes and respect of the rule of law. The main principles and rights are contained in Chapter III, which consists of Articles 6 to 13. Chapter IV (Articles 14 to 15) sets up the legal remedies. Chapter V states the risk and impact management framework. Chapter VI facilitates the implementation criteria of the treaty. Chapter VII sets the co-operation and oversight mechanisms. Chapter VIII contains various concluding clauses. Article 1 declares the objectives of the treaty, to ensure that activities within the lifecycle of artificial intelligence systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law. == Entry into force == The treaty will enter into force on the first day of the month following the expiration of a period of three months after the date on which five ratification made by five countries, including three member states of the Council of Europe. == Competing approaches == While the CoE's AI Convention represents a multilateral effort to regulate AI through a human rights-based approach, alternative frameworks have also been proposed. One notable example is the Munich Draft for a Convention on AI, Data and Human Rights, an initiative led by legal scholars and policymakers in Germany. The Munich Draft advocates for stronger safeguards against AI-related risks, emphasizing stricter data protection measures, accountability for AI developers, and explicit prohibitions on high-risk AI applications, such as mass surveillance and autonomous lethal weapons. Unlike the CoE convention, which focuses on balancing innovation with regulation, the Munich Draft takes a more precautionary stance, calling for tighter controls over AI deployment in sensitive domains. Other competing international efforts include the OECD’s AI Principles, the GPAI (Global Partnership on AI), and the European Union's AI Act, each of which offers different regulatory strategies to govern AI at regional and global levels. == Signatories == Signatories include Andorra, Canada, the European Union, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, San Marino, Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. == Endorsement == The treaty was widely endorsed by leading AI policy experts, including Stuart J. Russell, Virginia Dignum, Emma Ruttkamp-Bloem, Pascal Pichonnaz, Maria Helen Murphy, Angella Ndaka, Hannes Werthner, Katja Langenbucher, Gry Hasselbalch, Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Kutoma Wakunuma, Gianclaudio Malgieri, Oreste Pollicino, Nagla Rizk, Giovanni Sartor, Lee Tiedrich, Ingrid Schneider, Eduardo Bertoni, Garry Kasparov, Merve Hikcok, and Marc Rotenberg. The treaty was also endorsed by notable political leaders, including Theodoros Roussopoulos, President of the Parliamentart Assembly in the Council of Europe, and Christopher Holmes, Member of the House of Lords of the United Kingdom, and by the International Bar Association (IBA), and personally by Almudena Arpón de Mendívil, President of the IBA. The Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP) has been carrying out a campaign to promote endorsement of the treaty by urging various countries to sign and ratify the treaty. The CAIDP further urged the countries to make a clear and firm commitment to ensure the full inclusion of the private sector under the treaty’s provisions.