Viral marketing

Viral marketing is a business strategy that uses existing social networks to promote a product or service on social media platforms. Its name refers to how consumers spread information about a product with other people, much in the same way that a virus spreads from one person to another. It can be delivered by word of mouth, or enhanced by the network effects of the Internet and mobile networks. The concept is often misused or misunderstood, as people apply it to any successful enough story without taking into account the word "viral". Viral advertising is personal and, while coming from an identified sponsor, it does not mean businesses pay for its distribution. Most of the well-known viral ads circulating online are ads paid by a sponsor company, launched either on their own platform (company web page or social media profile) or on social media websites such as YouTube. Consumers receive the page link from a social media network or copy the entire ad from a website and pass it along through e-mail or posting it on a blog, web page or social media profile. Viral marketing may take the form of video clips, advergames, ebooks, brandable software, images, text messages, email messages, or web pages. The most commonly utilized transmission vehicles for viral messages include pass-along based, incentive based, trendy based, and undercover based. However, the creative nature of viral marketing enables an "endless amount of potential forms and vehicles the messages can utilize for transmission", including mobile devices. The ultimate goal of marketers interested in creating successful viral marketing programs is to create viral messages that appeal to individuals with high social networking potential (SNP) and that have a high probability of being presented and spread by these individuals and their competitors in their communications with others in a short period. The term "viral marketing" has also been used pejoratively to refer to stealth marketing campaigns—marketing strategies that advertise a product to people without them knowing they are being marketed to. == History == The emergence of "viral marketing", as an approach to advertisement, has been tied to the popularization of the notion that ideas spread like viruses. The field that developed around this notion, memetics, peaked in popularity in the 1990s. As this then began to influence marketing gurus, it took on a life of its own in that new context. The brief career of Australian pop singer Marcus Montana is largely remembered as an early example of viral marketing. In early 1989, thousands of posters declaring "Marcus is Coming" were placed around Sydney, generating discussion and interest within the media and the community about the meaning of the mysterious advertisements. The campaign successfully made Montana's musical debut a talking point, but his subsequent music career was a failure. The term is found in PC User magazine in 1989 with a somewhat differing meaning. It was later used by Jeffrey Rayport in the 1996 Fast Company article "The Virus of Marketing", and Tim Draper and Steve Jurvetson of the venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson in 1997 to describe Hotmail's practice of appending advertising to outgoing mail from their users. Doug Rushkoff, a media critic, wrote about viral marketing on the Internet in 1996. Bob Gerstley wrote about algorithms designed to identify people with high "social networking potential." Gerstley employed SNP algorithms in quantitative marketing research. In 2004, the concept of the alpha user was coined to indicate that it had now become possible to identify the focal members of any viral campaign, the "hubs" who were most influential. Alpha users could be targeted for advertising purposes most accurately in mobile phone networks, due to their personal nature. In early 2013, the first ever Viral Summit was held in Las Vegas. == Factors == Marketer Jonah Berger defines six key factors that drive virality, organized in an acronym called STEPPS: Social currency – the better something makes people look, the more likely they will be to share it Triggers – things that are "top of mind" are more likely to be "tip of the tongue" Emotion – when people care, they share Public – the easier something is to see, the more likely people are to imitate it Practical value – people share useful information to help others Stories – like a Trojan Horse, stories carry messages and ideas along for the ride. Another important factor that drives virality is the propagativity of the content, referring to the ease with which consumers can redistribute it. == Psychology == To form deeper connections with viewers and increase the chances of virality, many marketers use psychological principles. They argue that this approach is scientific and can foster an environment where the odds of gaining traction are much higher. People find psychological safety and can develop a sense of trust when more people interact with online content. For this reason, marketers work to develop media that resonates with viewers on a deeper, emotional level as this approach frequently results in higher engagement. This level of interaction serves as a sign of approval, reducing the personal risk that is subconsciously linked to associating oneself with a company or brand’s content. Professor Jonah Berger at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business affirms that marketing campaigns that trigger psychological responses linked to strong emotions tend to perform better. In particular, Berger found that positive emotions like happiness, joy, and excitement have more successful share rates than their negative counterparts. This outcome results from the human instinct to respond more positively to content with activating emotions, increasing the desire to share content, which contributes to its virality. Viral marketing utilizes the primitive feeling of frisson to increase their view and share counts. This feeling of excitement is considered powerful because of its ability to cause a physical response. From increased heart rates to full body chills, Professor Brent Coker at the University of Melbourne describes that this approach to marketing triggers a primitive response that immerses the viewer in the content on a deeper level. Researchers Juliana Fernandes from the University of Florida and Sigal Segev from the Florida International University also found that people are more inclined to share emotional campaigns over those that are heavily informational. They claim that consumers do not often care to learn about a product’s actual features and benefits. Instead, people prefer to be immersed in experience-based content that creates an emotional impact. Companies and brands can benefit from treating their content in this manner and go viral more frequently than those who do not. Social proof is another psychological phenomenon that impacts viral content. Experts in this field argue that it is a natural instinct to want to behave similarly to others because it results in positive validation. This phenomenon explains the human need to conform, so marketers focus on creating engaging content that encourages interactions and causes a snowball effect. This subconsciously influences people to like, comment, and share if they already see others doing the same. Social proof goes further by providing people with a form of social currency. When individuals interact with and share content, they become associated with the topics at hand. People naturally tend to perceive one another, and this pattern carries over to the digital world. As a result, many people tend to be vigilant about the viral marketing they engage with, since they want to be perceived positively. Companies and brands have the opportunity to develop social currency themselves by aligning with their target audiences and creating marketing campaigns that fit their interests or match their values. == Methods and metrics == According to marketing professors Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein, to make viral marketing work, three basic criteria must be met, i.e., giving the right message to the right messengers in the right environment: Messenger: Three specific types of messengers are required to ensure the transformation of an ordinary message into a viral one: market mavens, social hubs, and salespeople. Market mavens are individuals who are continuously 'on the pulse' of things (information specialists); they are usually among the first to get exposed to the message and who transmit it to their immediate social network. Social hubs are people with an exceptionally large number of social connections; they often know hundreds of different people and have the ability to serve as connectors or bridges between different subcultures. Salespeople might be needed who receive the message from the market maven, amplify it by making it more relevant and persuasive, and then transmit it to the social hub for further distr

Toad (software)

Toad is a database management toolset from Quest Software for managing relational and non-relational databases using SQL aimed at database developers, database administrators, and data analysts. The Toad toolset runs against Oracle, SQL Server, IBM DB2 (LUW & z/OS), SAP and MySQL. A Toad product for data preparation supports many data platforms. == History == A practicing Oracle DBA, Jim McDaniel, designed Toad for his own use in the mid-1990s. He called it Tool for Oracle Application Developers, shortened to "TOAD". McDaniel initially distributed the tool as shareware and later online as freeware. Quest Software acquired TOAD in October 1998. Quest Software itself was acquired by Dell in 2012 to form Dell Software. In June 2016, Dell announced the sale of their software division, including the Quest business, to Francisco Partners and Elliott Management Corporation. On October 31, 2016, the sale was finalized. On November 1, 2016, the sale of Dell Software to Francisco Partners and Elliott Management was completed, and the company re-launched as Quest Software. == Features == Connection Manager - Allow users to connect natively to the vendor’s database whether on-premise or DBaaS. Browser - Allow users to browse all the different database/schema objects and their properties effective management. Editor - A way to create and maintain scripts and database code with debugging and integration with source control. Unit Testing (Oracle) - Ensures code is functionally tested before it is released into production. Static code review (Oracle) - Ensures code meets required quality level using a rules-based system. SQL Optimization - Provides developers with a way to tune and optimize SQL statements and database code without relying on a DBA. Advanced optimization enables DBAs to tune SQL effectively in production. Scalability testing and database workload replay - Ensures that database code and SQL will scale properly before it gets released into production. == Books == Toad Pocket Reference for Oracle plsql 1st Edition by Jim McDaniel and Patrick McGrath, O'Reilly, 2002 (ISBN 0596003374, ISBN 978-0-596-00337-1) Toad Pocket Reference for Oracle 2nd Edition by Jeff Smith, Bert Scalzo, and Patrick McGrath, O'Reilly, 2005 (ISBN 0596009712, ISBN 978-0-596-00971-7) TOAD Handbook by Bert Scalzo and Dan Hotka, Sams, 2003 (ISBN 0672324865, ISBN 978-0-672-32486-4) TOAD Handbook 2nd Edition by Bert Scalzo and Dan Hotka, Addison-Wesley Professional, 2009 (ISBN 0321649109, ISBN 978-0-321-64910-2). TOAD Handbook 2nd Edition by Bert Scalzo and Dan Hotka, Addison-Wesley Professional, 2009 (ISBN 0321649109, ISBN 978-0-321-64910-2).

Fuzzy measure theory

In mathematics, fuzzy measure theory considers generalized measures in which the additive property is replaced by the weaker property of monotonicity. The central concept of fuzzy measure theory is the fuzzy measure (also capacity, see ), which was introduced by Choquet in 1953 and independently defined by Sugeno in 1974 in the context of fuzzy integrals. There exists a number of different classes of fuzzy measures including plausibility/belief measures, possibility/necessity measures, and probability measures, which are a subset of classical measures. == Definitions == Let X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } be a universe of discourse, C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} be a class of subsets of X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , and E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} . A function g : C → R {\displaystyle g:{\mathcal {C}}\to \mathbb {R} } where ∅ ∈ C ⇒ g ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle \emptyset \in {\mathcal {C}}\Rightarrow g(\emptyset )=0} E ⊆ F ⇒ g ( E ) ≤ g ( F ) {\displaystyle E\subseteq F\Rightarrow g(E)\leq g(F)} is called a fuzzy measure. A fuzzy measure is called normalized or regular if g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(\mathbf {X} )=1} . == Properties of fuzzy measures == A fuzzy measure is: additive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) = g ( E ) + g ( F ) . {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)=g(E)+g(F).} ; supermodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; submodular if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ∪ F ) + g ( E ∩ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)+g(E\cap F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; superadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≥ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\geq g(E)+g(F)} ; subadditive if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} such that E ∩ F = ∅ {\displaystyle E\cap F=\emptyset } , we have g ( E ∪ F ) ≤ g ( E ) + g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E\cup F)\leq g(E)+g(F)} ; symmetric if for any E , F ∈ C {\displaystyle E,F\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have | E | = | F | {\displaystyle |E|=|F|} implies g ( E ) = g ( F ) {\displaystyle g(E)=g(F)} ; Boolean if for any E ∈ C {\displaystyle E\in {\mathcal {C}}} , we have g ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle g(E)=0} or g ( E ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(E)=1} . Understanding the properties of fuzzy measures is useful in application. When a fuzzy measure is used to define a function such as the Sugeno integral or Choquet integral, these properties will be crucial in understanding the function's behavior. For instance, the Choquet integral with respect to an additive fuzzy measure reduces to the Lebesgue integral. In discrete cases, a symmetric fuzzy measure will result in the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator. Submodular fuzzy measures result in convex functions, while supermodular fuzzy measures result in concave functions when used to define a Choquet integral. == Möbius representation == Let g be a fuzzy measure. The Möbius representation of g is given by the set function M, where for every E , F ⊆ X {\displaystyle E,F\subseteq X} , M ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E ( − 1 ) | E ∖ F | g ( F ) . {\displaystyle M(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}(-1)^{|E\backslash F|}g(F).} The equivalent axioms in Möbius representation are: M ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(\emptyset )=0} . ∑ F ⊆ E | i ∈ F M ( F ) ≥ 0 {\displaystyle \sum _{F\subseteq E|i\in F}M(F)\geq 0} , for all E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } and all i ∈ E {\displaystyle i\in E} A fuzzy measure in Möbius representation M is called normalized if ∑ E ⊆ X M ( E ) = 1. {\displaystyle \sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} }M(E)=1.} Möbius representation can be used to give an indication of which subsets of X interact with one another. For instance, an additive fuzzy measure has Möbius values all equal to zero except for singletons. The fuzzy measure g in standard representation can be recovered from the Möbius form using the Zeta transform: g ( E ) = ∑ F ⊆ E M ( F ) , ∀ E ⊆ X . {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{F\subseteq E}M(F),\forall E\subseteq \mathbf {X} .} == Simplification assumptions for fuzzy measures == Fuzzy measures are defined on a semiring of sets or monotone class, which may be as granular as the power set of X, and even in discrete cases the number of variables can be as large as 2|X|. For this reason, in the context of multi-criteria decision analysis and other disciplines, simplification assumptions on the fuzzy measure have been introduced so that it is less computationally expensive to determine and use. For instance, when it is assumed the fuzzy measure is additive, it will hold that g ( E ) = ∑ i ∈ E g ( { i } ) {\displaystyle g(E)=\sum _{i\in E}g(\{i\})} and the values of the fuzzy measure can be evaluated from the values on X. Similarly, a symmetric fuzzy measure is defined uniquely by |X| values. Two important fuzzy measures that can be used are the Sugeno- or λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -fuzzy measure and k-additive measures, introduced by Sugeno and Grabisch respectively. === Sugeno λ-measure === The Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a special case of fuzzy measures defined iteratively. It has the following definition: ==== Definition ==== Let X = { x 1 , … , x n } {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} =\left\lbrace x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}\right\rbrace } be a finite set and let λ ∈ ( − 1 , + ∞ ) {\displaystyle \lambda \in (-1,+\infty )} . A Sugeno λ {\displaystyle \lambda } -measure is a function g : 2 X → [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle g:2^{X}\to [0,1]} such that g ( X ) = 1 {\displaystyle g(X)=1} . if A , B ⊆ X {\displaystyle A,B\subseteq \mathbf {X} } (alternatively A , B ∈ 2 X {\displaystyle A,B\in 2^{\mathbf {X} }} ) with A ∩ B = ∅ {\displaystyle A\cap B=\emptyset } then g ( A ∪ B ) = g ( A ) + g ( B ) + λ g ( A ) g ( B ) {\displaystyle g(A\cup B)=g(A)+g(B)+\lambda g(A)g(B)} . As a convention, the value of g at a singleton set { x i } {\displaystyle \left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace } is called a density and is denoted by g i = g ( { x i } ) {\displaystyle g_{i}=g(\left\lbrace x_{i}\right\rbrace )} . In addition, we have that λ {\displaystyle \lambda } satisfies the property λ + 1 = ∏ i = 1 n ( 1 + λ g i ) {\displaystyle \lambda +1=\prod _{i=1}^{n}(1+\lambda g_{i})} . Tahani and Keller as well as Wang and Klir have shown that once the densities are known, it is possible to use the previous polynomial to obtain the values of λ {\displaystyle \lambda } uniquely. === k-additive fuzzy measure === The k-additive fuzzy measure limits the interaction between the subsets E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq X} to size | E | = k {\displaystyle |E|=k} . This drastically reduces the number of variables needed to define the fuzzy measure, and as k can be anything from 1 (in which case the fuzzy measure is additive) to X, it allows for a compromise between modelling ability and simplicity. ==== Definition ==== A discrete fuzzy measure g on a set X is called k-additive ( 1 ≤ k ≤ | X | {\displaystyle 1\leq k\leq |\mathbf {X} |} ) if its Möbius representation verifies M ( E ) = 0 {\displaystyle M(E)=0} , whenever | E | > k {\displaystyle |E|>k} for any E ⊆ X {\displaystyle E\subseteq \mathbf {X} } , and there exists a subset F with k elements such that M ( F ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle M(F)\neq 0} . == Shapley and interaction indices == In game theory, the Shapley value or Shapley index is used to indicate the weight of a game. Shapley values can be calculated for fuzzy measures in order to give some indication of the importance of each singleton. In the case of additive fuzzy measures, the Shapley value will be the same as each singleton. For a given fuzzy measure g, and | X | = n {\displaystyle |\mathbf {X} |=n} , the Shapley index for every i , … , n ∈ X {\displaystyle i,\dots ,n\in X} is: ϕ ( i ) = ∑ E ⊆ X ∖ { i } ( n − | E | − 1 ) ! | E | ! n ! [ g ( E ∪ { i } ) − g ( E ) ] . {\displaystyle \phi (i)=\sum _{E\subseteq \mathbf {X} \backslash \{i\}}{\frac {(n-|E|-1)!|E|!}{n!}}[g(E\cup \{i\})-g(E)].} The Shapley value is the vector ϕ ( g ) = ( ψ ( 1 ) , … , ψ ( n ) ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {\phi } (g)=(\psi (1),\dots ,\psi (n)).}

On a Red Station, Drifting

On a Red Station, Drifting is a 2012 science fiction novella by Aliette de Bodard. Set in her Xuya Universe, it focuses on two women aboard a space station with a failing artificial intelligence. It received critical acclaim, becoming a finalist for the 2012 Nebula Award for Best Novella, the 2013 Hugo Award for Best Novella, and the 2013 Locus Award for Best Novella. == Plot == Lê Thi Linh is a magistrate of the Dai Viet Empire who is forced to flee her planet after criticizing the Emperor’s wartime policies. At the same time, rebel groups seize control of her planet and kill most of her subordinates. Linh seeks refuge with her distant relatives on Prosper Station. Prosper is controlled by an artificial intelligence called the Honoured Ancestress. Lê Thi Quyen, Linh’s cousin by marriage, manages the day-to-day operations of Prosper while her husband is away at war. Quyen and Linh immediately fall into conflict. Quyen’s brother-in-law Huu Hieu sells his mem-implants, which are copies of their ancestors’ consciousnesses. Meanwhile, the Honoured Ancestress experiences increasingly severe technical problems. Hieu and Linh become close. Hieu plans use the money from the sale of the implants to leave Prosper and marry his lover on a different station. Linh is upset knowing that she will never be able to leave. A visiting cousin, Lady Oahn, provides schematics for the repair of the Honoured Ancestress. In an effort to hurt Quyen, Linh writes an unflattering poem at a banquet honoring Oanh. In doing so, she reveals that Hieu is trying to leave Prosper. Hieu attempts suicide out of shame, but Linh rescues him. Quyen is able to repair the Honoured Ancestress, restoring her functionality at the expense of erasing many of her memories. The Emperor’s Embroidered Guard arrives at Prosper Station in search of Linh. Linh finds the missing mem-implants and returns them to Quyen. Quyen and Linh briefly reconcile before Linh is arrested and removed from Prosper Station. == Major themes == A review in Kirkus wrote that the novel's "familiar setting" was a "departure point" for the novel to explore its themes. The novel explores family ties; almost everyone on Prosper Station is related in some fashion. Additionally, the use of ancestors' mem-implants further explores the concept of family ties, with some descendants being considered more "worthy" than others due to their higher number of implants. The novel also explores questions of worth, as those who fail at ability tests are often forced to become the "lesser partners" in marriages and are discriminated against due to their perceived lack of achievement. The author notes that it is interesting that gender plays no role in the question of worth, and that the majority of the men in the story are actually the "lesser partner" in their marriage. == Style == The novel is divided into three sections. Liz Bourke wrote that each section builds thematically "towards an emotional crescendo". == Reception == Writing for Locus, Liz Bourke praised the novel's exploration of interpersonal conflict between Linh and Quyen, writing that "essentially subverts the popularly-understood derogatory overtones of 'domestic conflict'". Bourke also praised the story's tension, calling it "so well-strung the prose practically vibrates under its influence". A review for Kirkus stated that the novel is a "beautifully realized story and the characters, plot, theme and writing are expertly crafted." === Awards ===

Multi Autonomous Ground-robotic International Challenge

The Multi Autonomous Ground-robotic International Challenge (MAGIC) is a 1.6 million dollar prize competition for autonomous mobile robots funded by TARDEC and the DSTO, the primary research organizations for Tank and Defense research in the United States and Australia respectively. The goal of the competition is to create multi-vehicle robotic teams that can execute an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance mission in a dynamic urban environment. The challenge required competitors to map a 500 m x 500 m challenge area in under 3.5 hours and to correctly locate, classify and recognise all simulated threats. The challenge event was conducted in Adelaide, Australia, during November 2010. == Competitors == Initially 12 teams were selected for the competition in November 2009, of which 10 teams received funding. These included: MAGICian – Adelaide/Perth, Australia (UWA, ECU, Flinders, Thales) Strategic Engineering – Adelaide, Australia (U. Adelaide) Northern Hunters – Canada (Royal Military College of Canada) Chiba Team – Japan (Chiba University) Cappadocia – Ankara, Turkey (ASELSAN, Ohio State University) RASR – Gaithersburg, Md. (Robotics Research, LLC; QinetiQ; Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University) Team Cornell – US (Cornell University) Team Michigan – Ann Arbor, Mich. (University of Michigan) Virginia Tech – US (Virginia Tech) University of Pennsylvania – Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania) Numinence – Brisbane, Australia (Numinence Pty Ltd, La Trobe University) UNSW – Sydney, Australia (UNSW) The first downselection trial required teams to map an indoor area and outdoor area, and to demonstrate distributing and handing over tasks between robots. During the first downselection trial, the top six teams were selected: Cappadocia – Ankara, Turkey MAGICian – Adelaide/Perth, Australia RASR – Gaithersburg, Md. Team Michigan – Ann Arbor, Mich. University of Pennsylvania – Philadelphia Chiba Team – Japan Before the finals were held, Chiba Team withdrew from the competition, leaving five competitors. == Event == Ultimately the overall goal of fully autonomous operations without human intervention was not achieved, however, the Secretary for Defence stated "The competing vehicles demonstrated new advances in robotics technology, which are very promising for their potential deployment in combat zones where they can replace our troops in carrying out life-threatening tasks" and considered the competition a success. == Results == The official results of the competition were: First – Team Michigan ($750,000 prize) Second – University of Pennsylvania ($250,000 prize) Third – RASR ($100,000 prize) Fourth – MAGICian & Cappadocia The "Old Ram Shed Challenge" was a single-day competition held after the completion of MAGIC. It was smaller in scale, allowing all of the teams to demonstrate their systems during a single day. The University of Pennsylvania won this challenge, having found a greater number of the target objects than the other teams. == Technology == Key technology used by all teams was computer vision, sensor fusion, human-robot interaction, and simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM). Team Michigan, a collaboration between the University of Michigan's APRIL Lab and Soar Technology, Inc., had the largest fleet of 14 robots, developed their own Inertial Measurement Unit, and created their skid steer robot chassis out of Baltic birch plywood. Additionally, they had minimal reliance on GPS and used bandwidth limited 900 MHz radios for all telemetry, imaging, and status communications between all robots and the ground station. The code was written primarily in Java and each robot was equipped with an actuated 2D LIDAR, along with a unique 2D barcode for inter-robot recognition. The University of Pennsylvania team consisted of only four members. All code was written using Matlab. The robots were equipped with omnidirectional vision. RASR used the Foster-Miller TALON vehicle. MAGICian used the WAMbot robots developed by The University of Western Australia, Edith Cowan University and Thales Australia. Code was written in C++ and Java. The robots were equipped with SICK laser scanners. See the September/October 2012 special issue of the Journal of Field Robotics for contest highlights, technical approaches taken by several of the teams, and an explanation of the evaluation metrics used by organizers.

Meta-Labeling

Meta-labeling, also known as corrective AI, is a machine learning (ML) technique utilized in quantitative finance to enhance the performance of investment and trading strategies, developed in 2017 by Marcos López de Prado at Guggenheim Partners and Cornell University. The core idea is to separate the decision of trade direction (side) from the decision of trade sizing, addressing the inefficiencies of simultaneously learning both side and size predictions. The side decision involves forecasting market movements (long, short, neutral), while the size decision focuses on risk management and profitability. It serves as a secondary decision-making layer that evaluates the signals generated by a primary predictive model. By assessing the confidence and likely profitability of those signals, meta-labeling allows investors and algorithms to dynamically size positions and suppress false positives. == Motivation == Meta-labeling is designed to improve precision without sacrificing recall. As noted by López de Prado, attempting to model both the direction and the magnitude of a trade using a single algorithm can result in poor generalization. By separating these tasks, meta-labeling enables greater flexibility and robustness: Enhances control over capital allocation. Reduces overfitting by limiting model complexity. Allows the use of interpretability tools and tailored thresholds to manage risk. Enables dynamic trade suppression in unfavorable regimes. == Applications == Meta-labeling has been applied in a variety of financial ML contexts, including: Algorithmic trading: Filtering and sizing trades to reduce false positives. Portfolio optimization: Scaling exposure across multiple signals with differing confidence levels. Risk management: Dynamically disabling strategies in adverse market conditions. Model validation: Interpreting when and why a model may be underperforming due to regime shifts. == General architecture == Meta-labeling decouples two core components of systematic trading strategies: directional prediction and position sizing. The process involves training a primary model to generate trade signals (e.g., buy, sell, or hold) and then training a secondary model to determine whether each signal is likely to lead to a profitable trade. The second model outputs a probability that is interpreted as the confidence in the forecast, which can be used to adjust the position size or to filter out unreliable trades. Meta-labeling is typically implemented as a three-stage process: Primary model (M1): Predicts the direction or label of a financial outcome using features such as market prices, returns, or volatility indicators. A typical output is directional, e.g., Y ∈ {−1,0,1}, representing short, neutral, or long positions. Secondary model (M2): A binary classifier trained to predict whether the primary model's prediction will be profitable. The target variable is a binary meta-label F ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle F\in \{0,1\}} . Inputs can include features used in the primary model, performance diagnostics, or market regime data. Position sizing algorithm (M3): Translates the output probability of the secondary model into a position size. Higher confidence scores result in larger allocations, while lower confidence leads to reduced or zero exposure. === Stage 1: Forecasting side === Primary model architecture Figure 1 Figure 1 presents the architecture of a primary model. It focuses on forecasting the side of the trade. Following the example, this model (M1) takes in input data – such as open-high-low-close data and determines the side of the position to take: a negative number is a short position, and positive number is a long position, the range is set between −1 and 1 (the closer it is to −1 or 1, the stronger the models conviction is). When training the model, the labels are −1 and 1, based on the direction of forward returns for some predefined investment horizon. The researcher may decide to apply a recall check (τ: "Tau") by setting a minimum threshold that the initial output needs to be to qualify of a short or long position (if the threshold is not met, no side forecast is predicted, leading to closing of any open positions), this leads to the primary model output which is one of three possible side forecasts: −1, 0, or 1. The primary model also generates evaluation data which can be used by the secondary model, to improve performance of size forecasts. Some examples of evaluation data include rolling accuracy, F1, recall, precision, and AUC scores. === Stage 2: Filtering out false positives === General meta-labeling architecture Figure 2 Next comes the phase of filtering out false positives, by applying a secondary machine learning model (M2), which is a binary classifier trained to determine if the trade will be profitable or not. The model takes as input four general groupings of data: General input data which is predictive of a false positive. For example the last 30 days rolling volatility of the underlying asset. Evaluation data. Market state and regime data, one may find that macro economic data or clustering the market into regimes may help as specific trading strategies are known to perform better in particular regimes. Example: momentum based strategies perform best in periods with low volatility and strong directional moves. Primary models initial input which is a value between −1 and 1. This highlights the strength of the primary models conviction. The output of the model is a value between −1 and 1 (if using a Tanh function) which will indicate the strength of the conviction that a short or long position is profitable, or it could simply be between 0 and 1 (using a sigmoid function) if one only wanted to know if it made money or not. This output allows filtering out trades that are likely to lead to losses. One could stop at this point or use the outputs of the secondary model as inputs to a position sizing algorithm (M3) which could further enhance strategy performance metrics by translating the output probability of the secondary model into a position size. Higher confidence scores result in larger allocations, while lower confidence leads to reduced or zero exposure. === Stage 3: Optimizing position sizes === ==== Position sizing methods (M3) ==== Various algorithms have been proposed for transforming predicted probabilities into trade sizes: All-or-nothing: Allocate 100% of capital if the probability exceeds a predefined threshold (e.g., 0.5); otherwise, do not trade. Model confidence: Use the probability score directly as the fraction of capital allocated. Linear scaling: Rescale the model's probabilities using min-max normalization based on the training data. Normal CDF (NCDF): Use a normal cumulative distribution function applied to a z-statistic derived from the predicted probability. Empirical CDF (ECDF): Rank probabilities based on their percentile in the training data to ensure relative allocation. Sigmoid Optimal Position Sizing (SOPS): Applies a smooth non-linear sigmoid transformation optimized to maximize risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratio). ==== Model calibration ==== Each machine learning algorithm used in meta-labeling tends to produce outputs with different characteristic distributions; for example, some are approximately normally distributed, whereas others exhibit a pronounced U-shape, concentrating probabilities near the extremes. Due to these varying distributions, simply summing the outputs of different models can inadvertently lead to uneven weighting of signals, biasing trade decisions. To address this, model calibration techniques are essential to adjust the predicted probabilities towards frequentist probabilities, ensuring that model outputs reflect true likelihoods more accurately. Two common calibration techniques are: Platt scaling (Sigmoid scaling): Suitable for correcting S-shaped calibration plots typically produced by models such as support vector machines (SVMs). Isotonic regression: Fits a non-decreasing step function to probabilities and is effective particularly with larger datasets, though it can sometimes lead to overfitting. Transforming predictions to frequentist probabilities is crucial as it provides probabilistic outputs that are directly interpretable as the actual likelihood of an event occurring. Such calibration significantly enhances the effectiveness of fixed position sizing methods, reducing maximum drawdowns and increasing risk-adjusted returns. However, calibration has less impact on position sizing methods that directly estimate parameters from the training data, such as ECDF and SOPS, suggesting that calibration is a critical step mainly for fixed methods that rely heavily on raw model outputs. =

Speech-generating device

Speech-generating devices (SGDs), also known as voice output communication aids, are electronic augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems used to supplement or replace speech or writing for individuals with severe speech impairments, enabling them to verbally communicate. SGDs are important for people who have limited means of interacting verbally, as they allow individuals to become active participants in communication interactions. They are particularly helpful for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) but recently have been used for children with predicted speech deficiencies. There are several input and display methods for users of varying abilities to make use of SGDs. Some SGDs have multiple pages of symbols to accommodate a large number of utterances, and thus only a portion of the symbols available are visible at any one time, with the communicator navigating the various pages. Speech-generating devices can produce electronic voice output by using digitized recordings of natural speech or through speech synthesis—which may carry less emotional information but can permit the user to speak novel messages. The content, organization, and updating of the vocabulary on an SGD is influenced by a number of factors, such as the user's needs and the contexts that the device will be used in. The development of techniques to improve the available vocabulary and rate of speech production is an active research area. Vocabulary items should be of high interest to the user, be frequently applicable, have a range of meanings, and be pragmatic in functionality. There are multiple methods of accessing messages on devices: directly or indirectly, or using specialized access devices—although the specific access method will depend on the skills and abilities of the user. SGD output is typically much slower than speech, although rate enhancement strategies can increase the user's rate of output, resulting in enhanced efficiency of communication. The first known SGD was prototyped in the mid-1970s, and rapid progress in hardware and software development has meant that SGD capabilities can now be integrated into devices like smartphones. Notable users of SGDs include Stephen Hawking, Roger Ebert, Tony Proudfoot, and Pete Frates (founder of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge). Speech-generating systems may be dedicated devices developed solely for AAC, or non-dedicated devices such as computers running additional software to allow them to function as AAC devices. == History == SGDs have their roots in early electronic communication aids. The first such aid was a sip-and-puff typewriter controller named the patient-operated selector mechanism (Naman) prototyped by Reg Maling in the United Kingdom in 1960. POSSUM scanned through a set of symbols on an illuminated display. Researchers at Delft University in the Netherlands created the lightspot-operated typewriter (LOT) in 1970, which made use of small movements of the head to point a small spot of light at a matrix of characters, each equipped with a photoelectric cell. Although it was commercially unsuccessful, the LOT was well received by its users. In 1966, Barry Romich, a freshman engineering student at Case Western Reserve University, and Ed Prentke, an engineer at Highland View Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio, formed a partnership, creating the Prentke Romich Company. In 1969, the company produced its first communication device, a typing system based on a discarded Teletype machine. In 1979, Mark Dahmke developed software for a vocal communication aid program using the Computalker CT-1 analog speech synthesizer with a microcomputer. The software utilized phonemes to generate speech, assisting individuals with communication impairments in constructing words and sentences. Dahmke's work contributed to the advancement of assistive technology for people with disabilities. Notably, he designed the "Vocabulary Management System" for Bill Rush, a student with cerebral palsy. This early speech synthesis technology facilitated improved communication for Rush and was featured in a 1980 issue of LIFE Magazine. Dahmke's contributions have influenced the development of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) technologies. During the 1970s and early 1980s, several other companies emerged that have since become prominent manufacturers of SGDs. Toby Churchill founded Toby Churchill Ltd in 1973, after losing his speech following encephalitis. In the US, Dynavox (then known as Sentient Systems Technology) grew out of a student project at Carnegie-Mellon University, created in 1982 to help a young woman with cerebral palsy to communicate. Beginning in the 1980s, improvements in technology led to a greatly increased number, variety, and performance of commercially available communication devices, and a reduction in their size and price. Alternative methods of access such as Target Scanning (also known as eye pointing) calibrate the movement of a user's eyes to direct an SGD to produce the desired speech. Scanning, in which alternatives are presented to the user sequentially, became available on communication devices. Speech output possibilities included both digitized and synthesized speech. Rapid progress in hardware and software development continued, including projects funded by the European Community. The first commercially available dynamic screen speech-generating devices were developed in the 1990s. Software was developed that allowed the computer-based production of communication boards. High-tech devices have continued to become smaller and lighter, while increasing accessibility and capability; communication devices can be accessed using eye-tracking systems, perform as a computer for word-processing and Internet use, and as an environmental control device for independent access to other equipment such as TV, radio and telephones. Stephen Hawking came to be associated with the unique voice of his particular synthesis equipment. Hawking was unable to speak due to a combination of disabilities caused by ALS, and an emergency tracheotomy. In the past 20 or so years SGD have gained popularity amongst young children with speech deficiencies, such as autism, Down syndrome, and predicted brain damage due to surgery. Starting in the early 2000s, specialists saw the benefit of using SGDs not only for adults but for children, as well. Neuro-linguists found that SGDs were just as effective in helping children who were at risk for temporary language deficits after undergoing brain surgery as it is for patients with ALS. In particular, digitized SGDs have been used as communication aids for pediatric patients during the recovery process. == Access methods == There are many methods of accessing messages on devices: directly, indirectly, and with specialized access devices. Direct access methods involve physical contact with the system, by using a keyboard or a touch screen. Users accessing SGDs indirectly and through specialized devices must manipulate an object in order to access the system, such as maneuvering a joystick, head mouse, optical head pointer, light pointer, infrared pointer, or switch access scanner. The specific access method will depend on the skills and abilities of the user. With direct selection a body part, pointer, adapted mouse, joystick, or eye tracking could be used, whereas switch access scanning is often used for indirect selection. Unlike direct selection (e.g., typing on a keyboard, touching a screen), users of Target Scanning can only make selections when the scanning indicator (or cursor) of the electronic device is on the desired choice. Those who are unable to point typically calibrate their eyes to use eye gaze as a way to point and blocking as a way to select desired words and phrases. The speed and pattern of scanning, as well as the way items are selected, are individualized to the physical, visual and cognitive capabilities of the user. == Message construction == Augmentative and alternative communication is typically much slower than speech, with users generally producing 8–10 words per minute. Rate enhancement strategies can increase the user's rate of output to around 12–15 words per minute, and as a result enhance the efficiency of communication. In any given SGD there may be a large number of vocal expressions that facilitate efficient and effective communication, including greetings, expressing desires, and asking questions. Some SGDs have multiple pages of symbols to accommodate a large number of vocal expressions, and thus only a portion of the symbols available are visible at any one time, with the communicator navigating the various pages. Speech-generating devices generally display a set of selections either using a dynamically changing screen, or a fixed display. There are two main options for increasing the rate of communication for an SGD: encoding, and prediction. Encoding permits a user to produce a word, sentence or phrase using only on