Generative literature is poetry or fiction that is automatically generated, often using computers. It is a genre of electronic literature, and also related to generative art. John Clark's Latin Verse Machine (1830–1843) is probably the first example of mechanised generative literature, while Christopher Strachey's love letter generator (1952) is the first digital example. With the large language models (LLMs) of the 2020s, generative literature is becoming increasingly common. == Definitions == Hannes Bajohr defines generative literature as literature involving "the automatic production of text according to predetermined parameters, usually following a combinatory, sometimes aleatory logic, and it emphasizes the production rather than the reception of the work (unlike, say, hypertext)." In his book Electronic Literature, Scott Rettberg connects generative literature to avant-garde literary movements like Dada, Surrealism, Oulipo and Fluxus. Bajohr argues that conceptual art is also an important reference. == Paradigms of generative literature == Bajohr describes two main paradigms of generative literature: the sequential paradigm, where the text generation is "executed as a sequence of rule-steps" and employs linear algorithms, and the connectionist paradigm, which is based on neural nets. The latter leads to what Bajohr calls a algorithmic empathy: "a non-anthropocentric empathy aimed not at the psychological states of the artists but at understanding the process of the work’s material production." == Poetry generation == The first examples of automated generative literature are poetry: John Clark's mechanical Latin Verse Machine (1830–1843) produced lines of hexameter verse in Latin, and Christopher Strachey's love letter generator (1952), programmed on the Manchester Mark 1 computer, generated short, satirical love letters. Examples of generative poetry using artificial neural networks include David Jhave Johnston's ReRites. == Narrative generation == Story generators have often followed specific narratological theories of how stories are constructed. An early example is Grimes' Fairy Tales, the "first to take a grammar-based approach and the first to operationalize Propp's famous model." Mike Sharples and Rafael Peréz y Peréz's book Story Machines gives a detailed history of story generation. Storyland by Nanette Wylde is an example of generative narrative. Jonathan Baillehache compares Storyland to Surrealist writing. Baillehache states, "When compared to earlier uses of chance operation in literature, a piece like this one resembles some of the automatic writings produced by André Breton and Philippe Soupault in their collective work The Magnetic Fields. . . The difference between Nanette Wylde’s Storyland and Breton and Soupault’s Magnetic Fields is that the former is produced according to a computational algorithm involving randomizers and user interaction, and the latter by two free-wheeling human subjects."
SQLBuddy
SQL Buddy is an open-source web-based application primarily coded in PHP, that allows users to control both MySQL and SQLite database through a web browser. The project was well regarded for its easy installation process and the friendly user interface it offered. The application was further praised for its cross-platform compatibility, meaning users could manage their databases on various operating systems, including Linux, Windows, and macOS. The development of SQL Buddy has stopped, with version 1.3.3 being the final release on January 18, 2011. No further releases are expected.
Jiliang Tang
Jiliang Tang is a Chinese-born computer scientist and a University Foundation Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at Michigan State University, where he is the director of the Data Science and Engineering (DSE) Lab. His research expertise is in data mining and machine learning. == Education and career == He received his BEng in software engineering (2008) and MSc in computer science (2010) from the Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China. His PhD is from Arizona State University (2015), under the direction of Huan Liu. After gaining his PhD, he worked as a research scientist at Yahoo Labs (2015–16) before joining Michigan State University as an assistant professor (2016). His research has mostly been published jointly with Huan Liu. It has received over thirteen thousand citations documented by Google Scholar, and has received coverage in the media. == Awards == He has received the 2020 ACM SIGKDD Rising Star Award that "aims to celebrate the early accomplishments of the SIGKDD communities' brightest new minds", NSF Career Award, and Michigan State University's Distinguished Withrow Research Award. == Selected publications == === Books === Jiliang Tang, Huan Liu. Trust in Social Media, (Synthesis digital library of engineering and computer science; Synthesis lectures on information security, privacy, and trust, # 13) Morgan & Claypool, 2015 ISBN 9781627054058 === Peer reviewed journal articles === Shu K, Sliva A, Wang S, Tang J, Liu H. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter. 2017 Sep 1;19(1):22-36. [1] Tang J, Alelyani S, Liu H. Feature selection for classification: A review. Data classification: Algorithms and applications. 2014:37. [2] Li J, Cheng K, Wang S, Morstatter F, Trevino RP, Tang J, Liu H. Feature selection: A data perspective. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 2017 Dec 6;50(6):1-45. [3] Chang S, Han W, Tang J, Qi GJ, Aggarwal CC, Huang TS. Heterogeneous network embedding via deep architectures. InProceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining 2015 Aug 10 (pp. 119–128) Gao H, Tang J, Hu X, Liu H. Exploring temporal effects for location recommendation on location-based social networks. InProceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Recommender systems 2013 Oct 12 (pp. 93–100). Hu X, Tang J, Gao H, Liu H. Unsupervised sentiment analysis with emotional signals. InProceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web 2013 May 13 (pp. 607–618).
HOCR
hOCR is an open standard of data representation for formatted text obtained from optical character recognition (OCR). The definition encodes text, style, layout information, recognition confidence metrics and other information using Extensible Markup Language (XML) in the form of Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) or XHTML. == Software == The following OCR software can output the recognition result as hOCR file: OCRopus Tesseract Cuneiform ghostscript HebOCR gcv2hocr gImageReader == Example == The following example is an extract of an hOCR file: The recognized text is stored in normal text nodes of the HTML file. The distribution into separate lines and words is here given by the surrounding span tags. Moreover, the usual HTML entities are used, for example the p tag for a paragraph. Additional information is given in the properties such as: different layout elements such as "ocr_par", "ocr_line", "ocrx_word" geometric information for each element with a bounding box "bbox" language information "lang" some confidence values "x_wconf" == bbox == === General === The Layout of the Bounding Box Object or bbox Object is Grammar. property-name = "bbox" property-value = uint uint uint uint ==== Example ==== bbox 0 0 100 200 The bbox - short for "bounding box" - of an element is a rectangular box around this element, which is defined by the upper-left corner (x0, y0) and the lower-right corner (x1, y1). the values are with reference to the top-left corner of the document image and measured in pixels the order of the values are x0 y0 x1 y1 = "left top right bottom" ===== Usage ===== Use x_bboxes below for character bounding boxes. Do not use bbox unless the bounding box of the layout component is, in fact, rectangular, some non-rectangular layout components may have rectangular bounding boxes if the non-rectangularity is caused by floating elements around which text flows. The bounding box bbox of this line is shown in blue and it is span by the upper-left corner (10, 20) and the lower-right corner (160, 30). All coordinates are measured with reference to the top-left corner of the document image which border is drawn in black. == Searchable PDF files == The hOCR format is most commonly used in order to make searchable PDF files or as an extracted metadata of the PDF file. In order to create searchable PDF files we can use a scanned document image and a .hocr file of the particular image. We can use the following open source tools in order to achieve that. === hocr-tools === Source: hocr-tools is an open source library written in Python. It has a command-line utility attached in the scripts called hocr-pdf that enables us to convert standard hocr files to a searchable PDF file. It is also worth noting that the version for dealing with hocr files in RTL or non-Latin scripts like Arabic, we need to use the GitHub repository at the moment. hocr-pdf We can use the hocr-pdf utility using the following basic syntax. hocr-pdf—savefile final.pdf folder_images_and_hocr The folder_images_and_hocr must contain the respective .jpg and .hocr format files with their file extensions changed. ==== Known issues ==== Some of the known issues of hocr-pdf script in PyPI installation are the following. Not up to date with GitHub repository. hocr-pdf is broken on line 134 due to decodebytes() depreciated after Python 3.1 ==== Known fixes ==== Compile hocr-tools using latest GitHub repository. === hocr2pdf === hocr2pdf is another library that supports the conversion of hocr files. It is written in C++ and is cross-compatible with other libraries. It also has support for UTF-8 languages but that may require some additional debugging and browsing through some google conversation records to achieve that. According to Ubuntu Manpages,ExactImage is a fast C++ image processing library. Unlike many other library frameworks it allows operation in several color spaces and bit depths natively, resulting in low memory and computational requirements. hocr2pdf creates well layouted, searchable PDF files from hOCR (annotated HTML) input obtained from an OCR system. == hOCR to PDF attempts == In addition to the following discussed and stable libraries there have been many contributions to the hOCR format over the years with support from many of the early adopters of this format. You can get access to inlaying text on an Image with hOCR and converting that in a PDF file using Python 2 with this 12-year-old script as of 2021. This script can also be updated and made functional by converting that Python 2 Source code to Python 3 Supported Context. - HOCRConverter by jbrinley (Documentation) === HOCRConverter === The HOCRConverter is a script written in Python 2.x that can used in order to convert a hOCR file with a specified image file in order to convert it to a searchable PDF file. You can see the documentation using the link above. ==== Known issues ==== Has not been tested. Does not natively support Python 3.x
Top 10 AI Subtitle Generators Compared (2026)
Curious about the best AI subtitle generator? An AI subtitle generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI subtitle generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.
Render layers
When creating computer-generated imagery, final scenes appearing in movies and television productions are usually produced by rendering more than one "layer" or "pass," which are multiple images designed to be put together through digital compositing to form a completed frame. Rendering in passes is based on a traditions in motion control photography which predate CGI. As an example, for a visual effects shot, a camera could be programmed to move past a physical model of a spaceship in one pass to film the fully lit beauty pass of the ship, and then to repeat exactly the same camera move passing the ship again to photograph additional elements such as the illuminated windows in the ship or its thrusters. Once all of the passes were filmed, they could then be optically printed together to form a completed shot. The terms render layers and render passes are sometimes used interchangeably. However, rendering in layers refers specifically to separating different objects into separate images, such as a layer each for foreground characters, sets, distant landscape, and sky. On the other hand, rendering in passes refers to separating out different aspects of the scene, such as shadows, highlights, or reflections, into separate images.
Tf–idf
In information retrieval, tf–idf (term frequency–inverse document frequency, TFIDF, TFIDF, TF–IDF, or Tf–idf) is a measure of importance of a word to a document in a collection or corpus, adjusted for the fact that some words appear more frequently in general. Like the bag-of-words model, it models a document as a multiset of words, without word order. It is a refinement over the simple bag-of-words model, by allowing the weight of words to depend on the rest of the corpus. It was often used as a weighting factor in searches of information retrieval, text mining, and user modeling. A survey conducted in 2015 showed that 83% of text-based recommender systems in digital libraries used tf–idf. Variations of the tf–idf weighting scheme were often used by search engines as a central tool in scoring and ranking a document's relevance given a user query. One of the simplest ranking functions is computed by summing the tf–idf for each query term; many more sophisticated ranking functions are variants of this simple model. == Motivations == Karen Spärck Jones (1972) conceived a statistical interpretation of term-specificity called Inverse Document Frequency (idf), which became a cornerstone of term weighting: The specificity of a term can be quantified as an inverse function of the number of documents in which it occurs.For example, the df (document frequency) and idf for some words in Shakespeare's 37 plays might be represented as follows: We see that "Romeo", "Falstaff", and "salad" appears in very few plays, so seeing these words, one could get a good idea as to which play it might be. In contrast, "good" and "sweet" appears in every play and are completely uninformative as to which play it is. == Definition == The tf–idf is the product of two statistics, term frequency and inverse document frequency. There are various ways for determining the exact values of both statistics. A formula that aims to define the importance of a keyword or phrase within a document or a web page. === Term frequency === Term frequency, tf(t,d), is the relative frequency of term t within document d, t f ( t , d ) = f t , d ∑ t ′ ∈ d f t ′ , d {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)={\frac {f_{t,d}}{\sum _{t'\in d}{f_{t',d}}}}} , where ft,d is the raw count of a term in a document, i.e., the number of times that term t occurs in document d. Note the denominator is simply the total number of terms in document d (counting each occurrence of the same term separately). There are various other ways to define term frequency: the raw count itself: tf(t,d) = ft,d Boolean "frequencies": tf(t,d) = 1 if t occurs in d and 0 otherwise; logarithmically scaled frequency: tf(t,d) = log (1 + ft,d); augmented frequency, to prevent a bias towards longer documents, e.g. raw frequency divided by the raw frequency of the most frequently occurring term in the document: t f ( t , d ) = 0.5 + 0.5 ⋅ f t , d max { f t ′ , d : t ′ ∈ d } {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)=0.5+0.5\cdot {\frac {f_{t,d}}{\max\{f_{t',d}:t'\in d\}}}} === Inverse document frequency === The inverse document frequency is a measure of how much information the word provides, i.e., how common or rare it is across all documents. It is the logarithmically scaled inverse fraction of the documents that contain the word (obtained by dividing the total number of documents by the number of documents containing the term, and then taking the logarithm of that quotient): i d f ( t , D ) = log N n t {\displaystyle \mathrm {idf} (t,D)=\log {\frac {N}{n_{t}}}} with D {\displaystyle D} : is the set of all documents in the corpus N = | D | {\displaystyle N={|D|}} : total number of documents in the corpus n t = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle n_{t}=|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} : number of documents where the term t {\displaystyle t} appears (i.e., t f ( t , d ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)\neq 0} ). If the term is not in the corpus, this will lead to a division-by-zero. It is therefore common to adjust the numerator to 1 + N {\displaystyle 1+N} and the denominator to 1 + | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle 1+|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} . === Term frequency–inverse document frequency === Then tf–idf is calculated as t f i d f ( t , d , D ) = t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t , D ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {tfidf} (t,d,D)=\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t,D)} A high weight in tf–idf is reached by a high term frequency (in the given document) and a low document frequency of the term in the whole collection of documents; the weights hence tend to filter out common terms. Since the ratio inside the idf's log function is always greater than or equal to 1, the value of idf (and tf–idf) is greater than or equal to 0. As a term appears in more documents, the ratio inside the logarithm approaches 1, bringing the idf and tf–idf closer to 0. == Justification of idf == Idf was introduced as "term specificity" by Karen Spärck Jones in a 1972 paper. Although it has worked well as a heuristic, its theoretical foundations have been troublesome for at least three decades afterward, with many researchers trying to find information theoretic justifications for it. Spärck Jones's own explanation did not propose much theory, aside from a connection to Zipf's law. Attempts have been made to put idf on a probabilistic footing, by estimating the probability that a given document d contains a term t as the relative document frequency, P ( t | D ) = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | N , {\displaystyle P(t|D)={\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{N}},} so that we can define idf as i d f = − log P ( t | D ) = log 1 P ( t | D ) = log N | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mathrm {idf} &=-\log P(t|D)\\&=\log {\frac {1}{P(t|D)}}\\&=\log {\frac {N}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}\end{aligned}}} Namely, the inverse document frequency is the logarithm of "inverse" relative document frequency. This probabilistic interpretation in turn takes the same form as that of self-information. However, applying such information-theoretic notions to problems in information retrieval leads to problems when trying to define the appropriate event spaces for the required probability distributions: not only documents need to be taken into account, but also queries and terms. == Link with information theory == Both term frequency and inverse document frequency can be formulated in terms of information theory; it helps to understand why their product has a meaning in terms of joint informational content of a document. A characteristic assumption about the distribution p ( d , t ) {\displaystyle p(d,t)} is that: p ( d | t ) = 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle p(d|t)={\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}} This assumption and its implications, according to Aizawa: "represent the heuristic that tf–idf employs." The conditional entropy of a "randomly chosen" document in the corpus D {\displaystyle D} , conditional to the fact it contains a specific term t {\displaystyle t} (and assuming that all documents have equal probability to be chosen) is: H ( D | T = t ) = − ∑ d p d | t log p d | t = − log 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | = log | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | | D | + log | D | = − i d f ( t ) + log | D | {\displaystyle H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}}=t)=-\sum _{d}p_{d|t}\log p_{d|t}=-\log {\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}=\log {\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{|D|}}+\log |D|=-\mathrm {idf} (t)+\log |D|} In terms of notation, D {\displaystyle {\cal {D}}} and T {\displaystyle {\cal {T}}} are "random variables" corresponding to respectively draw a document or a term. The mutual information can be expressed as M ( T ; D ) = H ( D ) − H ( D | T ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ ( H ( D ) − H ( D | W = t ) ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ i d f ( t ) {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}})=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot (H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|W=t))=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)} The last step is to expand p t {\displaystyle p_{t}} , the unconditional probability to draw a term, with respect to the (random) choice of a document, to obtain: M ( T ; D ) = ∑ t , d p t | d ⋅ p d ⋅ i d f ( t ) = ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ 1 | D | ⋅ i d f ( t ) = 1 | D | ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t ) . {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=\sum _{t,d}p_{t|d}\cdot p_{d}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)=\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot {\frac {1}{|D|}}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)={\frac {1}{|D|}}\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t).} This expression shows that summing the Tf–idf of all possible terms and documents recovers the mutual information between documents and term taking into account all the specificities of their joint distribution. Each Tf–idf hence carries the "bit of information" attached to a term x document pair. == Link with statistical theory == Tf–idf is closely related to the negative logarithmically transformed p-value from a one-tailed formulation of Fisher's exact test when the underlying corpus documents satisfy certain idealized assumptions. More recently, tf–idf variants were shown to arise as components in the test st