Patch management (or patch management policy or patch policy or patch management process) is concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, testing and installation of patches to systems. Proper patch management can be a net productivity boost for an organization. Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them. Problems can arise during patch management, including buggy patches that either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Patch management tools help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. == Description == Patch management is defined as a sub-practice of various disciplines including vulnerability management (part of security management), lifecycle management (with further possible sub-classification into application lifecycle management and release management), change management, and systems management. The practice is broadly concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, and installation of patches to systems. Some definitions of patch management are as a software-level practice, while others are as a systems-level process: software, drivers, and firmware. == Cost–benefit analysis == While reserving time for patching takes up enterprise resources, there are balancing factors which can make proper patch management into a net productivity boost for an organization. Up-to-date systems often perform more efficiently, less costly, with less errors, less security risks, and better user workflow. Additionally, compliance with changing local and federal regulations are more likely to be satisfied. Patching security vulnerabilities has been one among many competing priorities for organizations, leading to longer periods before patching for some organizations. Equifax was too slow to implement its 2015 patch management plan to be able to mitigate or prevent the 2017 Equifax data breach, leading to scrutiny from regulators. == Relation to security management == Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them; therefore, patch management can be considered a sub-discipline of vulnerability management. Every patchable device in a system presents an attack surface that must be secured. === Time plan === Automatic updates are where the patch is applied automatically with little to know actions or planning required. This approach is recommended for many individuals and organizations. Some organizations also have to prioritize which patches to prioritize given limited resources. Patch Tuesday is the most common process when major companies like Microsoft and Adobe release patches on a known date so that companies can plan resources around implementing the patches more quickly. Linux is open-sourced and patches can be released at any time, leading some to rely on mailing lists or other ways to be alerted to updates. === Inventory === Taking an inventory of software and hardware, including versions can make it easier to correlate with bugs or patches as they become known. Taking stock of how much education and support others in an organization need to install their patches can also help for planning how to implement the patch or design systems to begin with. Streamlining the process by using tools that can communicate with each other can also help to reduce the time of exposure to known vulnerabilities. == Challenges == There are a multitude of problems that can arise during patch management. A common issue is buggy patches, which either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Another issue is deployment synchronization, since various subsystems may receive instructions to update at different times. Similarly, the difficulty of patch management across many devices may grow at an uncontrollable rate depending on organizational size. One prominent demonstration of the challenges facing proper patch management was the buggy Falcon Sensor patch by CrowdStrike which caused one of the worst IT outages of all time. == Implementations == A patch management tool (alternatively patch manager, patch management system, patch management software, or centralized patch management) help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. Tools can be in-house (applied locally by local administrators), or external, as with managed service providers (applied externally by a provider). === Patch management software === Windows Update for Business, System Center Configuration Manager, and Windows Server Update Services offer control over patch deployment, with features enabling testing, scheduling updates, and setting custom configurations on Windows platforms. === Managed service providers === == Regulatory requirements (United States) == Timely patching of software vulnerabilities is a requirement under multiple regulatory frameworks in the United States. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule requires covered entities to protect electronic protected health information by implementing security measures sufficient to reduce risks to a reasonable and appropriate level, which industry guidance has long interpreted to include timely patch management. A proposed new HIPAA Security Rule would make patch management requirements explicit, mandating that covered entities and business associates deploy security patches and updates within a defined risk-based timeline and maintain written procedures for prioritizing, testing, and applying patches to systems that store, process, or transmit ePHI. The 2025 proposal continues to receive industry pushback as of December 2025. HIPAA was last updated in 2013. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires organizations to protect system components from known vulnerabilities by installing applicable security patches within one month of release for critical patches. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) maintains a Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog that compels U.S. federal agencies to remediate listed vulnerabilities within specified timelines. Agencies are typically required to patch within 3 weeks, though some vulnerabilities must be fixed within 24 hours.
Common data model
A common data model (CDM) can refer to any standardised data model which allows for data and information exchange between different applications and data sources. Common data models aim to standardise logical infrastructure so that related applications can "operate on and share the same data", and can be seen as a way to "organize data from many sources that are in different formats into a standard structure". A common data model has been described as one of the components of a "strong information system". A standardised common data model has also been described as a typical component of a well designed agile application besides a common communication protocol. Providing a single common data model within an organisation is one of the typical tasks of a data warehouse. == Examples of common data models == === Border crossings === X-trans.eu was a cross-border pilot project between the Free State of Bavaria (Germany) and Upper Austria with the aim of developing a faster procedure for the application and approval of cross-border large-capacity transports. The portal was based on a common data model that contained all the information required for approval. === Climate data === The Climate Data Store Common Data Model is a common data model set up by the Copernicus Climate Change Service for harmonising essential climate variables from different sources and data providers. === General information technology === Within service-oriented architecture, S-RAMP is a specification released by HP, IBM, Software AG, TIBCO, and Red Hat which defines a common data model for SOA repositories as well as an interaction protocol to facilitate the use of common tooling and sharing of data. Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) is an open standard for inter-operation of different content management systems over the internet, and provides a common data model for typed files and folders used with version control. The NetCDF software libraries for array-oriented scientific data implements a common data model called the NetCDF Java common data model, which consists of three layers built on top of each other to add successively richer semantics. === Health === Within genomic and medical data, the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) research program established under the U.S. National Institutes of Health has created a common data model for claims and electronic health records which can accommodate data from different sources around the world. PCORnet, which was developed by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, is another common data model for health data including electronic health records and patient claims. The Sentinel Common Data Model was initially started as Mini-Sentinel in 2008. It is used by the Sentinel Initiative of the USA's Food and Drug Administration. The Generalized Data Model was first published in 2019. It was designed to be a stand-alone data model as well as to allow for further transformation into other data models (e.g., OMOP, PCORNet, Sentinel). It has a hierarchical structure to flexibly capture relationships among data elements. The JANUS clinical trial data repository also provides a common data model which is based on the SDTM standard to represent clinical data submitted to regulatory agencies, such as tabulation datasets, patient profiles, listings, etc. === Logistics === SX000i is a specification developed jointly by the Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) and the American Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) to provide information, guidance and instructions to ensure compatibility and the commonality. The associated SX002D specification contains a common data model. === Microsoft Common Data Model === The Microsoft Common Data Model is a collection of many standardised extensible data schemas with entities, attributes, semantic metadata, and relationships, which represent commonly used concepts and activities in various businesses areas. It is maintained by Microsoft and its partners, and is published on GitHub. Microsoft's Common Data Model is used amongst others in Microsoft Dataverse and with various Microsoft Power Platform and Microsoft Dynamics 365 services. === Rail transport === RailTopoModel is a common data model for the railway sector. === Other === There are many more examples of various common data models for different uses published by different sources.
Sentence embedding
In natural language processing, a sentence embedding is a representation of a sentence as a vector of numbers which encodes meaningful semantic information. State of the art embeddings are based on the learned hidden layer representation of dedicated sentence transformer models. BERT pioneered an approach involving the use of a dedicated [CLS] token prepended to the beginning of each sentence inputted into the model; the final hidden state vector of this token encodes information about the sentence and can be fine-tuned for use in sentence classification tasks. In practice however, BERT's sentence embedding with the [CLS] token achieves poor performance, often worse than simply averaging non-contextual word embeddings. SBERT later achieved superior sentence embedding performance by fine tuning BERT's [CLS] token embeddings through the usage of a siamese neural network architecture on the SNLI dataset. Other approaches are loosely based on the idea of distributional semantics applied to sentences. Skip-Thought trains an encoder-decoder structure for the task of neighboring sentences predictions; this has been shown to achieve worse performance than approaches such as InferSent or SBERT. An alternative direction is to aggregate word embeddings, such as those returned by Word2vec, into sentence embeddings. The most straightforward approach is to simply compute the average of word vectors, known as continuous bag-of-words (CBOW). However, more elaborate solutions based on word vector quantization have also been proposed. One such approach is the vector of locally aggregated word embeddings (VLAWE), which demonstrated performance improvements in downstream text classification tasks. == Applications == In recent years, sentence embedding has seen a growing level of interest due to its applications in natural language queryable knowledge bases through the usage of vector indexing for semantic search. LangChain for instance utilizes sentence transformers for purposes of indexing documents. In particular, an indexing is generated by generating embeddings for chunks of documents and storing (document chunk, embedding) tuples. Then given a query in natural language, the embedding for the query can be generated. A top k similarity search algorithm is then used between the query embedding and the document chunk embeddings to retrieve the most relevant document chunks as context information for question answering tasks. This approach is also known formally as retrieval-augmented generation. Though not as predominant as BERTScore, sentence embeddings are commonly used for sentence similarity evaluation which sees common use for the task of optimizing a Large language model's generation parameters is often performed via comparing candidate sentences against reference sentences. By using the cosine-similarity of the sentence embeddings of candidate and reference sentences as the evaluation function, a grid-search algorithm can be utilized to automate hyperparameter optimization. == Evaluation == A way of testing sentence encodings is to apply them on Sentences Involving Compositional Knowledge (SICK) corpus for both entailment (SICK-E) and relatedness (SICK-R). In the best results are obtained using a BiLSTM network trained on the Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI) Corpus. The Pearson correlation coefficient for SICK-R is 0.885 and the result for SICK-E is 86.3. A slight improvement over previous scores is presented in: SICK-R: 0.888 and SICK-E: 87.8 using a concatenation of bidirectional Gated recurrent unit.
Residual neural network
A residual neural network (also referred to as a residual network or ResNet) is a deep learning architecture in which the layers learn residual functions with reference to the layer inputs. It was developed in 2015 for image recognition, and won the ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC) of that year. As a point of terminology, "residual connection" refers to the specific architectural motif of x ↦ f ( x ) + x {\displaystyle x\mapsto f(x)+x} , where f {\displaystyle f} is an arbitrary neural network module. The motif had been used previously (see §History for details). However, the publication of ResNet made it widely popular for feedforward networks, appearing in neural networks that are seemingly unrelated to ResNet. The residual connection stabilizes the training and convergence of deep neural networks with hundreds of layers, and is a common motif in deep neural networks, such as transformer models (e.g., BERT, and GPT models such as ChatGPT), the AlphaGo Zero system, the AlphaStar system, and the AlphaFold system. == Mathematics == === Residual connection === In a multilayer neural network model, consider a (non-residual) subnetwork with a certain number of stacked layers (e.g., 2 or 3). Let H ( x ; α ) {\displaystyle H(x;\alpha )} denote the subnetwork. Suppose H ∗ {\displaystyle H^{}} is the desired optimal output of this subnetwork. Residual learning simply adds x {\displaystyle x} directly to the output, such that the optimal learned output now becomes be H ∗ − x {\displaystyle H^{}-x} , which is interpreted as a "residual" with respect to x {\displaystyle x} . The operation of "adding x {\displaystyle x} " is implemented via a "skip connection" that performs an identity mapping to connect the input of the subnetwork with its output. This connection is referred to as a "residual connection" in later work. Let F ( x ; α ) = H ( x ; a ) + x {\displaystyle F(x;\alpha )=H(x;a)+x} . The function F {\displaystyle F} is often represented by matrix multiplication interlaced with activation functions and normalization operations (e.g., batch normalization or layer normalization). As a whole, one of these subnetworks is referred to as a "residual block". A deep residual network is constructed by simply stacking these blocks. Long short-term memory (LSTM) has a memory mechanism that serves as a residual connection. In an LSTM without a forget gate, an input x t {\displaystyle x_{t}} is processed by a function F {\displaystyle F} and added to a memory cell c t {\displaystyle c_{t}} , resulting in c t + 1 = c t + F ( x t ) {\displaystyle c_{t+1}=c_{t}+F(x_{t})} . An LSTM with a forget gate essentially functions as a highway network. To stabilize the variance of the layers' inputs, it is recommended to replace the residual connections x + f ( x ) {\displaystyle x+f(x)} with x / L + f ( x ) {\displaystyle x/L+f(x)} , where L {\displaystyle L} is the total number of residual layers. === Projection connection === If the function F {\displaystyle F} is of type F : R n → R m {\displaystyle F:\mathbb {R} ^{n}\to \mathbb {R} ^{m}} where n ≠ m {\displaystyle n\neq m} , then F ( x ) + x {\displaystyle F(x)+x} is undefined. To handle this special case, a projection connection is used: y = F ( x ) + P ( x ) {\displaystyle y=F(x)+P(x)} where P {\displaystyle P} is typically a linear projection, defined by P ( x ) = M x {\displaystyle P(x)=Mx} where M {\displaystyle M} is a m × n {\displaystyle m\times n} matrix. The matrix is trained via backpropagation, as is any other parameter of the model. === Signal propagation === The introduction of identity mappings facilitates signal propagation in both forward and backward paths. ==== Forward propagation ==== If the output of the ℓ {\displaystyle \ell } -th residual block is the input to the ( ℓ + 1 ) {\displaystyle (\ell +1)} -th residual block (assuming no activation function between blocks), then the ( ℓ + 1 ) {\displaystyle (\ell +1)} -th input is: x ℓ + 1 = F ( x ℓ ) + x ℓ {\displaystyle x_{\ell +1}=F(x_{\ell })+x_{\ell }} Applying this formulation recursively, e.g.: x ℓ + 2 = F ( x ℓ + 1 ) + x ℓ + 1 = F ( x ℓ + 1 ) + F ( x ℓ ) + x ℓ {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}x_{\ell +2}&=F(x_{\ell +1})+x_{\ell +1}\\&=F(x_{\ell +1})+F(x_{\ell })+x_{\ell }\end{aligned}}} yields the general relationship: x L = x ℓ + ∑ i = ℓ L − 1 F ( x i ) {\displaystyle x_{L}=x_{\ell }+\sum _{i=\ell }^{L-1}F(x_{i})} where L {\textstyle L} is the index of a residual block and ℓ {\textstyle \ell } is the index of some earlier block. This formulation suggests that there is always a signal that is directly sent from a shallower block ℓ {\textstyle \ell } to a deeper block L {\textstyle L} . ==== Backward propagation ==== The residual learning formulation provides the added benefit of mitigating the vanishing gradient problem to some extent. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that the vanishing gradient issue is not the root cause of the degradation problem, which is tackled through the use of normalization. To observe the effect of residual blocks on backpropagation, consider the partial derivative of a loss function E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}} with respect to some residual block input x ℓ {\displaystyle x_{\ell }} . Using the equation above from forward propagation for a later residual block L > ℓ {\displaystyle L>\ell } : ∂ E ∂ x ℓ = ∂ E ∂ x L ∂ x L ∂ x ℓ = ∂ E ∂ x L ( 1 + ∂ ∂ x ℓ ∑ i = ℓ L − 1 F ( x i ) ) = ∂ E ∂ x L + ∂ E ∂ x L ∂ ∂ x ℓ ∑ i = ℓ L − 1 F ( x i ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{\ell }}}&={\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}{\frac {\partial x_{L}}{\partial x_{\ell }}}\\&={\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}\left(1+{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{\ell }}}\sum _{i=\ell }^{L-1}F(x_{i})\right)\\&={\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}+{\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}{\frac {\partial }{\partial x_{\ell }}}\sum _{i=\ell }^{L-1}F(x_{i})\end{aligned}}} This formulation suggests that the gradient computation of a shallower layer, ∂ E ∂ x ℓ {\textstyle {\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{\ell }}}} , always has a later term ∂ E ∂ x L {\textstyle {\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}} that is directly added. Even if the gradients of the F ( x i ) {\displaystyle F(x_{i})} terms are small, the total gradient ∂ E ∂ x ℓ {\textstyle {\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{\ell }}}} resists vanishing due to the added term ∂ E ∂ x L {\textstyle {\frac {\partial {\mathcal {E}}}{\partial x_{L}}}} . == Variants of residual blocks == === Basic block === A basic block is the simplest building block studied in the original ResNet. This block consists of two sequential 3x3 convolutional layers and a residual connection. The input and output dimensions of both layers are equal. === Bottleneck block === A bottleneck block consists of three sequential convolutional layers and a residual connection. The first layer in this block is a 1×1 convolution for dimension reduction (e.g., to 1/2 of the input dimension); the second layer performs a 3×3 convolution; the last layer is another 1×1 convolution for dimension restoration. The models of ResNet-50, ResNet-101, and ResNet-152 are all based on bottleneck blocks. === Pre-activation block === The pre-activation residual block applies activation functions before applying the residual function F {\displaystyle F} . Formally, the computation of a pre-activation residual block can be written as: x ℓ + 1 = F ( ϕ ( x ℓ ) ) + x ℓ {\displaystyle x_{\ell +1}=F(\phi (x_{\ell }))+x_{\ell }} where ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } can be any activation (e.g. ReLU) or normalization (e.g. LayerNorm) operation. This design reduces the number of non-identity mappings between residual blocks, and allows an identity mapping directly from the input to the output. This design was used to train models with 200 to over 1000 layers, and was found to consistently outperform variants where the residual path is not an identity function. The pre-activation ResNet with 200 layers took 3 weeks to train for ImageNet on 8 GPUs in 2016. Since GPT-2, transformer blocks have been mostly implemented as pre-activation blocks. This is often referred to as "pre-normalization" in the literature of transformer models. == Applications == Originally, ResNet was designed for computer vision. All transformer architectures include residual connections. Indeed, very deep transformers cannot be trained without them. The original ResNet paper made no claim on being inspired by biological systems. However, later research has related ResNet to biologically-plausible algorithms. A study published in Science in 2023 disclosed the complete connectome of an insect brain (specifically that of a fruit fly larva). This study discovered "multilayer shortcuts" that resemble the skip connections in artificial neural networks, including ResNets. == History == === Previous work === Residual connections were noticed in neu
Deep Learning Indaba
The Deep Learning Indaba is an annual conference and educational event that aims to strengthen machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) capacity across Africa. Launched in 2017, it brings together students, researchers, industry practitioners, and policymakers from across the African continent. == History == The Deep Learning Indaba began in 2017 at the University of the Witwatersrand with over 300 participants from 23 African countries, offering tutorials in advanced AI topics and featuring notable speakers like Nando de Freitas. In 2018, it expanded to 650 delegates at Stellenbosch University, introducing parallel sessions to encourage collaboration. The 2019 edition in Nairobi, Kenya, reflected further growth, with increasing sponsorship and support from major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. === Deep Learning IndabaX ===
Syman
SYMAN is an artificial intelligence technology that uses data from social media profiles to identify trends in the job market. SYMAN is designed to organize actionable data for products and services including recruiting, human capital management, CRM, and marketing. SYMAN was developed with a $21 million series B financing round secured by Identified, which was led by VantagePoint Capital Partners and Capricorn Investment Group.
Pronunciation assessment
Automatic pronunciation assessment uses computer speech recognition to determine how accurately speech has been pronounced, instead of relying on a human instructor or proctor. It is also called speech verification, pronunciation evaluation, and pronunciation scoring. This technology is used to grade speech quality, for language testing, for computer-aided pronunciation teaching (CAPT) in computer-assisted language learning (CALL), for speaking skill remediation, and for accent reduction. Pronunciation assessment is different from dictation or automatic transcription, because instead of determining unknown speech, it verifies learners' pronunciation of known word(s), often from prior transcription of the same utterance; ideally scoring the intelligibility of the learners' speech. Sometimes pronunciation assessment evaluates the prosody of the learners' speech, such as intonation, pitch, tempo, rhythm, and syllable and word stress, although those are usually not essential for being understood in most languages. Pronunciation assessment is also used in reading tutoring, for example in products from Google, Microsoft, and Amira Learning. Automatic pronunciation assessment can also be used to help diagnose and treat speech disorders such as apraxia. == Intelligibility == Intelligibility refers to how well a learner's utterance is understood by a listener, rather than how much it sounds like a native speaker. This is separate from measures of fluency, such as so-called "Goodness of Pronunciation" (GoP) scores, which estimate how closely an utterance aligns with those of native speakers. Intelligibility is widely regarded as the most important communicative goal in pronunciation teaching and assessment. For example, in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) assessment criteria for "overall phonological control", intelligibility outweighs formally correct pronunciation at all levels. Studies in applied linguistics have shown that accent reduction does not always increase intelligibility because listeners can often comprehend heavily accented speech without difficulty. Pronunciation assessment systems often rely on acoustic methods such as GoP which compare learner speech to reference models to produce phoneme-level scores, which are in turn aggregated to produce word and phrase scores. While these methods are effective for identifying deviations from native speakers' utterances, they do not effectively measure how understandable speech is to human listeners. Intelligibility is influenced by broader linguistic and contextual factors such as stress placement, speech rate, and coarticulation, which are not represented in purely segmental scores. The earliest work on pronunciation assessment avoided measuring genuine listener intelligibility, a shortcoming corrected in 2011 at the Toyohashi University of Technology, and included in the Versant high-stakes English fluency assessment from Pearson and mobile apps from 17zuoye Education & Technology, but still missing in 2023 products from Google Search, Microsoft, Educational Testing Service, Speechace, and ELSA. Assessing authentic listener intelligibility is essential for avoiding inaccuracies from accent bias, especially in high-stakes assessments; from words with multiple correct pronunciations; and from phoneme coding errors in machine-readable pronunciation dictionaries. In 2022, researchers found that some newer speech-to-text systems, based on end-to-end reinforcement learning to map audio signals directly into words, produce word and phrase confidence scores (from 10-25ms audio frame logit aggregation) closely correlated with genuine listener intelligibility. Others have been able to assess intelligibility using Levenshtein or dynamic time warping distance measures from Wav2Vec2 representation of good speech. Further work through 2025 has focused specifically on measuring intelligibility. A 2025 study of 42 pronunciation and speech coaching apps (32 mobile and 10 web) found that none offered intelligibility assessment. Instead, most provided only segmental and accent-focused scoring. About two-thirds of the apps provided some form of specific pronunciation feedback, usually with phonetic transcriptions, but accompanied by visual cues (such as animations of the vocal tract or the lips and tongue from the front) in only about 5% of the apps. Less than a third provided feedback on learner perception of exemplar speech. == Evaluation == Although there are as yet no industry-standard benchmarks for evaluating pronunciation assessment accuracy, researchers occasionally release evaluation speech corpuses for others to use for improving assessment quality. Such evaluation databases often emphasize formally unaccented pronunciation to the exclusion of genuine intelligibility evident from blinded listener transcriptions. As of mid-2025, state of the art approaches for automatically transcribing phonemes typically achieve an error rate of about 10% from known good speech. The International Speech Communication Association (ISCA) 2025 Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education (SLaTE) administered a Speak & Improve Challenge: Spoken Language Assessment and Feedback, introducing benchmarks for evaluating pronunciation assessment and remediation systems across languages, accents, and learner populations. The challenge emphasized cross-lingual generalization and alignment with human intelligibility judgments, for more robust and interpretable assessment systems. Ethical issues in pronunciation assessment are present in both human and automatic methods. Authentic validity, fairness, and mitigating bias in evaluation are all crucial. Diverse speech data should be included in automatic pronunciation assessment models. Combining human judgments, especially blinded transcriptions from a wide diversity of listeners, with automated feedback can improve accuracy and fairness. Second language learners benefit substantially from their use of widely available speech recognition systems for dictation, virtual assistants, and AI chatbots. In such systems, users naturally try to correct their own errors evident in speech recognition results that they notice. Such use improves their grammar and vocabulary development along with their pronunciation skills. The extent to which explicit pronunciation assessment and remediation approaches improve on such self-directed interactions remains an open question. Similarly, automatic dictation results have been shown to reflect intelligibility about as well as human scorers. == Recent developments == During 2021–22, a smartphone-based CAPT system was used to sense articulation through both audible and inaudible signals, providing feedback at the phoneme level. Some promising areas for improvement which were being developed in 2024 include articulatory feature extraction and transfer learning to suppress unnecessary corrections. Other interesting advances under development include "augmented reality" interfaces for mobile devices using optical character recognition to provide pronunciation training on text found in user environments. In 2024, audio multimodal large language models were first described as assessing pronunciation. That work has been carried forward by other researchers in 2025 who report positive results. Subsequently, researchers demonstrated pronunciation scoring by providing a language model with textual descriptions of speech, including the speech-to-text transcript, phoneme sequences, pauses, and phoneme sequence matching; this approach can achieve performance similar to multimodal LLMs that analyze raw audio while avoiding their higher computational cost. In 2025, the Duolingo English Test authors published a description of their pronunciation assessment method, purportedly built to measure intelligibility rather than accent imitation. While achieving a correlation of 0.82 with expert human ratings, very close to inter-rater agreement and outperforming alternative methods, the method is nonetheless based on experts' scores along the six-point CEFR common reference levels scale, instead of actual blinded listener transcriptions. Further promising work in 2025 includes assessment feedback aligning learner speech to synthetic utterances using interpretable features, identifying continuous spans of words for remediation feedback; synthesizing corrected speech matching learners' self-perceived voices, which they prefer and imitate more accurately as corrections; and streaming such interactions. On January 21, 2026, Educational Testing Service's TOEFL iBT high-stakes English language test, required by US university admissions and employers from English as a foreign language applicants more often than all other internet-based tests combined, changed its speaking assessments. While official rubrics claim that the new scoring will be based primarily on intelligibility, the new test's technical description indicates that it ju