A variable- (also changeable-, electronic-, or dynamic-) message sign or message board, often abbreviated VMS, VMB, CMS, or DMS, and in the UK known as a matrix sign, is an electronic traffic sign often used on roadways to give travelers information about special events. Such signs warn of traffic congestion, accidents, incidents such as terrorist attacks, Amber/Silver/Blue Alerts, roadwork zones, or speed limits on a specific highway segment. In urban areas, VMS are used within parking guidance and information systems to guide drivers to available car parking spaces. They may also ask vehicles to take alternative routes, limit travel speed, warn of duration and location of the incidents, inform of the traffic conditions, or display general public safety messages. == History == VMS systems were deployed at least as early as the 1950s on the New Jersey Turnpike. The road's signs of that period, and up to around 2012, were capable of displaying a few messages in neon, all oriented around warning drivers to slow down: "REDUCE SPEED", followed by a warning of either construction, accident, congestion, ice, snow, or fog at a certain distance ahead. The New Jersey Turnpike Authority replaced those signs (along with 1990s-vintage dot-matrix VMS systems along the Garden State Parkway) with more flexible electronic signs between 2010 and 2016. The current VMS systems are largely deployed on freeways, trunk highways, or in work zones. On the interchange of I-5 and SR 120 in San Joaquin County, California, an automated visibility and speed warning system was installed in 1996 to warn traffic of reduced visibility due to fog (where tule fog is a common problem in the winter), and of slow or stopped traffic. Message Signs were deployed in Ontario during the 1990s and are now being upgraded on 400-series highways as well as two pilot secondary highways in northeastern Ontario. == Technologies and types == Early variable message signs included static signs with words that would illuminate (often using neon tubing) indicating the type of incident that occurred, or signs that used rotating prisms (trilons) to change the message being displayed. These were later replaced by dot matrix displays typically using eggcrate, fiber optic, or flip-disc technology, which were capable of displaying a much wider range of messages than earlier static variable message signs. Since the late 1990s, the most common technology used in new installations for variable message signs are LED displays. In recent years, some newer LED variable message signs have the ability to display colored text and graphics. Dot-matrix variable message signs are divided into three subgroups: character matrix, row matrix, and full matrix. In a character matrix VMS, each character is given its own matrix with equal horizontal spacing between them, typically with two or three rows of characters. In a full matrix VMS, the entire sign is a single large dot matrix display, allowing the display of different fonts and graphics. A row matrix VMS is a hybrid of the two types, divided into two or three rows like a character matrix display, except each row is a single long dot matrix display instead of being split per character horizontally. Overhead variable message signs are today available in three form factors: front access, rear access, and walk-in. In a front access variable message sign, maintenance is performed by lifting the sign open from the front. Most smaller VMS are of the front access form factor, and are typically installed today on major arterials. The rear access form factor is similar to the front access form factor, except that maintenance is performed from the rear of the sign, and are commonly used for medium-sized dynamic message signs installed along the roadside of freeways (instead of overhead). The walk-in form factor is a more recent introduction, where maintenance on the sign is performed from the inside of the sign. A key advantage of the walk-in form factor is that lane closures are generally not required to perform maintenance on the sign. Most of the largest VMS units installed today are walk-in units, and are typically installed overhead on freeways. The NJ Turnpike Authority counts five unique types of variable message signs under its jurisdiction, at least one of which has been replaced by newer signs. They are: "REDUCE SPEED" neon signs (1950s-2010, obsolete, have now been replaced). "Changeable message signs" (trilon/ rotating-drum signs that can be used for closing roads or moving traffic to other roadways). Electronic VMS: signs with remotely controlled messages displayed on them; the messages are sent from the State Traffic Management Center, updating the signs automatically. Variable speed limit signs - used for varying the posted speed limits within work zones and in emergencies. Portable VMS: movable "electronic VMS". A portable VMS has much the same characteristics as a fixed electronic VMS, but can be moved from location to location as the need dictates. == Usage == Early models required an operator to be physically present when programming a message, whereas newer models may be reprogrammed remotely via a wired or wireless network or cellphone connection. A complete message on a panel generally includes a problem statement indicating incident, roadwork, stalled vehicle etc.; a location statement indicating where the incident is located; an effect statement indicating lane closure, delay, etc. and an action statement giving suggestion what to do traffic conditions ahead. These signs are also used for Amber alert messages, and in some states, Silver and Blue Alert messages. In some places, VMSes are set up with permanent, semi-static displays indicating predicted travel times to important traffic destinations such as major cities or interchanges along the route of a highway. Typical messages provide the following information: Promotional messages about services provided by a road authority during non-critical hours, such as carpooling efforts, travelers' information stations and 5-1-1 lines Crashes, including vehicle spin-out or rollover Road Works Incidents affecting normal traffic flow in a lane or on shoulders Non-recurring congestion, often a residual effect of cleared crash Closures of an entire road, e.g. over a mountain pass in winter. Exit ramp closures Debris on roadway Vehicle fires Wildfires Short-term maintenance or construction lasting less than three days Pavement failure alerts AMBER, Silver, and Blue Alerts, as well as weather warnings via the warning infrastructure of NOAA Weather Radio's SAME system Travel times Variable speed limits Car park occupancy levels speed sign, for recommending a speed to approach the next traffic light in its green phase. The information comes from a variety of traffic monitoring and surveillance systems. It is expected that by providing real-time information on special events on the oncoming road, VMS can improve motorists' route selection, reduce travel time, mitigate the severity and duration of incidents and improve the performance of the transportation network. === United Kingdom === Do not enter the motorway when the red lamps are flashing in pairs from side to side. On 27 March 1972, the first motorway computer-controlled warning lights in the UK, with 59 miles on the M6 from Broughton, Lancashire to Barthomley, on the Cheshire boundary, and 26 miles on the M62 east of Whitefield, was switched on by Michael Heseltine and Charles Legh Shuldham Cornwall-Legh, 5th Baron Grey of Codnor at the headquarters of Cheshire Constabulary on Nuns Road. It was centred at a police computer centre at Westhoughton, that connected to police stations in Preston and Chester. The Chester site was soon be connected to the M53 and M57. Four other regional computer centres would be opened at Perry Barr near the M6, Scratchwood near the M1, at Hook near the M3, and at Almondsbury near the M4. Most British motorways would be covered by 1975. The system was designed by GEC and had taken five years to design. == Safety messages for drivers == Increasingly, signs have been used to remind drivers to buckle seat belts ("Click It or Ticket"), obey the speed limit, and stay off the road if impaired ("Drive sober or get pulled over"). In a federal study, a slight majority of drivers reported that public safety messages on dynamic message signs impacted their driving behaviors. The Ohio Department of Transportation began using humorous dynamic message signs in 2015, perplexing some drivers. Examples of humorous signs seen in New Jersey, Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Iowa, New York, Minnesota and Ohio include: "Hold on to your butts. Help prevent forest fires." "We'll be blunt. Don't drive high." "Visiting in-laws? Slow down, get there late." "Only sparklers should be lit." and “Don’t drive Star Spangled hammered." (for Fourth of July) "Hocus pocus – drive with focus." and "Slow down in work zones - my mummy works here." (f
Glow (app)
Glow is a fertility awareness and period-tracking app. It is part of a suite of mobile apps focused on women's reproductive health and childcare, which includes Eve by Glow (a dedicated period tracker), Glow Nurture (a pregnancy tracker), and Glow Baby (a baby development tracker). The Glow company also operates an online shop that sells several fertility-related products, including ovulation test strips, pregnancy tests, and wearable breast pumps. In 2024, Glow was reported to have approximately 25 million users across its various apps and community message boards. == History == Glow debuted in August 2013 as an iOS app. It was founded by Michael Huang and Max Levchin and launched with $6 million in Series A funding from venture capital firms Founders Fund and Andreesen Horowitz. In 2014, Glow raised an additional $17 million in Series B funding, with Formation 8 joining existing investors. In 2015, Glow launched Ruby, an app dedicated to sexual health. That year, Wired reported that the company had added features to their apps allowing men to monitor their fertility. Glow subsequently released an additional set of apps focused on pregnancy tracking and infant development. In 2016, Glow reported that it had a total of approximately 3 million users; by 2018, this had grown to 15 million. Vox described it as one of the “big two” period and fertility tracking apps and the one that had started the “boom” in the femtech space. == Application and features == Glow was initially described as a fertility application that applied data-driven methods to menstrual and ovulation tracking. Core features include cycle logging, ovulation prediction, and symptom tracking. The app also provides educational content related to reproductive health and childcare, as well as a set of online message boards that allow individuals to share experiences and seek peer support. == Privacy and legal issues == Glow has received significant media attention for its privacy and security practices. In 2016, Consumer Reports identified potential exploits in the Glow app that they claimed could have exposed private user data to hackers. Glow subsequently reported that it had fixed the vulnerabilities and told The Washington Post they had no evidence that user data had been compromised. In September 2020, the California Attorney General announced a settlement with Glow related to Consumer Reports’ findings, which included a $250,000 civil penalty. Following the US Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson ruling, which legalized state-level bans on abortion, Glow (and other fertility trackers, such as Clue and Flo) came under additional scrutiny over concerns that user data on abortions could be reported to law enforcement. After this surge of media interest, a research team affiliated with the University of New South Wales conducted an investigation into the privacy practices of several popular fertility apps, including Glow. Their review of Glow was mixed, noting that they provided several privacy settings and de-identified sensitive data, but that user information could still be disclosed in the future if the app was sold. Glow rejected that claim, telling the Australian Associated Press that it "did not share" personal data. The company also cited several internal security measures it had implemented and its apps' offline data protection setting, which allows users to permanently delete their health-related data. == Reception == In 2014, Fast Company reported that 20,000 women had used Glow to conceive. Later that year, The Guardian included Glow Nurture on its list of the best iPhone apps of 2014. Media coverage often praised Glow's array of menstrual tracking options, although some reviews also noted that fertility apps are not birth control tools and cautioned against relying on them for that purpose. In 2019, Cosmopolitan singled Glow's community of users as one of its standout features.
Computer-aided software engineering
Computer-aided software engineering (CASE) is a domain of software tools used to design and implement applications. CASE tools are similar to and are partly inspired by computer-aided design (CAD) tools used for designing hardware products. CASE tools are intended to help develop high-quality, defect-free, and maintainable software. CASE software was often associated with methods for the development of information systems together with automated tools that could be used in the software development process. == History == The Information System Design and Optimization System (ISDOS) project, started in 1968 at the University of Michigan, initiated a great deal of interest in the whole concept of using computer systems to help analysts in the very difficult process of analysing requirements and developing systems. Several papers by Daniel Teichroew fired a whole generation of enthusiasts with the potential of automated systems development. His Problem Statement Language / Problem Statement Analyzer (PSL/PSA) tool was a CASE tool although it predated the term. Another major thread emerged as a logical extension to the data dictionary of a database. By extending the range of metadata held, the attributes of an application could be held within a dictionary and used at runtime. This "active dictionary" became the precursor to the more modern model-driven engineering capability. However, the active dictionary did not provide a graphical representation of any of the metadata. It was the linking of the concept of a dictionary holding analysts' metadata, as derived from the use of an integrated set of techniques, together with the graphical representation of such data that gave rise to the earlier versions of CASE. The next entrant into the market was Excelerator from Index Technology in Cambridge, Mass. While DesignAid ran on Convergent Technologies and later Burroughs Ngen networked microcomputers, Index launched Excelerator on the IBM PC/AT platform. While, at the time of launch, and for several years, the IBM platform did not support networking or a centralized database as did the Convergent Technologies or Burroughs machines, the allure of IBM was strong, and Excelerator came to prominence. Hot on the heels of Excelerator were a rash of offerings from companies such as Knowledgeware (James Martin, Fran Tarkenton and Don Addington), Texas Instrument's CA Gen and Andersen Consulting's FOUNDATION toolset (DESIGN/1, INSTALL/1, FCP). CASE tools were at their peak in the early 1990s. According to the PC Magazine of January 1990, over 100 companies were offering nearly 200 different CASE tools. At the time IBM had proposed AD/Cycle, which was an alliance of software vendors centered on IBM's Software repository using IBM DB2 in mainframe and OS/2: The application development tools can be from several sources: from IBM, from vendors, and from the customers themselves. IBM has entered into relationships with Bachman Information Systems, Index Technology Corporation, and Knowledgeware wherein selected products from these vendors will be marketed through an IBM complementary marketing program to provide offerings that will help to achieve complete life-cycle coverage. With the decline of the mainframe, AD/Cycle and the Big CASE tools died off, opening the market for the mainstream CASE tools of today. Many of the leaders of the CASE market of the early 1990s ended up being purchased by Computer Associates, including IEW, IEF, ADW, Cayenne, and Learmonth & Burchett Management Systems (LBMS). The other trend that led to the evolution of CASE tools was the rise of object-oriented methods and tools. Most of the various tool vendors added some support for object-oriented methods and tools. In addition new products arose that were designed from the bottom up to support the object-oriented approach. Andersen developed its project Eagle as an alternative to Foundation. Several of the thought leaders in object-oriented development each developed their own methodology and CASE tool set: Jacobson, Rumbaugh, Booch, etc. Eventually, these diverse tool sets and methods were consolidated via standards led by the Object Management Group (OMG). The OMG's Unified Modelling Language (UML) is currently widely accepted as the industry standard for object-oriented modeling. == CASE software == === Tools === CASE tools support specific tasks in the software development life-cycle. They can be divided into the following categories: Business and analysis modeling: Graphical modeling tools. E.g., E/R modeling, object modeling, etc. Development: Design and construction phases of the life-cycle. Debugging environments. E.g., IISE LKO. Verification and validation: Analyze code and specifications for correctness, performance, etc. Configuration management: Control the check-in and check-out of repository objects and files. E.g., SCCS, IISE. Metrics and measurement: Analyze code for complexity, modularity (e.g., no "go to's"), performance, etc. Project management: Manage project plans, task assignments, scheduling. Another common way to distinguish CASE tools is the distinction between Upper CASE and Lower CASE. Upper CASE Tools support business and analysis modeling. They support traditional diagrammatic languages such as ER diagrams, Data flow diagram, Structure charts, Decision Trees, Decision tables, etc. Lower CASE Tools support development activities, such as physical design, debugging, construction, testing, component integration, maintenance, and reverse engineering. All other activities span the entire life-cycle and apply equally to upper and lower CASE. === Workbenches === Workbenches integrate two or more CASE tools and support specific software-process activities. Hence they achieve: A homogeneous and consistent interface (presentation integration) Seamless integration of tools and toolchains (control and data integration) An example workbench is Microsoft's Visual Basic programming environment. It incorporates several development tools: a GUI builder, a smart code editor, debugger, etc. Most commercial CASE products tended to be such workbenches that seamlessly integrated two or more tools. Workbenches also can be classified in the same manner as tools; as focusing on Analysis, Development, Verification, etc. as well as being focused on the upper case, lower case, or processes such as configuration management that span the complete life-cycle. === Environments === An environment is a collection of CASE tools or workbenches that attempts to support the complete software process. This contrasts with tools that focus on one specific task or a specific part of the life-cycle. CASE environments are classified by Fuggetta as follows: Toolkits: Loosely coupled collections of tools. These typically build on operating system workbenches such as the Unix Programmer's Workbench or the VMS VAX set. They typically perform integration via piping or some other basic mechanism to share data and pass control. The strength of easy integration is also one of the drawbacks. Simple passing of parameters via technologies such as shell scripting can't provide the kind of sophisticated integration that a common repository database can. Fourth generation: These environments are also known as 4GL standing for fourth generation language environments due to the fact that the early environments were designed around specific languages such as Visual Basic. They were the first environments to provide deep integration of multiple tools. Typically these environments were focused on specific types of applications. For example, user-interface driven applications that did standard atomic transactions to a relational database. Examples are Informix 4GL, and Focus. Language-centered: Environments based on a single often object-oriented language such as the Symbolics Lisp Genera environment or VisualWorks Smalltalk from Parcplace. In these environments all the operating system resources were objects in the object-oriented language. This provides powerful debugging and graphical opportunities but the code developed is mostly limited to the specific language. For this reason, these environments were mostly a niche within CASE. Their use was mostly for prototyping and R&D projects. A common core idea for these environments was the model–view–controller user interface that facilitated keeping multiple presentations of the same design consistent with the underlying model. The MVC architecture was adopted by the other types of CASE environments as well as many of the applications that were built with them. Integrated: These environments are an example of what most IT people tend to think of first when they think of CASE. Environments such as IBM's AD/Cycle, Andersen Consulting's FOUNDATION, the ICL CADES system, and DEC Cohesion. These environments attempt to cover the complete life-cycle from analysis to maintenance and provide an integrated database repository for storing all artifacts of the software pr
IBM 37xx
IBM 37xx (or 37x5) is a family of IBM Systems Network Architecture (SNA) programmable front-end processors used mainly in mainframe environments. All members of the family ran one of three IBM-supplied programs. Emulation Program (EP) mimicked the operation of the older IBM 270x non-programmable controllers. Network Control Program (NCP) supported Systems Network Architecture devices. Partitioned Emulation Program (PEP) combined the functions of the two. == Models == === 370x series === 3705 — the oldest of the family, introduced in 1972 to replace the non-programmable IBM 270x family. The 3705 could control up to 352 communications lines. 3704 was a smaller version, introduced in 1973. It supported up to 32 lines. === 371x === The 3710 communications controller was introduced in 1984. === 372x series === The 3725 and the 3720 systems were announced in 1983. The 3725 replaced the hardware line scanners used on previous 370x machines with multiple microcoded processors. The 3725 was a large-scale node and front end processor. The 3720 was a smaller version of the 3725, which was sometimes used as a remote concentrator. The 3726 was an expansion unit for the 3725. With the expansion unit, the 3725 could support up to 256 lines at data rates up to 256 kbit/s, and connect to up to eight mainframe channels. Marketing of the 372x machines was discontinued in 1989. IBM discontinued support for the 3705, 3720, 3725 in 1999. === 374x series === The 3745, announced in 1988, provides up to eight T1 circuits. At the time of the announcement, IBM was estimated to have nearly 85% of the over US$825 million market for communications controllers over rivals such as NCR Comten and Amdahl Corporation. The 3745 is no longer marketed, but still supported and used. The 3746 "Nways Controller" model 900, unveiled in 1992, was an expansion unit for the 3745 supporting additional Token Ring and ESCON connections. A stand-alone model 950 appeared in 1995. == Successors == IBM no longer manufactures 37xx processors. The last models, the 3745/46, were withdrawn from marketing in 2002. Replacement software products are Communications Controller for Linux on System z and Enterprise Extender. == Clones == Several companies produced clones of 37xx controllers, including NCR COMTEN and Amdahl Corporation.
Ultra (cryptography)
Ultra was the designation adopted by British military intelligence in June 1941 for wartime signals intelligence obtained by breaking high-level encrypted enemy radio and teleprinter communications at the Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS) at Bletchley Park. Ultra eventually became the standard designation among the western Allies for all such intelligence. The name arose because the intelligence obtained was considered more important than that designated by the highest British security classification then used (Most Secret) and so was regarded as being Ultra Secret. Several other cryptonyms had been used for such intelligence. The code name "Boniface" was used as a cover name for Ultra. In order to ensure that the successful code-breaking did not become apparent to the Germans, British intelligence created a fictional MI6 master spy, Boniface, who controlled a fictional series of agents throughout Germany. Information obtained through code-breaking was often attributed to the human intelligence from the Boniface network. The U.S. used the codename Magic for its decrypts from Japanese sources, including the "Purple" cipher. Much of the German cipher traffic was encrypted on the Enigma machine. Used properly, the German military Enigma would have been virtually unbreakable; in practice, shortcomings in operation allowed it to be broken. The term "Ultra" has often been used almost synonymously with "Enigma decrypts". However, Ultra also encompassed decrypts of the German Lorenz SZ 40/42 machines that were used by the German High Command, and the Hagelin machine. Many observers, at the time and later, regarded Ultra as immensely valuable to the Allies. Winston Churchill was reported to have told King George VI, when presenting to him Stewart Menzies (head of the Secret Intelligence Service and the person who controlled distribution of Ultra decrypts to the government): "It is thanks to the secret weapon of General Menzies, put into use on all the fronts, that we won the war!" F. W. Winterbotham quoted the western Supreme Allied Commander, Dwight D. Eisenhower, at war's end describing Ultra as having been "decisive" to Allied victory. Sir Harry Hinsley, Bletchley Park veteran and official historian of British Intelligence in World War II, made a similar assessment of Ultra, saying that while the Allies would have won the war without it, "the war would have been something like two years longer, perhaps three years longer, possibly four years longer than it was." However, Hinsley and others have emphasized the difficulties of counterfactual history in attempting such conclusions, and some historians, such as John Keegan, have said the shortening might have been as little as the three months it took the United States to deploy the atomic bomb. == Sources of intelligence == Most Ultra intelligence was derived from reading radio messages that had been encrypted with cipher machines, complemented by material from radio communications using traffic analysis and direction finding. In the early phases of the war, particularly during the eight-month Phoney War, the Germans could transmit most of their messages using land lines and so had no need to use radio. This meant that those at Bletchley Park had some time to build up experience of collecting and starting to decrypt messages on the various radio networks. German Enigma messages were the main source, with those of the German air force (the Luftwaffe) predominating, as they used radio more and their operators were particularly ill-disciplined. === German === ==== Enigma ==== "Enigma" refers to a family of electro-mechanical rotor cipher machines. These produced a polyalphabetic substitution cipher and were widely thought to be unbreakable in the 1920s, when a variant of the commercial Model D was first used by the Reichswehr. The German Army (Heer), Navy, Air Force, Nazi party, Gestapo and German diplomats used Enigma machines in several variants. Abwehr (German military intelligence) used a four-rotor machine without a plugboard and Naval Enigma used different key management from that of the army or air force, making its traffic far more difficult to cryptanalyse; each variant required different cryptanalytic treatment. The commercial versions were not as secure and Dilly Knox of GC&CS is said to have broken one before the war. German military Enigma was first broken in December 1932 by Marian Rejewski and the Polish Cipher Bureau, using a combination of brilliant mathematics, the services of a spy in the German office responsible for administering encrypted communications, and good luck. The Poles read Enigma to the outbreak of World War II and beyond, in France. At the turn of 1939, the Germans made the systems ten times more complex, which required a tenfold increase in Polish decryption equipment, which they could not meet. On 25 July 1939, the Polish Cipher Bureau handed reconstructed Enigma machines and their techniques for decrypting ciphers to the French and British. Gordon Welchman wrote, Ultra would never have got off the ground if we had not learned from the Poles, in the nick of time, the details both of the German military Enigma machine, and of the operating procedures that were in use. At Bletchley Park, some of the key people responsible for success against Enigma included mathematicians Alan Turing and Hugh Alexander and, at the British Tabulating Machine Company, chief engineer Harold Keen. After the war, interrogation of German cryptographic personnel led to the conclusion that German cryptanalysts understood that cryptanalytic attacks against Enigma were possible but were thought to require impracticable amounts of effort and investment. The Poles' early start at breaking Enigma and the continuity of their success gave the Allies an advantage when World War II began. ==== Lorenz cipher ==== In June 1941, the Germans started to introduce on-line stream cipher teleprinter systems for strategic point-to-point radio links, to which the British gave the code-name Fish. Several systems were used, principally the Lorenz SZ 40/42 (codenamed "Tunny" by the British) and Geheimfernschreiber ("Sturgeon"). These cipher systems were cryptanalysed, particularly Tunny, which the British thoroughly penetrated. It was eventually attacked using Colossus machines, which were the first digital programme-controlled electronic computers. In many respects the Tunny work was more difficult than for the Enigma, since the British codebreakers had no knowledge of the machine producing it and no head-start such as that the Poles had given them against Enigma. Although the volume of intelligence derived from this system was much smaller than that from Enigma, its importance was often far higher because it produced primarily high-level, strategic intelligence that was sent between Wehrmacht high command (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, OKW). The eventual bulk decryption of Lorenz-enciphered messages contributed significantly, and perhaps decisively, to the defeat of Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, the Tunny story has become much less well known among the public than the Enigma one. At Bletchley Park, some of the key people responsible for success in the Tunny effort included mathematicians W. T. "Bill" Tutte and Max Newman and electrical engineer Tommy Flowers. === Italian === In June 1940, the Italians were using book codes for most of their military messages, except for the Italian Navy, which in early 1941 had started using a version of the Hagelin rotor-based cipher machine C-38. This was broken from June 1941 onwards by the Italian subsection of GC&CS at Bletchley Park. === Japanese === In the Pacific theatre, a Japanese cipher machine, called "Purple" by the Americans, was used for highest-level Japanese diplomatic traffic. It produced a polyalphabetic substitution cipher, but unlike Enigma, was not a rotor machine, being built around electrical stepping switches. It was broken by the US Army Signal Intelligence Service and disseminated as Magic. Detailed reports by the Japanese ambassador to Germany were encrypted on the Purple machine. His reports included reviews of German assessments of the military situation, reviews of strategy and intentions, reports on direct inspections by the ambassador (in one case, of Normandy beach defences), and reports of long interviews with Hitler. The Japanese are said to have obtained an Enigma machine in 1937, although it is debated whether they were given it by the Germans or bought a commercial version, which, apart from the plugboard and internal wiring, was the German Heer/Luftwaffe machine. Having developed a similar machine, the Japanese did not use the Enigma machine for their most secret communications. The chief fleet communications code system used by the Imperial Japanese Navy was called JN-25 by the Americans, and by early 1942 the US Navy had made considerable progress in decrypting Japanese naval messages. The US Army also made progress on the
Contract management software
Contract management software constitutes software and associated data management used to support contract management, contract lifecycle management, and contractor management on projects in the procurement of goods and services. It may be used together with project management software. == History == Historically, contract management was seen as a "paper-intensive" process. Early steps from the early 2000's reported by the Aberdeen Group required extensive data conversion work to enable documents to be handled electronically. With the adoption of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2016, companies needed to take additional steps in regards to contract management. Each data responsible entity was obliged to sign data processing agreements (DPAs) with the various vendors, who treat personal data on behalf of the data responsible. DPAs need to be regularly controlled, adjusted and renewed, which adds an extra agreement to such vendors or at least an extra DPA addendum to each agreement. By 2018, Ardent Partner's research had found that software used for automating contract management activities was being more extensively used among major companies or businesses with "Best-in-Class" procurement teams. Contract management process automation was found to be closely linked with more effective internal business collaboration, standardization and risk management. == Advantages and key functions == Using contract management software can have multiple benefits compared to manually managing paper contracts. This software can help keep track of multiple activities and can have features for automating administration, ensuring compliance, monitoring risk, running reports and triggering alerts. In addition to these types of features, contract management software systems provide a centralized repository for employees to quickly access all contracts worldwide in one place. Contract management software is produced by many companies, working on a range of scales and offering varying degrees of customizability. Basic functions should include the ability to store contract documents, track changes to contract documents, search documents for a particular criterion, send key date alerts and to report required aspects of the contract. Other functions include managing a new contract request, capturing related data, following a document through a review and approval process, and collecting digital signatures. Contract management software may also be an aid to project portfolio management and spend analysis, and may also monitor KPIs. Leading contract management software provides contract visibility, monitoring, and compliance to automate and streamline the contract lifecycle process. Contract management software which uses artificial intelligence (AI) can identify contract types based on pattern recognition. AI contracting software trains its algorithms on a set of contract data to recognize patterns and extract variables such as clauses, dates, and parties. It also offers simple prediction capabilities, by sorting through a large volume of contracts and flagging individual contracts based on specified criteria. AI software can also read contracts in multiple formats and languages, extract contract data, and provide analytics. It can reduce the risk of human error in contract drafting and review. A centralized repository provides a critical advantage allowing for all contract documents to be stored within one location. Having contracts stored in multiple locations can delay and interrupt the contracting process. == Contract risk management software (CRMS) for capital projects == Very large enterprises, such as capital expenditure (capex) projects, involve multiple parties and high risk and uncertainty. They are unlike traditional operating contracts in that they are subject to shared deadlines in unique situations. As the complexity of these unique projects increases, the relationships between parties become more important. This requires contract management software, or contract risk management software (CRMS), to become more dynamic and responsive. The terms of these capex contracts necessarily involve assumptions at the start of the process and are likely to change over the lifetime of the project lifecycle. For this reason, CRMS must be capable of recording one single instance of agreed changes to contract terms and incorporating these changes in an auditable and legally robust way. With multiple decision makers involved, CRMS should also make accountability more transparent and enable faster decisions about variation proposals.
Electronic lab notebook
An electronic lab notebook or electronic laboratory notebook (ELN) is a computer program designed to replace paper laboratory notebooks. Lab notebooks in general are used by scientists, engineers, and technicians to document research, experiments, and procedures performed in a laboratory. A lab notebook is often maintained to be a legal document and may be used in a court of law as evidence. Similar to an inventor's notebook, the lab notebook is also often referred to in patent prosecution and intellectual property litigation. Electronic lab notebooks offer many benefits to the user as well as organizations; they are easier to search upon, simplify data copying and backups, and support collaboration amongst many users. ELNs can have fine-grained access controls, and can be more secure than their paper counterparts. They also allow the direct incorporation of data from instruments, replacing the practice of printing out data to be stapled into a paper notebook. == Types == ELNs can be divided into two categories: "Specific ELNs" contain features designed to work with specific applications, scientific instrumentation or data types. "Cross-disciplinary ELNs" or "Generic ELNs" are designed to support access to all data and information that needs to be recorded in a lab notebook. Lab Platforms that combine an ELN, LIMS, and scientific data management together, all-in-one configurable software environment. Solutions range from specialized programs designed from the ground up for use as an ELN, to modifications or direct use of more general programs. Examples of using more general software as an ELN include using OpenWetWare, a MediaWiki install (running the same software that Wikipedia uses), WordPress, or the use of general note taking software such as OneNote as an ELN. ELN's come in many different forms. They can be standalone programs, use a client-server model, or be entirely web-based. Some use a lab-notebook approach, others resemble a blog. ELNs are embracing artificial intelligence and LLM technology to provide scientific AI chat assistants. A good many variations on the "ELN" acronym have appeared. Differences between systems with different names are often subtle, with considerable functional overlap between them. Examples include "ERN" (Electronic Research Notebook), "ERMS" (Electronic Resource (or Research or Records) Management System (or Software) and SDMS (Scientific Data (or Document) Management System (or Software). Ultimately, these types of systems all strive to do the same thing: Capture, record, centralize and protect scientific data in a way that is highly searchable, historically accurate, and legally stringent, and which also promotes secure collaboration, greater efficiency, reduced mistakes and lowered total research costs. == Objectives == A good electronic laboratory notebook should offer a secure environment to protect the integrity of both data and process, whilst also affording the flexibility to adopt new processes or changes to existing processes without recourse to further software development. The package architecture should be a modular design, so as to offer the benefit of minimizing validation costs of any subsequent changes that you may wish to make in the future as your needs change. A good electronic laboratory notebook should be an "out of the box" solution that, as standard, has fully configurable forms to comply with the requirements of regulated analytical groups through to a sophisticated ELN for inclusion of structures, spectra, chromatograms, pictures, text, etc. where a preconfigured form is less appropriate. All data within the system may be stored in a database (e.g. MySQL, MS-SQL, Oracle) and be fully searchable. The system should enable data to be collected, stored and retrieved through any combination of forms or ELN that best meets the requirements of the user. The application should enable secure forms to be generated that accept laboratory data input via PCs and/or laptops / palmtops, and should be directly linked to electronic devices such as laboratory balances, pH meters, etc. Networked or wireless communications should be accommodated for by the package which will allow data to be interrogated, tabulated, checked, approved, stored and archived to comply with the latest regulatory guidance and legislation. A system should also include a scheduling option for routine procedures such as equipment qualification and study related timelines. It should include configurable qualification requirements to automatically verify that instruments have been cleaned and calibrated within a specified time period, that reagents have been quality-checked and have not expired, and that workers are trained and authorized to use the equipment and perform the procedures. == Regulatory and legal aspects == The laboratory accreditation criteria found in the ISO 17025 standard needs to be considered for the protection and computer backup of electronic records. These criteria can be found specifically in clause 4.13.1.4 of the standard. Electronic lab notebooks used for development or research in regulated industries, such as medical devices or pharmaceuticals, are expected to comply with FDA regulations related to software validation. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure the integrity of the entries in terms of time, authorship, and content. Unlike ELNs for patent protection, FDA is not concerned with patent interference proceedings, but is concerned with avoidance of falsification. Typical provisions related to software validation are included in the medical device regulations at 21 CFR 820 (et seq.) and Title 21 CFR Part 11. Essentially, the requirements are that the software has been designed and implemented to be suitable for its intended purposes. Evidence to show that this is the case is often provided by a Software Requirements Specification (SRS) setting forth the intended uses and the needs that the ELN will meet; one or more testing protocols that, when followed, demonstrate that the ELN meets the requirements of the specification and that the requirements are satisfied under worst-case conditions. Security, audit trails, prevention of unauthorized changes without substantial collusion of otherwise independent personnel (i.e., those having no interest in the content of the ELN such as independent quality unit personnel) and similar tests are fundamental. Finally, one or more reports demonstrating the results of the testing in accordance with the predefined protocols are required prior to release of the ELN software for use. If the reports show that the software failed to satisfy any of the SRS requirements, then corrective and preventive action ("CAPA") must be undertaken and documented. Such CAPA may extend to minor software revisions, or changes in architecture or major revisions. CAPA activities need to be documented as well. Aside from the requirements to follow such steps for regulated industry, such an approach is generally a good practice in terms of development and release of any software to assure its quality and fitness for use. There are standards related to software development and testing that can be applied (see ref.).