Hildon is an application framework originally developed for mobile devices (PDAs, mobile phones, etc.) running the Linux operating system as well as the Symbian operating system. The Symbian variant of Hildon was discontinued with the cancellation of Series 90. It was developed by Nokia for the Maemo operating system. It focuses on providing a finger-friendly interface. It is primarily a set of GTK extensions that provide mobile-device–oriented functionality, but also provides a desktop environment that includes a task navigator for opening and switching between programs, a control panel for user settings, and status bar, task bar and home applets. It is standard on the Maemo platform used by the Nokia Internet Tablets and the Nokia N900 smartphone. Hildon has also been selected as the framework for Ubuntu Mobile and Embedded Edition. Hildon was an early instance of a software platform for generic computing in a tablet device intended for internet consumption. But Nokia didn't commit to it as their only platform for their future mobile devices and the project competed against other in-house platforms. The strategic advantage of a modern platform was not exploited, being displaced by the Series 60, though its development is continued by the Maemo Leste project. == Components == The Hildon framework includes components that effectively provide a desktop environment. === Hildon Application Manager === Hildon Application Manager is the Hildon graphical package manager, it uses the Debian package management tools APT (Advanced Packaging Tool and dpkg) and provides a graphical interface for installing, updating and removing packages. It is a limited package manager, designed specifically for end-users, in that it doesn't directly offer the user access to system files and libraries. With the Diablo release of Maemo, Hildon Application Manager now supports "Seamless Software Update" (SSU), which implements a variety of features to allow system upgrades to be easily performed through it. === Hildon Control Panel === Hildon Control Panel is the user settings interface for Hildon. It provides simple access to control panels used to change system settings. === Hildon Desktop === Hildon Desktop is the primary UI component of Hildon, so makes up the bulk of what a user will see as "Hildon". It controls application launching and switching, general system control, and provides interfaces for task bar (application menu and task switcher), status bar (brightness and volume control), and home (internet radio and web search) applets. === Hildon Library === The Hildon library, originally developed by Nokia but since Maemo 5, developed by Igalia and Lanedo (who developed MaemoGTK+, the Maemo version of GTK+). It is a set of mobile specific GTK+ widgets for applications in Maemo. Up to Maemo 4, these widgets were designed for stylus usage. However, in Maemo 5, most widgets were deprecated and new widgets for direct finger manipulation were introduced, including a kinetic panning container.
Secure element
A secure element (SE) is a secure operating system (OS) in a tamper-resistant processor chip or secure component. It can protect assets (root of trust, sensitive data, keys, certificates, applications) against high-level software and hardware attacks. Applications that process this sensitive data on an SE are isolated and so operate within a controlled environment not affected by software (including possible malware) found elsewhere on the OS. The hardware and embedded software meet the requirements of the Security IC Platform Protection Profile [PP 0084] including resistance to physical tampering scenarios described within it. More than 96 billion secure elements were produced and shipped between 2010 and 2021. SEs exist in various form factors, as devices such as smart cards, UICCs, or smart microSD cards, or embedded, or integrated, as parts of larger devices. SEs are an evolution of the chips in earlier smart cards, which have been adapted to suit the needs of numerous use cases, such as smartphones, tablets, set-top boxes, wearables, connected cars, and other internet of things (IoT) devices. The technology is widely used by technology firms such as Oracle, Apple and Samsung. SEs provide secure isolation, storage and processing for applications (called applets) they host while being isolated from the external world (e.g. rich OS and application processor when embedded in a smartphone) and from other applications running on the SE. Java Card and MULTOS are the most deployed standardized multi-application operating systems currently used to develop applications running on SEs. Since 1999, GlobalPlatform has been the body responsible for standardizing secure element technologies to support a dynamic model of application management in a multi-actor model. GlobalPlatform also runs Functional and Security Certification programmes for secure elements, and hosts a list of Functional Certified and Security Certified products. GlobalPlatform technology is also embedded in other standards such as ETSI SCP (now SET) since release 7. A Common Criteria Secure Element Protection Profile has been released targeting EAL4+ level with ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 extension to standardize the security features of a secure element across markets.
Linguistic categories
Linguistic categories include Lexical category, a part of speech such as noun, preposition, etc. Syntactic category, a similar concept which can also include phrasal categories Grammatical category, a grammatical feature such as tense, gender, etc. The definition of linguistic categories is a major concern of linguistic theory, and thus, the definition and naming of categories varies across different theoretical frameworks and grammatical traditions for different languages. The operationalization of linguistic categories in lexicography, computational linguistics, natural language processing, corpus linguistics, and terminology management typically requires resource-, problem- or application-specific definitions of linguistic categories. In Cognitive linguistics it has been argued that linguistic categories have a prototype structure like that of the categories of common words in a language. == Linguistic category inventories == To facilitate the interoperability between lexical resources, linguistic annotations and annotation tools and for the systematic handling of linguistic categories across different theoretical frameworks, a number of inventories of linguistic categories have been developed and are being used, with examples as given below. The practical objective of such inventories is to perform quantitative evaluation (for language-specific inventories), to train NLP tools, or to facilitate cross-linguistic evaluation, querying or annotation of language data. At a theoretical level, the existence of universal categories in human language has been postulated, e.g., in Universal grammar, but also heavily criticized. === Part-of-Speech tagsets === Schools commonly teach that there are 9 parts of speech in English: noun, verb, article, adjective, preposition, pronoun, adverb, conjunction, and interjection. However, there are clearly many more categories and sub-categories. For nouns, the plural, possessive, and singular forms can be distinguished. In many languages words are also marked for their case (role as subject, object, etc.), grammatical gender, and so on; while verbs are marked for tense, aspect, and other things. In some tagging systems, different inflections of the same root word will get different parts of speech, resulting in a large number of tags. For example, NN for singular common nouns, NNS for plural common nouns, NP for singular proper nouns (see the POS tags used in the Brown Corpus). Other tagging systems use a smaller number of tags and ignore fine differences or model them as features somewhat independent from part-of-speech. In part-of-speech tagging by computer, it is typical to distinguish from 50 to 150 separate parts of speech for English. POS tagging work has been done in a variety of languages, and the set of POS tags used varies greatly with language. Tags usually are designed to include overt morphological distinctions, although this leads to inconsistencies such as case-marking for pronouns but not nouns in English, and much larger cross-language differences. The tag sets for heavily inflected languages such as Greek and Latin can be very large; tagging words in agglutinative languages such as Inuit languages may be virtually impossible. Work on stochastic methods for tagging Koine Greek (DeRose 1990) has used over 1,000 parts of speech and found that about as many words were ambiguous in that language as in English. A morphosyntactic descriptor in the case of morphologically rich languages is commonly expressed using very short mnemonics, such as ncmsan for category = noun, type = common, gender = masculine, number = singular, case = accusative, animate = no. The most popular tag set for POS tagging for American English is probably the Penn tag set, developed in the Penn Treebank project. === Multilingual annotation schemes === For Western European languages, cross-linguistically applicable annotation schemes for parts-of-speech, morphosyntax and syntax have been developed with the EAGLES Guidelines. The "Expert Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards" (EAGLES) was an initiative of the European Commission that ran within the DG XIII Linguistic Research and Engineering programme from 1994 to 1998, coordinated by Consorzio Pisa Ricerche, Pisa, Italy. The EAGLES guidelines provide guidance for markup to be used with text corpora, particularly for identifying features relevant in computational linguistics and lexicography. Numerous companies, research centres, universities and professional bodies across the European Union collaborated to produce the EAGLES Guidelines, which set out recommendations for de facto standards and rules of best practice for: Large-scale language resources (such as text corpora, computational lexicons and speech corpora); Means of manipulating such knowledge, via computational linguistic formalisms, mark up languages and various software tools; Means of assessing and evaluating resources, tools and products. The Eagles guidelines have inspired subsequent work on other regions, as well, e.g., Eastern Europe. A generation later, a similar effort was initiated by the research community under the umbrella of Universal Dependencies. Petrov et al. have proposed a "universal", but highly reductionist, tag set, with 12 categories (for example, no subtypes of nouns, verbs, punctuation, etc.; no distinction of "to" as an infinitive marker vs. preposition (hardly a "universal" coincidence), etc.). Subsequently, this was complemented with cross-lingual specifications for dependency syntax (Stanford Dependencies), and morphosyntax (Interset interlingua, partially building on the Multext-East/Eagles tradition) in the context of the Universal Dependencies (UD), an international cooperative project to create treebanks of the world's languages with cross-linguistically applicable ("universal") annotations for parts of speech, dependency syntax, and (optionally) morphosyntactic (morphological) features. Core applications are automated text processing in the field of natural language processing (NLP) and research into natural language syntax and grammar, especially within linguistic typology. The annotation scheme has it roots in three related projects: The UD annotation scheme uses a representation in the form of dependency trees as opposed to a phrase structure trees. At as of February 2019, there are just over 100 treebanks of more than 70 languages available in the UD inventory. The project's primary aim is to achieve cross-linguistic consistency of annotation. However, language-specific extensions are permitted for morphological features (individual languages or resources can introduce additional features). In a more restricted form, dependency relations can be extended with a secondary label that accompanies the UD label, e.g., aux:pass for an auxiliary (UD aux) used to mark passive voice. The Universal Dependencies have inspired similar efforts for the areas of inflectional morphology, frame semantics and coreference. For phrase structure syntax, a comparable effort does not seem to exist, but the specifications of the Penn Treebank have been applied to (and extended for) a broad range of languages, e.g., Icelandic, Old English, Middle English, Middle Low German, Early Modern High German, Yiddish, Portuguese, Japanese, Arabic and Chinese. === Conventions for interlinear glosses === In linguistics, an interlinear gloss is a gloss (series of brief explanations, such as definitions or pronunciations) placed between lines (inter- + linear), such as between a line of original text and its translation into another language. When glossed, each line of the original text acquires one or more lines of transcription known as an interlinear text or interlinear glossed text (IGT)—interlinear for short. Such glosses help the reader follow the relationship between the source text and its translation, and the structure of the original language. There is no standard inventory for glosses, but common labels are collected in the Leipzig Glossing Rules. Wikipedia also provides a List of glossing abbreviations that draws on this and other sources. === General Ontology for Linguistic Description (GOLD) === GOLD ("General Ontology for Linguistic Description") is an ontology for descriptive linguistics. It gives a formalized account of the most basic categories and relations used in the scientific description of human language, e.g., as a formalization of interlinear glosses. GOLD was first introduced by Farrar and Langendoen (2003). Originally, it was envisioned as a solution to the problem of resolving disparate markup schemes for linguistic data, in particular data from endangered languages. However, GOLD is much more general and can be applied to all languages. In this function, GOLD overlaps with the ISO 12620 Data Category Registry (ISOcat); it is, however, more stringently structured. GOLD was maintained by the LINGUIST List and others from 2007 to 2010. The RELISH project created a mirro
Transliteracy
Transliteracy is "a fluidity of movement across a range of technologies, media and contexts". It is an ability to use diverse techniques to collaborate across different social groups. Transliteracy combines a range of capabilities required to move across a range of contexts, media, technologies and genres. Conceptually, transliteracy is situated across five capabilities: information capabilities (see information literacy), ICT (information and communication technologies), communication and collaboration, creativity and critical thinking. It is underpinned by literacy and numeracy. (See figure below) The concept of transliteracy is impacting the system of education and libraries. == History == While the term appears to come from the prefix trans- ('across') and the word literacy, the scholars who coined it say they developed it from the practice of transliteration, which means to use the letters of one language to write down a different language. The study of transliteracy was first developed in 2005 by the Transliteracies Research Project, directed by University of California at Santa Barbara Professor Alan Liu. The concept of 'transliteracies' was developed as part of research into online reading. It was shared and refined at the Transliteracies conference, held at UC Santa Barbara in 2005. The conference inspired the at the time De Montfort University Professor, Sue Thomas, to create the Production in Research and Transliteracy (PART) group, which evolved into the Transliteracy Research Group. The current meaning of transliteracy was defined in the group's seminal paper Transliteracy: crossing divides as "the ability to read, write, and interact across a range of platforms, tools, and media from signing and orality through handwriting, print, TV, radio, and film, to digital social networks." The concept was enthusiastically adopted by a number of professional groups, notably in the library and information field. Transliteracy Research Group Archive 2006–2013 curates numerous resources from this period. For a number of years, there was a gap between significant interest in transliteracy among professional groups and the scarcity of research. A group of academics from the University of Bordeaux considered transliteracy mainly in the school context. Freelance writer and consultant, Sue Thomas, studied transliteracy and creativity, while Suzana Sukovic, executive director of educational research and evidence-based practice at HETI, researched transliteracy in relation to digital storytelling. The first book on the topic, Transliteracy in complex information environment by Sukovic, is based on research and experience with practice-based projects. == Transliteracy in education == Transliteracy is making an impact on the classroom setting because of how technologically advanced younger generations are today. In 2012, Adam Marcus, a teacher and librarian at the New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE), decided to incorporate transliteracy into his school's public library summer reading program. He had a desire to enhance the experience of reading for his students by allowing them to connect to the text differently by using social media. He used a tool called VoiceThread in order to have his students "take part in conversations, formulate ideas, and share higher-order thinking through a variety of media channels: video, audio, text, images, and music". Students were also enabled to communicate with the book's author through blogs and websites, and were given multiple modes of media to comprehend and engage with the text on a deeper level. Some of these examples include an audio-video glossary and web links that aimed to bring the details of the text to life. The results of his experiment were deemed to have a positive effect on the program as students responded well to this interactive experience they were given. Marcus believes that it is important for educators and librarians to enhance storytelling for children by providing them with a modern and transliterate experience that one could not receive back then. The Agence nationale de la recherche funded a program at a French high school from 2013 to 2015, where the transliteracy skills of students were tested and observed. Students were placed in groups of three or four members and were required to use all sorts of media and tools in order to collect data for their projects. They were not allowed to only use digital sources, and were advised to use a diversity of sources. The focus of this experiment was to observe "the possible diversity of media and tools employed, on the ways of and reasons for switching from one to another, on how these different media and tools are distributed within contexts, according to the academic requirements and tasks individually and collectively performed by the students." The conclusions of the experiment dealt with physical space and organization being an issue for students and teachers to deal with. Spatially, it was challenging for students to navigate through different mediums when their space inside the classroom was limited. It was noticed that students were prone to use something that took up less space, rather than focusing on expanding their diversity of sources. Organizationally, it was challenging for students to organize all of the information they collected since everything was not being search and collected for digitally. In addition, students were not allotted a lot of time to complete their projects which also impacted their final product. == Transliteracy in libraries == In 2009, Dr. Susie Andretta, senior lecturer in Information Management at London Metropolitan University, conducted interviews with four different information professionals including an academic librarian, an outreach librarian, a content manager, and a scholar within the library science and information discipline. She was aiming to explore how transliteracy was colliding and combining with the print-world of libraries. Dr. Andretta defines transliteracy as "an umbrella term encompassing different literacies and multiple communication channels that require active participation with and across a range of platforms, and embracing both linear and non-linear messages (3)." The goals of these interviews ranged from the following: to test the information professional's awareness of transliteracy, to have them identify transliteracy and how it is integrated into their work, and to explain the impact transliteracy has had on they library they work at. Andretta found that out of all the information professionals interviewed, it was only the academic librarian who was vaguely familiar with the concept of transliteracy. Bernadette Daly Swanson, an Academic Librarian at UC Davis, expresses in her interview with Dr. Andretta how she would "like to think that the transliterate library is more of an environment where we do different things [...] I would take maybe about a third of the first floor of our library and transform it into a lab [...] where we can start to evolve [..] explore, and experiment in media development, content development, and do it not just with librarians; so open up the space for other people [...] so you don't get people working in isolation." Although the other three candidates that Dr. Andretta interviewed had not heard of the term transliteracy, they responded well to the concept once it was explained to them and agreed with its impact on the workplace. Dr. Michael Stephens, an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Dominican University, explains in his interview how the term transliteracy describes the courses he teaches on libraries and Web 2.0 technologies. Dr. Stephens states that students being educated in Web 2.0 technologies gives them "the opportunity to experience what the channel can be and the potential for that sharing learning, for asking questions, just for out loud thinking – I think it's incredibly valuable. [..] this is where this wonderful concept comes in, it was teaching them transliteracy and the fact that they can move across channels without getting worried about it." Dr. Andretta concluded from her interviews how although transliteracy may not be a very well-known term yet, it has nonetheless established itself into the intuition of libraries while also transforming the traditional library to a world of enhanced and expanded services. "Inherent in this transition are the challenges of having to adapt to a constantly changing technological landscape, the multiple literacies that this generates, and the need to establish a multifaceted library profession that can speak the multiple-media languages of its diverse users." Thomas Ipri, a librarian at the University of Nevada, advocates for libraries needing to make a change in their literary functions. He argues that the divide between digital and print makes it harder for libraries to accommodate their patrons and to share information. He f
OpenSMILE
openSMILE is source-available software for automatic extraction of features from audio signals and for classification of speech and music signals. "SMILE" stands for "Speech & Music Interpretation by Large-space Extraction". The software is mainly applied in the area of automatic emotion recognition and is widely used in the affective computing research community. The openSMILE project exists since 2008 and is maintained by the German company audEERING GmbH since 2013. openSMILE is provided free of charge for research purposes and personal use under a source-available license. For commercial use of the tool, the company audEERING offers custom license options. == Application Areas == openSMILE is used for academic research as well as for commercial applications in order to automatically analyze speech and music signals in real-time. In contrast to automatic speech recognition which extracts the spoken content out of a speech signal, openSMILE is capable of recognizing the characteristics of a given speech or music segment. Examples for such characteristics encoded in human speech are a speaker's emotion, age, gender, and personality, as well as speaker states like depression, intoxication, or vocal pathological disorders. The software further includes music classification technology for automatic music mood detection and recognition of chorus segments, key, chords, tempo, meter, dance-style, and genre. The openSMILE toolkit serves as benchmark in manifold research competitions such as Interspeech ComParE, AVEC, MediaEval, and EmotiW. == History == The openSMILE project was started in 2008 by Florian Eyben, Martin Wöllmer, and Björn Schuller at the Technical University of Munich within the European Union research project SEMAINE. The goal of the SEMAINE project was to develop a virtual agent with emotional and social intelligence. In this system, openSMILE was applied for real-time analysis of speech and emotion. The final SEMAINE software release is based on openSMILE version 1.0.1. In 2009, the emotion recognition toolkit (openEAR) was published based on openSMILE. "EAR" stands for "Emotion and Affect Recognition". In 2010, openSMILE version 1.0.1 was published and was introduced and awarded at the ACM Multimedia Open-Source Software Challenge. Between 2011 and 2013, the technology of openSMILE was extended and improved by Florian Eyben and Felix Weninger in the context of their doctoral thesis at the Technical University of Munich. The software was also applied for the project ASC-Inclusion, which was funded by the European Union. For this project, the software was extended by Erik Marchi in order to teach emotional expression to autistic children, based on automatic emotion recognition and visualization. In 2013, the company audEERING acquired the rights to the code-base from the Technical University of Munich and version 2.0 was published under a source-available research license. Until 2016, openSMILE was downloaded more than 50,000 times worldwide and has established itself as a standard toolkit for emotion recognition. == Awards == openSMILE was awarded in 2010 in the context of the ACM Multimedia Open Source Competition. The software tool is applied in numerous scientific publications on automatic emotion recognition. openSMILE and its extension openEAR have been cited in more than 1000 scientific publications until today.
Language Computer Corporation
Language Computer Corporation (LCC) is a natural language processing research company based in Richardson, Texas. The company develops a variety of natural language processing products, including software for question answering, information extraction, and automatic summarization. Since its founding in 1995, the low-profile company has landed significant United States Government contracts, with $8,353,476 in contracts in 2006-2008. While the company has focused primarily on the government software market, LCC has also used its technology to spin off three start-up companies. The first spin-off, known as Lymba Corporation, markets the PowerAnswer question answering product originally developed at LCC. In 2010, LCC's CEO, Andrew Hickl, co-founded two start-ups which made use of the company's technology. These included Swingly, an automatic question answering start-up, and Extractiv, an information extraction service that was founded in partnership with Houston, Texas-based 80legs.
QuickPar
QuickPar is a computer program that creates parchives used as verification and recovery information for a file or group of files, and uses the recovery information, if available, to attempt to reconstruct the originals from the damaged files and the PAR volumes. Designed for the Microsoft Windows operating system, in the past it was often used to recover damaged or missing files that have been downloaded through Usenet. QuickPar may also be used under Linux via Wine. There are two main versions of PAR files: PAR and PAR2. The PAR2 file format lifts many of its previous restrictions. QuickPar is freeware but not open-source. It uses the Reed-Solomon error correction algorithm internally to create the error correcting information. == Replacement == Since QuickPar hasn't been updated in 21 years, it is considered abandonware. Currently, MultiPar is accepted as the software that replaces QuickPar. MultiPar is actively being developed by Yutaka Sawada. == 64-bit versions == At present the command line version of QuickPar for Linux command line is available as a 64-bit version. None of the GUI versions available presently offer a 64-bit version.