Perfectly Imperfect is an online newsletter and social media platform. It was initially founded in 2020 as a biweekly email newsletter that focused on recommendations. In January 2024, Perfectly Imperfect launched PI.FYI, a social media platform. The platform is based around sharing recommendations. Its main feed is presented in reverse chronological order and is not algorithmically curated. == History == Perfectly Imperfect was started during the COVID-19 pandemic by Tyler Bainbridge, alongside college friends Alex Cushing and Serey Morm, whom he met at UMass Lowell; Morm later departed. Motivated by a dissatisfaction with algorithm-driven recommendation culture, they launched on Substack in September 2020. Its early newsletter format, PI, published brief recommendation lists and personal notes from contributors. Contributors have included a mix of underground artists and more established creative figures, such as Charli XCX, Chloe Cherry, Chloe Wise, and Meetka Otto. In October 2024, PI announced it was leaving Substack to launch its own site. == Overview == The current platform, PI.FYI, features both editorial content (guest columns, long-form essays, staff picks) and user-generated recommendations. The platform also supports "Ask" posts, where users can solicit recommendations from the community, and allows commenting, liking, and profile customization. In August 2025, it launched an events feature. In 2022, Perfectly Imperfect hosted their first offline event at Baby's All Right in Brooklyn, with a performance by The Dare. They have since expanded their event promotion/sponsorship to markets such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and even Auckland.
Mix automation
In music recording, mix automation allows the mixing console to remember the mixing engineer's dynamic adjustment of faders during a musical piece in the post-production editing process. A timecode is necessary for the synchronization of automation. Modern mixing consoles and digital audio workstations use comprehensive mix automation. The need for automated mixing originated from the late 1970s transition form 8-track to 16-track and then 24-track multitrack recording, as mixing could be laborious and require multiple people and hands, and the results could be almost impossible to reproduce. With 48-track recording - synchronized twin 24-track recorders (for a net 46 audio tracks, with one on each machine for SMPTE timecode) - came larger recording and mixing consoles with even more channel faders to manage during mixdown. Manufacturers, such as Neve Electronics (now AMS Neve) and Solid State Logic (SSL), both English companies, developed systems that enabled one engineer to oversee every detail of a complex mix, although the computers required to power these desks remained a rarity into the late 1970s. According to record producer Roy Thomas Baker, Queen's 1975 single "Bohemian Rhapsody" was one of the first mixes to be done with automation. == Types == Voltage Controlled Automation fader levels are regulated by voltage-controlled amplifiers (VCA). VCAs control the audio level and not the actual fader. Moving Fader Automation a motor is attached to the fader, which then can be controlled by the console, digital audio workstation (DAW), or user. Software Controlled Automation the software can be internal to the console, or external as part of a DAW. The virtual fader can be adjusted in the software by the user. MIDI Automation the communications protocol MIDI can be used to send messages to the console to control automation. == Modes == Auto Write used the first time automation is created or when writing over existing automation Auto Touch writes automation data only while a fader is touched/faders return to any previously automated position after release Auto Latch starts writing automation data when a fader is touched/stays in position after release Auto Read digital Audio Workstation performs the written automation Auto Off automation is temporarily disabled All of these include the mute button. If mute is pressed during writing of automation, the audio track will be muted during playback of that automation. Depending on software, other parameters such as panning, sends, and plug-in controls can be automated as well. In some cases, automation can be written using a digital potentiometer instead of a fader.
AI Marketing Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)
Shopping for the best AI marketing tool? An AI marketing tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI marketing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.
Machine-readable medium and data
In communications and computing, a machine-readable medium (or computer-readable medium) is a medium capable of storing data in a format easily readable by a digital computer or a sensor. It contrasts with human-readable medium and data. The result is called machine-readable data or computer-readable data, and the data itself can be described as having machine-readability. == Data == Machine-readable data must be structured data. Attempts to create machine-readable data occurred as early as the 1960s. At the same time that seminal developments in machine-reading and natural-language processing were releasing (like Weizenbaum's ELIZA), people were anticipating the success of machine-readable functionality and attempting to create machine-readable documents. One such example was musicologist Nancy B. Reich's creation of a machine-readable catalog of composer William Jay Sydeman's works in 1966. In the United States, the OPEN Government Data Act of 14 January 2019 defines machine-readable data as "data in a format that can be easily processed by a computer without human intervention while ensuring no semantic meaning is lost." The law directs U.S. federal agencies to publish public data in such a manner, ensuring that "any public data asset of the agency is machine-readable". Machine-readable data may be classified into two groups: human-readable data that is marked up so that it can also be read by machines (e.g. microformats, RDFa, HTML), and data file formats intended principally for processing by machines (CSV, RDF, XML, JSON). These formats are only machine readable if the data contained within them is formally structured; exporting a CSV file from a badly structured spreadsheet does not meet the definition. Machine readable is not synonymous with digitally accessible. A digitally accessible document may be online, making it easier for humans to access via computers, but its content is much harder to extract, transform, and process via computer programming logic if it is not machine-readable. Extensible Markup Language (XML) is designed to be both human- and machine-readable, and Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) is used to improve the presentation of the data for human readability. For example, XSLT can be used to automatically render XML in Portable Document Format (PDF). Machine-readable data can be automatically transformed for human-readability but, generally speaking, the reverse is not true. For purposes of implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Modernization Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) defines "machine readable format" as follows: "Format in a standard computer language (not English text) that can be read automatically by a web browser or computer system. (e.g.; xml). Traditional word processing documents and portable document format (PDF) files are easily read by humans but typically are difficult for machines to interpret. Other formats such as extensible markup language (XML), (JSON), or spreadsheets with header columns that can be exported as comma separated values (CSV) are machine readable formats. As HTML is a structural markup language, discreetly labeling parts of the document, computers are able to gather document components to assemble tables of contents, outlines, literature search bibliographies, etc. It is possible to make traditional word processing documents and other formats machine readable but the documents must include enhanced structural elements." == Media == Examples of machine-readable media include magnetic media such as magnetic disks, cards, tapes, and drums, punched cards and paper tapes, optical discs, barcodes and magnetic ink characters. Common machine-readable technologies include magnetic recording, processing waveforms, and barcodes. Optical character recognition (OCR) can be used to enable machines to read information available to humans. Any information retrievable by any form of energy can be machine-readable. Examples include: Acoustics Chemical Photochemical Electrical Semiconductor used in volatile RAM microchips Floating-gate transistor used in non-volatile memory cards Radio transmission Magnetic storage Mechanical Tins And Swins Punched card Paper tape Music roll Music box cylinder or disk Grooves (See also: Audio Data) Phonograph cylinder Gramophone record DictaBelt (groove on plastic belt) Capacitance Electronic Disc Optics Optical storage Thermodynamic == Applications == === Documents === === Catalogs === === Dictionaries === === Passports ===
Noisy channel model
The noisy channel model is a framework used in spell checkers, question answering, speech recognition, and machine translation. In this model, the goal is to find the intended word given a word where the letters have been scrambled in some manner. == In spell-checking == See Chapter B of. Given an alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , let Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} be the set of all finite strings over Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } . Let the dictionary D {\displaystyle D} of valid words be some subset of Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} , i.e., D ⊆ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle D\subseteq \Sigma ^{}} . The noisy channel is the matrix Γ w s = Pr ( s | w ) {\displaystyle \Gamma _{ws}=\Pr(s|w)} , where w ∈ D {\displaystyle w\in D} is the intended word and s ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle s\in \Sigma ^{}} is the scrambled word that was actually received. The goal of the noisy channel model is to find the intended word given the scrambled word that was received. The decision function σ : Σ ∗ → D {\displaystyle \sigma :\Sigma ^{}\to D} is a function that, given a scrambled word, returns the intended word. Methods of constructing a decision function include the maximum likelihood rule, the maximum a posteriori rule, and the minimum distance rule. In some cases, it may be better to accept the scrambled word as the intended word rather than attempt to find an intended word in the dictionary. For example, the word schönfinkeling may not be in the dictionary, but might in fact be the intended word. === Example === Consider the English alphabet Σ = { a , b , c , . . . , y , z , A , B , . . . , Z , . . . } {\displaystyle \Sigma =\{a,b,c,...,y,z,A,B,...,Z,...\}} . Some subset D ⊆ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle D\subseteq \Sigma ^{}} makes up the dictionary of valid English words. There are several mistakes that may occur while typing, including: Missing letters, e.g., leter instead of letter Accidental letter additions, e.g., misstake instead of mistake Swapping letters, e.g., recieved instead of received Replacing letters, e.g., fimite instead of finite To construct the noisy channel matrix Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } , we must consider the probability of each mistake, given the intended word ( Pr ( s | w ) {\displaystyle \Pr(s|w)} for all w ∈ D {\displaystyle w\in D} and s ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle s\in \Sigma ^{}} ). These probabilities may be gathered, for example, by considering the Damerau–Levenshtein distance between s {\displaystyle s} and w {\displaystyle w} or by comparing the draft of an essay with one that has been manually edited for spelling. == In machine translation == One naturally wonders if the problem of translation could conceivably be treated as a problem in cryptography. When I look at an article in Russian, I say: 'This is really written in English, but it has been coded in some strange symbols. I will now proceed to decode. See chapter 1, and chapter 25 of. Suppose we want to translate a foreign language to English, we could model P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle P(E|F)} directly: the probability that we have English sentence E given foreign sentence F, then we pick the most likely one E ^ = arg max E P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle {\hat {E}}=\arg \max _{E}P(E|F)} . However, by Bayes law, we have the equivalent equation: E ^ = argmax E ∈ English P ( F ∣ E ) ⏞ translation model P ( E ) ⏞ language model {\displaystyle {\hat {E}}={\underset {E\in {\text{ English }}}{\operatorname {argmax} }}\overbrace {P(F\mid E)} ^{\text{translation model }}\overbrace {P(E)} ^{\text{language model}}} The benefit of the noisy-channel model is in terms of data: If collecting a parallel corpus is costly, then we would have only a small parallel corpus, so we can only train a moderately good English-to-foreign translation model, and a moderately good foreign-to-English translation model. However, we can collect a large corpus in the foreign language only, and a large corpus in the English language only, to train two good language models. Combining these four models, we immediately get a good English-to-foreign translator and a good foreign-to-English translator. The cost of noisy-channel model is that using Bayesian inference is more costly than using a translation model directly. Instead of reading out the most likely translation by arg max E P ( E | F ) {\displaystyle \arg \max _{E}P(E|F)} , it would have to read out predictions by both the translation model and the language model, multiply them, and search for the highest number. == In speech recognition == Speech recognition can be thought of as translating from a sound-language to a text-language. Consequently, we have T ^ = argmax T ∈ Text P ( S ∣ T ) ⏞ speech model P ( T ) ⏞ language model {\displaystyle {\hat {T}}={\underset {T\in {\text{ Text }}}{\operatorname {argmax} }}\overbrace {P(S\mid T)} ^{\text{speech model }}\overbrace {P(T)} ^{\text{language model}}} where P ( S | T ) {\displaystyle P(S|T)} is the probability that a speech sound S is produced if the speaker is intending to say text T. Intuitively, this equation states that the most likely text is a text that's both a likely text in the language, and produces the speech sound with high probability. The utility of the noisy-channel model is not in capacity. Theoretically, any noisy-channel model can be replicated by a direct P ( T | S ) {\displaystyle P(T|S)} model. However, the noisy-channel model factors the model into two parts which are appropriate for the situation, and consequently it is generally more well-behaved. When a human speaks, it does not produce the sound directly, but first produces the text it wants to speak in the language centers of the brain, then the text is translated into sound by the motor cortex, vocal cords, and other parts of the body. The noisy-channel model matches this model of the human, and so it is appropriate. This is justified in the practical success of noisy-channel model in speech recognition. === Example === Consider the sound-language sentence (written in IPA for English) S = aɪ wʊd laɪk wʌn tuː. There are three possible texts T 1 , T 2 , T 3 {\displaystyle T_{1},T_{2},T_{3}} : T 1 = {\displaystyle T_{1}=} I would like one to. T 2 = {\displaystyle T_{2}=} I would like one too. T 3 = {\displaystyle T_{3}=} I would like one two. that are equally likely, in the sense that P ( S | T 1 ) = P ( S | T 2 ) = P ( S | T 3 ) {\displaystyle P(S|T_{1})=P(S|T_{2})=P(S|T_{3})} . With a good English language model, we would have P ( T 2 ) > P ( T 1 ) > P ( T 3 ) {\displaystyle P(T_{2})>P(T_{1})>P(T_{3})} , since the second sentence is grammatical, the first is not quite, but close to a grammatical one (such as "I would like one to [go]."), while the third one is far from grammatical. Consequently, the noisy-channel model would output T 2 {\displaystyle T_{2}} as the best transcription.
Calais (Reuters product)
Calais is a service created by Thomson Reuters that automatically extracts semantic information from web pages in a format that can be used on the semantic web. Calais was launched in January 2008, and is free to use. The technology is now available via the website of Refinitiv, a provider of financial market data and infrastructure founded in 2018, that is a subsidiary of London Stock Exchange Group. The Calais Web service reads unstructured text and returns Resource Description Framework formatted results identifying entities, facts and events within the text. The service appears to be based on technology acquired when Reuters purchased ClearForest in 2007. The technology has also been used to automatically tag blog articles, and organize museum collections. Calais uses natural language processing technologies delivered via a web service interface.
Kalman filter
In statistics and control theory, Kalman filtering (also known as linear quadratic estimation) is an algorithm that uses a series of measurements observed over time, including statistical noise and other inaccuracies, to produce estimates of unknown variables that tend to be more accurate than those based on a single measurement, by estimating a joint probability distribution over the variables for each time-step. The filter is constructed as a mean squared error minimiser, but an alternative derivation of the filter is also provided showing how the filter relates to maximum likelihood statistics. The filter is named after Rudolf E. Kálmán. Kalman filtering has numerous technological applications. A common application is for guidance, navigation, and control of vehicles, particularly aircraft, spacecraft and ships positioned dynamically. Furthermore, Kalman filtering is much applied in time series analysis tasks such as signal processing and econometrics. Kalman filtering is also important for robotic motion planning and control, and can be used for trajectory optimization. Kalman filtering also works for modeling the central nervous system's control of movement. Due to the time delay between issuing motor commands and receiving sensory feedback, the use of Kalman filters provides a realistic model for making estimates of the current state of a motor system and issuing updated commands. The algorithm works via a two-phase process: a prediction phase and an update phase. In the prediction phase, the Kalman filter produces estimates of the current state variables, including their uncertainties. Once the outcome of the next measurement (necessarily corrupted with some error, including random noise) is observed, these estimates are updated using a weighted average, with more weight given to estimates with greater certainty. The algorithm is recursive. It can operate in real time, using only the present input measurements and the state calculated previously and its uncertainty matrix; no additional past information is required. Optimality of Kalman filtering assumes that errors have a normal (Gaussian) distribution. In the words of Rudolf E. Kálmán, "The following assumptions are made about random processes: Physical random phenomena may be thought of as due to primary random sources exciting dynamic systems. The primary sources are assumed to be independent gaussian random processes with zero mean; the dynamic systems will be linear." Regardless of Gaussianity, however, if the process and measurement covariances are known, then the Kalman filter is the best possible linear estimator in the minimum mean-square-error sense, although there may be better nonlinear estimators. It is a common misconception (perpetuated in the literature) that the Kalman filter cannot be rigorously applied unless all noise processes are assumed to be Gaussian. Extensions and generalizations of the method have also been developed, such as the extended Kalman filter and the unscented Kalman filter which work on nonlinear systems. The basis is a hidden Markov model such that the state space of the latent variables is continuous and all latent and observed variables have Gaussian distributions. Kalman filtering has been used successfully in multi-sensor fusion, and distributed sensor networks to develop distributed or consensus Kalman filtering. == History == The filtering method is named for Hungarian émigré Rudolf E. Kálmán, although Thorvald Nicolai Thiele and Peter Swerling developed a similar algorithm earlier. Richard S. Bucy of the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory contributed to the theory, causing it to be known sometimes as Kalman–Bucy filtering. Kalman was inspired to derive the Kalman filter by applying state variables to the Wiener filtering problem. Stanley F. Schmidt is generally credited with developing the first implementation of a Kalman filter. He realized that the filter could be divided into two distinct parts, with one part for time periods between sensor outputs and another part for incorporating measurements. It was during a visit by Kálmán to the NASA Ames Research Center that Schmidt saw the applicability of Kálmán's ideas to the nonlinear problem of trajectory estimation for the Apollo program resulting in its incorporation in the Apollo navigation computer. This digital filter is sometimes termed the Stratonovich–Kalman–Bucy filter because it is a special case of a more general, nonlinear filter developed by the Soviet mathematician Ruslan Stratonovich. In fact, some of the special case linear filter's equations appeared in papers by Stratonovich that were published before the summer of 1961, when Kalman met with Stratonovich during a conference in Moscow. This Kalman filtering was first described and developed partially in technical papers by Swerling (1958), Kalman (1960) and Kalman and Bucy (1961). The Apollo computer used 2k of magnetic core RAM and 36k wire rope [...]. The CPU was built from ICs [...]. Clock speed was under 100 kHz [...]. The fact that the MIT engineers were able to pack such good software (one of the very first applications of the Kalman filter) into such a tiny computer is truly remarkable. Kalman filters have been vital in the implementation of the navigation systems of U.S. Navy nuclear ballistic missile submarines, and in the guidance and navigation systems of cruise missiles such as the U.S. Navy's Tomahawk missile and the U.S. Air Force's Air Launched Cruise Missile. They are also used in the guidance and navigation systems of reusable launch vehicles and the attitude control and navigation systems of spacecraft which dock at the International Space Station. == Overview of the calculation == Kalman filtering uses a system's dynamic model (e.g., physical laws of motion), known control inputs to that system, and multiple sequential measurements (such as from sensors) to form an estimate of the system's varying quantities (its state) that is better than the estimate obtained by using only one measurement alone. As such, it is a common sensor fusion and data fusion algorithm. Noisy sensor data, approximations in the equations that describe the system evolution, and external factors that are not accounted for, all limit how well it is possible to determine the system's state. The Kalman filter deals effectively with the uncertainty due to noisy sensor data and, to some extent, with random external factors. The Kalman filter produces an estimate of the state of the system as an average of the system's predicted state and of the new measurement using a weighted average. The purpose of the weights is that values with better (i.e., smaller) estimated uncertainty are "trusted" more. The weights are calculated from the covariance, a measure of the estimated uncertainty of the prediction of the system's state. The result of the weighted average is a new state estimate that lies between the predicted and measured state, and has a better estimated uncertainty than either alone. This process is repeated at every time step, with the new estimate and its covariance informing the prediction used in the following iteration. This means that Kalman filter works recursively and requires only the last "best guess", rather than the entire history, of a system's state to calculate a new state. The measurements' certainty-grading and current-state estimate are important considerations. It is common to discuss the filter's response in terms of the Kalman filter's gain. The Kalman gain is the weight given to the measurements and current-state estimate, and can be "tuned" to achieve a particular performance. With a high gain, the filter places more weight on the most recent measurements, and thus conforms to them more responsively. With a low gain, the filter conforms to the model predictions more closely. At the extremes, a high gain (close to one) will result in a more jumpy estimated trajectory, while a low gain (close to zero) will smooth out noise but decrease the responsiveness. When performing the actual calculations for the filter (as discussed below), the state estimate and covariances are coded into matrices because of the multiple dimensions involved in a single set of calculations. This allows for a representation of linear relationships between different state variables (such as position, velocity, and acceleration) in any of the transition models or covariances. == Example application == As an example application, consider the problem of determining the precise location of a truck. The truck can be equipped with a GPS unit that provides an estimate of the position within a few meters. The GPS estimate is likely to be noisy; readings 'jump around' rapidly, though remaining within a few meters of the real position. In addition, since the truck is expected to follow the laws of physics, its position can also be estimated by integrating its velocity over time, determined by keeping track of wheel revolutions and the