In natural language processing, semantic compression is a process of compacting a lexicon used to build a textual document (or a set of documents) by reducing language heterogeneity, while maintaining text semantics. As a result, the same ideas can be represented using a smaller set of words. In most applications, semantic compression is a lossy compression. Increased prolixity does not compensate for the lexical compression and an original document cannot be reconstructed in a reverse process. == By generalization == Semantic compression is basically achieved in two steps, using frequency dictionaries and semantic network: determining cumulated term frequencies to identify target lexicon, replacing less frequent terms with their hypernyms (generalization) from target lexicon. Step 1 requires assembling word frequencies and information on semantic relationships, specifically hyponymy. Moving upwards in word hierarchy, a cumulative concept frequency is calculating by adding a sum of hyponyms' frequencies to frequency of their hypernym: c u m f ( k i ) = f ( k i ) + ∑ j c u m f ( k j ) {\displaystyle cumf(k_{i})=f(k_{i})+\sum _{j}cumf(k_{j})} where k i {\displaystyle k_{i}} is a hypernym of k j {\displaystyle k_{j}} . Then a desired number of words with top cumulated frequencies are chosen to build a target lexicon. In the second step, compression mapping rules are defined for the remaining words in order to handle every occurrence of a less frequent hyponym as its hypernym in output text. Example The below fragment of text has been processed by the semantic compression. Words in bold have been replaced by their hypernyms. They are both nest building social insects, but paper wasps and honey bees organize their colonies in very different ways. In a new study, researchers report that despite their differences, these insects rely on the same network of genes to guide their social behavior.The study appears in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Honey bees and paper wasps are separated by more than 100 million years of evolution, and there are striking differences in how they divvy up the work of maintaining a colony. The procedure outputs the following text: They are both facility building insect, but insects and honey insects arrange their biological groups in very different structure. In a new study, researchers report that despite their difference of opinions, these insects act the same network of genes to steer their party demeanor. The study appears in the proceeding of the institution bacteria Biological Sciences. Honey insects and insect are separated by more than hundred million years of organic processes, and there are impinging differences of opinions in how they divvy up the work of affirming a biological group. == Implicit semantic compression == A natural tendency to keep natural language expressions concise can be perceived as a form of implicit semantic compression, by omitting unmeaningful words or redundant meaningful words (especially to avoid pleonasms). == Applications and advantages == In the vector space model, compacting a lexicon leads to a reduction of dimensionality, which results in less computational complexity and a positive influence on efficiency. Semantic compression is advantageous in information retrieval tasks, improving their effectiveness (in terms of both precision and recall). This is due to more precise descriptors (reduced effect of language diversity – limited language redundancy, a step towards a controlled dictionary). As in the example above, it is possible to display the output as natural text (re-applying inflexion, adding stop words).
Cognitive philology
Cognitive philology is the science that studies written and oral texts as the product of human mental processes. Studies in cognitive philology compare documentary evidence emerging from textual investigations with results of experimental research, especially in the fields of cognitive and ecological psychology, neurosciences and artificial intelligence. "The point is not the text, but the mind that made it". Cognitive Philology aims to foster communication between literary, textual, philological disciplines on the one hand and researches across the whole range of the cognitive, evolutionary, ecological and human sciences on the other. Cognitive philology: investigates transmission of oral and written text, and categorization processes which lead to classification of knowledge, mostly relying on the information theory; studies how narratives emerge in so called natural conversation and selective process which lead to the rise of literary standards for storytelling, mostly relying on embodied semantics; explores the evolutive and evolutionary role played by rhythm and metre in human ontogenetic and phylogenetic development and the pertinence of the semantic association during processing of cognitive maps; Provides the scientific ground for multimedia critical editions of literary texts. Among the founding thinkers and noteworthy scholars devoted to such investigations are: Alan Richardson: Studies Theory of Mind in early-modern and contemporary literature. Anatole Pierre Fuksas Benoît de Cornulier David Herman: Professor of English at North Carolina State University and an adjunct professor of linguistics at Duke University. He is the author of "Universal Grammar and Narrative Form" and the editor of "Narratologies: New Perspectives on Narrative Analysis". Domenico Fiormonte François Recanati Gilles Fauconnier, a professor in Cognitive science at the University of California, San Diego. He was one of the founders of cognitive linguistics in the 1970s through his work on pragmatic scales and mental spaces. His research explores the areas of conceptual integration and compressions of conceptual mappings in terms of the emergent structure in language. Julián Santano Moreno Luca Nobile Manfred Jahn in Germany Mark Turner Paolo Canettieri
Microscope image processing
Microscope image processing is a broad term that covers the use of digital image processing techniques to process, analyze and present images obtained from a microscope. Such processing is now commonplace in a number of diverse fields such as medicine, biological research, cancer research, drug testing, metallurgy, etc. A number of manufacturers of microscopes now specifically design in features that allow the microscopes to interface to an image processing system. == Image acquisition == Until the early 1990s, most image acquisition in video microscopy applications was typically done with an analog video camera, often simply closed circuit TV cameras. While this required the use of a frame grabber to digitize the images, video cameras provided images at full video frame rate (25-30 frames per second) allowing live video recording and processing. While the advent of solid state detectors yielded several advantages, the real-time video camera was actually superior in many respects. Today, acquisition is usually done using a CCD camera mounted in the optical path of the microscope. The camera may be full colour or monochrome. Very often, very high resolution cameras are employed to gain as much direct information as possible. Cryogenic cooling is also common, to minimise noise. Often digital cameras used for this application provide pixel intensity data to a resolution of 12-16 bits, much higher than is used in consumer imaging products. Ironically, in recent years, much effort has been put into acquiring data at video rates, or higher (25-30 frames per second or higher). What was once easy with off-the-shelf video cameras now requires special, high speed electronics to handle the vast digital data bandwidth. Higher speed acquisition allows dynamic processes to be observed in real time, or stored for later playback and analysis. Combined with the high image resolution, this approach can generate vast quantities of raw data, which can be a challenge to deal with, even with a modern computer system. While current CCD detectors allow very high image resolution, often this involves a trade-off because, for a given chip size, as the pixel count increases, the pixel size decreases. As the pixels get smaller, their well depth decreases, reducing the number of electrons that can be stored. In turn, this results in a poorer signal-to-noise ratio. For best results, one must select an appropriate sensor for a given application. Because microscope images have an intrinsic limiting resolution, it often makes little sense to use a noisy, high resolution detector for image acquisition. A more modest detector, with larger pixels, can often produce much higher quality images because of reduced noise. This is especially important in low-light applications such as fluorescence microscopy. Moreover, one must also consider the temporal resolution requirements of the application. A lower resolution detector will often have a significantly higher acquisition rate, permitting the observation of faster events. Conversely, if the observed object is motionless, one may wish to acquire images at the highest possible spatial resolution without regard to the time required to acquire a single image. == 2D image techniques == Image processing for microscopy application begins with fundamental techniques intended to most accurately reproduce the information contained in the microscopic sample. This might include adjusting the brightness and contrast of the image, averaging images to reduce image noise and correcting for illumination non-uniformities. Such processing involves only basic arithmetic operations between images (i.e. addition, subtraction, multiplication and division). The vast majority of processing done on microscope image is of this nature. Another class of common 2D operations called image convolution are often used to reduce or enhance image details. Such "blurring" and "sharpening" algorithms in most programs work by altering a pixel's value based on a weighted sum of that and the surrounding pixels (a more detailed description of kernel based convolution deserves an entry for itself) or by altering the frequency domain function of the image using Fourier Transform. Most image processing techniques are performed in the Frequency domain. Other basic two dimensional techniques include operations such as image rotation, warping, color balancing etc. At times, advanced techniques are employed with the goal of "undoing" the distortion of the optical path of the microscope, thus eliminating distortions and blurring caused by the instrumentation. This process is called deconvolution, and a variety of algorithms have been developed, some of great mathematical complexity. The end result is an image far sharper and clearer than could be obtained in the optical domain alone. This is typically a 3-dimensional operation, that analyzes a volumetric image (i.e. images taken at a variety of focal planes through the sample) and uses this data to reconstruct a more accurate 3-dimensional image. == 3D image techniques == Another common requirement is to take a series of images at a fixed position, but at different focal depths. Since most microscopic samples are essentially transparent, and the depth of field of the focused sample is exceptionally narrow, it is possible to capture images "through" a three-dimensional object using 2D equipment like confocal microscopes. Software is then able to reconstruct a 3D model of the original sample which may be manipulated appropriately. The processing turns a 2D instrument into a 3D instrument, which would not otherwise exist. In recent times this technique has led to a number of scientific discoveries in cell biology. == Analysis == Analysis of images will vary considerably according to application. Typical analysis includes determining where the edges of an object are, counting similar objects, calculating the area, perimeter length and other useful measurements of each object. A common approach is to create an image mask which only includes pixels that match certain criteria, then perform simpler scanning operations on the resulting mask. It is also possible to label objects and track their motion over a series of frames in a video sequence.
Plum Voice
The Plum Group, Inc. (DBA Plum Voice) is a company. Plum is headquartered in New York City with offices in Boston and Denver. == History == Plum Voice, founded in 2000 as The Plum Group, Inc., was incorporated to create technologies for personalized audio communication. By 2001, Plum had commercialized the open-standard Plum VoiceXML IVR platform which facilitated the creation of dynamic telecom applications. 2001 - Commercial launch of Plum VoiceXML IVR platform for customer-premises deployment 2002 - Launch of Plum Voice Hosting Centers for 24x7x365 managed IVR hosting 2004 - Plum Voice application suite receives a "Product of the Year" award from Customer Interactions magazine 2008 - Plum Survey builder launched, a do-it-yourself IVR survey tool. 2010 - Plum launched QuickFuse, a web-based rapid development platform used to create voice applications. 2013 - Plum launched VoiceTrends, an analytics and reporting toolkit designed specifically for voice applications. Plum achieves PCI-DSS Level 1. 2015 - Plum launched Plum Insight, a multi-channel (voice, web, mobile) survey platform. Plum achieves HIPAA compliance. 2016 - Plum launched a new version of QuickFuse called Fuse+. 2020 - Plum sunsets QuickFuse, rebrands Fuse+ as Plum Fuse.
NeoPaint
NeoPaint is a raster graphics editor for Windows and MS-DOS. It supports several file formats including JPEG, GIF, BMP, PNG, and TIFF. The developer, NeoSoft, advertises NeoPaint as "being simple enough for use by children while remaining powerful enough for the purposes of advanced image editing". The first version, NeoPaint 1.0, was released in 1992 on floppy disks. It supported video modes ranging from 640x350 to 1024x768 and multiple fonts. NeoPaint 2.2 came out for MS-DOS 3.1 in 1993, with support of for 2, 16, or 256 color images in Hercules, EGA, VGA, and Super VGA modes. NeoPaint 3.1 was released in 1995 supporting 24-bit images and formats like PCX, TIFF and BMP. NeoPaint 3.2 was released in 1996. An updated version, NeoPaint 3.2a, supported the GIF file format. NeoPaint 3.2d was released in 1998. A Windows 95 version named NeoPaint for Windows v4.0 was released in 1999 supporting the PNG file format. On September 1, 2018 the program was rebranded as PixelNEO, becoming one of the VisualNEO software products. Formats such as JPEG 2000, ICO, CUR, PSD and RAW are supported.
VideoThang
VideoThang was free video editing software for Windows 2000, XP, and Vista. The software has three parts to it which are My Stuff, Edit My Stuff, and My Mix. The software accepts MOV, AVI, MPG, MP4, PNG, WMV, FLV, and MP3 standards. Its official website is now no longer available. == Reception == Jan Ozer, of Pcmag, said that the software "suffers from several unfortunate design and implementation flaws that dramatically limit output quality and overall utility." Jon L. Jacobi, of PC World, said that the software "may not be the most flexible multimedia editor in the world, but the trim/zoom basics are there, it's free, and it's so simple to use that just about anyone in the world should be able figure it out." Amit Agarwal, of Digital Inspiration, said that the software "doesn’t offer loads of features like other video editors but is perfect for making quick video slideshows of your pictures that you can upload on the web or share via email."
Non-local means
Non-local means is an algorithm in image processing for image denoising. Unlike "local mean" filters, which take the mean value of a group of pixels surrounding a target pixel to smooth the image, non-local means filtering takes a mean of all pixels in the image, weighted by how similar these pixels are to the target pixel. This results in much greater post-filtering clarity, and less loss of detail in the image compared with local mean algorithms. If compared with other well-known denoising techniques, non-local means adds "method noise" (i.e. error in the denoising process) which looks more like white noise, which is desirable because it is typically less disturbing in the denoised product. Recently non-local means has been extended to other image processing applications such as deinterlacing, view interpolation, and depth maps regularization. == Definition == Suppose Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } is the area of an image, and p {\displaystyle p} and q {\displaystyle q} are two points within the image. Then, the algorithm is: u ( p ) = 1 C ( p ) ∫ Ω v ( q ) f ( p , q ) d q . {\displaystyle u(p)={1 \over C(p)}\int _{\Omega }v(q)f(p,q)\,\mathrm {d} q.} where u ( p ) {\displaystyle u(p)} is the filtered value of the image at point p {\displaystyle p} , v ( q ) {\displaystyle v(q)} is the unfiltered value of the image at point q {\displaystyle q} , f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle f(p,q)} is the weighting function, and the integral is evaluated ∀ q ∈ Ω {\displaystyle \forall q\in \Omega } . C ( p ) {\displaystyle C(p)} is a normalizing factor, given by C ( p ) = ∫ Ω f ( p , q ) d q . {\displaystyle C(p)=\int _{\Omega }f(p,q)\,\mathrm {d} q.} == Common weighting functions == The purpose of the weighting function, f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle f(p,q)} , is to determine how closely related the image at the point p {\displaystyle p} is to the image at the point q {\displaystyle q} . It can take many forms. === Gaussian === The Gaussian weighting function sets up a normal distribution with a mean, μ = B ( p ) {\displaystyle \mu =B(p)} and a variable standard deviation: f ( p , q ) = e − | B ( q ) − B ( p ) | 2 h 2 {\displaystyle f(p,q)=e^{-{{\left\vert B(q)-B(p)\right\vert ^{2}} \over h^{2}}}} where h {\displaystyle h} is the filtering parameter (i.e., standard deviation) and B ( p ) {\displaystyle B(p)} is the local mean value of the image point values surrounding p {\displaystyle p} . == Discrete algorithm == For an image, Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } , with discrete pixels, a discrete algorithm is required. u ( p ) = 1 C ( p ) ∑ q ∈ Ω v ( q ) f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle u(p)={1 \over C(p)}\sum _{q\in \Omega }v(q)f(p,q)} where, once again, v ( q ) {\displaystyle v(q)} is the unfiltered value of the image at point q {\displaystyle q} . C ( p ) {\displaystyle C(p)} is given by: C ( p ) = ∑ q ∈ Ω f ( p , q ) {\displaystyle C(p)=\sum _{q\in \Omega }f(p,q)} Then, for a Gaussian weighting function, f ( p , q ) = e − | B ( q ) 2 − B ( p ) 2 | h 2 {\displaystyle f(p,q)=e^{-{{\left\vert B(q)^{2}-B(p)^{2}\right\vert } \over h^{2}}}} where B ( p ) {\displaystyle B(p)} is given by: B ( p ) = 1 | R ( p ) | ∑ i ∈ R ( p ) v ( i ) {\displaystyle B(p)={1 \over |R(p)|}\sum _{i\in R(p)}v(i)} where R ( p ) ⊆ Ω {\displaystyle R(p)\subseteq \Omega } and is a square region of pixels surrounding p {\displaystyle p} and | R ( p ) | {\displaystyle |R(p)|} is the number of pixels in the region R {\displaystyle R} . == Efficient implementation == The computational complexity of the non-local means algorithm is quadratic in the number of pixels in the image, making it particularly expensive to apply directly. Several techniques were proposed to speed up execution. One simple variant consists of restricting the computation of the mean for each pixel to a search window centred on the pixel itself, instead of the whole image. Another approximation uses summed-area tables and fast Fourier transform to calculate the similarity window between two pixels, speeding up the algorithm by a factor of 50 while preserving comparable quality of the result.