Netvibes is a French brand of Dassault Systèmes that previously ran a web service offering a dashboard and feed reader. Currently, the company offers business intelligence tools. == History == === 2005–2012 === Founded in 2005 by Tariq Krim, the company provided software for personalized dashboards for real-time monitoring, social analytics, knowledge sharing, and decision support. === 2012–present === On February 9, 2012, Dassault Systèmes announced the acquisition of Netvibes. As of 2024, Netvibes also contains the operations of two other software companies acquired by Dassault Systèmes: Exalead: founded in 2000 by François Bourdoncle, the company provided search platforms and search-based applications for consumer and business users. On June 9, 2010, Dassault Systèmes acquired the company. Proxem: Founded in 2007 by François-Régis Caumartin, the company provided AI-powered semantic processing software and services. On June 23, 2020, Dassault Systèmes acquired Proxem and integrated its technology into the 3DEXPERIENCE® platform to complement its information intelligence applications. Dassault Systèmes announced in April 2025 that Netvibes would retire its standalone web service offering on June 2, 2025. == Activities == Brand monitoring – to track clients, customers and competitors across media sources all in one place, analyze live results with third party reporting tools, and provide media monitoring dashboards for brand clients. E-reputation management – to visualize real-time online conversations and social activity online feeds, and track new trending topics. Product marketing – to create interactive product microsites, with drag-and-drop publishing interface. Community portals – to engage online communities Personalized workspaces – to gather all essential company updates to support specific divisions (e.g. sales, marketing, human resources) and localizations. The software was a multi-lingual Ajax-based start page or web portal. It was organized into tabs, with each tab containing user-defined modules. Built-in Netvibes modules included an RSS/Atom feed reader, local weather forecasts, a calendar supporting iCal, bookmarks, notes, to-do lists, multiple searches, support for POP3, IMAP4 email as well as several webmail providers including Gmail, Yahoo! Mail, Hotmail, and AOL Mail, Box.net web storage, Delicious, Meebo, Flickr photos, podcast support with a built-in audio player, and several others. A page could be personalized further through the use of existing themes or by creating personal theme. Customized tabs, feeds and modules can be shared with others individually or via the Netvibes Ecosystem. For privacy reasons, only modules with publicly available content could be shared.
Vigloo
Vigloo (Korean: 비글루) is a South Korean microdrama, also known as short-form drama, series streaming platform owned by SpoonLabs, with headquarters in Seoul. It provides content produced in South Korea, Japan, and the United States. Vigloo produced the first AI-created short-form drama in South Korea. == History == Vigloo launched in July 2024. After receiving an equity investment of $86 million (₩120 billion) by South Korean video game company Krafton in September 2024, Vigloo expanded to the U.S. In January 2025, Vigloo unveiled its first in-house produced drama, Xs Who Want to Kill: Adultery Investigation Unit. Vigloo had been testing the use of AI in post-production and visual effects, and in October 2025 released two original dramas produced entirely with AI. It adapted its live action Japanese short-form drama Boyfriend Search Project – Kissing 5 Men into the first short-form animation series made with AI technology in South Korea. Of the top free entertainment iOS apps in South Korea, Vigloo ranks Number 3 as of January 2026. == Service == === Content === Vigloo offers both original and licensed content. It partnered with Passionflix to repackage the latter's original series The Secret Life of Amy Bensen into 35 vertical "bite-sized episodes". The most popular genre is romance, such as romantasy. === Business Model === Vigloo is available around the world, providing subtitles in nine languages, including Korean, English, and Japanese. Fifty percent of Vigloo's revenue comes from the U.S. Vigloo operates on a freemium model, where viewers can try several episodes and then can choose to continue by subscription or in-app purchases. As of September 2025, 70% of Vigloo viewers were over 35 years old. === Microdramas === Emerging during the early COVID period in China, microdramas have grown into a 7-billion-dollar market with dozens of dedicated platforms now operating. Although the format first expanded across Asia, short-form scripted content optimized for mobile viewing is increasingly being produced and watched in markets worldwide. == Series == A Vampire in the Alpha's Den Fight for Love Matrimoney Signed, Sealed, Deceived by My Billionaire Mailboy Spring Break Bucket List Stake to the Heart
Sudip Roy (computer scientist)
Sudip Roy is a computer scientist and technology executive. He is the co-founder and chief technology officer of Adaption. He has worked on large-scale machine learning systems at organizations including Google DeepMind and Cohere. == Education == Roy earned a PhD in Computer Science from Cornell University. He holds a B.Tech in Computer Science and Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kharagpur. == Career == Sudip worked at Google Brain (now part of Google DeepMind) on systems research and large-scale data management. During his tenure, he contributed to infrastructure projects including Pathways and TensorFlow Extended, which support training and inference workflows for production machine learning models. He later served as Senior Director of Engineering at Cohere, leading work on inference infrastructure and fine-tuning systems. In late 2025, he co-founded the company Adaption Labs with Sara Hooker. The company focuses on developing AI systems designed for continuous learning and adaptation. Roy’s research spans systems for AI and AI for systems, including work on optimizing system performance and compilers. His publications have appeared in conferences such as MLSys, NeurIPS, SIGMOD, and KDD. He has been a program committee member or reviewer for the conferences SIGMOD, VLDB, ICDE, and MLSys. == Awards == He is the recipient of the MLSys Outstanding Paper Award (2022) and the SIGMOD Best Paper Award (2011). He holds multiple patents in machine learning systems, including methods for learned graph optimizations and neural network-based device placement.
Evaluation of machine translation
Various methods for the evaluation for machine translation have been employed. This article focuses on the evaluation of the output of machine translation, rather than on performance or usability evaluation. == Round-trip translation == A typical way for lay people to assess machine translation quality is to translate from a source language to a target language and back to the source language with the same engine. Though intuitively this may seem like a good method of evaluation, it has been shown that round-trip translation is a "poor predictor of quality". The reason why it is such a poor predictor of quality is reasonably intuitive. A round-trip translation is not testing one system, but two systems: the language pair of the engine for translating into the target language, and the language pair translating back from the target language. Consider the following examples of round-trip translation performed from English to Italian and Portuguese from Somers (2005): In the first example, where the text is translated into Italian then back into English—the English text is significantly garbled, but the Italian is a serviceable translation. In the second example, the text translated back into English is perfect, but the Portuguese translation is meaningless; the program thought "tit" was a reference to a tit (bird), which was intended for a "tat", a word it did not understand. While round-trip translation may be useful to generate a "surplus of fun," the methodology is deficient for serious study of machine translation quality. == Human evaluation == This section covers two of the large scale evaluation studies that have had significant impact on the field—the ALPAC 1966 study and the ARPA study. === Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee (ALPAC) === One of the constituent parts of the ALPAC report was a study comparing different levels of human translation with machine translation output, using human subjects as judges. The human judges were specially trained for the purpose. The evaluation study compared an MT system translating from Russian into English with human translators, on two variables. The variables studied were "intelligibility" and "fidelity". Intelligibility was a measure of how "understandable" the sentence was, and was measured on a scale of 1–9. Fidelity was a measure of how much information the translated sentence retained compared to the original, and was measured on a scale of 0–9. Each point on the scale was associated with a textual description. For example, 3 on the intelligibility scale was described as "Generally unintelligible; it tends to read like nonsense but, with a considerable amount of reflection and study, one can at least hypothesize the idea intended by the sentence". Intelligibility was measured without reference to the original, while fidelity was measured indirectly. The translated sentence was presented, and after reading it and absorbing the content, the original sentence was presented. The judges were asked to rate the original sentence on informativeness. So, the more informative the original sentence, the lower the quality of the translation. The study showed that the variables were highly correlated when the human judgment was averaged per sentence. The variation among raters was small, but the researchers recommended that at the very least, three or four raters should be used. The evaluation methodology managed to separate translations by humans from translations by machines with ease. The study concluded that, "highly reliable assessments can be made of the quality of human and machine translations". === Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) === As part of the Human Language Technologies Program, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) created a methodology to evaluate machine translation systems, and continues to perform evaluations based on this methodology. The evaluation programme was instigated in 1991, and continues to this day. Details of the programme can be found in White et al. (1994) and White (1995). The evaluation programme involved testing several systems based on different theoretical approaches; statistical, rule-based and human-assisted. A number of methods for the evaluation of the output from these systems were tested in 1992 and the most recent suitable methods were selected for inclusion in the programmes for subsequent years. The methods were; comprehension evaluation, quality panel evaluation, and evaluation based on adequacy and fluency. Comprehension evaluation aimed to directly compare systems based on the results from multiple choice comprehension tests, as in Church et al. (1993). The texts chosen were a set of articles in English on the subject of financial news. These articles were translated by professional translators into a series of language pairs, and then translated back into English using the machine translation systems. It was decided that this was not adequate for a standalone method of comparing systems and as such abandoned due to issues with the modification of meaning in the process of translating from English. The idea of quality panel evaluation was to submit translations to a panel of expert native English speakers who were professional translators and get them to evaluate them. The evaluations were done on the basis of a metric, modelled on a standard US government metric used to rate human translations. This was good from the point of view that the metric was "externally motivated", since it was not specifically developed for machine translation. However, the quality panel evaluation was very difficult to set up logistically, as it necessitated having a number of experts together in one place for a week or more, and furthermore for them to reach consensus. This method was also abandoned. Along with a modified form of the comprehension evaluation (re-styled as informativeness evaluation), the most popular method was to obtain ratings from monolingual judges for segments of a document. The judges were presented with a segment, and asked to rate it for two variables, adequacy and fluency. Adequacy is a rating of how much information is transferred between the original and the translation, and fluency is a rating of how good the English is. This technique was found to cover the relevant parts of the quality panel evaluation, while at the same time being easier to deploy, as it didn't require expert judgment. Measuring systems based on adequacy and fluency, along with informativeness is now the standard methodology for the ARPA evaluation program. == Automatic evaluation == In the context of this article, a metric is a measurement. A metric that evaluates machine translation output represents the quality of the output. The quality of a translation is inherently subjective, there is no objective or quantifiable "good." Therefore, any metric must assign quality scores so they correlate with the human judgment of quality. That is, a metric should score highly translations that humans score highly, and give low scores to those humans give low scores. Human judgment is the benchmark for assessing automatic metrics, as humans are the end-users of any translation output. The measure of evaluation for metrics is correlation with human judgment. This is generally done at two levels, at the sentence level, where scores are calculated by the metric for a set of translated sentences, and then correlated against human judgment for the same sentences. And at the corpus level, where scores over the sentences are aggregated for both human judgments and metric judgments, and these aggregate scores are then correlated. Figures for correlation at the sentence level are rarely reported, although Banerjee et al. (2005) do give correlation figures that show that, at least for their metric, sentence-level correlation is substantially worse than corpus level correlation. While not widely reported, it has been noted that the genre, or domain, of a text has an effect on the correlation obtained when using metrics. Coughlin (2003) reports that comparing the candidate text against a single reference translation does not adversely affect the correlation of metrics when working in a restricted domain text. Even if a metric correlates well with human judgment in one study on one corpus, this successful correlation may not carry over to another corpus. Good metric performance, across text types or domains, is important for the reusability of the metric. A metric that only works for text in a specific domain is useful, but less useful than one that works across many domains—because creating a new metric for every new evaluation or domain is undesirable. Another important factor in the usefulness of an evaluation metric is to have a good correlation, even when working with small amounts of data, that is candidate sentences and reference translations. Turian et al. (2003) point out that, "Any MT evaluation measure is less reliable on shorter translations", and
Markov chain
In probability theory and statistics, a Markov chain or Markov process is a stochastic process describing a sequence of possible events in which the probability of each event depends only on the state attained in the previous event. Informally, this may be thought of as, "What happens next depends only on the state of affairs now." A countably infinite sequence, in which the chain moves state at discrete time steps, gives a discrete-time Markov chain (DTMC). A continuous-time process is called a continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC). Markov processes are named in honor of the Russian mathematician Andrey Markov. Markov chains have many applications as statistical models of real-world processes. They provide the basis for general stochastic simulation methods known as Markov chain Monte Carlo, which are used for simulating sampling from complex probability distributions, and have found application in areas including Bayesian statistics, biology, chemistry, economics, finance, information theory, physics, signal processing, and speech processing. The adjectives Markovian and Markov are used to describe something that is related to a Markov process. == Principles == === Definition === A Markov process is a stochastic process that satisfies the Markov property (sometimes characterized as "memorylessness"). In simpler terms, it is a process for which predictions can be made regarding future outcomes based solely on its present state and—most importantly—such predictions are just as good as the ones that could be made knowing the process's full history. In other words, conditional on the present state of the system, its future and past states are independent. A Markov chain is a type of Markov process that has either a discrete state space or a discrete index set (often representing time), but the precise definition of a Markov chain varies. For example, it is common to define a Markov chain as a Markov process in either discrete or continuous time with a countable state space (thus regardless of the nature of time), but it is also common to define a Markov chain as having discrete time in either countable or continuous state space (thus regardless of the state space). === Types of Markov chains === The system's state space and time parameter index need to be specified. The following table gives an overview of the different instances of Markov processes for different levels of state space generality for both discrete and continuous time: Note that there is no definitive agreement in the literature on the use of some of the terms that signify special cases of Markov processes. Usually the term "Markov chain" is reserved for a process with a discrete set of times, that is, a discrete-time Markov chain (DTMC), but a few authors use the term "Markov process" to refer to a continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC) without explicit mention. In addition, there are other extensions of Markov processes that are referred to as such but do not necessarily fall within any of these four categories (see Markov model). Moreover, the time index need not necessarily be real-valued; like with the state space, there are conceivable processes that move through index sets with other mathematical constructs. Notice that the general state space continuous-time Markov chain is general to such a degree that it has no designated term. While the time parameter is usually discrete, the state space of a Markov chain does not have any generally agreed-on restrictions: the term may refer to a process on an arbitrary state space. However, many applications of Markov chains employ finite or countably infinite state spaces, which have a more straightforward statistical analysis. Besides time-index and state-space parameters, there are many other variations, extensions and generalizations (see Variations). For simplicity, most of this article concentrates on the discrete-time, discrete state-space case, unless mentioned otherwise. === Transitions === The changes of state of the system are called transitions. The probabilities associated with various state changes are called transition probabilities. The process is characterized by a state space, a transition matrix describing the probabilities of particular transitions, and an initial state (or initial distribution) across the state space. By convention, we assume all possible states and transitions have been included in the definition of the process, so there is always a next state, and the process does not terminate. A discrete-time random process involves a system which is in a certain state at each step, with the state changing randomly between steps. The steps are often thought of as moments in time, but they can equally well refer to physical distance or any other discrete measurement. Formally, the steps are the integers or natural numbers, and the random process is a mapping of these to states. The Markov property states that the conditional probability distribution for the system at the next step (and in fact at all future steps) depends only on the current state of the system, and not additionally on the state of the system at previous steps. Since the system changes randomly, it is generally impossible to predict with certainty the state of a Markov chain at a given point in the future. However, the statistical properties of the system's future can be predicted. In many applications, it is these statistical properties that are important. == History == Andrey Markov studied Markov processes in the early 20th century, publishing his first paper on the topic in 1906. Markov processes in continuous time were discovered long before his work in the early 20th century in the form of the Poisson process. Markov was interested in studying an extension of independent random sequences, motivated by a disagreement with Pavel Nekrasov who claimed independence was necessary for the weak law of large numbers to hold. In his first paper on Markov chains, published in 1906, Markov showed that under certain conditions the average outcomes of the Markov chain would converge to a fixed vector of values, so proving a weak law of large numbers without the independence assumption, which had been commonly regarded as a requirement for such mathematical laws to hold. Markov later used Markov chains to study the distribution of vowels in Eugene Onegin, written by Alexander Pushkin, and proved a central limit theorem for such chains. In 1912 Henri Poincaré studied Markov chains on finite groups with an aim to study card shuffling. Other early uses of Markov chains include a diffusion model, introduced by Paul and Tatyana Ehrenfest in 1907, and a branching process, introduced by Francis Galton and Henry William Watson in 1873, preceding the work of Markov. After the work of Galton and Watson, it was later revealed that their branching process had been independently discovered and studied around three decades earlier by Irénée-Jules Bienaymé. Starting in 1928, Maurice Fréchet became interested in Markov chains, eventually resulting in him publishing in 1938 a detailed study on Markov chains. Andrey Kolmogorov developed in a 1931 paper a large part of the early theory of continuous-time Markov processes. Kolmogorov was partly inspired by Louis Bachelier's 1900 work on fluctuations in the stock market as well as Norbert Wiener's work on Einstein's model of Brownian movement. He introduced and studied a particular set of Markov processes known as diffusion processes, where he derived a set of differential equations describing the processes. Independent of Kolmogorov's work, Sydney Chapman derived in a 1928 paper an equation, now called the Chapman–Kolmogorov equation, in a less mathematically rigorous way than Kolmogorov, while studying Brownian movement. The differential equations are now called the Kolmogorov equations or the Kolmogorov–Chapman equations. Other mathematicians who contributed significantly to the foundations of Markov processes include William Feller, starting in 1930s, and then later Eugene Dynkin, starting in the 1950s. == Examples == Mark V. Shaney is a third-order Markov chain program, and a Markov text generator. It ingests the sample text (the Tao Te Ching, or the posts of a Usenet group) and creates a massive list of every sequence of three successive words (triplet) which occurs in the text. It then chooses two words at random, and looks for a word which follows those two in one of the triplets in its massive list. If there is more than one, it picks at random (identical triplets count separately, so a sequence which occurs twice is twice as likely to be picked as one which only occurs once). It then adds that word to the generated text. Then, in the same way, it picks a triplet that starts with the second and third words in the generated text, and that gives a fourth word. It adds the fourth word, then repeats with the third and fourth words, and so on. Random walks based on integers and the gambler's ruin problem are ex
Observability (software)
In software engineering, more specifically in distributed computing, observability is the ability to collect data about programs' execution, modules' internal states, and the communication among components. To improve observability, software engineers use a wide range of logging and tracing techniques to gather telemetry information, and tools to analyze and use it. Observability is foundational to site reliability engineering, as it is the first step in triaging a service outage. One of the goals of observability is to minimize the amount of prior knowledge needed to debug an issue. == Etymology, terminology and definition == The term is borrowed from control theory, where the "observability" of a system measures how well its state can be determined from its outputs. Similarly, software observability measures how well a system's state can be understood from the obtained telemetry (metrics, logs, traces, profiling). The definition of observability varies by vendor: Observability is the process of making a system’s internal state more transparent. Systems are made observable by the data they produce, which in turn helps you to determine if your infrastructure or application is healthy and functioning normally. a measure of how well you can understand and explain any state your system can get into, no matter how novel or bizarre [...] without needing to ship new code software tools and practices for aggregating, correlating and analyzing a steady stream of performance data from a distributed application along with the hardware and network it runs onobservability starts by shipping all your raw data to central service before you begin analysisthe ability to measure a system’s current state based on the data it generates, such as logs, metrics, and traces Observability is tooling or a technical solution that allows teams to actively debug their system. Observability is based on exploring properties and patterns not defined in advance. proactively collecting, visualizing, and applying intelligence to all of your metrics, events, logs, and traces—so you can understand the behavior of your complex digital system The term is frequently referred to as its numeronym o11y (where 11 stands for the number of letters between the first letter and the last letter of the word). This is similar to other computer science abbreviations such as i18n and l10n and k8s. === Observability vs. monitoring === Observability and monitoring are sometimes used interchangeably. As tooling, commercial offerings and practices evolved in complexity, "monitoring" was re-branded as observability in order to differentiate new tools from the old. The terms are commonly contrasted in that systems are monitored using predefined sets of telemetry, and monitored systems may be observable. Majors et al. suggest that engineering teams that only have monitoring tools end up relying on expert foreknowledge (seniority), whereas teams that have observability tools rely on exploratory analysis (curiosity). == Telemetry types == Observability relies on three main types of telemetry data: metrics, logs and traces. Those are often referred to as "pillars of observability". === Metrics === A metric is a point in time measurement (scalar) that represents some system state. Examples of common metrics include: number of HTTP requests per second; total number of query failures; database size in bytes; time in seconds since last garbage collection. Monitoring tools are typically configured to emit alerts when certain metric values exceed set thresholds. Thresholds are set based on knowledge about normal operating conditions and experience. Metrics are typically tagged to facilitate grouping and searchability. Application developers choose what kind of metrics to instrument their software with, before it is released. As a result, when a previously unknown issue is encountered, it is impossible to add new metrics without shipping new code. Furthermore, their cardinality can quickly make the storage size of telemetry data prohibitively expensive. Since metrics are cardinality-limited, they are often used to represent aggregate values (for example: average page load time, or 5-second average of the request rate). Without external context, it is impossible to correlate between events (such as user requests) and distinct metric values. === Logs === Logs, or log lines, are generally free-form, unstructured text blobs that are intended to be human readable. Modern logging is structured to enable machine parsability. As with metrics, an application developer must instrument the application upfront and ship new code if different logging information is required. Logs typically include a timestamp and severity level. An event (such as a user request) may be fragmented across multiple log lines and interweave with logs from concurrent events. === Traces === ==== Distributed traces ==== A cloud native application is typically made up of distributed services which together fulfill a single request. A distributed trace is an interrelated series of discrete events (also called spans) that track the progression of a single user request. A trace shows the causal and temporal relationships between the services that interoperate to fulfill a request. Instrumenting an application with traces means sending span information to a tracing backend. The tracing backend correlates the received spans to generate presentable traces. To be able to follow a request as it traverses multiple services, spans are labeled with unique identifiers that enable constructing a parent-child relationship between spans. Span information is typically shared in the HTTP headers of outbound requests. === Continuous profiling === Continuous profiling is another telemetry type used to precisely determine how an application consumes resources. === Instrumentation === To be able to observe an application, telemetry about the application's behavior needs to be collected or exported. Instrumentation means generating telemetry alongside the normal operation of the application. Telemetry is then collected by an independent backend for later analysis. In fast-changing systems, instrumentation itself is often the best possible documentation, since it combines intention (what are the dimensions that an engineer named and decided to collect?) with the real-time, up-to-date information of live status in production. Instrumentation can be automatic, or custom. Automatic instrumentation offers blanket coverage and immediate value; custom instrumentation brings higher value but requires more intimate involvement with the instrumented application. Instrumentation can be native - done in-code (modifying the code of the instrumented application) - or out-of-code (e.g. sidecar, eBPF). Verifying new features in production by shipping them together with custom instrumentation is a practice called "observability-driven development". == "Pillars of observability" == Metrics, logs and traces are most commonly listed as the pillars of observability. Majors et al. suggest that the pillars of observability are high cardinality, high-dimensionality, and explorability, arguing that runbooks and dashboards have little value because "modern systems rarely fail in precisely the same way twice." == Self monitoring == Self monitoring is a practice where observability stacks monitor each other, in order to reduce the risk of inconspicuous outages. Self monitoring may be put in place in addition to high availability and redundancy to further avoid correlated failures.
Diane Litman
Diane Litman is an American professor of computer science at the University of Pittsburgh. She also jointly holds the positions of senior scientist with the Learning Research and Development Center and faculty with the Intelligent Systems department. Litman is noted for her work in the areas of artificial intelligence, computational linguistics, knowledge representation and reasoning, natural language processing, and user modeling. == Education == Litman did her undergraduate studies at the College of William and Mary and her master's and PhD degrees at the University of Rochester. == Career == Before joining the University of Pittsburgh, she was an assistant professor at Columbia University. She additionally held the position of a research scientist in the Artificial Intelligence Principles Research Department Laboratory at AT&T Labs. Litman has held the position of Chair of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics two times, elected twice for the position, whose tenure lasts four years. She is also a distinguished member of the executive committee of the Association for Computational Linguistics, and a member of the editorial boards of Computational Linguistics and User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction. She has also held the position of Leverhulme Professor at the University of Edinburgh. Litman was the keynote speaker at the Speech and Language Technology in Education 2013 symposium, the 2006 SIGdial Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, and at the 2008 Symposium of the Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour. She also sits on the board of the several interest groups, including the International Speech Communication Association's Special Interest Group on Speech and Language Technology in Education. Litman has served as chair, organizer, and a senior member of numerous committees of peer-reviewed scientific journals. == Awards and recognition == She has also co-authored numerous award-winning papers and was awarded senior member status by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence in 2011, an award designed to honor those who have "achieved significant accomplishments within the field of artificial intelligence."