ARMA International (formerly the Association of Records Managers and Administrators) is an American not-for-profit professional association for information professionals – primarily information management (including records management) and information governance, and related industry practitioners and vendors. The association provides educational opportunities and publications covering aspects of information management broadly. == History == The Association was founded in 1955. In 1975, the Association of Records Executives and Administrators (AREA) and the American Records Management Association merged to form ARMA International. The headquarters for ARMA International is located in Overland Park, Kansas. == Operations == ARMA International services professionals in the United States, Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Its members include records managers, attorneys, information technology professionals, consultants, and archivists involved in various aspects of managing records and information assets. ARMA hosts an annual conference with the goal of bringing together record and information management professionals from around the world – In 2023, ARMA hosted conferences in both the United States and Canada. Topics addressed in the 120+ educational sessions include advanced technology, creating information structure, ediscovery and information law, information management fundamentals, information project management, and reducing organizational information risk. The expo features exhibitors displaying records and information technologies, products, and services.
Event store
An event store is a type of database optimized for storage of events. Conceptually, an event store records only the events affecting an entity, dossier, or policy, and the state of the entity at any point in its history can be reconstructed by replaying its contributing events in sequential order. Events (and their corresponding data) are the only "real" facts that should be stored in the database. All other objects can be derived from these events, meaning they are instantiated in memory by runtime code as needed (e.g. for showing in a user interface). In theory, any object that aggregates over recorded event data is not stored in the database. Instead these objects are built 'on the fly', by traversing the event history. When the aggregated object instance is no longer needed, it can simply be discarded (released from memory). == Example with insurance policies == For example, the event store concept of a database can be applied to insurance policies or pension dossiers. In these policies or dossiers the instantiation of each object that make up the dossier or policy (the person, partner(s), employments, etc.) can be derived and can be instantiated in memory based on the real world events. == Double timeline == A crucial part of an event store database is that each event has a double timeline: This enables event stores to correct errors of events that have been entered into the event store database before. The two dates are: Valid date is the date at which the event has become valid. Transaction date is the date at which the event is entered into the database. == Error correction == Another crucial part of an event store database is that events that are stored are not allowed to be changed. Once stored, also erroneous events are not changed anymore. The only way to change (or better: correct) these events is to instantiate a new event with the new values and using the double timeline. A correcting event would have the new values of the original event, with an event data of that corrected event, but a different transaction date. This mechanism ensures reproducibility at each moment in the time, even in the time period before the correction has taken place. It also allows to reproduce situations based on erroneous events (if required). == Advantages and disadvantages == One advantage of the event store concept is that handling the effects of back dated events (events that take effect before previous events and that may even invalidate them) is much easier. An event store will simplify the code in that rolling back erroneous situations and rolling up the new, correct situations is not needed anymore. Disadvantage may be that the code needs to re-instantiate all objects in memory based on the events each time a service call is received for a specific dossier or policy. == Compared to regular databases == In regular databases, handling backdated events to correct previous, erroneous events can be painful as it often results in rolling back all previous, erroneous transactions and objects and rolling up the new, correct transactions and objects. In an event store, only the new event (and its corresponding facts) are stored. The code will then redetermine the transactions and objects based on the new facts in memory.
Ronald J. Williams
Ronald James Williams (1945 – February 16, 2024) was an American mathematician and computer scientist who spent the majority of his career at Northeastern University. He is considered one of the pioneers of neural networks. In 1986, he co-authored the seminal paper in Nature on the backpropagation algorithm along with David Rumelhart and Geoffrey Hinton, which triggered a boom in neural network research. == Education and career == Williams was born in Southern California. He studied at California Institute of Technology as a undergraduate student and received a B.S. in mathematics there in 1966. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in mathematics, both at University of California, San Diego (UCSD) in 1972 and 1975, respectively. His Ph.D. thesis was supervised by Donald Werner Anderson. He worked for a defense contractor for some time after graduation. From 1983 to 1986, Williams was a member of the Parallel Distributed Processing research group headed by David Rumelhart at the Institute for Cognitive Science at UCSD. In 1986, Williams accepted a professorship in computer science at Northeastern University in Boston, where he remained afterwards. In addition to the backpropagation paper, Williams made fundamental contributions to the fields of recurrent neural networks, where he, along with David Zipser, invented the teacher forcing algorithm and made important contributions to backpropagation through time. In reinforcement learning, Williams introduced the REINFORCE algorithm in 1992, which became the first policy gradient method. Besides his works on neural networks, Williams, together with Wenxu Tong and Mary Jo Ondrechen, developed Partial Order Optimum Likelihood (POOL), a machine learning method used in the prediction of active amino acids in protein structures. POOL is a maximum likelihood method with a monotonicity constraint and is a general predictor of properties that depend monotonically on the input features.
Christopher K. I. Williams
Christopher Kenneth Ingle Williams (born 1960) is a professor at the School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, working in Artificial intelligence, and particularly the areas of Machine learning and Computer vision. == Education == Williams received a BA in Physics and Theoretical Physics from the University of Cambridge in 1982, followed by Part III Mathematics (1983). He did a MSc in Water Resources at the University of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, then worked in Lesotho on low-cost sanitation. In 1988, he studied at the Department of Computer Science of the University of Toronto under the supervision of Geoffrey Hinton. He obtained his MSc and PhD both in computer science, in 1990 and 1994, respectively. == Career and research == In 1994, Williams moved to Aston University as a Research Fellow. He became a Lecturer in August 1995. He moved to the University of Edinburgh in July 1998 and became Reader in 2000. He obtained a Personal Chair in Machine Learning in 2005 in the School of Informatics. Williams has been a Fellow of the European Laboratory for Learning and Intelligent Systems (ELLIS) since 2019. Williams' research interests are in machine learning and computer vision. He has worked on new models for understanding time-series and images, and for finding structure in data. He is best known for his work on Gaussian processes and for the book Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning, co-authored with Carl Rasmussen. The book received the 2009 DeGroot Prize of the International Society for Bayesian Analysis. Williams was an organizer of the PASCAL Visual Object Classes (VOC) project (2005–2012) along with Mark Everingham, Luc van Gool, John Winn, and Andrew Zisserman. == Awards and honours == In 2021 Williams was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (FRSE).
Separating words problem
In theoretical computer science, the separating words problem is the problem of finding the smallest deterministic finite automaton that behaves differently on two given strings, meaning that it accepts one of the two strings and rejects the other string. It is an open problem how large such an automaton must be, in the worst case, as a function of the length of the input strings. == Example == The two strings 0010 and 1000 may be distinguished from each other by a three-state automaton in which the transitions from the start state go to two different states, both of which are terminal in the sense that subsequent transitions from these two states always return to the same state. The state of this automaton records the first symbol of the input string. If one of the two terminal states is accepting and the other is rejecting, then the automaton will accept only one of the strings 0010 and 1000. However, these two strings cannot be distinguished by any automaton with fewer than three states. == Simplifying assumptions == For proving bounds on this problem, it may be assumed without loss of generality that the inputs are strings over a two-letter alphabet. For, if two strings over a larger alphabet differ then there exists a string homomorphism that maps them to binary strings of the same length that also differ. Any automaton that distinguishes the binary strings can be translated into an automaton that distinguishes the original strings, without any increase in the number of states. It may also be assumed that the two strings have equal length. For strings of unequal length, there always exists a prime number p whose value is logarithmic in the smaller of the two input lengths, such that the two lengths are different modulo p. An automaton that counts the length of its input modulo p can be used to distinguish the two strings from each other in this case. Therefore, strings of unequal lengths can always be distinguished from each other by automata with few states. == History and bounds == The problem of bounding the size of an automaton that distinguishes two given strings was first formulated by Goralčík & Koubek (1986), who showed that the automaton size is always sublinear. Later, Robson (1989) proved the upper bound O(n2/5(log n)3/5) on the automaton size that may be required. This was improved by Chase (2020) to O(n1/3(log n)7). There exist pairs of inputs that are both binary strings of length n for which any automaton that distinguishes the inputs must have size Ω(log n). Closing the gap between this lower bound and Chase's upper bound remains an open problem. Jeffrey Shallit has offered a prize of 100 British pounds for any improvement to Robson's upper bound. == Special cases == Several special cases of the separating words problem are known to be solvable using few states: If two binary words have differing numbers of zeros or ones, then they can be distinguished from each other by counting their Hamming weights modulo a prime of logarithmic size, using a logarithmic number of states. More generally, if a pattern of length k appears a different number of times in the two words, they can be distinguished from each other using O(k log n) states. If two binary words differ from each other within their first or last k positions, they can be distinguished from each other using k + O(1) states. This implies that almost all pairs of binary words can be distinguished from each other with a logarithmic number of states, because only a polynomially small fraction of pairs have no difference in their initial O(log n) positions. If two binary words have Hamming distance d, then there exists a prime p with p = O(d log n) and a position i at which the two strings differ, such that i is not equal modulo p to the position of any other difference. By computing the parity of the input symbols at positions congruent to i modulo p, it is possible to distinguish the words using an automaton with O(d log n) states.
Sensory, Inc.
Sensory, Inc. is an American company which develops software AI technologies for speech, sound and vision. It is based in Santa Clara, California. Sensory’s technologies have shipped in over three billion products from hundreds of leading consumer electronics manufacturers including AT&T, Hasbro, Huawei, Google, Amazon, Samsung, LG, Mattel, Motorola, Plantronics, GoPro, Sony, Tencent, Garmin, LG, Microsoft, Lenovo, and more. Sensory has over 60 issued patents covering speech recognition in consumer electronics, biometric authentication, sensor/speech combinations, wake word technology, and more. == History == Sensory, Inc. was founded in 1994, originally as Sensory Circuits, by Forrest Mozer, Mike Mozer and Todd Mozer. The three had also co-founded ESS Technology years earlier. In 1999 Sensory acquired Fluent Speech Technologies, which was formed and started by a group of professors out of the Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGI, now OHSU). Fluent Speech Technologies developed high performance embedded speech engines, the technology from this acquisition is now the core technology used throughout Sensory's chip and software line. === Company timeline === 1994 – Founded 1995 – Introduces the RSC 164 - first commercially successful speech recognition IC 1998 – Introduces first speaker verification IC 2000 – Acquires Oregon based Fluent-Speech Technologies 2002 – Acquires Texas Instruments line of speech output ICs (the SC series) 2007 – Introduces first Voice User Interface for Bluetooth silicon (CSR BC-5) - BlueGenie 2008 - Sensory and BlueAnt partner on the V1 - Revolutionary new Bluetooth headset with a voice user interface. First wearable to use a voice user interface for control and best-reviewed speech recognition product in history 2009 – Introduced world's smallest text to speech system (TTS) and Truly HandsfreeTM Triggers/ wake words. 2010 – Introduced the NLP-5x – First Natural Language Voice Processor and TrulyHandsfree wake words in SDKs for Android, iOS, Linux, and Windows. NLP5x used the first generation of TrulyHandsfree wake words with low power and enhanced accuracy. 2011 – Sensory partners with Google and Microsoft to enable TrulyHandsfree as a front end to Goog411 and Bing411 2012 – Partnered with Tensilica to offer ultra-low power TrulyHandsfree wake words; introduced Speaker Verification and Speaker Identification for mobile phones and other consumer electronics. 2012 - TrulyHandsfree released into Samsung's Galaxy S2 for "Hey Galaxy" wake word 2013 – TrulyHandsfree wake words migrated to many new platforms and began shipping as MotoVoice in the Google-owned MotoX. Sensory's TrulyHandsfree in mobile takes off with the Galaxy S3 and S4 and Galaxy Note and is licensed into wearables like Google Glass. 2014 – Announced new initiative in Vision; added LG and Motorola as customers; received the 2014 Global Mobile Award for Best Mobile Technology Breakthrough at the GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain (judges commented, "A big advance for the wearables market, this offers many benefits for consumers, increasing uptake and usage of many mobile apps, driving revenue for operators and content providers.") 2015-2018 - Licensed Google, Amazon, MSFT, Baidu, Huawei, ZTE, and many others with TrulyHandsfree wake words. Sensory develops first wake words for OK Google, Hey Siri, and Hey Cortana. 2019 - Sensory launched two new solutions: SoundID, sound identification, and TrulyNatural, embedded large vocabulary speech recognition. Sensory also acquired Vocalize.ai, an independent testing lab. 2020 - Sensory introduced VoiceHub, which allows the automated generation of wake words. 2021 - Sensory expands VoiceHub with speech recognition and NLU capabilities. The company initiated a new cloud platform, SensoryCloud.ai. 2022-Sensory rolls out SensoryCloud.ai with speech to text, text to speech, face & voice biometrics 2024- Sensory Automotive & TrulyNatural Speech-to-text On-Device launched == Technology and products == Sensory originally developed both hardware (Integrated Circuit - IC or "chip") and software platforms but migrated to software only around 2005 and added cloud and hybrid computing capabilities in 2021. Sensory's RSC-164 IC (Integrated Circuit or "chip") was used on NASA's Mars Polar Lander in the Mars Microphone on the Lander. Speech Synthesis SC-6x chips – acquired some speech synthesis technology from Texas Instruments. Sensory’s embedded AI solutions include the following: TrulyHandsfree (THF) - wake word detection and phrase spotting. TrulyNatural (TNL) - large vocabulary continuous speech recognition with NLU. TrulySecure (TS) - face and voice biometrics. TrulySecureSpeakerVerification (TSSV) - speaker and sound identification. VoiceHub - Online portal for creating custom wake words and speech recognition models with NLU. Sensory Automotive- Sensory Automotive is a full voice and vision suite of AI technologies that operate efficiently in the car without connecting to a network. The cloud initiative, SensoryCloud.ai, is targeting Speech To Text (STT), Text To Speech (TTS), Wake Word verification, face and voice recognition, and sound identification.
Top 10 AI Marketing Tools Compared (2026)
Comparing the best AI marketing tool? An AI marketing tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI marketing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.