Mata v. Avianca, Inc. was a U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York case in which the Court dismissed a personal injury case against the airline Avianca and issued a $5,000 fine to the plaintiffs' lawyers who had submitted fake precedents generated by ChatGPT in their legal briefs. == Background == In February 2022, Roberto Mata filed a personal injury lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Avianca, alleging that he was injured when a metal serving cart struck his knee during an international flight. The plaintiff's lawyers used ChatGPT to generate a legal motion, which contained numerous fake legal cases involving fictitious airlines with fabricated quotations and internal citations. Avianca's lawyers notified the Court that they had been "unable to locate" a few legal cases cited in the legal motion. The Court could not locate the cases either and ordered the plaintiff's lawyers to provide copies of the cited legal cases. Mata's lawyers provided copies of documents purportedly containing all but one of the legal cases, after ChatGPT assured that the cases "indeed exist" and "can be found in reputable legal databases such as LexisNexis and Westlaw." == Opinion == In May 2023, Judge P. Kevin Castel dismissed the personal injury case against Avianca and ordered the plaintiff's attorneys to pay a $5,000 fine. Judge Castel noted numerous inconsistencies in the opinion summaries, describing one of the legal analyses as "gibberish." Judge Castel held that Mata's lawyers had acted with "subjective bad faith" sufficient for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 11. == Impact == In July 2024, the American Bar Association issued its first formal ethics opinion on the responsibilities of lawyers using generative AI (GAI). The 15-page opinion outlines how the Rules of Professional Conduct apply to the use of GAI in the practice of law. Experts caution that lawyers cannot reasonably rely on the accuracy, completeness, or validity of content generated by GAI tools. Due to the continued usage of GAI in the practice of law, Mata has been described as a landmark case by legal professionals, as it is frequently cited by courts in cases where usage of GAI during the course of proceedings leads to the creation and citation of nonexistent caselaw.
BBC Own It
The BBC Own It app was a British information site designed to protect and support children using the Internet. The app was launched in 2017 and retired in 2022, though the website retired in 2024 and has since moved to BBC Teach. As part of the BBC's partnership with Internet Matters, the not-for-profit contributed to content on the BBC Own It website. == History == In 2016, The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge established The Royal Foundation Taskforce on the Prevention of Cyberbullying. Work began in 2017 by the BBC to create an app about cyberbullying and online safety (later titled Own It) in response to a call for action from the Taskforce. In December 2017, the BBC launched Own It. In November 2018, work on the BBC Own It App was announced by Prince William. In September 2019, the BBC Own It App was launched into the AppStore and Google Play. In 2022, the BBC discontinued the app, although the website was still active, however in 2024, the website was discontinued, and now any links to the website now redirect to a BBC Teach page. == Awards == UXUK award for Best Education or Learning Experience (2019) Banff World Media Festival Rockies Award for Children & Youth Interactive Content (2020) CogX Award for Best Innovation In Natural Language Processing (2020)
Open Compute Project
The Open Compute Project (OCP) is an organization that facilitates the sharing of data center product designs and industry best practices among companies. Founded in 2011, OCP has significantly influenced the design and operation of large-scale computing facilities worldwide. As of February 2025, over 400 companies across the world are members of OCP, including Arm, Meta, IBM, Wiwynn, Intel, Nokia, Google, Microsoft, Seagate Technology, Dell, Rackspace, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, NVIDIA, Cisco, Goldman Sachs, Fidelity, Lenovo, Accton Technology Corporation and Alibaba Group. == Structure == The Open Compute Project Foundation is a 501(c)(6) non-profit incorporated in the state of Delaware, United States. OCP has multiple committees, including the board of directors, advisory board and steering committee to govern its operations. As of July 2020, there are seven members who serve on the board of directors which is made up of one individual member and six organizational members. Mark Roenigk (Facebook) is the Foundation's president and chairman. Andy Bechtolsheim is the individual member. In addition to Mark Roenigk who represents Facebook, other organizations on the Open Compute board of directors include Intel (Rebecca Weekly), Microsoft (Kushagra Vaid), Google (Partha Ranganathan), and Rackspace (Jim Hawkins). A list of members can be found on the OCP website. == History == The Open Compute Project began at Facebook (now Meta) in 2009 as an internal project called "Project Freedom". The hardware designs and engineering teams were led by Amir Michael (Manager, Hardware Design) and sponsored by Jonathan Heiliger (VP, Technical Operations) and Frank Frankovsky (Director, Hardware Design and Infrastructure). The three would later open source the designs of Project Freedom and co-found the Open Compute Project. The project was announced at a press event at Facebook's headquarters in Palo Alto on April 7, 2011. == OCP projects == The Open Compute Project Foundation maintains a number of OCP projects, such as: === Server designs === In 2013, two years after the Open Compute Project had started, it was noted that the goal of a more modular server design was "still a long way from live data centers". However, by then some aspects published had been used in Facebook's Prineville data center to improve energy efficiency, as measured by the power usage effectiveness index defined by The Green Grid. Efforts to advance server compute node designs included one for Intel processors and one for AMD processors. Also in 2013, Calxeda contributed a design with ARM architecture processors. Since then, several generations of OCP server designs have been deployed: Wildcat (Intel), Spitfire (AMD), Windmill (Intel E5-2600), Watermark (AMD), Winterfell (Intel E5-2600 v2) and Leopard (Intel E5-2600 v3). === OCP Accelerator Module === OCP Accelerator Module (OAM) is a design specification for hardware architectures that implement artificial intelligence systems that require high module-to-module bandwidth. OAM is used in some of AMD's Instinct accelerator modules. === Rack and power designs === Designs for a mechanical mounting system to replace standard 19-inch racks have been published, with a cabinet the same outside width (600 mm) and depth as existing racks, but with an interior space allowing for wider equipment chassis with a 537 mm width (21 inches). This allows more equipment to fit in the same volume and improves air flow. Compute chassis sizes are defined in multiples of an OpenU or OU, which is 48 mm, slightly taller than the 44 mm rack unit defined for 19-inch racks. As of March 2026, the most current base mechanical definition is the Open Rack V3.1 Specification. At the time the base specification was released, Meta also defined in greater depth the specifications for the rectifiers and power shelf. Specifications for the power monitoring interface (PMI), a communications interface enabling upstream communications between the rectifiers and battery backup unit(BBU) were published by Meta that same year, with Delta Electronics as the main technical contributor to the BBU spec. However, since 2022 the AI boom in the data center has created higher power requirements in order to satisfy the demands of AI accelerators that have been released. As of September 2024, Meta is in the process of updating its Open Rack v3 rectifier, power shelf, battery backup and power management interface specifications to accommodate this increased energy demand. In May 2024, at an Open Compute regional summit, Meta and Rittal outlined their plans for development of their High Power Rack (HPR) ecosystem in conjunction with rack, power and cable partners, increasing power capacity in the rack to 92 kilowatts or more. At the same meeting, Delta Electronics and Advanced Energy reported on their progress in developing new Open Compute standard specifications for power shelf and rectifier designs for HPR applications. Rittal also outlined their collaboration with Meta in designing airflow containment, busbar designs and grounding schemes for the new HPR requirements. === Data storage === Open Vault storage building blocks (also called "Knox") offer high disk densities, with 30 drives in a 2 OU Open Rack chassis designed for easy disk drive replacement. The 3.5 inch disks are stored in two drawers, five across and three deep in each drawer, with connections via serial attached SCSI. There is a "cold storage" variant where idle disks power down to reduce energy consumption. Another design concept was contributed by Hyve Solutions, a division of Synnex, in 2012. At the OCP Summit 2016 Facebook, together with Taiwanese ODM Wistron's spin-off Wiwynn, introduced "Lightning", a flexible NVMe JBOF (just a bunch of flash), based on the existing Open Vault (Knox) design. === Energy efficient data centers === The OCP has published data center designs for energy efficiency. These include power distribution at three-phase 277/480 VAC, which eliminates one transformer stage in typical North American data centers, a single voltage (12.5 VDC) power supply designed to work with 277/480 VAC input, and 48 VDC battery backup. For European (and other 230V countries) datacenters, there is a specification for 230/400 VAC power distribution and its conversion to 12.5 VDC. === Open networking switches === On May 8, 2013, an effort to define an open network switch was announced. The plan was to allow Facebook to load its own operating system software onto its top-of-rack switches. Press reports predicted that more expensive and higher-performance switches would continue to be popular, while less expensive products treated more like a commodity. The first attempt at an open networking switch by Facebook was designed together with Taiwanese ODM Accton using Broadcom Trident II chip and is called "Wedge"; the Linux OS that it runs is called "FBOSS". Later switch contributions include "6-pack" and Wedge-100, based on Broadcom Tomahawk chips. Similar switch hardware designs have been contributed by: Accton Technology Corporation (and its Edgecore Networks subsidiary), Mellanox Technologies, Interface Masters Technologies, Agema Systems. Capable of running Open Network Install Environment (ONIE)-compatible network operating systems such as Cumulus Linux, Switch Light OS by Big Switch Networks, or PICOS by Pica8. A similar project for a custom switch for the Google platform had been rumored, and evolved to use the OpenFlow protocol. === Servers === A sub-project for Mezzanine (NIC) OCP NIC 3.0 specification 1v00 was released in late 2019 establishing three form factors: SFF, TSFF, and LFF. == Litigation == In March, 2015, BladeRoom Group Limited and Bripco (UK) Limited sued Facebook, Emerson Electric Co. and others alleging that Facebook has disclosed BladeRoom and Bripco's trade secrets for prefabricated data centers in the Open Compute Project. Facebook petitioned for the lawsuit to be dismissed, but this was rejected in 2017. A confidential mid-trial settlement was agreed in April 2018.
Personal, Inc.
Personal (also referred to as Personal.com or Personal, Inc.) was a consumer personal data service and identity management system for individuals to aggregate, manage and reuse their own data. It merged with digi.me in August 2017, a business in Europe that has the same business model. The combined company is called digi.me. One of its product lines, a collaborative data management and information security solution for the workplace called TeamData, was spun off as a new company as a result of the merger. == History == Personal was founded in 2009 in Washington, DC by the management team that built The Map Network, a location data and mapping platform that was acquired by Nokia/NAVTEQ in 2006. Personal was the first online consumer-facing company to be named an Ambassador for Privacy by Design for its technical, business and legal commitments to providing users with control over the data they store in Personal's service. Called a “life management platform” by The Economist and a “personal encrypted cloud service” by TIME for its user-centric approach to data, the company has been associated with both the Infomediary model originated in 1999 by John Hagel III and Mark Singer, as well as the vendor relationship management (VRM) model developed by Doc Searls. Personal raised $30m in funding to develop its platform and products from such leading investors as Steve Case's Revolution Ventures, Grotech Ventures, Allen & Company, Ted Leonsis, Neil Ashe, Jonathan Miller, Bill Miller of Legg Mason, Esther Dyson of EDventures, and Eric C. Anderson. The company received recognition for its user agreement, called the Owner Data Agreement, which acted like a reverse license agreement when data was shared between registered parties and emphasized that data ownership resides with the user. Doc Searls wrote in The Intention Economy: When Customers Take Charge that the Owner Data Agreement “had no precedent and modeled a new legal position, both for vendors and for intermediaries.” Personal was early to embrace “small data,” which it defines as “big data for the benefit of individuals.” The term “small data” may have been originally coined by Jeremie Miller of Sing.ly, who mentioned it in a talk at the Web 2.0 Summit in November 2011 and is cited in The Intention Economy. In 2011, Personal was a part of the first group of companies to join the Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium's Startup Circle. A Small Data Meetup group has also formed in New York City, bringing together technology, legal and business experts to exchange ideas about user-centric and user-driven models for internet products and services. Personal has been included in case studies by Ctrl-Shift and Forrester regarding Personal Data Stores and Personal Identity Management. In 2011, Personal received the Innovator Spotlight Award at Privacy Identity Innovation Conference (pii2011) and participated in the Technology Showcase at pii2012. In 2012, TechHive named Personal as one of the top five apps or web services of SXSW. Personal won the 2013 Campus Technology Innovators Award with Lone Star College in July 2013. Personal was included in a list of Executive Travel Magazine's favorite travel apps for 2013 in its May/June issue. In 2013, Personal was also included as part of NYU GovLab's Open Data 500 and was named by J. Walter Thompson as one of 100 things to watch for in 2014. In 2015, the National Law Journal named Company Chief Policy Officer and General Counsel, Joshua P. Galper, as one of their 50 "Cybersecurity & Privacy Trailblazers." == Products and services == === Overview === The Personal Platform was a privacy- and security-by-design platform for individuals to manage and reuse their own data and information. The Fill It app was a 1-click form-filling solution for web and mobile logins, checkouts and forms, and the Data Vault app served as the main cloud-based repository for a user's data. Personal helped individuals take control and benefit from their information while knowing that the information in their Data Vault remained legally theirs and could not be used without their permission. === Data Vault with Cloud Sync === Personal spent two years building the Personal Platform before launching its Data Vault product in beta in November 2011. Following Privacy by Design principles, Personal only enabled users to see or share the sensitive data and all the files they stored in their Data Vault. Such information was encrypted, and could only be decrypted with a user's password. Only users could choose and know their passwords to their vault because Personal did not store user passwords – and therefore could not reset them without deleting a user's sensitive data and all files stored in their vault. All Personal apps and services were linked to a user's private Data Vault. The Data Vault featured automatic synchronization of data and files added on any device logged into Personal. It also featured a “Secure Share” function that created a live, private network, allowing registered users to share access to data and files through an exchange of encrypted keys without the risk of transmitting the data or files through non-secure, direct means. It also allowed users to immediately update data across their own network and revoke access to it when they choose. Fast Company called the Data Vault “a tool that will simplify our lives.” Personal launched its Android app on November 30, 2011. The iOS Data Vault app was released on May 7, 2012. Personal officially launched its application programming interface (APIs) on October 2, 2012 at the Mashery Business of APIs Conference. A review by CNET highlighted the challenges of getting people to trust such a new service with their sensitive data and spending the time required entering enough data to make it useful. === Fill It App and Form Index === When the Data Vault was launched in November 2011, Mashable posed the question: “Never Fill Out a Form Again?” The World Economic Forum in its February 2013 report highlighted the possibility of saving 10 billion hours globally “and improv[ing] the delivery of public and private sector services” through automated form-filling tools, specifically citing Personal's Fill It app. In January 2013, Personal launched Fill It in beta as a web bookmarklet for automatic form-filling. On June 11, 2014, Personal released Fill It as a web extension and announced that it was publishing an index of over 140,000 1-click online forms at www.fillit.com. The company also announced that a mobile version of the product will launch later in the year. According to a story in Tech Cocktail about the launch, Personal's “web extension and mobile app are able to support over 1,200 different types of reusable data, even enabling them to unlock more confidential information so they can complete longer forms, including patient registrations, job applications, event registrations, school admissions, insurance and bank applications, and government forms.” In November 2014, a mobile version of Fill It was launched that could autofill mobile forms using APIs. Personal's form portal ultimately indexed more than 500,000 forms with three components, which, together, allowed data to be captured and reused across any of the forms: (1) a form graph, which mapped individual form fields to the Personal ontology; (2) a semantic layer, which determined how data was required on a form (e.g. one field vs. three fields for a U.S. telephone number); and (3) a correlations graph, which helped individuals match their specific data to a form without looking at the data value (e.g. knowing which phone number is a mobile phone number, which address is a billing address, or that a person uses their middle name as a first name on most forms). === Monetizing personal data === With the initial public offering of Facebook in May 2012, there was media interest in the question of the monetary value of personal data and whether tools and services might emerge to help consumers monetize their own data. Personal was frequently cited as a company that could potentially offer such a service. Articles and pieces focusing on this subject have appeared in The New York Times, AdWeek, the MIT Technology Review, and on CNN and National Public Radio. Company Co-founder and CEO Shane Green was quoted as saying that “the average American consumer would soon be able to realize over $1,000 per year” by granting limited, anonymous access to their data to marketers, but that figure was never supported by Green or the company. === Launch of TeamData === In May 2016, Personal shifted its product focus to TeamData, which focuses on the problem of securing and collaboratively managing data in the workplace. It is now a separate business.
Knuth–Plass line-breaking algorithm
The Knuth–Plass algorithm is a line-breaking algorithm designed for use in Donald Knuth's typesetting program TeX. It integrates the problems of text justification and hyphenation into a single algorithm by using a discrete dynamic programming method to minimize a loss function that attempts to quantify the aesthetic qualities desired in the finished output. The algorithm works by dividing the text into a stream of three kinds of objects: boxes, which are non-resizable chunks of content, glue, which are flexible, resizeable elements, and penalties, which represent places where breaking is undesirable (or, if negative, desirable). The loss function, known as "badness", is defined in terms of the deformation of the glue elements, and any extra penalties incurred through line breaking. Making hyphenation decisions follows naturally from the algorithm, but the choice of possible hyphenation points within words, and optionally their preference weighting, must be performed first, and that information inserted into the text stream in advance. Knuth and Plass' original algorithm does not include page breaking, but may be modified to interface with a pagination algorithm, such as the algorithm designed by Plass in his PhD thesis. Typically, the cost function for this technique should be modified so that it does not count the space left on the final line of a paragraph; this modification allows a paragraph to end in the middle of a line without penalty. The same technique can also be extended to take into account other factors such as the number of lines or costs for hyphenating long words. == Computational complexity == A naive brute-force exhaustive search for the minimum badness by trying every possible combination of breakpoints would take an impractical O ( 2 n ) {\displaystyle O(2^{n})} time. The classic Knuth-Plass dynamic programming approach to solving the minimization problem is a worst-case O ( n 2 ) {\displaystyle O(n^{2})} algorithm but usually runs much faster, in close to linear time. Solving for the Knuth-Plass optimum can be shown to be a special case of the convex least-weight subsequence problem, which can be solved in O ( n ) {\displaystyle O(n)} time. Methods to do this include the SMAWK algorithm. == Simple example of minimum raggedness metric == For the input text AAA BB CC DDDDD with line width 6, a greedy algorithm that puts as many words on a line as possible while preserving order before moving to the next line, would produce: ------ Line width: 6 AAA BB Remaining space: 0 CC Remaining space: 4 DDDDD Remaining space: 1 The sum of squared space left over by this method is 0 2 + 4 2 + 1 2 = 17 {\displaystyle 0^{2}+4^{2}+1^{2}=17} . However, the optimal solution achieves the smaller sum 3 2 + 1 2 + 1 2 = 11 {\displaystyle 3^{2}+1^{2}+1^{2}=11} : ------ Line width: 6 AAA Remaining space: 3 BB CC Remaining space: 1 DDDDD Remaining space: 1 The difference here is that the first line is broken before BB instead of after it, yielding a better right margin and a lower cost 11.
Neuro-symbolic AI
Neuro-symbolic AI is a subfield of artificial intelligence that integrates neural methods (e.g., neural networks and deep learning) with symbolic methods (e.g., formal logic, knowledge representation, and automated reasoning). The goal is to combine the strengths of both approaches, resulting in AI systems that can be trained from raw data and demonstrate robustness against outliers or errors in the base data, while preserving explainability, explicit use of expert knowledge, and explicit cognitive reasoning. As argued by Leslie Valiant and others, the effective construction of rich computational cognitive models demands the combination of symbolic reasoning and efficient machine learning. Gary Marcus argued, "We cannot construct rich cognitive models in an adequate, automated way without the triumvirate of hybrid architecture, rich prior knowledge, and sophisticated techniques for reasoning." Further, "To build a robust, knowledge-driven approach to AI we must have the machinery of symbol manipulation in our toolkit. Too much of useful knowledge is abstract to make do without tools that represent and manipulate abstraction, and to date, the only known machinery that can manipulate such abstract knowledge reliably is the apparatus of symbol manipulation." Angelo Dalli, Henry Kautz, Francesca Rossi, and Bart Selman also argued for such a synthesis. Their arguments attempt to address the two kinds of thinking, as discussed in Daniel Kahneman's book Thinking, Fast and Slow. It describes cognition as encompassing two components: System 1 is fast, reflexive, intuitive, and unconscious. System 2 is slower, step-by-step, and explicit. System 1 is used for pattern recognition. System 2 handles planning, deduction, and deliberative thinking. In this view, deep learning best handles the first kind of cognition, while symbolic reasoning best handles the second kind. Both are necessary for the development of a robust and reliable AI system capable of learning, reasoning, and interacting with humans to accept advice and answer questions. Since the 1990s, dual-process models with explicit references to the two contrasting systems have been the focus of research in both the fields of AI and cognitive science by numerous researchers. In 2025, the adoption of neurosymbolic AI, an approach that integrates neural networks with symbolic reasoning, increased in response to the need to address hallucination issues in large language models. For example, Amazon implemented Neurosymbolic AI in its Vulcan warehouse robots and Rufus shopping assistant to enhance accuracy and decision-making. == Approaches == Approaches for integration are diverse. Henry Kautz's taxonomy of neuro-symbolic architectures follows, along with some examples: Symbolic Neural symbolic is the current approach of many neural models in natural language processing, where words or subword tokens are the ultimate input and output of large language models. Examples include BERT, RoBERTa, and GPT-3. Symbolic[Neural] is exemplified by AlphaGo, where symbolic techniques are used to invoke neural techniques. In this case, the symbolic approach is Monte Carlo tree search and the neural techniques learn how to evaluate game positions. Neural | Symbolic uses a neural architecture to interpret perceptual data as symbols and relationships that are reasoned about symbolically. Neural-Concept Learner is an example. Neural: Symbolic → Neural relies on symbolic reasoning to generate or label training data that is subsequently learned by a deep learning model, e.g., to train a neural model for symbolic computation by using a Macsyma-like symbolic mathematics system to create or label examples. NeuralSymbolic uses a neural net that is generated from symbolic rules. An example is the Neural Theorem Prover, which constructs a neural network from an AND-OR proof tree generated from knowledge base rules and terms. Logic Tensor Networks also fall into this category. Neural[Symbolic] according to Kautz, this approach embeds true symbolic reasoning inside a neural network. These are tightly-coupled neural-symbolic systems, in which the logical inference rules are internal to the neural network. This way, the neural network internally computes the inference from the premises and learns to reason based on logical inference systems. Early work on connectionist modal and temporal logics by Garcez, Lamb, and Gabbay is aligned with this approach. These categories are not exhaustive, as they do not consider multi-agent systems. In 2005, Bader and Hitzler presented a more fine-grained categorization that took into account, e.g., whether the use of symbols included logic and, if so, whether the logic was propositional or first-order logic. The 2005 categorization and Kautz's taxonomy above are compared and contrasted in a 2021 article. Sepp Hochreiter argued that Graph Neural Networks "...are the predominant models of neural-symbolic computing" since "[t]hey describe the properties of molecules, simulate social networks, or predict future states in physical and engineering applications with particle-particle interactions." == Artificial general intelligence == Gary Marcus argues that "...hybrid architectures that combine learning and symbol manipulation are necessary for robust intelligence, but not sufficient", and that there are ...four cognitive prerequisites for building robust artificial intelligence: hybrid architectures that combine large-scale learning with the representational and computational powers of symbol manipulation, large-scale knowledge bases—likely leveraging innate frameworks—that incorporate symbolic knowledge along with other forms of knowledge, reasoning mechanisms capable of leveraging those knowledge bases in tractable ways, and rich cognitive models that work together with those mechanisms and knowledge bases. This echoes earlier calls for hybrid models as early as the 1990s. == History == Garcez and Lamb described research in this area as ongoing, at least since the 1990s. During that period, the terms symbolic and sub-symbolic AI were popular. A series of workshops on neuro-symbolic AI has been held annually since 2005 Neuro-Symbolic Artificial Intelligence. In the early 1990s, an initial set of workshops on this topic were organized. == Research == Key research questions remain, such as: What is the best way to integrate neural and symbolic architectures? How should symbolic structures be represented within neural networks and extracted from them? How should common-sense knowledge be learned and reasoned about? How can abstract knowledge that is hard to encode logically be handled? == Implementations == Implementations of neuro-symbolic approaches include: AllegroGraph: an integrated Knowledge Graph based platform for neuro-symbolic application development. Scallop: a language based on Datalog that supports differentiable logical and relational reasoning. Scallop can be integrated in Python and with a PyTorch learning module. Logic Tensor Networks: encode logical formulas as neural networks and simultaneously learn term encodings, term weights, and formula weights. DeepProbLog: combines neural networks with the probabilistic reasoning of ProbLog. Abductive Learning: integrates machine learning and logical reasoning in a balanced-loop via abductive reasoning, enabling them to work together in a mutually beneficial way. SymbolicAI: a compositional differentiable programming library.
Bisection (software engineering)
Bisection is a method used in software development to identify change sets that result in a specific behavior change. It is mostly employed for finding the patch that introduced a bug. Another application area is finding the patch that indirectly fixed a bug. == Overview == The process of locating the changeset that introduced a specific regression was described as "source change isolation" in 1997 by Brian Ness and Viet Ngo of Cray Research. Regression testing was performed on Cray's compilers in editions comprising one or more changesets. Editions with known regressions could not be validated until developers addressed the problem. Source change isolation narrowed the cause to a single changeset that could then be excluded from editions, unblocking them with respect to this problem, while the author of the change worked on a fix. Ness and Ngo outlined linear search and binary search methods of performing this isolation. Code bisection has the goal of minimizing the effort to find a specific change set. It employs a divide and conquer algorithm that depends on having access to the code history which is usually preserved by revision control in a code repository. == Bisection method == === Code bisection algorithm === Code history has the structure of a directed acyclic graph which can be topologically sorted. This makes it possible to use a divide and conquer search algorithm which: splits up the search space of candidate revisions tests for the behavior in question reduces the search space depending on the test result re-iterates the steps above until a range with at most one bisectable patch candidate remains === Algorithmic complexity === Bisection is in LSPACE having an algorithmic complexity of O ( log N ) {\displaystyle O(\log N)} with N {\displaystyle N} denoting the number of revisions in the search space, and is similar to a binary search. === Desirable repository properties === For code bisection it is desirable that each revision in the search space can be built and tested independently. === Monotonicity === For the bisection algorithm to identify a single changeset which caused the behavior being tested to change, the behavior must change monotonically across the search space. For a Boolean function such as a pass/fail test, this means that it only changes once across all changesets between the start and end of the search space. If there are multiple changesets across the search space where the behavior being tested changes between false and true, then the bisection algorithm will find one of them, but it will not necessarily be the root cause of the change in behavior between the start and the end of the search space. The root cause could be a different changeset, or a combination of two or more changesets across the search space. To help deal with this problem, automated tools allow specific changesets to be ignored during a bisection search. == Automation support == Although the bisection method can be completed manually, one of its main advantages is that it can be easily automated. It can thus fit into existing test automation processes: failures in exhaustive automated regression tests can trigger automated bisection to localize faults. Ness and Ngo focused on its potential in Cray's continuous delivery-style environment in which the automatically isolated bad changeset could be automatically excluded from builds. The revision control systems Fossil, Git and Mercurial have built-in functionality for code bisection. The user can start a bisection session with a specified range of revisions from which the revision control system proposes a revision to test, the user tells the system whether the revision tested as "good" or "bad", and the process repeats until the specific "bad" revision has been identified. Other revision control systems, such as Bazaar or Subversion, support bisection through plugins or external scripts. Phoronix Test Suite can do bisection automatically to find performance regressions.