SeaTable is a no-code platform that allows users to develop and implement business processes. The cloud collaboration service SeaTable is marketed by the GmbH of the same name with headquarters in Mainz and additional offices in Berlin and Beijing, and developed by the same company as Seafile. == History == SeaTable is a collaborative database and low-code application platform developed as part of a joint venture between Seafile Ltd., a software company based in Guangzhou, China, and SeaTable GmbH, a German firm headquartered in Mainz. Founded in 2020, the project represents the international expansion of Seafile, a Chinese developer originally known for its file synchronization and sharing software. While SeaTable's cloud services and European client operations are managed by the German entity, the platform itself is developed in China by Seafile's engineering team. This cross-border structure, described by TechCrunch as an “unconventional path” for a Chinese startup expanding abroad, reflects Seafile's effort to maintain its product development in China while addressing growing scrutiny in Western markets over data governance and corporate control. In 2021, an innovation project led by the Cyber Innovation Hub at the IT School of the German Armed Forces started to evaluate the possibilities of a large-scale deployment at the German Armed Forces. The evaluation project is currently still ongoing. In 2022, SeaTable is optimizing its database backend to allow millions of records within one base in the future. The focus of development is increasingly on automation and visualization. In 2025, SeaTable introduced AI-powered automations with version 6. The update enabled the integration of large language models (LLMs) for text analysis and automated decision-making. SeaTable operates a self-hosted LLM on servers provided by Hetzner (Germany), while self-hosted deployments can connect to any compatible model. == Features == SeaTable combines the traditional capabilities of a spreadsheet such as Excel and supplements them with a wide range of functions for process automation and visualization as well as a fully comprehensive API. SeaTable is not a pure cloud solution, but can alternatively be installed on a private server and operated completely autonomously. In this way, the owner retains full control over their own data. The installation is done via Docker on a Linux server. == Security and privacy == While most no-code platforms exist only as SaaS solutions, SeaTable describes itself as a data-sparse European solution. While initially the SeaTable Cloud was hosted on Amazon AWS, the move to the German data centers of Swiss provider Exoscale then took place in May 2021. This was followed by the replacement of the Freshdesk cloud ticketing system with a self-hosted Zammad instance, and since April 2022 SeaTable has completely dispensed with all tracking cookies on its website.
Language-Theoretic Security
Language-theoretic security, or LangSec, is an approach to software security that focuses on input handling, complexity, and program design as strategies to improve the verifiability of computer programs. It was introduced in 2005 by Robert J. Hansen and Meredith L. Patterson at BlackHat and in 2011 by Len Sassaman and Patterson. It aims to create a formal description of which software is likely to have security vulnerabilities of particular classes, and why. It considers programs to have an inherent parser component, whether or not explicit, composed of that part of the program which operates on external input before that input is fully parsed. A central hypothesis of language-theoretic security is that vulnerabilities in software increase according to the computational power of the notional input-accepting automaton equivalent to this parser, using the definitions of automata theory. The lower bound on this computational power is the input language complexity of the program. The extent to which reducing this complexity is possible is a function of the specification of the communication protocol or file format the program takes as input. == Parsing as a security mechanism == The behaviour of a program is defined with reference to its expected input. Unexpected input being used by a program is a factor in numerous security bugs, including the so-called Android master key vulnerability (CVE-2013-4787), because accepting unexpected input renders the program's specification ambiguous. In that instance, the unexpected ambiguity came in the form of a ZIP file with duplicate filenames. If a program fully parses its input and only acts on input that unambiguously meets the specification, it follows that the program will avoid these types of vulnerabilities. This is an intentional inversion of the Postel principle. Accepting only unambiguous and valid input is a more formal requirement than input validation or sanitization, and narrows the number of possible but unanticipated program states that can be induced in an application via user input. Conversely, failure to do this is associated with security vulnerabilities. Input sanitization in particular is held to be an inadequate approach to avoiding malicious input because it inherently ignores context-sensitive properties of the input; it can therefore result in paradoxical effects, such as sanitization code activating otherwise inert cross-site scripting payloads in browsers. === Parser differentials === If the language of accepted program input is sufficiently simple, it is possible to verify that two implementations parse the same input language consistently. This is advantageous because it shows no parser differential exists between the two implementations. The requisite level of simplicity is theoretically that for which there is a solution to the equivalence problem. If the two parsers involved in CVE-2013-4787 were equivalent - that is, if they rendered the same output state given the same input state - the vulnerability could not have existed. One strategy for doing this is to publish machine-readable specifications of a format or protocol, and then use a parser generator to generate the parser code. An example of a parser generator built for this purpose is DaeDaLus. The combination of Lex with any of GNU Bison, ANTLR, or Yacc also accomplishes this. However, many parser generators allow the mixing of general purpose code with the parsing definitions, which weakens the guarantees provided by parsing. === Analysis of injection attacks === Injection attacks are generally the result of differences between the serializer (or "unparser") and the corresponding parser at a layer boundary in a system; therefore, they are a special case of parser differentials. In a SQL injection attack, for example, an attacker is able to cause the application with which they are interacting to serialize a SQL query that has different semantics than intended. In the simplest case where the payload ends a string and adds new code, the payload has crossed the code-data boundary in SQL. In language-theoretic security, this is treated as a bug in the serializer of the SQL query, which should instead be written in a way that constrains its possible outputs to those within the scope of the intended query. === Parser combinators === If a parser generator is not used, it is still possible to avoid implementation bugs by using parser combinator such as Nom to implement the parser code. This has the drawback of relying on a programmer correctly translating the specification into the language of the parser generator library, though this task is still less error-prone than hand-coding a parser. == Input format complexity == Complexity in computer programs is associated with security vulnerabilities. Within the domain of language-theoretic security, complexity is described with reference to the computational power of the abstract machine necessary to implement the program, or more particularly, to implement the parser for its input language. This complexity describes whether it is possible to show that there is no unintended or undesired functionality in the program which might be exploitable by an attacker. To be bounded in complexity, the program's input must be well-defined both in terms of form and of semantics. === Weird machines === A weird machine is a model of computation in a program that exists in parallel with, but is distinct from, the intended abstract model of computation in that program. Some classes of weird machine arise from the multi-layered nature of computer programs, or the context in which the programs run; others result from the unanticipated functionality a program has due to its complexity or to software bugs. The more complex the computation model of a program, the more likely it is to implement a weird machine. Depending on context, the weird machine may or may not be concretely useful for an attacker. Since the space of weird machines in the context of some program is the universe of all possible states that are not within the program's intended states, many exploited states including remote code execution and injection attacks belong to the domain of weird machines. A reduction in weird machines is therefore a likely correlate with reduced program vulnerability. === SafeDocs project === SafeDocs is a DARPA project undertaken in 2018 to take existing file formats, create safer subsets of them, and develop programming tools to work for the safer formats. The initial test case for this was PDF. The purpose of creating safer subsets in this case is to lower the minimum bound on parser complexity so that it becomes possible to create tools that will generate correct, normative parsers for them. == Relation to programming languages == The analytic framework of language-theoretic security assumes programs to be virtual machines that execute their input. A document that is read by an application is in this sense a form of machine code, in a generalization of the data as code idea, following the automata theory description of parsers. === Type-safe programming languages === Parsing input and serializing output are operations that consume one data type and emit another. A programming language can therefore check that data is correctly parsed and contains the expected structure by checking data types, and correct serializing (or unparsing) can be implemented as operations on the data types that are relevant to the program's output. This approach can be used to show that the recognizer and unparser patterns have been implemented. It is also possible to implement type checking across a distributed system to enforce parsing and unparsing of the expected structures and to verify that the assumptions made in designing the compositional properties of a distributed system have been followed. === Memory-safe programming languages === In the general case, spatial memory correctness is undecidable. If any proof of spatial memory correctness is to be made, it is therefore necessary to bound the complexity of the code. Interpreted languages such as Java and Python effectively accomplish this via runtime bounds checking, and frameworks for runtime bounds checking also exist for C. The effect of these strategies for spatial memory correctness are to create a halt state in place of a spatial memory correctness violation; therefore, it can be shown that the program will not violate spatial memory correctness, but in exchange, it cannot be shown in the general case that programs will not have runtime bounds checking exceptions. Some programming languages, such as Rust, accomplish this using borrow checking. The borrow checker acts to assure spatial memory correctness by compile-time reference counting. Code for which spatial memory correctness cannot be shown to not be violated therefore does not compile, inherently limiting the complexity of the spatial memory correctness of the program to what is decidable. Thi
Information Rules
Information Rules is a 1999 book by Carl Shapiro and Hal Varian applying traditional economic theories to modern information-based technologies. The book examines commercial strategies appropriate to companies that deal in information, given the high "first copy" and low "subsequent copy" costs of information commodities, such as music CDs or original texts. == Content == The book examines competing standards, and how a company might influence widespread consumer acceptance of one over another, such as VHS versus Betamax, or HD DVD versus Blu-ray. The book mentions possible business strategies of such publishers as Encyclopædia Britannica who have to confront how to stay viable as technology changes the value and availability of information.
DIKW pyramid
The DIKW pyramid (also known as the knowledge pyramid or information hierarchy) is a model describing relationships between data, information, knowledge and wisdom sometimes also stylized as a chain, refer to models of possible structural and functional relationships between a set of components—often four, data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. The concept has roots predating the 1980s. In the latter years of that decade, interest in the models grew after explicit presentations and discussions, including from Milan Zeleny, Russell Ackoff, and Robert W. Lucky. Subsequent important discussions extended along theoretical and practical lines into the coming decades. While debate continues as to actual meaning of the component terms of DIKW-type models, and the actual nature of their relationships—including occasional doubt being cast over any simple, linear, unidirectional model—even so they have become very popular visual representations in use by business, the military, and others. Among the academic and popular, not all versions of the DIKW-type models include all four components (earlier ones excluding data, later ones excluding or downplaying wisdom, and several including additional components (for instance Ackoff inserting "understanding" before and Zeleny adding "enlightenment" after the wisdom component). In addition, DIKW-type models are no longer always presented as pyramids, instead also as a chart or framework (e.g., by Zeleny), as flow diagrams (e.g., by Liew, and by Chisholm et al.), and sometimes as a continuum (e.g., by Choo et al.). == Short description == As Rowley noted in 2007, the DIKW model "is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but [as of that date] there ha[d] been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy". Reviews of textbooks and a survey of scholars in relevant fields indicate that there was not a consensus as to definitions used in the model as of that date, and as reviewed by Liew in that year, even less "in the description of the processes that transform components lower in the hierarchy into those above them". Zins work, published in 2007—from studies in 2003-2005 that documented "130 definitions of data, information, and knowledge formulated by 45 scholars", published in 2007—to suggest that the data–information–knowledge components of DIKW refer to a class of no less than five models, as a function of whether data, information, and knowledge are each conceived of as subjective, objective (what Zins terms, "universal" or "collective") or both. In Zins' usage, subjective and objective "are not related to arbitrariness and truthfulness, which are usually attached to the concepts of subjective knowledge and objective knowledge". Information science, Zins argues, studies data and information, but not knowledge, as knowledge is an internal (subjective) rather than an external (universal–collective) phenomenon. == Representations == === Graphical representation === DIKW is a hierarchical model often depicted as a pyramid, sometimes as a chain, with data at its base and wisdom at its apex (or chain-beginning and -end). Both Zeleny and Ackoff have been credited with originating the pyramid representation, although neither used a pyramid to present their ideas. According to Wallace, Debons and colleagues may have been the first to "present the hierarchy graphically". Many variations of the DIKW-type pyramid have been produced. One, in use by knowledge managers in the United States Department of Defense, attempts to show the DIKW progression to enable effective decisions and consequent activities supporting shared understanding throughout defense organizations, as well as supporting management of risks associated with decisions. DIKW-type hierarchical information paradigms have also been represented as two-dimensional charts, and as flow diagrams, where relationships between the components may be presented less hierarchically, with defining aspects of the relationships, feedback loops, etc. === Computational representation === Intelligent decision support systems are trying to improve decision making by introducing new technologies and methods from the domain of modeling and simulation in general, and in particular from the domain of intelligent software agents in the contexts of agent-based modeling. The following example describes a military decision support system, but the architecture and underlying conceptual idea are transferable to other application domains: The value chain starts with data quality describing the information within the underlying command and control systems. Information quality tracks the completeness, correctness, currency, consistency and precision of the data items and information statements available. Knowledge quality deals with procedural knowledge and information embedded in the command and control system such as templates for adversary forces, assumptions about entities such as ranges and weapons, and doctrinal assumptions, often coded as rules. Awareness quality measures the degree of using the information and knowledge embedded within the command and control system. Awareness is explicitly placed in the cognitive domain. By the introduction of a common operational picture, data are put into context, which leads to information instead of data. The next step, which is enabled by service-oriented web-based infrastructures (but not yet operationally used), is the use of models and simulations for decision support. Simulation systems are the prototype for procedural knowledge, which is the basis for knowledge quality. Finally, using intelligent software agents to continually observe the battle sphere, apply models and simulations to analyze what is going on, to monitor the execution of a plan, and to do all the tasks necessary to make the decision maker aware of what is going on, command and control systems could even support situational awareness, the level in the value chain traditionally limited to pure cognitive methods. == History == Danny P. Wallace, a professor of library and information science, explained that the origin of the DIKW pyramid is uncertain: The presentation of the relationships among data, information, knowledge, and sometimes wisdom in a hierarchical arrangement has been part of the language of information science for many years. Although it is uncertain when and by whom those relationships were first presented, the ubiquity of the notion of a hierarchy is embedded in the use of the acronym DIKW as a shorthand representation for the data-to-information-to-knowledge-to-wisdom transformation.Many authors think that the idea of the DIKW relationship originated from two lines in the poem "Choruses", by T. S. Eliot, that appeared in the pageant play The Rock, in 1934: === Knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom === In 1927, Clarence W. Barron addressed his employees at Dow Jones & Company on the hierarchy: "Knowledge, Intelligence and Wisdom". === Data, information, knowledge === In 1955, English-American economist and educator Kenneth Boulding presented a variation on the hierarchy consisting of "signals, messages, information, and knowledge". However, "[t]he first author to distinguish among data, information, and knowledge and to also employ the term 'knowledge management' may have been American educator Nicholas L. Henry", in a 1974 journal article. === Data, information, knowledge, wisdom === Other early versions (prior to 1982) of the hierarchy that refer to a data tier include those of Chinese-American geographer Yi-Fu Tuan and sociologist-historian Daniel Bell.. In 1980, Irish-born engineer Mike Cooley invoked the same hierarchy in his critique of automation and computerization, in his book Architect or Bee?: The Human / Technology Relationship. Thereafter, in 1987, Czechoslovakia-born educator Milan Zeleny mapped the components of the hierarchy to knowledge forms: know-nothing, know-what, know-how, and know-why. Zeleny "has frequently been credited with proposing the [representation of DIKW as a pyramid ]... although he actually made no reference to any such graphical model." The hierarchy appears again in a 1988 address to the International Society for General Systems Research, by American organizational theorist Russell Ackoff, published in 1989. Subsequent authors and textbooks cite Ackoff's as the "original articulation" of the hierarchy or otherwise credit Ackoff with its proposal. Ackoff's version of the model includes an understanding tier (as Adler had, before him), interposed between knowledge and wisdom. Although Ackoff did not present the hierarchy graphically, he has also been credited with its representation as a pyramid. In 1989, Bell Labs veteran Robert W. Lucky wrote about the four-tier "information hierarchy" in the form of a pyramid in his book Silicon Dreams. In the same year as Ackoff presented his a
Distributed transaction
A distributed transaction operates within a distributed environment, typically involving multiple nodes across a network depending on the location of the data. A key aspect of distributed transactions is atomicity, which ensures that the transaction is completed in its entirety or not executed at all. It's essential to note that distributed transactions are not limited to databases. The Open Group, a vendor consortium, proposed the X/Open Distributed Transaction Processing Model (X/Open XA), which became a de facto standard for the behavior of transaction model components. Databases are common transactional resources and, often, transactions span a couple of such databases. In this case, a distributed transaction can be seen as a database transaction that must be synchronized (or provide ACID properties) among multiple participating databases which are distributed among different physical locations. The isolation property (the I of ACID) poses a special challenge for multi database transactions, since the (global) serializability property could be violated, even if each database provides it (see also global serializability). In practice most commercial database systems use strong strict two-phase locking (SS2PL) for concurrency control, which ensures global serializability, if all the participating databases employ it. A common algorithm for ensuring correct completion of a distributed transaction is the two-phase commit (2PC). This algorithm is usually applied for updates able to commit in a short period of time, ranging from couple of milliseconds to couple of minutes. There are also long-lived distributed transactions, for example a transaction to book a trip, which consists of booking a flight, a rental car and a hotel. Since booking the flight might take up to a day to get a confirmation, two-phase commit is not applicable here, it will lock the resources for this long. In this case more sophisticated techniques that involve multiple undo levels are used. The way you can undo the hotel booking by calling a desk and cancelling the reservation, a system can be designed to undo certain operations (unless they are irreversibly finished). In practice, long-lived distributed transactions are implemented in systems based on web services. Usually these transactions utilize principles of compensating transactions, Optimism and Isolation Without Locking. The X/Open standard does not cover long-lived distributed transactions. Several technologies, including Jakarta Enterprise Beans and Microsoft Transaction Server fully support distributed transaction standards. == Synchronization == In event-driven architectures, distributed transactions can be synchronized through using request–response paradigm and it can be implemented in two ways: Creating two separate queues: one for requests and the other for replies. The event producer must wait until it receives the response. Creating one dedicated ephemeral queue for each request.
Umple
Umple is a language for both object-oriented programming and modelling with class diagrams and state diagrams. The name Umple is a portmanteau of "UML", "ample" and "Simple", indicating that it is designed to provide ample features to extend programming languages with UML capabilities. == History and philosophy == The design of Umple started in 2008 at the University of Ottawa. Umple was open-sourced and its development was moved to Google Code in early 2011 and to GitHub in 2015. Umple was developed, in part, to address certain problems observed in the modelling community. Most specifically, it was designed to bring modelling and programming into alignment, It was intended to help overcome inhibitions against modelling common in the programmer community. It was also intended to reduce some of the difficulties of model-driven development that arise from the need to use large, expensive or incomplete tools. One design objective is to enable programmers to model in a way they see as natural, by adding modelling constructs to programming languages. == Features and capabilities == Umple can be used to represent in a textual manner many UML modelling entities found in class diagrams and state diagrams. Umple can generate code for these in various programming languages. Currently Umple fully supports Java, C++ and PHP as target programming languages and has functional, but somewhat incomplete support for Ruby. Umple also incorporates various features not related to UML, such as the singleton pattern, keys, immutability, mixins and aspect-oriented code injection. The class diagram notations Umple supports includes classes, interfaces, attributes, associations, generalizations and operations. The code Umple generates for attributes include code in the constructor, 'get' methods and 'set' methods. The generated code differs considerably depending on whether the attribute has properties such as immutability, has a default value, or is part of a key. Umple generates many methods for manipulating, querying and navigating associations. It supports all combinations of UML multiplicity and enforces referential integrity. Umple supports the vast majority of UML state machine notation, including arbitrarily deep nested states, concurrent regions, actions on entry, exit and transition, plus long-lasting activities while in a state. A state machine is treated as an enumerated attribute where the value is controlled by events. Events encoded in the state machine can be methods written by the user, or else generated by the Umple compiler. Events are triggered by calling the method. An event can trigger transitions (subject to guards) in several different state machines. Since a program can be entirely written around one or more state machines, Umple enables automata-based programming. The bodies of methods are written in one of the target programming languages. The same is true for other imperative code such as state machine actions and guards, and code to be injected in an aspect-oriented manner. Such code can be injected before many of the methods in the code Umple generates, for example before or after setting or getting attributes and associations. The Umple notation for UML constructs can be embedded in any of its supported target programming languages. When this is done, Umple can be seen as a pre-processor: The Umple compiler expands the UML constructs into code of the target language. Code in a target language can be passed to the Umple compiler directly; if no Umple-specific notation is found, then the target-language code is emitted unchanged by the Umple compiler. Umple, combined with one of its target languages for imperative code, can be seen and used as a complete programming language. Umple plus Java can therefore be seen as an extension of Java. Alternatively, if imperative code and Umple-specific concepts are left out, Umple can be seen as a way of expressing a large subset of UML in a purely textual manner. Code in one of the supported programming languages can be added in the same manner as UML envisions adding action language code. == License == Umple is licensed under an MIT-style license. == Examples == Here is the classic Hello world program written in Umple (extending Java): This example looks just like Java, because Umple extends other programming languages. With the program saved in a file named HelloWorld.ump, it can be compiled from the command line: $ java -jar umple.jar HelloWorld.ump To run it: $ java HelloWorld The following is a fully executable example showing embedded Java methods and declaration of an association. The following example describes a state machine called status, with states Open, Closing, Closed, Opening and HalfOpen, and with various events that cause transitions from one state to another. class GarageDoor { status { Open { buttonOrObstacle -> Closing; } Closing { buttonOrObstacle -> Opening; reachBottom -> Closed; } Closed { buttonOrObstacle -> Opening; } Opening { buttonOrObstacle -> HalfOpen; reachTop -> Open; } HalfOpen { buttonOrObstacle -> Opening; } } } == Umple use in practice == The first version of the Umple compiler was written in Java, Antlr and Jet (Java Emitter Templates), but in a bootstrapping process, the Java code was converted to Umple following a technique called Umplification. The Antlr and Jet were also later converted to native Umple. Umple is therefore now written entirely in itself, in other words it is self-hosted and serves as its own largest test case. Umple and UmpleOnline have been used in the classroom by several instructors to teach UML and modelling. In one study it was found to help speed up the process of teaching UML, and was also found to improve the grades of students. == Tools == Umple is available as a Jar file so it can be run from the command line, and as an Eclipse plugin. There is also an online tool for Umple called UmpleOnline , which allows a developer to create an Umple system by drawing a UML class diagram, editing Umple code or both. Umple models created with UmpleOnline are stored in the cloud. Currently UmpleOnline only supports Umple programs consisting of a single input file. In addition to code, Umple's tools can generate a variety of other types of output, including user interfaces based on the Umple model.
Lion algorithm
Lion algorithm (LA) is one among the bio-inspired (or) nature-inspired optimization algorithms (or) that are mainly based on meta-heuristic principles. It was first introduced by B. R. Rajakumar in 2012 in the name, Lion’s Algorithm. It was further extended in 2014 to solve the system identification problem. This version was referred as LA, which has been applied by many researchers for their optimization problems. == Inspiration from lion’s social behaviour == Lions form a social system called a "pride", which consists of 1–3 pair of lions. A pride of lions shares a common area known as territory in which a dominant lion is called as territorial lion. The territorial lion safeguards its territory from outside attackers, especially nomadic lions. This process is called territorial defense. It protects the cubs till they become sexually matured. The maturity period is about 2–4 years. The pride undergoes survival fights to protect its territory and the cubs from nomadic lions. Upon getting defeated by the nomadic lions, the dominating nomadic lion takes the role of territorial lion by killing or driving out the cubs of the pride. The lioness of the pride give birth to cubs though the new territorial lion. When the cubs of the pride mature and considered to be stronger than the territorial lion, they take over the pride. This process is called territorial take-over. If territorial take-over happens, either the old territorial lion, which is considered to be laggard, is driven out or it leaves the pride. The stronger lions and lioness form the new pride and give birth to their own cubs == Terminology == In the LA, the terms that are associated with lion’s social system are mapped to the terminology of optimization problems. Few of such notable terms are related here. Lion: A potential solution to be generated or determined as optimal (or) near-optimal solution of the problem. The lion can be a territorial lion and lioness, cubs and nomadic lions that represent the solution based on the processing steps of the LA. Territorial lion: The strongest solution of the pride that tends to meet the objective function. Nomadic lion: A random solution, sometimes termed as nomad, to facilitate the exploration principle Laggard lion: Poor solutions that are failed in the survival fight. Pride: A pool of potential solutions i.e. a lion, lioness and their cubs, that are potential solutions of the search problem. Fertility evaluation: A process of evaluating whether the territorial lion and lioness are able to provide potential solutions in the future generations i.e. It ensures that the lion or lioness converge at every generation. Survival fight: It is a greedy selection process, which is often carried out between the pride and nomadic lion. == Algorithm == The steps involved in LA are given below: Pride Generation: Generate X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} , X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} and X 1 n o m a d {\displaystyle X_{1}^{nomad}} Determine f ( X m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{male})} , f ( X f e m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{female})} , f ( X 1 n o m a d ) {\displaystyle f(X_{1}^{nomad})} Initialize f r e f {\displaystyle f^{ref}} as f ( X m a l e ) {\displaystyle f(X^{male})} and N g {\displaystyle N_{g}} as 0 Memorize X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} and X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} Apply Fertility evaluation Process Generation of cubpool by mating Gender clustering: Define X c u b m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{male}} and X c u b f e m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{female}} Initialize a g e c u b {\displaystyle age_{cub}} as zero Apply Cub growth function Territorial defense: If X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} (or pride) fails in the survival fight i.e. X 1 n o m a d {\displaystyle X_{1}^{nomad}} defeats the pride, go to step 4, else continue Increase a g e c u b {\displaystyle age_{cub}} by 1 and check whether cub attains maturity i.e., if a g e c u b > a g e m a x {\displaystyle age_{cub}>age_{max}} , go to Step 9, else continue Territorial takeover: If X c u b m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{male}} and X c u b f e m a l e {\displaystyle X_{cub}^{female}} are found to be closer to optimal solution, update X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} and X f e m a l e {\displaystyle X^{female}} Increment N g {\displaystyle N_{g}} by 1 Repeat from Step 5, if termination criterion is not violated, else return X m a l e {\displaystyle X^{male}} as the near-optimal solution == Variants == The LA has been further taken forward to adopt in different problem areas. According to the characteristics of the problem area, significant amendment has been done in the processes and the models used in the LA. Accordingly, diverse variants have been developed by the researchers. They can be broadly grouped as hybrid LAs and non-hybrid LAs. Hybrid LAs are the LAs that are amended by the principle of other meta-heuristics, whereas the Non-hybrid LAs take any scientific amendment inside its operation that are felt to be essential to attend the respective problem area. == Applications == LA is applied in diverse engineering applications that range from network security, text mining, image processing, electrical systems, data mining and many more. Few of the notable applications are discussed here. Networking applications: In WSN, LA is used to solve the cluster head selection problem by determining optimal cluster head. Route discovery problem in both the VANET and MANET are also addressed by the LA in the literature. It is also used to detect attacks in advanced networking scenarios such as Software-Defined Networks (SDN) Power Systems: LA has attended generation rescheduling problem in a deregulated environment, optimal localization and sizing of FACTS devices for power quality enhancement and load-frequency controlling problem Cloud computing: LA is used in optimal container-resource allocation problem in cloud environment and cloud security