MaPS S.A. is a software editor founded in 2011 by Thierry Muller. The company is headquartered in Luxembourg. Its platform, called MaPS System, provides Data Management software for Multichannel Marketing. == History and funding == The first version of MaPS System was released under the agency Prem1um S.A. in 2005 in the partnership with Pingroom agency. In combination with MaPS System, Prem1um also provided various consulting services in Marketing, Publishing and Sales. This is where MaPS System takes its names (M stands for Marketing, P for Publishing and S for Sales). In 2011, after being successful, Prem1um S.A. decided to enable the software MaPS System to operate independently under MaPS S.A., as a separate company and editor of the software. The first financial supports were provided by Malta ICI, a Venture Capital firm, and the local partner Chameleon Invest, a seed-capital fund led by Business Angels, who invested €900,000. In a second investment round in 2014 led by Newion Investments, a Venture Capital firm, €1.4 Million were raised, thus amounting to total assets of €2.2 Million. In 2016, the company was taken over by three private investors. In 2018, after two years of continuous growth and European expansion in Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, MaPS S.A acquired Awevo, an e-commerce web agency. == Products == The services included in MaPS System range from the data centralization, Data Governance to an optimized Multichannel Marketing. The software currently includes more than 35 modules for Master Data Management, Product Information Management, Digital Asset Management, Business Process Management including catalogue Publishing features. == Certifications == In 2019, MaPS System and Awevo received "Made in Luxembourg" label, given to the companies whose services are entirely designed in Luxembourg, without any production or development offshoring. MaPS System is a member of ICT Cluster by Luxinnovation.
Super-resolution optical fluctuation imaging
Super-resolution optical fluctuation imaging (SOFI) is a post-processing method for the calculation of super-resolved images from recorded image time series that is based on the temporal correlations of independently fluctuating fluorescent emitters. SOFI has been developed for super-resolution of biological specimen that are labelled with independently fluctuating fluorescent emitters (organic dyes, fluorescent proteins). In comparison to other super-resolution microscopy techniques such as STORM or PALM that rely on single-molecule localization and hence only allow one active molecule per diffraction-limited area (DLA) and timepoint, SOFI does not necessitate a controlled photoswitching and/ or photoactivation as well as long imaging times. Nevertheless, it still requires fluorophores that are cycling through two distinguishable states, either real on-/off-states or states with different fluorescence intensities. In mathematical terms SOFI-imaging relies on the calculation of cumulants, for what two distinguishable ways exist. For one thing an image can be calculated via auto-cumulants that by definition only rely on the information of each pixel itself, and for another thing an improved method utilizes the information of different pixels via the calculation of cross-cumulants. Both methods can increase the final image resolution significantly although the cumulant calculation has its limitations. Actually SOFI is able to increase the resolution in all three dimensions. == Principle == Likewise to other super-resolution methods SOFI is based on recording an image time series on a CCD- or CMOS camera. In contrary to other methods the recorded time series can be substantially shorter, since a precise localization of emitters is not required and therefore a larger quantity of activated fluorophores per diffraction-limited area is allowed. The pixel values of a SOFI-image of the n-th order are calculated from the values of the pixel time series in the form of a n-th order cumulant, whereas the final value assigned to a pixel can be imagined as the integral over a correlation function. The finally assigned pixel value intensities are a measure of the brightness and correlation of the fluorescence signal. Mathematically, the n-th order cumulant is related to the n-th order correlation function, but exhibits some advantages concerning the resulting resolution of the image. Since in SOFI several emitters per DLA are allowed, the photon count at each pixel results from the superposition of the signals of all activated nearby emitters. The cumulant calculation now filters the signal and leaves only highly correlated fluctuations. This provides a contrast enhancement and therefore a background reduction for good measure. As it is implied in the figure on the left the fluorescence source distribution: ∑ k = 1 N δ ( r → − r → k ) ⋅ ε k ⋅ s k ( t ) {\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{N}\delta ({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\cdot \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}(t)} is convolved with the system's point spread function (PSF) U(r). Hence the fluorescence signal at time t and position r → {\displaystyle {\vec {r}}} is given by F ( r → , t ) = ∑ k = 1 N U ( r → − r → k ) ⋅ ε k ⋅ s k ( t ) . {\displaystyle F({\vec {r}},t)=\sum _{k=1}^{N}U({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\cdot \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}(t).} Within the above equations N is the amount of emitters, located at the positions r → k {\displaystyle {\vec {r}}_{k}} with a time-dependent molecular brightness ε k ⋅ s k {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{k}\cdot s_{k}} where ε k {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{k}} is a variable for the constant molecular brightness and s k ( t ) {\displaystyle s_{k}(t)} is a time-dependent fluctuation function. The molecular brightness is just the average fluorescence count-rate divided by the number of molecules within a specific region. For simplification it has to be assumed that the sample is in a stationary equilibrium and therefore the fluorescence signal can be expressed as a zero-mean fluctuation: δ F ( r → , t ) = F ( r → , t ) − ⟨ F ( r → , t ) ⟩ t {\displaystyle \delta F({\vec {r}},t)=F({\vec {r}},t)-\langle F({\vec {r}},t)\rangle _{t}} where ⟨ ⋯ ⟩ t {\displaystyle \langle \cdots \rangle _{t}} denotes time-averaging. The auto-correlation here e.g. the second-order can then be described deductively as follows for a certain time-lag τ {\displaystyle \tau } : δ F ( r → , t ) = ⟨ δ F ( r → , t + τ ) ⋅ δ F ( r → , t ) ⟩ t {\displaystyle \delta F({\vec {r}},t)=\langle \delta F({\vec {r}},t+\tau )\cdot \delta F({\vec {r}},t)\rangle _{t}} From these equations it follows that the PSF of the optical system has to be taken to the power of the order of the correlation. Thus in a second-order correlation the PSF would be reduced along all dimensions by a factor of 2 {\displaystyle {\sqrt {2}}} . As a result, the resolution of the SOFI-images increases according to this factor. === Cumulants versus correlations === Using only the simple correlation function for a reassignment of pixel values, would ascribe to the independency of fluctuations of the emitters in time in a way that no cross-correlation terms would contribute to the new pixel value. Calculations of higher-order correlation functions would suffer from lower-order correlations for what reason it is superior to calculate cumulants, since all lower-order correlation terms vanish. == Cumulant-calculation == === Auto-cumulants === For computational reasons it is convenient to set all time-lags in higher-order cumulants to zero so that a general expression for the n-th order auto-cumulant can be found: A C n ( r → , τ 1 … n − 1 = 0 ) = ∑ k = 1 N U n ( r → − r → k ) ε k n w k ( 0 ) {\displaystyle AC_{n}({\vec {r}},\tau _{1\ldots n-1}=0)=\sum _{k=1}^{N}U^{n}({\vec {r}}-{\vec {r}}_{k})\varepsilon _{k}^{n}w_{k}(0)} w k {\displaystyle w_{k}} is a specific correlation based weighting function influenced by the order of the cumulant and mainly depending on the fluctuation properties of the emitters. Albeit there is no fundamental limitation in calculating very high orders of cumulants and thereby shrinking the FWHM of the PSF there are practical limitations according to the weighting of the values assigned to the final image. Emitters with a higher molecular brightness will show a strong increase in terms of the pixel cumulant value assigned at higher-orders as well as this performance can be expected from a diverse appearance of fluctuations of different emitters. A wide intensity range of the resulting image can therefore be expected and as a result dim emitters can get masked by bright emitters in higher-order images:. The calculation of auto-cumulants can be realized in a very attractive way in a mathematical sense. The n-th order cumulant can be calculated with a basic recursion from moments K n ( r → ) = μ n ( r → ) − ∑ i = 1 n − 1 ( n − 1 i ) K n − i ( r → ) μ i ( r → ) {\displaystyle K_{n}({\vec {r}})=\mu _{n}({\vec {r}})-\sum _{i=1}^{n-1}{\begin{pmatrix}n-1\\i\end{pmatrix}}K_{n-i}({\vec {r}})\mu _{i}({\vec {r}})} where K is a cumulant of the index's order, likewise μ {\displaystyle \mu } represents the moments. The term within the brackets indicates a binomial coefficient. This way of computation is straightforward in comparison with calculating cumulants with standard formulas. It allows for the calculation of cumulants with only little time of computing and is, as it is well implemented, even suitable for the calculation of high-order cumulants on large images. === Cross-cumulants === In a more advanced approach cross-cumulants are calculated by taking the information of several pixels into account. Cross-cumulants can be described as follows: C C n ( r → , τ 1 … n − 1 = 0 ) = ∏ j < l n U ( r → j − r → l n ) ⋅ ∑ i = 1 N U n ( r → i − ∑ k n r → k n ) ε i n w i ( 0 ) {\displaystyle CC_{n}({\vec {r}},\tau _{1\ldots n-1}=0)=\prod _{j Cryptographic High Value Product (CHVP) is a designation used within the information security community to identify assets that have high value, and which may be used to encrypt / decrypt secure communications, but which do not retain or store any classified information. When disconnected from the secure communication network, the CHVP equipment may be handled with a lower level of controls than required for COMSEC equipment. The knapsack problem is the following problem in combinatorial optimization: Given a set of items, each with a weight and a value, determine which items to include in the collection so that the total weight is less than or equal to a given limit and the total value is as large as possible. It derives its name from the problem faced by someone who is constrained by a fixed-size knapsack and must fill it with the most valuable items. The problem often arises in resource allocation where the decision-makers have to choose from a set of non-divisible projects or tasks under a fixed budget or time constraint, respectively. The knapsack problem has been studied for more than a century, with early works dating back to 1897. The subset sum problem is a special case of the decision and 0-1 problems where for each kind of item, the weight equals the value: w i = v i {\displaystyle w_{i}=v_{i}} . In the field of cryptography, the term knapsack problem is often used to refer specifically to the subset sum problem. The subset sum problem is one of Karp's 21 NP-complete problems. == Applications == Knapsack problems appear in real-world decision-making processes in a wide variety of fields, such as finding the least wasteful way to cut raw materials, selection of investments and portfolios, selection of assets for asset-backed securitization, and generating keys for the Merkle–Hellman and other knapsack cryptosystems. One early application of knapsack algorithms was in the construction and scoring of tests in which the test-takers have a choice as to which questions they answer. For small examples, it is a fairly simple process to provide the test-takers with such a choice. For example, if an exam contains 12 questions each worth 10 points, the test-taker need only answer 10 questions to achieve a maximum possible score of 100 points. However, on tests with a heterogeneous distribution of point values, it is more difficult to provide choices. Feuerman and Weiss proposed a system in which students are given a heterogeneous test with a total of 125 possible points. The students are asked to answer all of the questions to the best of their abilities. Of the possible subsets of problems whose total point values add up to 100, a knapsack algorithm would determine which subset gives each student the highest possible score. A 1999 study of the Stony Brook University Algorithm Repository showed that, out of 75 algorithmic problems related to the field of combinatorial algorithms and algorithm engineering, the knapsack problem was the 19th most popular and the third most needed after suffix trees and the bin packing problem. == Definition == The most common problem being solved is the 0-1 knapsack problem, which restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to zero or one. Given a set of n {\displaystyle n} items numbered from 1 up to n {\displaystyle n} , each with a weight w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} and a value v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} , along with a maximum weight capacity W {\displaystyle W} , maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1\}} . Here x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} represents the number of instances of item i {\displaystyle i} to include in the knapsack. Informally, the problem is to maximize the sum of the values of the items in the knapsack so that the sum of the weights is less than or equal to the knapsack's capacity. The bounded knapsack problem (BKP) removes the restriction that there is only one of each item, but restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to a maximum non-negative integer value c {\displaystyle c} : maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , … , c } . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1,2,\dots ,c\}.} The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no upper bound on the number of copies of each kind of item and can be formulated as above except that the only restriction on x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is that it is a non-negative integer. maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ N . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \mathbb {N} .} One example of the unbounded knapsack problem is given using the figure shown at the beginning of this article and the text "if any number of each book is available" in the caption of that figure. == Computational complexity == The knapsack problem is interesting from the perspective of computer science for many reasons: The decision problem form of the knapsack problem (Can a value of at least V be achieved without exceeding the weight W?) is NP-complete, thus there is no known algorithm that is both correct and fast (polynomial-time) in all cases. There is no known polynomial algorithm which can tell, given a solution, whether it is optimal (which would mean that there is no solution with a larger V). This problem is co-NP-complete. There is a pseudo-polynomial time algorithm using dynamic programming. There is a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme, which uses the pseudo-polynomial time algorithm as a subroutine, described below. Many cases that arise in practice, and "random instances" from some distributions, can nonetheless be solved exactly. There is a link between the "decision" and "optimization" problems in that if there exists a polynomial algorithm that solves the "decision" problem, then one can find the maximum value for the optimization problem in polynomial time by applying this algorithm iteratively while increasing the value of k. On the other hand, if an algorithm finds the optimal value of the optimization problem in polynomial time, then the decision problem can be solved in polynomial time by comparing the value of the solution output by this algorithm with the value of k. Thus, both versions of the problem are of similar difficulty. One theme in research literature is to identify what the "hard" instances of the knapsack problem look like, or viewed another way, to identify what properties of instances in practice might make them more amenable than their worst-case NP-complete behaviour suggests. The goal in finding these "hard" instances is for their use in public-key cryptography systems, such as the Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem. More generally, better understanding of the structure of the space of instances of an optimization problem helps to advance the study of the particular problem and can improve algorithm selection. Furthermore, notable is the fact that the hardness of the knapsack problem depends on the form of the input. If the weights and profits are given as integers, it is weakly NP-complete, while it is strongly NP-complete if the weights and profits are given as rational numbers. However, in the case of rational weights and profits it still admits a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme. === Unit-cost models === The NP-hardness of the Knapsack problem relates to computational models in which the size of integers matters (such as the Turing machine). In contrast, decision trees count each decision as a single step. Dobkin and Lipton show an 1 2 n 2 {\displaystyle {1 \over 2}n^{2}} lower bound on linear decision trees for the knapsack problem, that is, trees where decision nodes test the sign of affine functions. This was generalized to algebraic decision trees by Steele and Yao. If the elements in the problem are real numbers or rationals, the decision-tree lower bound extends to the real random-access machine model with an instruction set that includes addition, subtraction and multiplication of real numbers, as well as comparison and either division or remaindering ("floor"). This model covers more algorithms than the algebraic decision-tree model, as it encompasses algorithms that use indexing into tables. However, in this model all program steps are counted, not just decisions. An upper bound for a decision-tree model was given by Meyer auf der Heide who showed that for every n there exists an O(n4)-deep linear decision tree that solves the subset-sum problem with n items. Note that this does not imply any upper bound for an algorithm that should solve the problem for any given n. == Solving == Several algorithms are available to solve knapsack problems, based on the dynamic programming approach, the branch and bound approach or hybridizations of both approaches. === Dynamic programming in-advance algorithm === The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no restriction on the number of copies of each kind of item. Besides, here we assume that x i > 0 {\displaystyle x_{i}>0} m [ w ′ ] = max ( ∑ i = 1 n v i x i ) {\displaystyle m[w']=\max \left(\sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}\right)} subject to ∑ Over the years, television broadcast rights have distinguished what Olympic-related content can be accessed by fans online. By doing so, mobile-friendly social platforms began to integrate into the Olympics. Athletes and fans use these platforms to share live updates, special moments, and behind-the-scenes specials. Various social media platforms have been used for Olympic content, including Twitter and Facebook. Some marketers credit social media for prompting the official U.S. broadcasters, NBC, to live stream events, including early rounds. == Background == The Olympics is able to advertise to its viewers and its host country with the use of data it collects through Social media marketing. Prominent social media platforms include: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, YouTube, Google, MSN, Yahoo and many more. Campaign Initiatives and Artificial Intelligence technologies have been used to analyze the social media content of users. Information from consumers such as their preferences, demographics, age and locality are all analyzed to gain consumer insight. Campaign initiatives and AI technologies were used for such purposes in the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics and are in use currently. Social media marketing of the Olympics is a new phenomena, beginning prior to the 2008 Beijing Olympics == Variations == There are two classifications of social media marketing recognized by the IOC: Officially sanctioned content from rights holders and sponsors that maximizes the use of Olympic content (imagery, hashtag) Unofficial content that is generated by brands that leverage the excitement of the Olympics == 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics == Social media marketing emerged as a phenomenon during the 2008 Beijing Olympics, which progressed as a marketing and an advertising tactic ever since. The Beijing Olympics became the test subject for social media marketing initiatives started by advertising agencies. In 2008, social media marketing began the transition from one-sided communication to mass communication of the Olympic Games. Although social media marketing of the Olympic Games began in 2008, the audience to the Olympics was still primarily reached through television–reaching an audience of 4.3 billion viewers. At the time, the viewers of the Olympic Games through Internet website platforms made up an audience of approximately 390 million individuals. What was the beginning of Olympic social media marketing, was also the beginning of a more globalized experience of the Olympic Games via social media. Twitter, now a prominent social media platform, began in 2006 and grew to three million active users by the beginning of the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Members of Facebook, another prominent social media platform, tracking the Olympic Games grew from approximately one million during the Olympic Games of Athens 2004 to 90 million during the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Social media use, in general, increased by 24 percent between 2007 and 2008–from 63 percent of U.S. adults to 87 percent of U.S. adults. == 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics == The International Olympic Committee (IOC) deemed The Vancouver Winter Olympics as "the first social media games” based on its fan base through social media platforms. The IOC launched their Facebook page a month before the games began, attracting 1.5 million fans. Shifting to online viewing attracted a younger audience than past Olympic games with over 60 percent of Facebook fans being under 24 years of age. Athletes like Lindsey Vonn and Shaun White reached fans on social media as the platform posted behind-the-scenes coverage on their experiences. The IOC used social media to create competitions between athletes and fans streamed online. Its YouTube channel hosted a “Best of Us” challenge in which the public could compete in games with their favorite athletes, acquiring three million viewers. Photos spread across social media platforms, such as Flickr, which had 11,000 photos posted by 600 photographers, bringing a new perspective to the games. Twitter contributed constant live updates of the competitions. The IOC's Twitter following doubled to 12,000 followers during the Vancouver Olympics, creating a larger viewer population for the games. The IOC created social media guidelines as more athletes and fans got online to interact with the Olympics. Social media was still relatively new as a marketing platform, so these guidelines confused many individuals. == 2012 London Summer Olympics == The London 2012 Olympic Games succeeded in broadcasting, participation and marketing. For the first time, the IOC broadcast the Olympic Games live and on-demand through YouTube, allowing fans to access the Games anytime, anywhere through live streaming. The combination of conventional broadcasting and mobile platforms reached a global audience of 4.8 billion people. Social media soared with Facebook, Twitter and Google+, attracting 4.7 million followers. Athletes shared photographs, interacted online with fans and updated daily, either in person or via an agent. Instagram was established by 2012, making itself a premier photo-sharing platform perfect for athletes to capture their emotions. Lewis Wiltshire, head of sport for Twitter UK said, "Never before have fans had such direct access to their sporting heroes." Social media created conversation on fan opinions regarding athletes, including 962,756 total mentions of Usain Bolt, “Fastest Man in History,” who defended the 100 meter and 200 meter gold medals. Michael Phelps followed with 828,081 total mentions. Olympic sponsors were active on social media; created several campaigns to promote their brands; and inspired viewers with mass participation and personalized events. The Adidas “Take the Stage” Campaign recognized talent around the world, installing a photo booth and inviting the 550 Olympics athletes to take the stage. (IOC Marketing Report 2012). David Beckham surprised fans at the photo booth in Westfield shopping centre, gaining popularity in UK media. Coca-Cola, Acer Inc., McDonald's, Visa Inc. and several others used similar tactics of participation to attract viewers. == 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics == === Channels === The 2014 Winter Olympic Games were held in Sochi, a city in Krasnodar Krai, Russia, establishing the first “social media Olympics” for Russia. The most popular Russian social media and networking service, VK, created an Olympic page, similar to Facebook's. The Olympic VK page has 2.8 million fans and—the most popular official community on the platform. Throughout the games, VK had 54 million Olympic mentions, an average of 1.5 million per day. Numbers grew on other social media pages: more than 2 million fans joined the Olympic Facebook page, 168,101 followed the Olympic Twitter, 150,000 followed the Olympic Instagram and three million visited the Olympic website in February 2014. There were 90,000 total updates on social media by Sochi 2014 Olympians and teams. The United States was the most active country during the games logging 22,598 posts across Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. === Engagement === With social media there is also hashtags. The most popular hashtag was #sochi2014 with almost 11,000 uses. The next top five hashtags were #wearewinter, #teamusa, #olympics, #goaus and #wirfuerD. Another popular hashtag was #Sochiproblems, depicting local struggles. Photos of the poor state of Sochi on all platforms made the games the number one trending topic one week before the opening ceremony. #SochiFail and #SochiProblems gave multiple reports of the poor living arrangements, incomplete construction, broken elevators, and polluted waters. This was one way that social media provided awareness to its users. === Media Perceptions === Media perceptions varied during the games; the Olympics was viewed as a confrontation between Eastern and Western Civilizations. The LGBT community took a stand against the games. Sponsors for the games including Coca-Cola, Mcdonald's, and P&G protested against Russian authorities and Russian anti-LGBT laws. Many protests took a stand against Russian laws, which created a discussion between human rights advocates. Advocates believed organizations should not promote certain values in western markets while supporting an anti-human rights government in another market. == 2016 Rio Summer Olympics == Social media marketing was an influential tool in the promotion and analysis of the 2016 Rio Olympics. Thomas Bach, President of the International Olympic Committee said that the power of sport demonstrates that diversity and interconnectedness can enlighten us all. With over 25,000+ sources of accredited media covering the games, the 2016 games were the most consumed Olympic games to date. Marketing for the Rio Olympics began in 2013 and ultimately lasted 3 years. There were 26 million visits to Olympic.org, the official website of the Olympic games, and over 7 billion views of official Olympic content on social media. There were o The GNU Binary Utilities, or binutils, is a collection of programming tools maintained by the GNU Project for working with executable code including assembly, linking and many other development operations. The tools are originally from Cygnus Solutions. The tools are typically used along with other GNU tools such as GNU Compiler Collection, and the GNU Debugger. == Tools == The tools include: == elfutils == Ulrich Drepper wrote elfutils, to partially replace GNU Binutils, purely for Linux and with support only for ELF and DWARF. It distributes three libraries with it for programmatic access. The Short Signal Code, also known as the Short Signal Book (German: Kurzsignalbuch), was a short code system used by the Kriegsmarine (German Navy) during World War II to minimize the transmission duration of messages. == Description == The transmission of radio messages had the potential risks of revealing the submarine's presence and direction; if decoded the content was also revealed. Submarines need to provide information, mostly in standard form (position of convoy to attack and of submarine, weather information), to their bases. Initially Morse code transmissions could be used. To inhibit detection, the duration of messages needed to be minimised; for this, Kurzsignale short-coding was used. To prevent interception, messages needed to be encrypted by the Enigma machine. To shorten transmission even further, the message could be sent by a fast machine instead of a human radio operator. For example, the Kurier system – not implemented in time – decreased the time to send a Morse dot from around 50 milliseconds for a human to 1 millisecond. == Short Signal book == The Kurzsignale code was intended to shorten transmission time to below the time required to get a directional fix. It was not primarily intended to hide signal contents; protection was intended to be achieved by encoding with the Enigma machine. A copy of the Kurzsignale code book was captured from German submarine U-110 on 9 May 1941. In August 1941, Dönitz began addressing U-boats by the names of their commanders, instead of boat numbers. The method of defining U-boat meeting points in the Short Signal Book was regarded as compromised, so a method was defined by B-Dienst cryptanalysts to disguise their positions on the Kriegsmarine German Naval Grid System (German:Gradnetzmeldeverfahren) was introduced and used until the end of the war == Radio direction finding == Aware of the danger presented by radio direction finding (RDF), the Kriegsmarine developed various systems to speed up broadcast. The Kurzsignale code system condensed messages into short codes consisting of short sequences for common terms such as "convoy location" so that additional descriptions would not be needed in the message. The resulting Kurzsignal was then encoded with the Enigma machine and subsequently transmitted as rapidly as possible, typically taking about 20 seconds. Typical length of an information or weather signal was about 25 characters. Conventional RDF needed about a minute to fix the bearing of a radio signal, and the Kurzsignale protected against this. However, the huff-duff system which was in use by the Allies could cope with these short transmissions. The fully automated burst transmission Kurier system, in testing from August 1944, could send a Kurzsignal in not more than 460 milliseconds; this was short enough to prevent location even by huff-duff and, if deployed, would have been a serious setback for Allied anti-submarine and code-breaking activities. By late 1944 the Kurier program was a top priority, but the war ended before the system was operational. == Short Weather cipher == A similar coding system was used for weather reports from U-boats, the Wetterkurzschlüssel (Short Weather Cipher). Code books were captured from U-559 on 30 October 1942.Cryptographic High Value Product
Knapsack problem
Social media coverage of the Olympics
GNU Binutils
Kurzsignale