An evolutionary attractor is a point in an evolutionary space where a selection process will always drive trait values towards that point from the region around it. Because of the importance of evolution through natural selection, often such an evolutionary space will be defined by genetic or phenotypic traits, or possibly both. In this case the selection process will be a form of natural selection. The existence of an evolutionary attractor in a biological evolutionary space does not always imply that it can be reached from all points in that evolutionary space, nor does it identify what will happen when the evolutionary attractor is reached. While an evolutionary attractor may represent a point in evolutionary space that is resistant to further selection, such as an evolutionarily stable strategy, other possibilities are available. Because identification of an evolutionary attractor on its own does not describe everything about the evolutionary space in which it lies, this has led to interest in the evolutionary dynamics surrounding evolutionary attractors and in evolutionary spaces in general. (Theoretical biologists and mathematicians working in the area may prefer the terms adaptive dynamics or evolutionary invasion analysis to evolutionary dynamics.) These fields use differential equations which allows a more complete understanding of the dynamics in evolutionary spaces including the existence or otherwise of evolutionary attractors. Advances in the study of molecular evolution have also led to the identification of evolutionary attractors at a molecular level. Because biological evolutionary processes have been studied using evolutionary game theory, a technique inspired by game theory originally derived to address economic problems, not only can evolutionary attractors be found in biology but economists studying evolutionary economic models have also identified evolutionary attractors. Evolution in biology has also inspired evolutionary computation in computer science. Many algorithms in this field use a form of selection inspired by natural selection to generate results through evolutionary algorithms. This is therefore another area in which evolutionary attractors have been identified. == Evolutionary attractors in biology == It is not probably not surprising that biology is the field where most examples of evolutionary attractors have been identified, given the importance of evolution through natural selection. === Evolutionary attractors in adaptive landscapes === An evolutionary attractor is a point in genetic and/or phenotypic trait space, that evolution will always drive trait values towards via a selection process. The concept of an evolutionary attractor arose in population genetics following the origin of the adaptive landscape originally proposed by Sewall Wright in 1932. The height of a point in an adaptive landscape is a measure of evolutionary fitness. If a point in an adaptive landscape is a peak, then selection will always drive traits towards it and it will be an evolutionary attractor. While population genetics deals with discrete genetic traits, quantitative genetics extended such concepts to deal with continuous genetic traits, where the concept of evolutionary attractor is also valid. === Evolutionary attractors in evolutionary game models === Evolutionary game theory introduced into evolutionary biology concepts originally used in economics, with the advantage that evolution could be studied in relation to strategic choices made in animal conflicts. This is of particular interest because of the concept of the evolutionarily stable strategy or ESS, a strategy that once established is resistant to invasion by other strategies. ESSs will not always be evolutionary attractors, but if they are they will persist over evolutionary time. === Dynamics around evolutionary attractors in biology === Evolutionary attractors in biology do not exist in isolation. By definition they must exist in an evolutionary trait space where selection drives all traits towards them from a region immediately around them. That is, they must be convergence stable. Eshel (1983) modified the definition of an ESS by considering individually advantageous reduction from a majority deviation: he created the term continuous stability. A continuously stable ESS can be shown to be convergence stable, therefore it will act as an evolutionary attractor. But the nature of evolutionary trait spaces in biology means that it is not possible to guarantee that the region of convergence to the evolutionary attractor covers the whole of the trait space, nor that there is only one evolutionary attractor in a particular trait space. These issues have led to the emergence of the related fields of evolutionary dynamics, adaptive dynamics and evolutionary invasion analysis, all of which use differential equations to understand the dynamics in evolutionary trait spaces. Hence, if one or more evolutionary attractor exists in an evolutionary trait space, they provide techniques to understand the dynamics in that trait space around the evolutionary attractor. === Evolutionary attractors in an ecological context === Evolution in biology does not take place in single species in isolation. Ecological interaction of species leads to coevolution. Important examples of this are host-parasite or host-pathogen interaction, which can make both the dynamics around evolutionary attractors more complex, and the occurrence and number of evolutionary attractors more diverse. Evolutionary attractors have been identified in the analysis of evolutionary epidemiology of plant pathogens. In the above study working on plant populations the authors were able to identify evolutionary attractors using methods from adaptive dynamics. A model applied to the analysis of a maize (Zea mays L.) virus identified convergence stable equilibria through simulation modelling. A related model identified evolutionary attractors in the interaction of plants with fungal pathogens. === Evolutionary attractors in molecular genetics === As mentioned above much of the consideration of evolutionary attractors in biology has been through investigation of selection at a genetic or phenotypic level or both, in a single species or in coevolving species. Advances in the study of molecular genetics now allow the study of evolutionary attractors to be taken to a molecular genetic level. Wilson et. al (2019) studied the evolution of gene regulatory networks and identified the emergence of evolutionary attractors. == Evolutionary attractors in economics == Evolutionary game theory as applied in biology was inspired by game theory originally devised for applications in economics. Game theory remains an active field of research outside of biology, and thus it is not surprising that researchers in evolutionary economics use evolutionary game theory. Evolutionary attractors have been demonstrated by economists studying the evolutionary dynamics of market entry with market dynamics based on the replicator dynamics of biological evolutionary games. == Evolutionary attractors in computing == Evolutionary computation is a branch of computer science inspired by biological evolution. Many algorithms in evolutionary computation use a form of selection. Thus evolutionary attractors have been identified in computer science as well as in biology and economics. Evolutionary algorithms have generated evolutionary attractors, probably because of the similarity between adaptive hill-climbing in evolutionary heuristics and the adaptive landscape originated to explain evolution through natural selection.
1DayLater
1DayLater was a free, web-based software that was focused on professional invoicing. The company was formed in 2009 and closed in October 2013. The main function of 1DayLater was to help users create invoices for clients. It could also be used to track time and other expenses, work to budgets, and to track projects. Multiple users could simultaneously work on the same projects together. PC Magazine (PCMag) voted 1DayLater as one of the 'Best Free Software of 2010'. == History == The software was developed by two brothers, Paul and David King; after they experienced similar frustrations while working freelance, the brothers wanted to create a product that would let them track time, expenses and business miles in a single online location. == Media coverage == 1DayLater had the following press coverage: BBC Webscape (July 2010) - Kate Russell gives her latest selection of the best sites on the World Wide Web PCMag (March 2010) - The best free software of 2010 Lifehacker (February 2010) - "A worthy addition to our 'Top Ten Tips and Tools for Freelancers'" Gigaom (February 2010) - Taking a closer look with 1DayLater The Journal (May 2009) - "Top Ten Brands of the North East" (UK) Techcrunch (January 2009) - "A 'feisty time tracking solution from the North East of England'"
Reification (computer science)
In computer science, reification is the process by which an abstract idea about a program is turned into an explicit data model or other object created in a programming language. A computable/addressable object—a resource—is created in a system as a proxy for a non computable/addressable object. By means of reification, something that was previously implicit, unexpressed, and possibly inexpressible is explicitly formulated and made available to conceptual (logical or computational) manipulation. Informally, reification is often referred to as "making something a first-class citizen" within the scope of a particular system. Some aspect of a system can be reified at language design time, which is related to reflection in programming languages. It can be applied as a stepwise refinement at system design time. Reification is one of the most frequently used techniques of conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. == Reflective programming languages == In the context of programming languages, reification is the process by which a user program or any aspect of a programming language that was implicit in the translated program and the run-time system, are expressed in the language itself. This process makes it available to the program, which can inspect all these aspects as ordinary data. In reflective languages, reification data is causally connected to the related reified aspect such that a modification to one of them affects the other. Therefore, the reification data is always a faithful representation of the related reified aspect . Reification data is often said to be made a first class object. Reification, at least partially, has been experienced in many languages to date: in early Lisp dialects and in current Prolog dialects, programs have been treated as data, although the causal connection has often been left to the responsibility of the programmer. In Smalltalk-80, the compiler from the source text to bytecode has been part of the run-time system since the very first implementations of the language. The C programming language reifies the low-level detail of memory addresses.Many programming language designs encapsulate the details of memory allocation in the compiler and the run-time system. In the design of the C programming language, the memory address is reified and is available for direct manipulation by other language constructs. For example, the following code may be used when implementing a memory-mapped device driver. The buffer pointer is a proxy for the memory address 0xB8000000. Functional programming languages based on lambda-calculus reify the concept of a procedure abstraction and procedure application in the form of the Lambda expression. The Scheme programming language reifies continuations (approximately, the call stack). In C#, reification is used to make parametric polymorphism implemented in the form of generics as a first-class feature of the language. In the Java programming language, there exist "reifiable types" that are "completely available at run time" (i.e. their information is not erased during compilation). REBOL reifies code as data and vice versa. Many languages, such as Lisp, JavaScript, and Curl, provide an eval or evaluate procedure that effectively reifies the language interpreter. Smalltalk and Actor languages permit the reification of blocks and messages, which are equivalent of lambda expressions in Lisp, and thisContext in Smalltalk, which is a reification of the current executing block. Homoiconic languages reify the syntax of the language as data that is understood by the language itself. This allows the user to write programs whose inputs and outputs are code (see macros, eval). Common representations of code include S-expressions (e.g. Clojure, Lisp), and abstract syntax trees (e.g. Rust). == Data reification vs. data refinement == Data reification (stepwise refinement) involves finding a more concrete representation of the abstract data types used in a formal specification. Data reification is the terminology of the Vienna Development Method (VDM) that most other people would call data refinement. An example is taking a step towards an implementation by replacing a data representation without a counterpart in the intended implementation language, such as sets, by one that does have a counterpart (such as maps with fixed domains that can be implemented by arrays), or at least one that is closer to having a counterpart, such as sequences. The VDM community prefers the word "reification" over "refinement", as the process has more to do with concretising an idea than with refining it. For similar usages, see Reification (linguistics). == In conceptual modeling == Reification is widely used in conceptual modeling. Reifying a relationship means viewing it as an entity. The purpose of reifying a relationship is to make it explicit, when additional information needs to be added to it. Consider the relationship type IsMemberOf(member:Person, Committee). An instance of IsMemberOf is a relationship that represents the fact that a person is a member of a committee. The figure below shows an example population of IsMemberOf relationship in tabular form. Person P1 is a member of committees C1 and C2. Person P2 is a member of committee C1 only. The same fact, however, could also be viewed as an entity. Viewing a relationship as an entity, one can say that the entity reifies the relationship. This is called reification of a relationship. Like any other entity, it must be an instance of an entity type. In the present example, the entity type has been named Membership. For each instance of IsMemberOf, there is one and only one instance of Membership, and vice versa. Now, it becomes possible to add more information to the original relationship. As an example, we can express the fact that "person p1 was nominated to be the member of committee c1 by person p2". Reified relationship Membership can be used as the source of a new relationship IsNominatedBy(Membership, Person). For related usages see Reification (knowledge representation). == In Unified Modeling Language (UML) == UML provides an association class construct for defining reified relationship types. The association class is a single model element that is both a kind of association and a kind of class. The association and the entity type that reifies are both the same model element. Note that attributes cannot be reified. == On Semantic Web == === RDF and OWL === In Semantic Web languages, such as Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), a statement is a binary relation. It is used to link two individuals or an individual and a value. Applications sometimes need to describe other RDF statements, for instance, to record information like when statements were made, or who made them, which is sometimes called "provenance" information. As an example, we may want to represent properties of a relation, such as our certainty about it, severity or strength of a relation, relevance of a relation, and so on. The example from the conceptual modeling section describes a particular person with URIref person:p1, who is a member of the committee:c1. The RDF triple from that description is Consider to store two further facts: (i) to record who nominated this particular person to this committee (a statement about the membership itself), and (ii) to record who added the fact to the database (a statement about the statement). The first case is a case of classical reification like above in UML: reify the membership and store its attributes and roles etc.: Additionally, RDF provides a built-in vocabulary intended for describing RDF statements. A description of a statement using this vocabulary is called a reification of the statement. The RDF reification vocabulary consists of the type rdf:Statement, and the properties rdf:subject, rdf:predicate, and rdf:object. Using the reification vocabulary, a reification of the statement about the person's membership would be given by assigning the statement a URIref such as committee:membership12345 so that describing statements can be written as follows: These statements say that the resource identified by the URIref committee:membership12345Stat is an RDF statement, that the subject of the statement refers to the resource identified by person:p1, the predicate of the statement refers to the resource identified by committee:isMemberOf, and the object of the statement refers to the resource committee:c1. Assuming that the original statement is actually identified by committee:membership12345, it should be clear by comparing the original statement with the reification that the reification actually does describe it. The conventional use of the RDF reification vocabulary always involves describing a statement using four statements in this pattern. Therefore, they are sometimes referred to as the "reification quad". Using reification according to this convention, we could record the fact that pe
AlphaGo
AlphaGo is a computer program that plays the board game Go. It was developed by the London-based DeepMind Technologies, an acquired subsidiary of Google. Subsequent versions of AlphaGo became increasingly powerful, including a version that competed under the name Master. After retiring from competitive play, AlphaGo Master was succeeded by an even more powerful version known as AlphaGo Zero, which was completely self-taught without learning from human games. AlphaGo Zero was then generalized into a program known as AlphaZero, which played additional games, including chess and shogi. AlphaZero has in turn been succeeded by a program known as MuZero which learns without being taught the rules. AlphaGo and its successors use a Monte Carlo tree search algorithm to find its moves based on knowledge previously acquired by machine learning, specifically by an artificial neural network (a deep learning method) by extensive training, both from human and computer play. A neural network is trained to identify the best moves and the winning percentages of these moves. This neural network improves the strength of the tree search, resulting in stronger move selection in the next iteration. In October 2015, in a match against Fan Hui, the original AlphaGo became the first computer Go program to beat a human professional Go player without handicap on a full-sized 19×19 board. In March 2016, it beat Lee Sedol in a five-game match, the first time a computer Go program has beaten a 9-dan professional without handicap. Although it lost to Lee Sedol in the fourth game, Lee resigned in the final game, giving a final score of 4 games to 1 in favour of AlphaGo. In recognition of the victory, AlphaGo was awarded an honorary 9-dan by the Korea Baduk Association. The lead up and the challenge match with Lee Sedol were documented in a documentary film also titled AlphaGo, directed by Greg Kohs. The win by AlphaGo was chosen by Science as one of the Breakthrough of the Year runners-up on 22 December 2016. At the 2017 Future of Go Summit, the Master version of AlphaGo beat Ke Jie, the number one ranked player in the world at the time, in a three-game match, after which AlphaGo was awarded professional 9-dan by the Chinese Weiqi Association. After the match between AlphaGo and Ke Jie, DeepMind retired AlphaGo, while continuing AI research in other areas. The self-taught AlphaGo Zero achieved a 100–0 victory against the early competitive version of AlphaGo, and its successor AlphaZero was perceived as the world's top player in Go by the end of the 2010s. == History == Go is considered much more difficult for computers to win than other games such as chess, because its strategic and aesthetic nature makes it hard to directly construct an evaluation function, and its much larger branching factor makes it prohibitively difficult to use traditional AI methods such as alpha–beta pruning, tree traversal and heuristic search. Almost two decades after IBM's computer Deep Blue beat world chess champion Garry Kasparov in the 1997 match, the strongest Go programs using artificial intelligence techniques only reached about amateur 5-dan level, and still could not beat a professional Go player without a handicap. In 2012, the software program Zen, running on a four PC cluster, beat Masaki Takemiya (9p) twice at five- and four-stone handicaps. In 2013, Crazy Stone beat Yoshio Ishida (9p) at a four-stone handicap. According to DeepMind's David Silver, the AlphaGo research project was formed around 2014 to test how well a neural network using deep learning can compete at Go. AlphaGo represents a significant improvement over previous Go programs. In 500 games against other available Go programs, including Crazy Stone and Zen, AlphaGo running on a single computer won all but one. In a similar matchup, AlphaGo running on multiple computers won all 500 games played against other Go programs, and 77% of games played against AlphaGo running on a single computer. The distributed version in October 2015 was using 1,202 CPUs and 176 GPUs. === Match against Fan Hui === In October 2015, the distributed version of AlphaGo defeated the European Go champion Fan Hui, a 2-dan (out of 9 dan possible) professional, five to zero. This was the first time a computer Go program had beaten a professional human player on a full-sized board without handicap. The announcement of the news was delayed until 27 January 2016 to coincide with the publication of a paper in the journal Nature describing the algorithms used. === Match against Lee Sedol === AlphaGo played South Korean professional Go player Lee Sedol, ranked 9-dan, one of the best players at Go, with five games taking place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Seoul, South Korea on 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 March 2016, which were video-streamed live. Out of five games, AlphaGo won four games and Lee won the fourth game which made him recorded as the only human player who beat AlphaGo in all of its 74 official games. AlphaGo ran on Google's cloud computing with its servers located in the United States. The match used Chinese rules with a 7.5-point komi, and each side had two hours of thinking time plus three 60-second byoyomi periods. The version of AlphaGo playing against Lee used a similar amount of computing power as was used in the Fan Hui match. The Economist reported that it used 1,920 CPUs and 280 GPUs. At the time of play, Lee Sedol had the second-highest number of Go international championship victories in the world after South Korean player Lee Chang-ho who kept the world championship title for 16 years. Since there is no single official method of ranking in international Go, the rankings may vary among the sources. While he was ranked top sometimes, some sources ranked Lee Sedol as the fourth-best player in the world at the time. AlphaGo was not specifically trained to face Lee nor was designed to compete with any specific human players. The first three games were won by AlphaGo following resignations by Lee. However, Lee beat AlphaGo in the fourth game, winning by resignation at move 180. AlphaGo then continued to achieve a fourth win, winning the fifth game by resignation. The prize was US$1 million. Since AlphaGo won four out of five and thus the series, the prize will be donated to charities, including UNICEF. Lee Sedol received $150,000 for participating in all five games and an additional $20,000 for his win in Game 4. In June 2016, at a presentation held at a university in the Netherlands, Aja Huang, one of the Deep Mind team, revealed that they had patched the logical weakness that occurred during the 4th game of the match between AlphaGo and Lee, and that after move 78 (which was dubbed the "divine move" by many professionals), it would play as intended and maintain Black's advantage. Before move 78, AlphaGo was leading throughout the game, but Lee's move caused the program's computing powers to be diverted and confused. Huang explained that AlphaGo's policy network of finding the most accurate move order and continuation did not precisely guide AlphaGo to make the correct continuation after move 78, since its value network did not determine Lee's 78th move as being the most likely, and therefore when the move was made AlphaGo could not make the right adjustment to the logical continuation. === Sixty online games === On 29 December 2016, a new account on the Tygem server named "Magister" (shown as 'Magist' at the server's Chinese version) from South Korea began to play games with professional players. It changed its account name to "Master" on 30 December, then moved to the FoxGo server on 1 January 2017. On 4 January, DeepMind confirmed that the "Magister" and the "Master" were both played by an updated version of AlphaGo, called AlphaGo Master. As of 5 January 2017, AlphaGo Master's online record was 60 wins and 0 losses, including three victories over Go's top-ranked player, Ke Jie, who had been quietly briefed in advance that Master was a version of AlphaGo. After losing to Master, Gu Li offered a bounty of 100,000 yuan (US$14,400) to the first human player who could defeat Master. Master played at the pace of 10 games per day. Many quickly suspected it to be an AI player due to little or no resting between games. Its adversaries included many world champions such as Ke Jie, Park Jeong-hwan, Yuta Iyama, Tuo Jiaxi, Mi Yuting, Shi Yue, Chen Yaoye, Li Qincheng, Gu Li, Chang Hao, Tang Weixing, Fan Tingyu, Zhou Ruiyang, Jiang Weijie, Chou Chun-hsun, Kim Ji-seok, Kang Dong-yun, Park Yeong-hun, and Won Seong-jin; national champions or world championship runners-up such as Lian Xiao, Tan Xiao, Meng Tailing, Dang Yifei, Huang Yunsong, Yang Dingxin, Gu Zihao, Shin Jinseo, Cho Han-seung, and An Sungjoon. All 60 games except one were fast-paced games with three 20 or 30 seconds byo-yomi. Master offered to extend the byo-yomi to one minute when playing with Nie Weiping in consideration of his age. After winning its 59th game Master revealed itse
Project Joshua Blue
Joshua Blue is a project under development by IBM that focuses on advancing the artificial intelligence field by designing and programming computers to emulate human mental functions. == Goals == According to researchers at IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center, the main goal of Joshua Blue is "to achieve cognitive flexibility that approaches human functioning". In short, IBM is aiming to design Joshua Blue to 'think like a human', mainly in terms of emotional thought. == How it will work == A model of Joshua Blue's learning pattern has been created. Similar to how young children learn human traits through interacting with their surroundings, Joshua Blue will acquire knowledge through external stimuli present in its environment. IBM believes that if computers evolve to learn in this way and then comprehend and analyze the knowledge gained using reason, computers could begin to possess a "mind", of sorts, capable of demonstrating complex social behaviors similar to those of humans. Thus far, IBM has revealed that Joshua Blue will be a computer with a network of wires and input nodes that function as a computer nervous system. This nervous system will be used by Joshua Blue to perceive affect or personal emotional feelings. Not only will this network of input nodes help Joshua Blue discover things physically, but it will also allow Joshua Blue to interpret the significance of events. The input nodes, or proprioceptors, will enable Joshua Blue to be aware of things that happen around itself, as well as recognize and attach meaning to the emotional effect produced by interacting with an object in a certain way. In addition, Joshua Blue's proprioceptors will function as pain and pleasure sensors, allowing Joshua Blue to employ a similar "reward and punishment" system that humans use to form behaviors.
VEX Robotics
VEX Robotics is one of the main robotics programs for elementary through university students, and a subset of Innovation First International. The VEX Robotics competitions and programs were overseen by the Robotics Education & Competition Foundation (RECF), until May 2026 when VEX split from the foundation. VEX Robotics Competition was named the largest robotics competition in the world by Guinness World Records. There are four leagues of VEX Robotics competitions designed for different age groups and skill levels: VEX V5 Robotics Competition (previously VEX EDR, VRC) is for middle and high school students, and is the largest competition out of the four. VEX Robotics teams have an opportunity to compete annually in the VEX V5 Robotics Competition (V5RC). VEX IQ Robotics Competition is for elementary and middle school students. VEX IQ robotics teams have an opportunity to compete annually in the VEX IQ Robotics Competition (VIQRC). VEX AI is a 'spinoff' of VEX U, for high school and college level students. The competition features no driver control periods, hence the name 'VEX AI'. VEX AI robotics teams have an opportunity to compete in the VEX AI Competition (VAIC). VEX U is a robotics competition for college and university students. The game is similar to V5RC, but traditionally with separate, more relaxed rules on the construction of their robots. In each of the four leagues, students are given a new challenge annually and must design, build, program, and drive a robot to complete the challenge as best they can. The robotics teams that consistently display exceptional mastery in all of these areas will eventually progress to the VEX Robotics World Championship. The description and rules for the season's competition are released during the world championship of the previous season. From 2021 to 2025, the VEX Robotics World Championship was held in Dallas, Texas each year in mid-April or mid-May, depending on which league the teams are competing in. St. Louis, Missouri will host the event in 2026 and 2027. == VEX V5 == VEX V5 is a STEM learning system designed by VEX Robotics and the REC Foundation to help middle and high school students develop problem-solving and computational thinking skills. It was introduced at the VEX Robotics World Championship in April 2019 as a replacement for a previous system called VEX EDR (VEX Cortex). The program utilizes the VEX V5 Construction and Control System as a standardized hardware, firmware, and software compatibility platform. Robotics teams and clubs can use the VEX V5 system to build robots to compete in the annual VEX V5 Robotics Competition. === Construction and Control System === The VEX V5 Construction and Control System is a metal-based robotics platform with machinable, bolt-together pieces that can be used to construct custom robotic mechanisms. The robot is controlled by a programmable processor known as the VEX V5 Brain. The Brain is equipped with a color LCD touchscreen, 21 hardware ports, an SD card port, a battery port, 8 legacy sensor ports, and a micro-USB programming port. Usage with a VEX V5 Radio enables wireless driving and wireless programming of the brain via the VEX V5 Controller. The controller allows wireless user input to the robot brain, and two controllers can be daisy-chained if necessary. Each controller has two hardware ports, a micro-USB port, two 2-axis joysticks, a monochrome LCD, and twelve buttons. The controller's LCD can be written wirelessly from the robot, providing users with configurable feedback from the robot brain. The VEX V5 Motors connect to the brain via the hardware ports and are equipped with an internal optical shaft encoder to provide feedback on the rotational status of the motor. The motor's speed is programmable but may also be altered by exchanging the internal gear cartridge with one of three cartridges of different gear ratios. The three cartridges are 100 rpm, 200 rpm, and 600 rpm. === VEXcode V5 === VEXcode V5 is a Scratch-based coding environment designed by VEX Robotics for programming VEX Robotics hardware, such as the VEX V5 Brain. The block-style interface makes programming simple for elementary through high-school students. VEXcode is consistent across VEX 123, GO, IQ, and V5 and can be used to program the devices from each. VEXcode allows the block programs to be viewed as equivalent C++ or programs to help more advanced students transition from blocks to text. This also allows easy interconversion between text-based and block-based programming. VEXcode also lets students code in C++, which gives the opportunity to learn basic C++, but to collect data from sensors or to move the drivetrain, VEX uses a header file. === PROS === PROS is a C/C++ programming environment for VEX V5 hardware maintained by students of Purdue University through Purdue ACM SIGBots. It provides a more bare-bones environment for more knowledgeable students that allows for an industry-applicable experience. It has a more robust API that allows for more precise control of the hardware for competition-level uses in VRC/VEX U. It is based on FreeRTOS. == VEX V5 Robotics Competition == VEX V5 Robotics Competition (V5RC) is a robotics competition for registered middle and high school teams that utilize the VEX V5 Construction and Control System. In this competition, teams design, cad, build, and program robots to compete at tournaments. At tournaments, teams participate in qualifying matches where two randomly chosen alliances of two teams each compete for the highest team ranking. Before the Elimination Rounds, the top-ranking teams choose their permanent alliance partners, starting with the highest-ranked team, and continuing until the alliance capacity for the tournament is reached. The new alliances then compete in an elimination bracket, and the tournament champions, alongside other award winners, qualify for their regional culminating event. . The current challenge is VEX V5 Robotics Competition: Override. === General rules === Middle and high school students have the same game and rules. The most general and basic rules for the VEX V5 Robotics Competition are as follows, but each year may have exceptions and/or additional constraints. Each robot is partnered with another robot in a pair called an "alliance". In any given match, each alliance competes against one other alliance. One team is designated as the red alliance, and the other as the blue alliance. No robot may exceed the dimensions of an 18-inch cube until the match has begun. No robot may contain hardware, software, material, or content that is not distributed by or explicitly allowed by VEX Robotics. The playing field consists of a 12-foot by 12-foot square of foam tiles bordered by a wall of metal-framed polycarbonate dividers. Anything outside of these border walls is considered as off of the playing field. The various field elements associated with that season's competition are arranged in a defined and reproducible manner before the start of each match. At the start of the match is a 15-second 'autonomous' period, where all four robots navigate the field based on pre-programmed instructions without driver input. After the autonomous period has ended, the 'driver control' period begins. This stage of the match consists of one minute and forty-five seconds of manual control of the robot using one or two handheld controllers utilized by the respective number of 'drivers'. The object of the match is to attain a higher score, i.e. more points, than the opposing alliance. The method by which the alliances attain these points varies significantly with each season. Throughout the match, the blue alliance is not allowed to enter the red alliance's 'protected zone' of the field, and vice versa. The designated areas of the field are often different for each season. During the autonomous period, the protected zone normally consists of half of the field where the alliance starts, whereas the driver control period rarely features a defined protected zone, as was the case for VRC Tipping Point, VRC High Stakes, and VRC Push Back. Intentionally removing game objects from the field will result in a warning, minor violation, and/or major violation (disqualification). Intentionally and repeatedly damaging any of the robots involved, either during the match or otherwise, will result in immediate disqualification. === 2025-2026 Game: Push Back === The objective of the game is to score as many blocks as possible in goals within a 15-second autonomous period, and 1:45 driver control period. Each field consists of two long goals, two center goals, four loaders, and two park zones. ==== Field Element - Goals ==== The goals may be pictured as 'bridges' above the field. Long goals can fit fifteen blocks of any color, while center goals can fit seven. Goals feature control bonuses that are always awarded to the alliance with the most blocks scored in the control zone of each goal. Center goal control zones inco
Semantic parameterization
Semantic parameterization is a conceptual modeling process for expressing natural language descriptions of a domain in first-order predicate logic. The process yields a formalization of natural language sentences in Description Logic to answer the who, what and where questions in the Inquiry-Cycle Model (ICM) developed by Colin Potts and his colleagues at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The parameterization process complements the Knowledge Acquisition and autOmated Specification (KAOS) method, which formalizes answers to the when, why and how ICM questions in Temporal Logic, to complete the ICM formalization. The artifacts used in the parameterization process include a dictionary that aligns the domain lexicon with unique concepts, distinguishing between synonyms and polysemes, and several natural language patterns that aid in mapping common domain descriptions to formal specifications. == Relationship to other theories == Semantic Parameterization defines a meta-model consisting of eight roles that are domain-independent and reusable. Seven of these roles correspond to Jeffrey Gruber's thematic relations and case roles in Charles Fillmore's case grammar: The Inquiry-Cycle Model (ICM) was introduced to drive elicitation between engineers and stakeholders in requirements engineering. The ICM consists of who, what, where, why, how and when questions. All but the when questions, which require a Temporal Logic to represent such phenomena, have been aligned with the meta-model in semantic parameterization using Description Logic (DL). == Introduction with Example == The semantic parameterization process is based on Description Logic, wherein the TBox is composed of words in a dictionary, including nouns, verbs, and adjectives, and the ABox is partitioned into two sets of assertions: 1) those assertions that come from words in the natural language statement, called the grounding, and 2) those assertions that are inferred by the (human) modeler, called the meta-model. Consider the following unstructured natural language statement (UNLS) (see Breaux et al. for an extended discussion): UNLS1.0 The customer1,1 must not share2,2 the access-code3,3 of the customer1,1 with someone4,4 who is not the provider5,4. The modeler first identifies intensional and extensional polysemes and synonyms, denoted by the subscripts: the first subscript uniquely refers to the intensional index, i.e., the same first index in two or more words refer to the same concept in the TBox; the second subscript uniquely refers to the extensional index, i.e., two same second index in two or more words refer to the same individual in the ABox. This indexing step aligns words in the statement and concepts in the dictionary. Next, the modeler identifies concepts from the dictionary to compose the meta-model. The following table illustrates the complete DL expression that results from applying semantic parameterization.