Time-inhomogeneous hidden Bernoulli model (TI-HBM) is an alternative to hidden Markov model (HMM) for automatic speech recognition. Contrary to HMM, the state transition process in TI-HBM is not a Markov-dependent process, rather it is a generalized Bernoulli (an independent) process. This difference leads to elimination of dynamic programming at state-level in TI-HBM decoding process. Thus, the computational complexity of TI-HBM for probability evaluation and state estimation is O ( N L ) {\displaystyle O(NL)} (instead of O ( N 2 L ) {\displaystyle O(N^{2}L)} in the HMM case, where N {\displaystyle N} and L {\displaystyle L} are number of states and observation sequence length respectively). The TI-HBM is able to model acoustic-unit duration (e.g. phone/word duration) by using a built-in parameter named survival probability. The TI-HBM is simpler and faster than HMM in a phoneme recognition task, but its performance is comparable to HMM. For details, see [1] or [2].
Tensor glyph
In scientific visualization a tensor glyph is an object that can visualize all or most of the nine degrees of freedom, such as acceleration, twist, or shear – of a 3 × 3 {\displaystyle 3\times 3} matrix. It is used for tensor field visualization, where a data-matrix is available at every point in the grid. "Glyphs, or icons, depict multiple data values by mapping them onto the shape, size, orientation, and surface appearance of a base geometric primitive." Tensor glyphs are a particular case of multivariate data glyphs. There are certain types of glyphs that are commonly used: Ellipsoid Cuboid Cylindrical Superquadrics According to Thomas Schultz and Gordon Kindlmann, specific types of tensor fields "play a central role in scientific and biomedical studies as well as in image analysis and feature-extraction methods."
Videotex
Videotex (or interactive videotex) was one of the earliest implementations of an end-user information system. From the late 1970s to early 2010s, it was used to deliver information (usually pages of text) to a user in computer-like format, typically to be displayed on a television or a dumb terminal. In a strict definition, videotex is any system that provides interactive content and displays it on a video monitor such as a television, typically using modems to send data in both directions. A close relative is teletext, which sends data in one direction only, typically encoded in a television signal. All such systems are occasionally referred to as viewdata. Unlike the modern Internet, traditional videotex services were highly centralized. Videotex in its broader definition can be used to refer to any such service, including teletext, the Internet, bulletin board systems, online service providers, and even the arrival/departure displays at an airport. This usage is no longer common. With the exception of Minitel in France, videotex elsewhere never managed to attract any more than a very small percentage of the universal mass market once envisaged. By the end of the 1980s its use was essentially limited to a few niche applications. == Initial development and technologies == === United Kingdom === The first attempts at a general-purpose videotex service were created in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s. In about 1970 the BBC had a brainstorming session in which it was decided to start researching ways to send closed captioning information to the audience. As the Teledata research continued the BBC became interested in using the system for delivering any sort of information, not just closed captioning. In 1972, the concept was first made public under the new name Ceefax. Meanwhile, the General Post Office (soon to become British Telecom) had been researching a similar concept since the late 1960s, known as Viewdata. Unlike Ceefax which was a one-way service carried in the existing TV signal, Viewdata was a two-way system using telephones. Since the Post Office owned the telephones, this was considered to be an excellent way to drive more customers to use the phones. Not to be outdone by the BBC, they also announced their service, under the name Prestel. ITV soon joined the fray with a Ceefax-clone known as ORACLE. In 1974, all the services agreed on a standard for displaying the information. The display would be a simple 40×24 grid of text, with some "graphics characters" for constructing simple graphics, revised and finalized in 1976. The standard did not define the delivery system, so both Viewdata-like and Teledata-like services could at least share the TV-side hardware, which was expensive at the time. The standard also introduced a new term that covered all such services, teletext. Ceefax first started operation in 1974 with a limited 30 pages, followed quickly by ORACLE and then Prestel in 1979. By 1981, Prestel International was available in nine countries, and a number of countries, including Sweden, The Netherlands, Finland and West Germany were developing their own national systems closely based on Prestel. General Telephone and Electronics (GTE) acquired an exclusive agency for the system for North America. In the early 1980s, videotex became the base technology for the London Stock Exchange's pricing service called TOPIC. Later versions of TOPIC, notably TOPIC2 and TOPIC3, were developed by Thanos Vassilakis and introduced trading and historic price feeds. === France === Development of a French teletext-like system began in 1973. A very simple 2-way videotex system called Tictac was also demonstrated in the mid-1970s. As in the UK, this led on to work to develop a common display standard for videotex and teletext, called Antiope, which was finalised in 1977. Antiope had similar capabilities to the UK system for displaying alphanumeric text and chunky "mosaic" character-based block graphics. A difference however was that while in the UK standard control codes automatically also occupied one character position on screen, Antiope allowed for "non spacing" control codes. This gave Antiope slightly more flexibility in the use of colours in mosaic block graphics, and in presenting the accents and diacritics of the French language. Meanwhile, spurred on by the 1978 Nora/Minc report, the French government was determined to catch up on a perceived falling behind in its computer and communications facilities. In 1980 it began field trials issuing Antiope-based terminals for free to over 250,000 telephone subscribers in Ille-et-Vilaine region, where the French CCETT research centre was based, for use as telephone directories. The trial was a success, and in 1982 Minitel was rolled out nationwide. === Canada === Since 1970, researchers at the Communications Research Centre (CRC) in Ottawa had been working on a set of "picture description instructions", which encoded graphics commands as a text stream. Graphics were encoded as a series of instructions (graphics primitives) each represented by a single ASCII character. Graphic coordinates were encoded in multiple 6 bit strings of XY coordinate data, flagged to place them in the printable ASCII range so that they could be transmitted with conventional text transmission techniques. ASCII SI/SO characters were used to differentiate the text from graphic portions of a transmitted "page". In 1975, the CRC gave a contract to Norpak to develop an interactive graphics terminal that could decode the instructions and display them on a colour display, which was successfully up and running by 1977. Against the background of the developments in Europe, CRC was able to persuade the Canadian government to develop the system into a fully-fledged service. In August 1978, the Canadian Department of Communications publicly launched it as Telidon, a "second generation" videotex/teletext service, and committed to a four-year development plan to encourage rollout. Compared to the European systems, Telidon offered real graphics, as opposed to block-mosaic character graphics. The downside was that it required much more advanced decoders, typically featuring Zilog Z80 or Motorola 6809 processors. === Japan === Research in Japan was shaped by the demands of the large number of Kanji characters used in Japanese script. With 1970s technology, the ability to generate so many characters on demand in the end-user's terminal was seen as prohibitive. Instead, development focussed on methods to send pages to user terminals pre-rendered, using coding strategies similar to facsimile machines. This led to a videotex system called Captain ("Character and Pattern Telephone Access Information Network"), created by NTT in 1978, which went into full trials from 1979 to 1981. The system also lent itself naturally to photographic images, albeit at only moderate resolution. However, the pages typically took two or three times longer to load, compared to the European systems. NHK developed an experimental teletext system along similar lines, called CIBS ("Character Information Broadcasting Station"). Based on a 388×200 pixel resolution, it was first announced in 1976, and began trials in late 1978. (NHK's ultimate production teletext system launched in 1983). == Standards == Work to establish an international standard for videotex began in 1978 in CCITT. But the national delegations showed little interest in compromise, each hoping that their system would come to define what was perceived to be going to be an enormous new mass-market. In 1980 CCITT therefore issued recommendation S.100 (later T.100), noting the points of similarity but the essential incompatibility of the systems, and declaring all four to be recognised options. Trying to kick-start the market, AT&T Corporation entered the fray, and in May 1981 announced its own Presentation Layer Protocol (PLP). This was closely based on the Canadian Telidon system, but added to it some further graphics primitives and a syntax for defining macros, algorithms to define cleaner pixel spacing for the (arbitrarily sizeable) text, and also dynamically redefinable characters and a mosaic block graphic character set, so that it could reproduce content from the French Antiope. After some further revisions this was adopted in 1983 as ANSI standard X3.110, more commonly called NAPLPS, the North American Presentation Layer Protocol Syntax. It was also adopted in 1988 as the presentation-layer syntax for NABTS, the North American Broadcast Teletext Specification. Meanwhile, the European national Postal Telephone and Telegraph (PTT) agencies were also increasingly interested in videotex, and had convened discussions in European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) to co-ordinate developments, which had been diverging along national lines. As well as the British and French standards, the Swedes had proposed extending the British Prestel standard with a new se
Clipping (computer graphics)
Clipping, in the context of computer graphics, is a method to selectively enable or disable rendering operations within a defined region of interest. Mathematically, clipping can be described using the terminology of constructive geometry. A rendering algorithm only draws pixels in the intersection between the clip region and the scene model. Lines and surfaces outside the view volume (aka. frustum) are removed. Clip regions are commonly specified to improve render performance. Pixels that will be drawn are said to be within the clip region. Pixels that will not be drawn are outside the clip region. More informally, pixels that will not be drawn are said to be "clipped." == In 2D graphics == In two-dimensional graphics, a clip region may be defined so that pixels are only drawn within the boundaries of a window or frame. Clip regions can also be used to selectively control pixel rendering for aesthetic or artistic purposes. In many implementations, the final clip region is the composite (or intersection) of one or more application-defined shapes, as well as any system hardware constraints In one example application, consider an image editing program. A user application may render the image into a viewport. As the user zooms and scrolls to view a smaller portion of the image, the application can set a clip boundary so that pixels outside the viewport are not rendered. In addition, GUI widgets, overlays, and other windows or frames may obscure some pixels from the original image. In this sense, the clip region is the composite of the application-defined "user clip" and the "device clip" enforced by the system's software and hardware implementation. Application software can take advantage of this clip information to save computation time, energy, and memory, avoiding work related to pixels that aren't visible. == In 3D graphics == In three-dimensional graphics, the terminology of clipping can be used to describe many related features. Typically, "clipping" refers to operations in the plane that work with rectangular shapes, and "culling" refers to more general methods to selectively process scene model elements. This terminology is not rigid, and exact usage varies among many sources. Scene model elements include geometric primitives: points or vertices; line segments or edges; polygons or faces; and more abstract model objects such as curves, splines, surfaces, and even text. In complicated scene models, individual elements may be selectively disabled (clipped) for reasons including visibility within the viewport (frustum culling); orientation (backface culling), obscuration by other scene or model elements (occlusion culling, depth- or "z" clipping). Sophisticated algorithms exist to efficiently detect and perform such clipping. Many optimized clipping methods rely on specific hardware acceleration logic provided by a graphics processing unit (GPU). The concept of clipping can be extended to higher dimensionality using methods of abstract algebraic geometry. === Near clipping === Beyond projection of vertices & 2D clipping, near clipping is required to correctly rasterise 3D primitives; this is because vertices may have been projected behind the eye. Near clipping ensures that all the vertices used have valid 2D coordinates. Together with far-clipping it also helps prevent overflow of depth-buffer values. Some early texture mapping hardware (using forward texture mapping) in video games suffered from complications associated with near clipping and UV coordinates. === Occlusion clipping (Z- or depth clipping) === In 3D computer graphics, "Z" often refers to the depth axis in the system of coordinates centered at the viewport origin: "Z" is used interchangeably with "depth", and conceptually corresponds to the distance "into the virtual screen." In this coordinate system, "X" and "Y" therefore refer to a conventional cartesian coordinate system laid out on the user's screen or viewport. This viewport is defined by the geometry of the viewing frustum, and parameterizes the field of view. Z-clipping, or depth clipping, refers to techniques that selectively render certain scene objects based on their depth relative to the screen. Most graphics toolkits allow the programmer to specify a "near" and "far" clip depth, and only portions of objects between those two planes are displayed. A creative application programmer can use this method to render visualizations of the interior of a 3D object in the scene. For example, a medical imaging application could use this technique to render the organs inside a human body. A video game programmer can use clipping information to accelerate game logic. For example, a tall wall or building that occludes other game entities can save GPU time that would otherwise be spent transforming and texturing items in the rear areas of the scene; and a tightly integrated software program can use this same information to save CPU time by optimizing out game logic for objects that aren't seen by the player. == Algorithms == Line clipping algorithms: Cohen–Sutherland Liang–Barsky Fast-clipping Cyrus–Beck Nicholl–Lee–Nicholl Skala O(lg N) algorithm Polygon clipping algorithms: Greiner–Hormann Sutherland–Hodgman Weiler–Atherton Vatti Rendering methodologies Painter's algorithm
Vulnerabilities Equities Process
The Vulnerabilities Equities Process (VEP) is a process used by the U.S. federal government to determine on a case-by-case basis how it should treat zero-day computer security vulnerabilities: whether to disclose them to the public to help improve general computer security, or to keep them secret for offensive use against the government's adversaries. The VEP was first developed during the period 2008–2009, but only became public in 2016, when the government released a redacted version of the VEP in response to a FOIA request by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Following public pressure for greater transparency in the wake of the Shadow Brokers affair, the U.S. government made a more public disclosure of the VEP process in November 2017. == Participants == According to the VEP plan published in 2017, the Equities Review Board (ERB) is the primary forum for interagency deliberation and determinations concerning the VEP. The ERB meets monthly, but may also be convened sooner if an immediate need arises. The ERB consists of representatives from the following agencies: Office of Management and Budget Office of the Director of National Intelligence (including the Intelligence Community-Security Coordination Center) United States Department of the Treasury United States Department of State United States Department of Justice (including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force) Department of Homeland Security (including the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center and the United States Secret Service) United States Department of Energy United States Department of Defense (to include the National Security Agency, including Information Assurance and Signals Intelligence elements), United States Cyber Command, and DoD Cyber Crime Center) United States Department of Commerce Central Intelligence Agency The National Security Agency serves as the executive secretariat for the VEP. == Process == According to the November 2017 version of the VEP, the process is as follows: === Submission and notification === When an agency finds a vulnerability, it will notify the VEP secretariat as soon as is possible. The notification will include a description of the vulnerability and the vulnerable products or systems, together with the agency's recommendation to either disseminate or restrict the vulnerability information. The secretariat will then notify all participants of the submission within one business day, requesting them to respond if they have an relevant interest. === Equity and discussions === An agency expressing an interest must indicate whether it concurs with the original recommendation to disseminate or restrict within five business days. If it does not, it will hold discussions with the submitting agency and the VEP secretariat within seven business days to attempt to reach consensus. If no consensus is reached, the participants will suggest options for the Equities Review Board. === Determination to disseminate or restrict === Decisions whether to disclose or restrict a vulnerability should be made quickly, in full consultation with all concerned agencies, and in the overall best interest of the competing interests of the missions of the U.S. government. As far as possible, determinations should be based on rational, objective methodologies, taking into account factors such as prevalence, reliance, and severity. If the review board members cannot reach consensus, they will vote on a preliminary determination. If an agency with an equity disputes that decision, they may, by providing notice to the VEP secretariat, elect to contest the preliminary determination. If no agency contests a preliminary determination, it will be treated as a final decision. === Handling and follow-on actions === If vulnerability information is released, this will be done as quickly as possible, preferably within seven business days. Disclosure of vulnerabilities will be conducted according to guidelines agreed on by all members. The submitting agency is presumed to be most knowledgeable about the vulnerability and, as such, will be responsible for disseminating vulnerability information to the vendor. The submitting agency may elect to delegate dissemination responsibility to another agency on its behalf. The releasing agency will promptly provide a copy of the disclosed information to the VEP secretariat for record keeping. Additionally, the releasing agency is expected to follow up so the ERB can determine whether the vendor's action meets government requirements. If the vendor chooses not to address a vulnerability, or is not acting with urgency consistent with the risk of the vulnerability, the releasing agency will notify the secretariat, and the government may take other mitigation steps. == Criticism == The VEP process has been criticized for a number of deficiencies, including restriction by non-disclosure agreements, lack of risk ratings, special treatment for the NSA, and less than whole-hearted commitment to disclosure as the default option. == UK equivalent == British intelligence agencies—GCHQ in particular—follow a similar approach, also known as the Equities Process, to determine whether to disclose or retain security vulnerabilities. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 was amended in 2022 to bring oversight of the operation of the process within the remit of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner. Details of the process were made public in 2018.
Rademacher complexity
In computational learning theory (machine learning and theory of computation), Rademacher complexity, named after Hans Rademacher, measures richness of a class of sets with respect to a probability distribution. The concept can also be extended to real valued functions. == Definitions == === Rademacher complexity of a set === Given a set A ⊆ R m {\displaystyle A\subseteq \mathbb {R} ^{m}} , the Rademacher complexity of A is defined as follows: Rad ( A ) := 1 m E σ [ sup a ∈ A ∑ i = 1 m σ i a i ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} (A):={\frac {1}{m}}\mathbb {E} _{\sigma }\left[\sup _{a\in A}\sum _{i=1}^{m}\sigma _{i}a_{i}\right]} where σ 1 , σ 2 , … , σ m {\displaystyle \sigma _{1},\sigma _{2},\dots ,\sigma _{m}} are independent random variables drawn from the Rademacher distribution i.e. Pr ( σ i = + 1 ) = Pr ( σ i = − 1 ) = 1 / 2 {\displaystyle \Pr(\sigma _{i}=+1)=\Pr(\sigma _{i}=-1)=1/2} for i ∈ { 1 , 2 , … , m } {\displaystyle i\in \{1,2,\dots ,m\}} , and a = ( a 1 , … , a m ) ∈ A {\displaystyle a=(a_{1},\ldots ,a_{m})\in A} . Some authors take the absolute value of the sum before taking the supremum, but if A {\displaystyle A} is symmetric this makes no difference. === Rademacher complexity of a function class === Let S = { z 1 , z 2 , … , z m } ⊆ Z {\displaystyle S=\{z_{1},z_{2},\dots ,z_{m}\}\subseteq Z} be a sample of points and consider a function class F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} of real-valued functions over Z {\displaystyle Z} . Then, the empirical Rademacher complexity of F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} given S {\displaystyle S} is defined as: Rad S ( F ) = 1 m E σ [ sup f ∈ F | ∑ i = 1 m σ i f ( z i ) | ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} _{S}({\mathcal {F}})={\frac {1}{m}}\mathbb {E} _{\sigma }\left[\sup _{f\in {\mathcal {F}}}\left|\sum _{i=1}^{m}\sigma _{i}f(z_{i})\right|\right]} This can also be written using the previous definition: Rad S ( F ) = Rad ( F ∘ S ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} _{S}({\mathcal {F}})=\operatorname {Rad} ({\mathcal {F}}\circ S)} where F ∘ S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}\circ S} denotes function composition, i.e.: F ∘ S := { ( f ( z 1 ) , … , f ( z m ) ) ∣ f ∈ F } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}\circ S:=\{(f(z_{1}),\ldots ,f(z_{m}))\mid f\in {\mathcal {F}}\}} The worst case empirical Rademacher complexity is Rad ¯ m ( F ) = sup S = { z 1 , … , z m } Rad S ( F ) {\displaystyle {\overline {\operatorname {Rad} }}_{m}({\mathcal {F}})=\sup _{S=\{z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}\}}\operatorname {Rad} _{S}({\mathcal {F}})} Let P {\displaystyle P} be a probability distribution over Z {\displaystyle Z} . The Rademacher complexity of the function class F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} with respect to P {\displaystyle P} for sample size m {\displaystyle m} is: Rad P , m ( F ) := E S ∼ P m [ Rad S ( F ) ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} _{P,m}({\mathcal {F}}):=\mathbb {E} _{S\sim P^{m}}\left[\operatorname {Rad} _{S}({\mathcal {F}})\right]} where the above expectation is taken over an identically independently distributed (i.i.d.) sample S = ( z 1 , z 2 , … , z m ) {\displaystyle S=(z_{1},z_{2},\dots ,z_{m})} generated according to P {\displaystyle P} . == Intuition == The Rademacher complexity is typically applied on a function class of models that are used for classification, with the goal of measuring their ability to classify points drawn from a probability space under arbitrary labellings. When the function class is rich enough, it contains functions that can appropriately adapt for each arrangement of labels, simulated by the random draw of σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} under the expectation, so that this quantity in the sum is maximized. The Rademacher complexity of a set A {\displaystyle A} can be rewritten as Rad ( A ) := 1 m E σ [ sup a ∈ A ∑ i = 1 m σ i a i ] = 1 m 2 m ∑ σ ∈ { − 1 / m , + 1 / m } m [ sup a ∈ A ⟨ σ , a ⟩ ] . {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} (A):={\frac {1}{m}}\mathbb {E} _{\sigma }\left[\sup _{a\in A}\sum _{i=1}^{m}\sigma _{i}a_{i}\right]={\frac {1}{{\sqrt {m}}2^{m}}}\sum _{\sigma \in \{-1/{\sqrt {m}},+1/{\sqrt {m}}\}^{m}}\left[\sup _{a\in A}\langle \sigma ,a\rangle \right].} Each term in the summation is the farthest distance of the set A {\displaystyle A} from the origin, along a unit-length direction σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . The directions are along the vertices of a hypercube. Thus, we can also write it as Rad ( A ) = 1 2 m 1 2 m − 1 ∑ σ ∈ { − 1 / m , + 1 / m } m / { − 1 , + 1 } [ sup a ∈ A ⟨ σ , a ⟩ − inf a ∈ A ⟨ σ , a ⟩ ] {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} (A)={\frac {1}{2{\sqrt {m}}}}{\frac {1}{2^{m-1}}}\sum _{\sigma \in \{-1/{\sqrt {m}},+1/{\sqrt {m}}\}^{m}/\{-1,+1\}}\left[\sup _{a\in A}\langle \sigma ,a\rangle -\inf _{a\in A}\langle \sigma ,a\rangle \right]} Here, the set { − 1 / m , + 1 / m } m / { − 1 , + 1 } {\displaystyle \{-1/{\sqrt {m}},+1/{\sqrt {m}}\}^{m}/\{-1,+1\}} denotes half of the vertices of a hypercube, selected so that each diagonal has exactly one vertex selected. In words, this states that 2 m Rad ( A ) {\displaystyle 2{\sqrt {m}}\operatorname {Rad} (A)} is precisely the average width of the set A {\displaystyle A} along all diagonal directions of a hypercube. == Examples == A singleton set has 0 width in any direction, so it has Rademacher complexity 0. The set A = { ( 1 , 1 ) , ( 1 , 2 ) } ⊆ R 2 {\displaystyle A=\{(1,1),(1,2)\}\subseteq \mathbb {R} ^{2}} has average width 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/{\sqrt {2}}} along the two diagonal directions of the square, so it has Rademacher complexity 1 / 4 {\displaystyle 1/4} . The unit cube [ 0 , 1 ] m {\displaystyle [0,1]^{m}} has constant width m {\displaystyle {\sqrt {m}}} along the diagonal directions, so it has Rademacher complexity 1 / 2 {\displaystyle 1/2} . Similarly, the unit cross-polytope { x ∈ R m : ‖ x ‖ 1 ≤ 1 } {\displaystyle \{x\in \mathbb {R} ^{m}:\|x\|_{1}\leq 1\}} has constant width 2 / m {\displaystyle 2/{\sqrt {m}}} along the diagonal directions, so it has Rademacher complexity 1 / m {\displaystyle 1/m} . == Using the Rademacher complexity == The Rademacher complexity can be used to derive data-dependent upper-bounds on the learnability of function classes. Intuitively, a function-class with smaller Rademacher complexity is easier to learn. === Bounding the representativeness === In machine learning, it is desired to have a training set that represents the true distribution of some sample data S {\displaystyle S} . This can be quantified using the notion of representativeness. Denote by P {\displaystyle P} the probability distribution from which the samples are drawn. Denote by H {\displaystyle H} the set of hypotheses (potential classifiers) and denote by F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} the corresponding set of error functions, i.e., for every hypothesis h ∈ H {\displaystyle h\in H} , there is a function f h ∈ F {\displaystyle f_{h}\in F} , that maps each training sample (features,label) to the error of the classifier h {\displaystyle h} (note in this case hypothesis and classifier are used interchangeably). For example, in the case that h {\displaystyle h} represents a binary classifier, the error function is a 0–1 loss function, i.e. the error function f h {\displaystyle f_{h}} returns 0 if h {\displaystyle h} correctly classifies a sample and 1 else. We omit the index and write f {\displaystyle f} instead of f h {\displaystyle f_{h}} when the underlying hypothesis is irrelevant. Define: L P ( f ) := E z ∼ P [ f ( z ) ] {\displaystyle L_{P}(f):=\mathbb {E} _{z\sim P}[f(z)]} – the expected error of some error function f ∈ F {\displaystyle f\in {\mathcal {F}}} on the real distribution P {\displaystyle P} ; L S ( f ) := 1 m ∑ i = 1 m f ( z i ) {\displaystyle L_{S}(f):={1 \over m}\sum _{i=1}^{m}f(z_{i})} – the estimated error of some error function f ∈ F {\displaystyle f\in {\mathcal {F}}} on the sample S {\displaystyle S} . The representativeness of the sample S {\displaystyle S} , with respect to P {\displaystyle P} and F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} , is defined as: Rep P ( F , S ) := sup f ∈ F ( L P ( f ) − L S ( f ) ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rep} _{P}({\mathcal {F}},S):=\sup _{f\in F}(L_{P}(f)-L_{S}(f))} Smaller representativeness is better, since it provides a way to avoid overfitting: it means that the true error of a classifier is not much higher than its estimated error, and so selecting a classifier that has low estimated error will ensure that the true error is also low. Note however that the concept of representativeness is relative and hence can not be compared across distinct samples. The expected representativeness of a sample can be bounded above by the Rademacher complexity of the function class: If F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is a set of functions with range within [ 0 , 1 ] {\displaystyle [0,1]} , then Rad P , m ( F ) − ln 2 2 m ≤ E S ∼ P m [ Rep P ( F , S ) ] ≤ 2 Rad P , m ( F ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Rad} _{P,m}({\mathcal {F}})-{\sqrt {\frac {\ln 2}{2m}}}\leq \mathbb {E} _{S\sim P^{m}}[\operatorname {Rep} _{P}({\
Wargame (hacking)
In hacking, a wargame (or war game) is a cyber-security challenge and mind sport in which the competitors must exploit or defend a vulnerability in a system or application, and/or gain or prevent access to a computer system. A wargame usually involves a capture the flag logic, based on pentesting, semantic URL attacks, knowledge-based authentication, password cracking, reverse engineering of software (often JavaScript, C and assembly language), code injection, SQL injections, cross-site scripting, exploits, IP address spoofing, forensics, and other hacking techniques. == Wargames for preparedness == Wargames are also used as a method of cyberwarfare preparedness. The NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence (CCDCOE) organizes an annual event, Locked Shields, which is an international live-fire cyber exercise. The exercise challenges cyber security experts through real-time attacks in fictional scenarios and is used to develop skills in national IT defense strategies. == Additional applications == Wargames can be used to teach the basics of web attacks and web security, giving participants a better understanding of how attackers exploit security vulnerabilities. Wargames are also used as a way to "stress test" an organization's response plan and serve as a drill to identify gaps in cyber disaster preparedness.