Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins of the Moon (フラジール ～さよなら月の廃墟～, Furajīru: Sayonara Tsuki no Haikyo; known in Japan as Fragile) is an action role-playing game for the Wii developed by Namco Bandai Games in co-operation with Tri-Crescendo. The game was released by Namco Bandai Games in Japan on January 22, 2009. It was later published by Xseed Games in North America on March 16, 2010, and in Europe by Rising Star Games on March 19, 2010, followed by its release in Australia on April 1, 2010. == Gameplay == In Fragile Dreams, the player character, Seto, must traverse the ruins of Tokyo and the surrounding areas, fighting off ghosts that lurk within these ruins. The game's heads-up display includes a mini-map and HP gauge for Seto's location and health, respectively. Seto will fall unconscious if his HP reaches zero, resulting in a game over. The player controls Seto from a third-person perspective with the Wii Remote and Nunchuk. Seto can use his flashlight (controlled by the Wii Remote pointer) to illuminate his surroundings or solve puzzles and interact with the environment. When searching for certain objectives or hidden enemies, pointing Seto's light in their direction picks up and plays their sounds through the Wii Remote's mini speaker. The Wii Nunchuk, meanwhile, directly controls Seto's movement: aside of basic movement, he can crouch to hide and crawl through small spaces. Seto will often come across damaged floors, which require slow movement (and for heavily damaged floors, crouching) to cross without falling through. As Seto, the player can use weapons found throughout the world to fight off ghosts, ranging from slingshots and golf clubs to crossbows and katanas. Each weapon can only take a certain amount of use: once a weapon reaches its limit, it will break after battle. The player can also find other usable and collectable items in the field, marked with fireflies. The player can only save their game by resting at small fire pits scattered throughout the world: used fire pits are marked with a bonfire. The player can also examine and identify Mystery Items, organize their inventory, as well as after encountering the Merchant, buy and sell items. As stated by the producer of the game, Kentarō Kawashima, Fragile Dreams is not strictly a survival horror: rather, its story focuses on human drama. In Fragile Dreams, aside of the main story, the player can find and examine objects and graffiti throughout the world. Objects called memory items (ranging from origami and stones to cell phones and books) hold the memories of their former owners (only accessible at bonfires), while the graffiti contains messages only seen by pointing at them in first-person. By examining these messages, the player can piece together hints to the game's backstory. == Story == === Setting and characters === Fragile Dreams is set in a post-apocalyptic version of Earth in the near-future. Almost all the world's population has vanished, leaving the surviving buildings and structures abandoned. The game is set in and near the ruins of Tokyo, Japan, where the event that nearly wiped out humanity may have originated. The protagonist, Seto, is a 15-year-old boy who searches the world for other living humans. He encounters Ren, a silver-haired girl who often leaves behind large, cryptic drawings. Other characters include: Sai, the ghost of a young woman; Crow, a mischievous and straightforward amnesiac boy; Personal Frame (P.F.), a portable computer who loves having conversations more than anything else; Chiyo, the ghost of a little girl; and the Merchant, a mysterious yet merry man who trades various goods. The game's host of enemies mainly consist of ghosts, but also include humanoid robots and security proxies. The main antagonist, Shin, is the AI of a scientist who considers speech to be an inferior means of communication. Various memory items include a greater set of characters, each giving hints to the game's backstory. === Plot === At the end of Seto's fifteenth summer, his grandfather dies. Seto buries him in front of their home, an old observatory, and that from then on he became "truly alone". At night, he searches for anything the old man had left for him and discovers a letter, along with a strange blue stone in a locket. Suddenly, a mask-like ghost appears and attacks Seto. After driving the creature off, Seto reads the old man's letter, who tells him to "reach a tall red tower" east of the observatory, where he might find other survivors. After departing for the tower, Seto reaches an old subway entrance in the Azabudai district and finds Ren sitting on a collapsed pillar, singing to the stars. He accidentally startles her and the frightened Ren flees into the subway station: getting over the shock of meeting another person, Seto follows her. While searching the station, he discovers a Personal Frame, who guides him towards Ren. Unfortunately, just as they reach the exit, P.F.'s battery dies out: Seto buries the device, keeping a screw from it in his locket. From the underground, Seto finds himself at an abandoned amusement park and encounters Crow, who steals Seto's locket. After a long chase across the park and another encounter with the masked ghost, Crow returns Seto's locket and directs him to a hotel nearby, where he saw a girl who might know something about Ren. Crow also gives Seto his skull ring to keep in his locket and kisses him. At the hotel, Seto encounters Sai and fights the masked ghost again. After laying to rest the spirit of an old woman named Chiyo, the two discover Ren's drawings by a sewer. Returning to the underground, Seto and Sai find themselves at a hydropower dam. While searching for Ren, Seto discovers that Crow is actually a robot, but his battery begins to fail and Seto mourns for him as he "die[s]". Finally, they encounter Ren in a cell: although glad to see him again, Ren runs off after Shin calls. Sai explains to Seto that most of humanity died because of a "human empathy expansion project" called Glass Cage. The project was meant to make human thoughts transparent, meaning that no one would need words to communicate. However, after Glass Cage activated, people who went to sleep never woke up again. Sai reveals that she was Glass Cage's first catalyst: this time, Shin intends to use Ren as the catalyst. After exiting the dam, a demolition crane attempts to destroy it. Hearing both Shin's and the masked ghost's voices from the crane — saying, "Any threat to the project must be eliminated." — the player realizes both are manifestations of Glass Cage. After Seto destroys the crane, Sai leads him to the facility where Ren was taken to. Entering the laboratory, Seto and Sai are confronted by Shin, who coldly dismisses Sai's attempts at reasoning with him and is adamant about proceeding with his plans. As they traverse the laboratory, they overhear a voice announcing "Glass Cage Launch Preparations Complete", strengthening their resolve to save Ren. Making it into the room where Ren is being held, Shin tells them of his intention to use Glass Cage to "obliterate corporeal beings". After Seto defeats him, Shin disappears and Seto releases Ren from the device holding her. Their reunion is cut short as Sai tells them that the backup system has "finished copying her psyche to the AI", allowing Glass Cage to proceed. Ren reveals Shin has escaped to the top of the Tokyo Tower and Seto asks Ren to wait at the base of the tower and for Sai to accompany her. On his way up the tower, Seto hears the voices of P.F., Chiyo and Crow wishing him luck. He confronts and defeats Shin a second time, who reveals his motivations: he had secretly used himself as the first test subject of the human empathy expansion project and gained the ability to hear the thoughts of those around him. Despite his initial belief in the project as a way for humans to empathize with one another, all he heard around him was "jealousy and contempt" and he soon grew disillusioned with the world as even his parents turned against him. Believing no person loved him, Shin wants to put an end to humanity. His words meet with a vehement response from Sai, as she tells him that she loves him, having developed those feelings while she was the catalyst and all she ever wanted was to be part of his life. Hearing this, Shin finds peace, tossing the AI mainframe away so Glass Cage can never be reactivated and vanishes together with Sai, hand-in-hand, after thanking Seto. Descending from the tower, Seto finally learns Ren's name and they resolve to look for other survivors together. == Development == Fragile Dreams was developed by the team at Namco Bandai Games. Director and producer Kentarō Kawashima came up with the concept for the game in 2003, before the Wii console was revealed. When the Wii was unveiled, it became the obvious choice as the game's platform as the Wii remote could be used to control the flashlight. Kawashima wrote the main scenario for the title, w
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a technique that enables large language models (LLMs) to retrieve and incorporate new information from external data sources. With RAG, LLMs first refer to a specified set of documents, then respond to user queries. These documents supplement information from the LLM's pre-existing training data. This allows LLMs to use domain-specific and/or updated information that is not available in the training data. For example, this enables LLM-based chatbots to access internal company data or generate responses based on authoritative sources. RAG improves LLMs by incorporating information retrieval before generating responses. Unlike LLMs that rely on static training data, RAG pulls relevant text from databases, uploaded documents, or web sources. According to Ars Technica, "RAG is a way of improving LLM performance, in essence by blending the LLM process with a web search or other document look-up process to help LLMs stick to the facts." This method helps reduce AI hallucinations, which have caused chatbots to describe policies that don't exist, or recommend nonexistent legal cases to lawyers that are looking for citations to support their arguments. RAG also reduces the need to retrain LLMs with new data, saving on computational and financial costs. Beyond efficiency gains, RAG also allows LLMs to include sources in their responses, so users can verify the cited sources. This provides greater transparency, as users can cross-check retrieved content to ensure accuracy and relevance. The term retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) was introduced in a 2020 paper that described combining a parametric language model with a non-parametric external memory accessed through retrieval at inference time. == RAG and LLM limitations == LLMs can provide incorrect information. For example, when Google first demonstrated its LLM tool "Google Bard" (later re-branded to Gemini), the LLM provided incorrect information about the James Webb Space Telescope. This error contributed to a $100 billion decline in Google's stock value. RAG is used to prevent these errors, but it does not solve all the problems. For example, LLMs can generate misinformation even when pulling from factually correct sources if they misinterpret the context. MIT Technology Review gives the example of an AI-generated response stating, "The United States has had one Muslim president, Barack Hussein Obama." The model retrieved this from an academic book rhetorically titled Barack Hussein Obama: America's First Muslim President? The LLM did not "know" or "understand" the context of the title, generating a false statement. LLMs with RAG are programmed to prioritize new information. This technique has been called "prompt stuffing." Without prompt stuffing, the LLM's input is generated by a user; with prompt stuffing, additional relevant context is added to this input to guide the model's response. This approach provides the LLM with key information early in the prompt, encouraging it to prioritize the supplied data over pre-existing training knowledge. == Process == Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by incorporating an information-retrieval mechanism that allows models to access and utilize additional data beyond their original training set. Ars Technica notes that "when new information becomes available, rather than having to retrain the model, all that's needed is to augment the model's external knowledge base with the updated information" ("augmentation"). IBM states that "in the generative phase, the LLM draws from the augmented prompt and its internal representation of its training data to synthesize" an answer. === RAG key stages === Typically, the data to be referenced is converted into LLM embeddings, numerical representations in the form of a large vector space. RAG can be used on unstructured (usually text), semi-structured, or structured data (for example knowledge graphs). These embeddings are then stored in a vector database to allow for document retrieval. Given a user query, a document retriever is first called to select the most relevant documents that will be used to augment the query. This comparison can be done using a variety of methods, which depend in part on the type of indexing used. The model feeds this relevant retrieved information into the LLM via prompt engineering of the user's original query. Newer implementations (as of 2023) can also incorporate specific augmentation modules with abilities such as expanding queries into multiple domains and using memory and self-improvement to learn from previous retrievals. Finally, the LLM can generate output based on both the query and the retrieved documents. Some models incorporate extra steps to improve output, such as the re-ranking of retrieved information, context selection, and fine-tuning. == Applications == Retrieval-augmented generation is used in applications where generated responses need to be grounded in external or frequently updated information. Commonly cited use cases include search engines, question-answering systems, customer support chatbots, enterprise knowledge assistants, content generation, recommendation systems, retail and e-commerce, and industrial or manufacturing workflows. In healthcare, RAG has been studied as a way to ground large language model outputs in external medical knowledge sources, although reviews have noted continuing challenges around evaluation, ethics, and clinical reliability. == Improvements == Improvements to the basic process above can be applied at different stages in the RAG flow. === Encoder === These methods focus on the encoding of text as either dense or sparse vectors. Sparse vectors, which encode the identity of a word, are typically dictionary-length and contain mostly zeros. Dense vectors, which encode meaning, are more compact and contain fewer zeros. Various enhancements can improve the way similarities are calculated in the vector stores (databases). Performance improves by optimizing how vector similarities are calculated. Dot products enhance similarity scoring, while approximate nearest neighbor (ANN) searches improve retrieval efficiency over K-nearest neighbors (KNN) searches. Accuracy may be improved with Late Interactions, which allow the system to compare words more precisely after retrieval. This helps refine document ranking and improve search relevance. Hybrid vector approaches may be used to combine dense vector representations with sparse one-hot vectors, taking advantage of the computational efficiency of sparse dot products over dense vector operations. Other retrieval techniques focus on improving accuracy by refining how documents are selected. Some retrieval methods combine sparse representations, such as SPLADE, with query expansion strategies to improve search accuracy and recall. === Retriever-centric methods === These methods aim to enhance the quality of document retrieval in vector databases: Pre-training the retriever using the Inverse Cloze Task (ICT), a technique that helps the model learn retrieval patterns by predicting masked text within documents. Supervised retriever optimization aligns retrieval probabilities with the generator model's likelihood distribution. This involves retrieving the top-k vectors for a given prompt, scoring the generated response's perplexity, and minimizing KL divergence between the retriever's selections and the model's likelihoods to refine retrieval. Reranking techniques can refine retriever performance by prioritizing the most relevant retrieved documents during training. === Language model === By redesigning the language model with the retriever in mind, a 25-time smaller network can get comparable perplexity as its much larger counterparts. Because it is trained from scratch, this method (Retro) incurs the high cost of training runs that the original RAG scheme avoided. The hypothesis is that by giving domain knowledge during training, Retro needs less focus on the domain and can devote its smaller weight resources only to language semantics. The redesigned language model is shown here. It has been reported that Retro is not reproducible, so modifications were made to make it so. The more reproducible version is called Retro++ and includes in-context RAG. === Chunking === Chunking involves various strategies for breaking up the data into vectors so the retriever can find details in it. Three types of chunking strategies are: Fixed length with overlap. This is fast and easy. Overlapping consecutive chunks helps to maintain semantic context across chunks. Syntax-based chunks can break the document up into sentences. Libraries such as spaCy or NLTK can also help. File format-based chunking. Certain file types have natural chunks built in, and it's best to respect them. For example, code files are best chunked and vectorized as whole functions or classes. HTML files should leave
AlphaEvolve is an evolutionary coding agent for designing advanced algorithms based on large language models such as Gemini. It was developed by Google DeepMind and unveiled in May 2025. == Design == AlphaEvolve aims to autonomously discover and refine algorithms through a combination of large language models (LLMs) and evolutionary computation. AlphaEvolve needs an evaluation function with metrics to optimize, and an initial algorithm. At each step, AlphaEvolve uses the LLM to produce variants of the existing algorithms, and then selects the most effective ones. Unlike domain-specific predecessors like AlphaFold or AlphaTensor, AlphaEvolve is designed as a general-purpose system. It can operate across a wide array of scientific and engineering tasks by automatically modifying code and optimizing for multiple objectives. Its architecture allows it to evaluate code programmatically, reducing reliance on human input and mitigating risks such as hallucinations common in standard LLM outputs. == Achievements == According to Google, across a selection of 50 open mathematical problems, the model was able to rediscover state-of-the-art solutions 75% of the time and discovered improved solutions 20% of the time, for example advancing the kissing number problem. AlphaEvolve was also used to optimize Google's computing ecosystem. Improved data center scheduling heuristics, enabled the recovery of 0.7% of stranded resources. It was also used to optimize TPU circuit design and Gemini's training matrix multiplication kernel. == Open source implementations == Following the publication of AlphaEvolve, several open source implementations have been developed by the research community. One such implementation is OpenEvolve, which implements distributed evolutionary algorithms, multi-language support, integration with various large language model providers, and automated discovery of high-performance GPU kernels that outperform expert-engineered baselines.
Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) is a W3C recommendation designed for representation of thesauri, classification schemes, taxonomies, subject-heading systems, or any other type of structured controlled vocabulary. SKOS is part of the Semantic Web family of standards built upon RDF and RDFS, and its main objective is to enable easy publication and use of such vocabularies as linked data. == History == === DESIRE II project (1997–2000) === The most direct ancestor to SKOS was the RDF Thesaurus work undertaken in the second phase of the EU DESIRE project . Motivated by the need to improve the user interface and usability of multi-service browsing and searching, a basic RDF vocabulary for Thesauri was produced. As noted later in the SWAD-Europe workplan, the DESIRE work was adopted and further developed in the SOSIG and LIMBER projects. A version of the DESIRE/SOSIG implementation was described in W3C's QL'98 workshop, motivating early work on RDF rule and query languages: A Query and Inference Service for RDF. === LIMBER (1999–2001) === SKOS built upon the output of the Language Independent Metadata Browsing of European Resources (LIMBER) project funded by the European Community, and part of the Information Society Technologies programme. In the LIMBER project CCLRC further developed an RDF thesaurus interchange format which was demonstrated on the European Language Social Science Thesaurus (ELSST) at the UK Data Archive as a multilingual version of the English language Humanities and Social Science Electronic Thesaurus (HASSET) which was planned to be used by the Council of European Social Science Data Archives CESSDA. === SWAD-Europe (2002–2004) === SKOS as a distinct initiative began in the SWAD-Europe project, bringing together partners from both DESIRE, SOSIG (ILRT) and LIMBER (CCLRC) who had worked with earlier versions of the schema. It was developed in the Thesaurus Activity Work Package, in the Semantic Web Advanced Development for Europe (SWAD-Europe) project. SWAD-Europe was funded by the European Community, and part of the Information Society Technologies programme. The project was designed to support W3C's Semantic Web Activity through research, demonstrators and outreach efforts conducted by the five project partners, ERCIM, the ILRT at Bristol University, HP Labs, CCLRC and Stilo. The first release of SKOS Core and SKOS Mapping were published at the end of 2003, along with other deliverables on RDF encoding of multilingual thesauri and thesaurus mapping. === Semantic web activity (2004–2005) === Following the termination of SWAD-Europe, SKOS effort was supported by the W3C Semantic Web Activity in the framework of the Best Practice and Deployment Working Group. During this period, focus was put both on consolidation of SKOS Core, and development of practical guidelines for porting and publishing thesauri for the Semantic Web. === Development as W3C Recommendation (2006–2009) === The SKOS main published documents — the SKOS Core Guide, the SKOS Core Vocabulary Specification, and the Quick Guide to Publishing a Thesaurus on the Semantic Web — were developed through the W3C Working Draft process. Principal editors of SKOS were Alistair Miles, initially Dan Brickley, and Sean Bechhofer. The Semantic Web Deployment Working Group, chartered for two years (May 2006 – April 2008), put in its charter to push SKOS forward on the W3C Recommendation track. The roadmap projected SKOS as a Candidate Recommendation by the end of 2007, and as a Proposed Recommendation in the first quarter of 2008. The main issues to solve were determining its precise scope of use, and its articulation with other RDF languages and standards used in libraries (such as Dublin Core). === Formal release (2009) === On August 18, 2009, W3C released the new standard that builds a bridge between the world of knowledge organization systems – including thesauri, classifications, subject headings, taxonomies, and folksonomies – and the linked data community, bringing benefits to both. Libraries, museums, newspapers, government portals, enterprises, social networking applications, and other communities that manage large collections of books, historical artifacts, news reports, business glossaries, blog entries, and other items can now use SKOS to leverage the power of linked data. === Historical view of components === SKOS was originally designed as a modular and extensible family of languages, organized as SKOS Core, SKOS Mapping, and SKOS Extensions, and a Metamodel. The entire specification is now complete within the namespace http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#. == Overview == In addition to the reference itself, the SKOS Primer (a W3C Working Group Note) summarizes the Simple Knowledge Organization System. The SKOS defines the classes and properties sufficient to represent the common features found in a standard thesaurus. It is based on a concept-centric view of the vocabulary, where primitive objects are not terms, but abstract notions represented by terms. Each SKOS concept is defined as an RDF resource. Each concept can have RDF properties attached, including: one or more preferred index terms (at most one in each natural language) alternative terms or synonyms definitions and notes, with specification of their language Concepts can be organized in hierarchies using broader-narrower relationships, or linked by non-hierarchical (associative) relationships. Concepts can be gathered in concept schemes, to provide consistent and structured sets of concepts, representing whole or part of a controlled vocabulary. === Element categories === The principal element categories of SKOS are concepts, labels, notations, documentation, semantic relations, mapping properties, and collections. The associated elements are listed in the table below. === Concepts === The SKOS vocabulary is based on concepts. Concepts are the units of thought—ideas, meanings, or objects and events (instances or categories)—which underlie many knowledge organization systems. As such, concepts exist in the mind as abstract entities which are independent of the terms used to label them. In SKOS, a Concept (based on the OWL Class) is used to represent items in a knowledge organization system (terms, ideas, meanings, etc.) or such a system's conceptual or organizational structure. A ConceptScheme is analogous to a vocabulary, thesaurus, or other way of organizing concepts. SKOS does not constrain a concept to be within a particular scheme, nor does it provide any way to declare a complete scheme—there is no way to say the scheme consists only of certain members. A topConcept is (one of) the upper concept(s) in a hierarchical scheme. === Labels and notations === Each SKOS label is a string of Unicode characters, optionally with language tags, that are associated with a concept. The prefLabel is the preferred human-readable string (maximum one per language tag), while altLabel can be used for alternative strings, and hiddenLabel can be used for strings that are useful to associate, but not meant for humans to read. A SKOS notation is similar to a label, but this literal string has a datatype, like integer, float, or date; the datatype can even be made up (see 6.5.1 Notations, Typed Literals and Datatypes in the SKOS Reference). The notation is useful for classification codes and other strings not recognizable as words. === Documentation === The Documentation or Note properties provide basic information about SKOS concepts. All the properties are considered a type of skos:note; they just provide more specific kinds of information. The property definition, for example, should contain a full description of the subject resource. More specific note types can be defined in a SKOS extension, if desired. A query for skos:note ? will obtain all the notes about , including definitions, examples, and scope, history and change, and editorial documentation. Any of these SKOS Documentation properties can refer to several object types: a literal (e.g., a string); a resource node that has its own properties; or a reference to another document, for example using a URI. This enables the documentation to have its own metadata, like creator and creation date. Specific guidance on SKOS documentation properties can be found in the SKOS Primer Documentary Notes. === Semantic relations === SKOS semantic relations are intended to provide ways to declare relationships between concepts within a concept scheme. While there are no restrictions precluding their use with two concepts from separate schemes, this is discouraged because it is likely to overstate what can be known about the two schemes, and perhaps link them inappropriately. The property related simply makes an association relationship between two concepts; no hierarchy or generality relation is implied. The properties broader and narrower are used to assert a direct hierarchical link between two concepts. The meaning may be unexpected; the relat
The Turing test, originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing in 1949, is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to that of a human. In the test, a human evaluator judges a text transcript of a natural-language conversation between a human and a machine. The evaluator tries to identify the machine, and the machine passes if the evaluator cannot reliably tell them apart. The results would not depend on the machine's ability to answer questions correctly, only on how closely its answers resembled those of a human. Since the Turing test is a test of indistinguishability in performance capacity, the verbal version generalizes naturally to all of human performance capacity, verbal as well as nonverbal (robotic). The test was introduced by Turing in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" while working at the University of Manchester. It opens with the words: "I propose to consider the question, 'Can machines think?'." Because "thinking" is difficult to define, Turing chooses to "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words". Turing describes the new form of the problem in terms of a three-person party game called the "imitation game", in which an interrogator asks questions of a man and a woman in another room in order to determine the correct sex of the two players. Turing's new question is: "Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?" This question, Turing believed, was one that could actually be answered. In the remainder of the paper, he argued against the major objections to the proposition that "machines can think". Since Turing introduced his test, it has been highly influential in the philosophy of artificial intelligence, resulting in substantial discussion and controversy, as well as criticism from philosophers like John Searle, who argue against the test's ability to detect consciousness. == History == === Philosophical background === The question of whether it is possible for machines to think has a long history, which is firmly entrenched in the distinction between dualist and materialist views of the mind. René Descartes prefigures aspects of the Turing test in his 1637 Discourse on the Method when he writes: [H]ow many different automata or moving machines could be made by the industry of man ... For we can easily understand a machine's being constituted so that it can utter words, and even emit some responses to action on it of a corporeal kind, which brings about a change in its organs; for instance, if touched in a particular part it may ask what we wish to say to it; if in another part it may exclaim that it is being hurt, and so on. But it never happens that it arranges its speech in various ways, in order to reply appropriately to everything that may be said in its presence, as even the lowest type of man can do. Here Descartes notes that automata are capable of responding to human interactions but argues that such automata cannot respond appropriately to things said in their presence in the way that any human can. Descartes therefore prefigures the Turing test by defining the insufficiency of appropriate linguistic response as that which separates the human from the automaton. Descartes fails to consider the possibility that future automata might be able to overcome such insufficiency, and so does not propose the Turing test as such, even if he prefigures its conceptual framework and criterion. Denis Diderot formulates in his 1746 book Pensées philosophiques a Turing-test criterion, though with the important implicit limiting assumption maintained, of the participants being natural living beings, rather than considering created artifacts: If they find a parrot who could answer to everything, I would claim it to be an intelligent being without hesitation. This does not mean he agrees with this, but that it was already a common argument of materialists at that time. According to dualism, the mind is non-physical (or, at the very least, has non-physical properties) and, therefore, cannot be explained in purely physical terms. According to materialism, the mind can be explained physically, which leaves open the possibility of minds that are produced artificially. In 1936, philosopher Alfred Ayer considered the standard philosophical question of other minds: how do we know that other people have the same conscious experiences that we do? In his book, Language, Truth and Logic, Ayer suggested a protocol to distinguish between a conscious man and an unconscious machine: "The only ground I can have for asserting that an object which appears to be conscious is not really a conscious being, but only a dummy or a machine, is that it fails to satisfy one of the empirical tests by which the presence or absence of consciousness is determined". (This suggestion is very similar to the Turing test, but it is not certain that Ayer's popular philosophical classic was familiar to Turing.) In other words, a thing is not conscious if it fails the consciousness test. === Cultural background === A rudimentary idea of the Turing test appears in the 1726 novel Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift. When Gulliver is brought before the king of Brobdingnag, the king thinks at first that Gulliver might be a "a piece of clock-work (which is in that country arrived to a very great perfection) contrived by some ingenious artist". Even when he hears Gulliver speaking, the king still doubts whether Gulliver was taught "a set of words" to make him "sell at a better price". Gulliver tells that only after "he put several other questions to me, and still received rational answers" the king became satisfied that Gulliver was not a machine. Tests where a human judges whether a computer or an alien is intelligent were an established convention in science fiction by the 1940s, and it is likely that Turing would have been aware of these. Stanley G. Weinbaum's "A Martian Odyssey" (1934) provides an example of how nuanced such tests could be. Earlier examples of machines or automatons attempting to pass as human include the Ancient Greek myth of Pygmalion who creates a sculpture of a woman that is animated by Aphrodite, Carlo Collodi's novel The Adventures of Pinocchio, about a puppet who wants to become a real boy, and E. T. A. Hoffmann's 1816 story "The Sandman," where the protagonist falls in love with an automaton. In all these examples, people are fooled by artificial beings that—up to a point—pass as human. === Alan Turing and the imitation game === Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. In Turing's report, "Intelligent Machinery," he investigated "the question of whether or not it is possible for machinery to show intelligent behaviour" and, as part of that investigation, proposed what may be considered the forerunner to his later tests: It is not difficult to devise a paper machine which will play a not very bad game of chess. Now get three men A, B and C as subjects for the experiment. A and C are to be rather poor chess players, B is the operator who works the paper machine. ... Two rooms are used with some arrangement for communicating moves, and a game is played between C and either A or the paper machine. C may find it quite difficult to tell which he is playing. "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" (1950) was the first published paper by Turing to focus exclusively on machine intelligence. Turing begins the 1950 paper with the claim, "I propose to consider the question 'Can machines think?'" As he highlights, the traditional approach to such a question is to start with definitions, defining both the terms "machine" and "think". Turing chooses not to do so; instead, he replaces the question with a new one, "which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words". In essence he proposes to change the question from "Can machines think?" to "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" The advantage of the new question, Turing argues, is that it draws "a fairly sharp line between the physical and intellectual capacities of a man". To demonstrate this approach Turing proposes a test inspired by a party game, known as the "imitation game", in which a man and a woman go into separate rooms and guests try to tell them apart by writing a series of questions and reading the typewritten answers sent back. In this game, both the man and the woman aim to convince the guests that they ar
Granular computing is an emerging computing paradigm of information processing that concerns the processing of complex information entities called "information granules", which arise in the process of data abstraction and derivation of knowledge from information or data. Generally speaking, information granules are collections of entities that usually originate at the numeric level and are arranged together due to their similarity, functional or physical adjacency, indistinguishability, coherency, or the like. At present, granular computing is more a theoretical perspective than a coherent set of methods or principles. As a theoretical perspective, it encourages an approach to data that recognizes and exploits the knowledge present in data at various levels of resolution or scales. In this sense, it encompasses all methods which provide flexibility and adaptability in the resolution at which knowledge or information is extracted and represented. == Types of granulation == As mentioned above, granular computing is not an algorithm or process; there is no particular method that is called "granular computing". It is rather an approach to looking at data that recognizes how different and interesting regularities in the data can appear at different levels of granularity, much as different features become salient in satellite images of greater or lesser resolution. On a low-resolution satellite image, for example, one might notice interesting cloud patterns representing cyclones or other large-scale weather phenomena, while in a higher-resolution image, one misses these large-scale atmospheric phenomena but instead notices smaller-scale phenomena, such as the interesting pattern that is the streets of Manhattan. The same is generally true of all data: At different resolutions or granularities, different features and relationships emerge. The aim of granular computing is to try to take advantage of this fact in designing more effective machine-learning and reasoning systems. There are several types of granularity that are often encountered in data mining and machine learning, and we review them below: === Value granulation (discretization/quantization) === One type of granulation is the quantization of variables. It is very common that in data mining or machine-learning applications the resolution of variables needs to be decreased in order to extract meaningful regularities. An example of this would be a variable such as "outside temperature" (temp), which in a given application might be recorded to several decimal places of precision (depending on the sensing apparatus). However, for purposes of extracting relationships between "outside temperature" and, say, "number of health-club applications" (club), it will generally be advantageous to quantize "outside temperature" into a smaller number of intervals. ==== Motivations ==== There are several interrelated reasons for granulating variables in this fashion: Based on prior domain knowledge, there is no expectation that minute variations in temperature (e.g., the difference between 80–80.7 °F (26.7–27.1 °C)) could have an influence on behaviors driving the number of health-club applications. For this reason, any "regularity" which our learning algorithms might detect at this level of resolution would have to be spurious, as an artifact of overfitting. By coarsening the temperature variable into intervals the difference between which we do anticipate (based on prior domain knowledge) might influence number of health-club applications, we eliminate the possibility of detecting these spurious patterns. Thus, in this case, reducing resolution is a method of controlling overfitting. By reducing the number of intervals in the temperature variable (i.e., increasing its grain size), we increase the amount of sample data indexed by each interval designation. Thus, by coarsening the variable, we increase sample sizes and achieve better statistical estimation. In this sense, increasing granularity provides an antidote to the so-called curse of dimensionality, which relates to the exponential decrease in statistical power with increase in number of dimensions or variable cardinality. Independent of prior domain knowledge, it is often the case that meaningful regularities (i.e., which can be detected by a given learning methodology, representational language, etc.) may exist at one level of resolution and not at another. For example, a simple learner or pattern recognition system may seek to extract regularities satisfying a conditional probability threshold such as p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) ≥ α . {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})\geq \alpha .} In the special case where α = 1 , {\displaystyle \alpha =1,} this recognition system is essentially detecting logical implication of the form X = x i → Y = y j {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j}} or, in words, "if X = x i , {\displaystyle X=x_{i},} then Y = y j {\displaystyle Y=y_{j}} ". The system's ability to recognize such implications (or, in general, conditional probabilities exceeding threshold) is partially contingent on the resolution with which the system analyzes the variables. As an example of this last point, consider the feature space shown to the right. The variables may each be regarded at two different resolutions. Variable X {\displaystyle X} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution wherein it takes on the four values { x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 } {\displaystyle \{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},x_{4}\}} or at a lower (binary) resolution wherein it takes on the two values { X 1 , X 2 } . {\displaystyle \{X_{1},X_{2}\}.} Similarly, variable Y {\displaystyle Y} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution or at a lower (binary) resolution, where it takes on the values { y 1 , y 2 , y 3 , y 4 } {\displaystyle \{y_{1},y_{2},y_{3},y_{4}\}} or { Y 1 , Y 2 } , {\displaystyle \{Y_{1},Y_{2}\},} respectively. At the high resolution, there are no detectable implications of the form X = x i → Y = y j , {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j},} since every x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is associated with more than one y j , {\displaystyle y_{j},} and thus, for all x i , {\displaystyle x_{i},} p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) < 1. {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})<1.} However, at the low (binary) variable resolution, two bilateral implications become detectable: X = X 1 ↔ Y = Y 1 {\displaystyle X=X_{1}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{1}} and X = X 2 ↔ Y = Y 2 {\displaystyle X=X_{2}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{2}} , since every X 1 {\displaystyle X_{1}} occurs iff Y 1 {\displaystyle Y_{1}} and X 2 {\displaystyle X_{2}} occurs iff Y 2 . {\displaystyle Y_{2}.} Thus, a pattern recognition system scanning for implications of this kind would find them at the binary variable resolution, but would fail to find them at the higher quaternary variable resolution. ==== Issues and methods ==== It is not feasible to exhaustively test all possible discretization resolutions on all variables in order to see which combination of resolutions yields interesting or significant results. Instead, the feature space must be preprocessed (often by an entropy analysis of some kind) so that some guidance can be given as to how the discretization process should proceed. Moreover, one cannot generally achieve good results by naively analyzing and discretizing each variable independently, since this may obliterate the very interactions that we had hoped to discover. A sample of papers that address the problem of variable discretization in general, and multiple-variable discretization in particular, is as follows: Chiu, Wong & Cheung (1991), Bay (2001), Liu et al. (2002), Wang & Liu (1998), Zighed, Rabaséda & Rakotomalala (1998), Catlett (1991), Dougherty, Kohavi & Sahami (1995), Monti & Cooper (1999), Fayyad & Irani (1993), Chiu, Cheung & Wong (1990), Nguyen & Nguyen (1998), Grzymala-Busse & Stefanowski (2001), Ting (1994), Ludl & Widmer (2000), Pfahringer (1995), An & Cercone (1999), Chiu & Cheung (1989), Chmielewski & Grzymala-Busse (1996), Lee & Shin (1994), Liu & Wellman (2002), Liu & Wellman (2004). === Variable granulation (clustering/aggregation/transformation) === Variable granulation is a term that could describe a variety of techniques, most of which are aimed at reducing dimensionality, redundancy, and storage requirements. We briefly describe some of the ideas here, and present pointers to the literature. ==== Variable transformation ==== A number of classical methods, such as principal component analysis, multidimensional scaling, factor analysis, and structural equation modeling, and their relatives, fall under the genus of "variable transformation." Also in this category are more modern areas of study such as dimensionality reduction, projection pursuit, and independent component analysis. The common goal of these methods in general is to find a representation of the data in terms of new variables, which are a linear or nonlinear transformation of the original variables, and in which important stati
The International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence was founded in 1987 and is published by World Scientific. The journal covers developments in artificial intelligence, and its sub-field, pattern recognition. This includes articles on image and language processing, robotics and neural networks. == Abstracting and indexing == The journal is abstracted and indexed in: SciSearch ISI Alerting Services CompuMath Citation Index Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology Inspec io-port.net Compendex Computer Abstracts
