Direct voice input (DVI), sometimes called voice input control (VIC), is a style of human–machine interaction "HMI" in which the user makes voice commands to issue instructions to the machine through speech recognition. In the field of military aviation, DVI has been introduced into the cockpits of several modern military aircraft, such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, the Dassault Rafale, the KF-21 Boramae and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen. Such systems have also been used for various other purposes, including industry control systems and speech recognition assistance for impaired individuals. == Overview == DVI systems can be divided into two major categories of functionality: "user-dependent" or "user-independent". A user-dependent system requires that a personal voice template to be generated for a specific person; the template for this individual has to be loaded onto their assigned machine prior to use of the DVI system for it to function properly. In contrast, a user-independent system does not require any personal voice template, being intended to respond correctly to the voice of any user. They can also be categorised between "discrete recognition" and "continuous recognition". Users of a discrete recognition system must pause between each word so that the DVI system can identify the separations between each word, while a continuous speech recognition system is capable of understanding a normal rate of speech. During the mid-2000s, researchers at the National Aerospace Laboratory in the Netherlands examined the use of DVI in the "GRACE" simulator; a total of twelve pilots participated in the ensuing experiment. The tests performed reportedly revealed that, while the hardware itself functioned well, several improvements were desirable prior to real-world deployment on aircraft since DVI operations actually consumed more time in comparison to traditional existing methods. Recommendations for improvements included the adoption of simpler syntax, the achievement of a greater recognition rate, and a decrease in response times; all of the issues encountered were determined to be of a technological nature, and were deemed feasible to resolve. The researchers concluded that in cockpits, especially during emergencies where pilots have to operate entirely on their own, a DVI system could be highly relevant, but that it was not of crucial importance during most other conceivable scenarios. Around the same time, evaluations of DVI systems for civil aviation purposes were conducted within the framework of Project SafeSound, coordinated by the European Union. It involved the observation of pilot workloads in real-world cockpits and contrasting them against pilot activity in flight simulators using both conventional systems and DVI assistance. The project aimed to enhance aviation safety and to decrease the workload in both ground and flight operations via the application of enhanced audio functions. == Applications == === Aviation === Prior to its widespread deployment, a handful of conventional military aircraft were converted to trial DVI systems; examples include the Harrier AV-8B and F-16 VISTA. In another case, a General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon simulator was modified with DVI for a voice control study that was undertaken by the Royal Netherlands Air Force. DVI trials have also been conducted on helicopters, including the Boeing AH-64 Apache, showing the potential to improve flight safety and mission effectiveness. Numerous modern fighter aircraft have been outfitted with DVI systems, often in combination with various other man-machine interface schemes, such as HOTAS-compliant controls and other advanced control technologies. The combination of Voice and HOTAS control schemes has sometimes been referred to as the "V-TAS" concept. A prominent fighter aircraft to be furnished with a V-TAS cockpit is the Eurofighter Typhoon. The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II also features a DVI system, which was developed by Adacel. Other examples includes the Dassault Rafale and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen. Numerous aircraft have been planned to use DVI. At one stage, the United States Air Force had sought to integrate DVI upon the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor; however, the technology was eventually judged to pose too many technical risks at that point in time, and thus such efforts were abandoned. === Personal === By 1990, working prototypes of speech recognition systems were being demonstrated; these were being promoted for the purpose of providing an effective man-machine interface for individuals with impaired speech. Techniques employed included time-encoded digital speech and automatic token set selection. Investigations of these early DVI systems reportedly included the use of automatic diagnostic routines and limited-scale trials using volunteers. During the 2010s, various companies were offering voice recognition systems to the general public in the form of personal digital assistants. One example is the Google Voice service, which allows users to pose questions via a DVI package installed on either a personal computer, tablet, or mobile phone. Numerous digital assistants have been developed, such as Amazon Echo, Siri, and Cortana, that use DVI to interact with users. === Commercial === DVI technology has enabled automated telephone systems to be widely deployed. Many companies commonly use centralised phone systems that route callers to the correct department via such methods. Various car manufacturers have also furnished their road vehicles with DVI systems; these typically allow drivers to control infotainment systems and interact with mobile phones with more convenience than legacy methods. During the late 1980s, investigations into the use of DVI systems for controlling CNC machines and other manufacturing apparatus were underway. During the 2010s, such systems were being used for logistics and warehouse management purposes.
Dynamic epistemic logic
Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a logical framework dealing with knowledge and information change. Typically, DEL focuses on situations involving multiple agents and studies how their knowledge changes when events occur. These events can change factual properties of the actual world (they are called ontic events): for example a red card is painted in blue. They can also bring about changes of knowledge without changing factual properties of the world (they are called epistemic events): for example, a card is revealed publicly (or privately) to be red. Originally, DEL focused on epistemic events. Only some of the basic ideas are present in this entry of the original DEL framework; more details about DEL in general can be found in the references. Due to the nature of its object of study and its abstract approach, DEL is related and has applications to numerous research areas, such as computer science (artificial intelligence), philosophy (formal epistemology), economics (game theory) and cognitive science. In computer science, DEL is for example very much related to multi-agent systems, which are systems where multiple intelligent agents interact and exchange information. As a combination of dynamic logic and epistemic logic, dynamic epistemic logic is a young field of research. It really started in 1989 with Plaza's logic of public announcement. Independently, Gerbrandy and Groeneveld proposed a system dealing moreover with private announcement and that was inspired by the work of Veltman. Another system was proposed by van Ditmarsch whose main inspiration was the Cluedo game. But the most influential and original system was the system proposed by Baltag, Moss and Solecki. This system can deal with all the types of situations studied in the works above and its underlying methodology is conceptually grounded. This entry will present some of its basic ideas. Formally, DEL extends ordinary epistemic logic by the inclusion of event models to describe actions, and a product update operator that defines how epistemic models are updated as the consequence of executing actions described through event models. Epistemic logic will first be recalled. Then, actions and events will enter into the picture and we will introduce the DEL framework. == Epistemic logic == Epistemic logic is a modal logic dealing with the notions of knowledge and belief. As a logic, it is concerned with understanding the process of reasoning about knowledge and belief: which principles relating the notions of knowledge and belief are intuitively plausible? Like epistemology, it stems from the Greek word ϵ π ι σ τ η μ η {\displaystyle \epsilon \pi \iota \sigma \tau \eta \mu \eta } or ‘episteme’ meaning knowledge. Epistemology is nevertheless more concerned with analyzing the very nature and scope of knowledge, addressing questions such as “What is the definition of knowledge?” or “How is knowledge acquired?”. In fact, epistemic logic grew out of epistemology in the Middle Ages thanks to the efforts of Burley and Ockham. The formal work, based on modal logic, that inaugurated contemporary research into epistemic logic dates back only to 1962 and is due to Hintikka. It then sparked in the 1960s discussions about the principles of knowledge and belief and many axioms for these notions were proposed and discussed. For example, the interaction axioms K p → B p {\displaystyle Kp\rightarrow Bp} and B p → K B p {\displaystyle Bp\rightarrow KBp} are often considered to be intuitive principles: if an agent Knows p {\displaystyle p} then (s)he also Believes p {\displaystyle p} , or if an agent Believes p {\displaystyle p} , then (s)he Knows that (s)he Believes p {\displaystyle p} . More recently, these kinds of philosophical theories were taken up by researchers in economics, artificial intelligence and theoretical computer science where reasoning about knowledge is a central topic. Due to the new setting in which epistemic logic was used, new perspectives and new features such as computability issues were then added to the research agenda of epistemic logic. === Syntax === In the sequel, A G T S = { 1 , … , n } {\displaystyle AGTS=\{1,\ldots ,n\}} is a finite set whose elements are called agents and P R O P {\displaystyle PROP} is a set of propositional letters. The epistemic language is an extension of the basic multi-modal language of modal logic with a common knowledge operator C A {\displaystyle C_{A}} and a distributed knowledge operator D A {\displaystyle D_{A}} . Formally, the epistemic language L EL C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\textsf {EL}}^{C}} is defined inductively by the following grammar in BNF: L EL C : ϕ ::= p ∣ ¬ ϕ ∣ ( ϕ ∧ ϕ ) ∣ K j ϕ ∣ C A ϕ ∣ D A ϕ {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\textsf {EL}}^{C}:\phi ~~::=~~p~\mid ~\neg \phi ~\mid ~(\phi \land \phi )~\mid ~K_{j}\phi ~\mid ~C_{A}\phi ~\mid ~D_{A}\phi } where p ∈ P R O P {\displaystyle p\in PROP} , j ∈ A G T S {\displaystyle j\in {AGTS}} and A ⊆ A G T S {\displaystyle A\subseteq {AGTS}} . The basic epistemic language L E L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{EL}} is the language L E L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{EL}^{C}} without the common knowledge and distributed knowledge operators. The formula ⊥ {\displaystyle \bot } is an abbreviation for ¬ p ∧ p {\displaystyle \neg p\land p} (for a given p ∈ P R O P {\displaystyle p\in PROP} ), ⟨ K j ⟩ ϕ {\displaystyle \langle K_{j}\rangle \phi } is an abbreviation for ¬ K j ¬ ϕ {\displaystyle \neg K_{j}\neg \phi } , E A ϕ {\displaystyle E_{A}\phi } is an abbreviation for ⋀ j ∈ A K j ϕ {\displaystyle \bigwedge \limits _{j\in A}K_{j}\phi } and C ϕ {\displaystyle C\phi } an abbreviation for C A G T S ϕ {\displaystyle C_{AGTS}\phi } . Group notions: general, common and distributed knowledge. In a multi-agent setting there are three important epistemic concepts: general knowledge, distributed knowledge and common knowledge. The notion of common knowledge was first studied by Lewis in the context of conventions. It was then applied to distributed systems and to game theory, where it allows to express that the rationality of the players, the rules of the game and the set of players are commonly known. General knowledge. General knowledge of ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } means that everybody in the group of agents A G T S {\displaystyle {AGTS}} knows that ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } . Formally, this corresponds to the following formula: E ϕ := ⋀ j ∈ A G T S K j ϕ . {\displaystyle E\phi :={\underset {j\in {AGTS}}{\bigwedge }}K_{j}\phi .} Common knowledge. Common knowledge of ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } means that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } but also that everybody knows that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } , that everybody knows that everybody knows that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } , and so on ad infinitum. Formally, this corresponds to the following formula C ϕ := E ϕ ∧ E E ϕ ∧ E E E ϕ ∧ … {\displaystyle C\phi :=E\phi \land EE\phi \land EEE\phi \land \ldots } As we do not allow infinite conjunction the notion of common knowledge will have to be introduced as a primitive in our language. Before defining the language with this new operator, we are going to give an example introduced by Lewis that illustrates the difference between the notions of general knowledge and common knowledge. Lewis wanted to know what kind of knowledge is needed so that the statement p {\displaystyle p} : “every driver must drive on the right” be a convention among a group of agents. In other words, he wanted to know what kind of knowledge is needed so that everybody feels safe to drive on the right. Suppose there are only two agents i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} . Then everybody knowing p {\displaystyle p} (formally E p {\displaystyle Ep} ) is not enough. Indeed, it might still be possible that the agent i {\displaystyle i} considers possible that the agent j {\displaystyle j} does not know p {\displaystyle p} (formally ¬ K i K j p {\displaystyle \neg K_{i}K_{j}p} ). In that case the agent i {\displaystyle i} will not feel safe to drive on the right because he might consider that the agent j {\displaystyle j} , not knowing p {\displaystyle p} , could drive on the left. To avoid this problem, we could then assume that everybody knows that everybody knows that p {\displaystyle p} (formally E E p {\displaystyle EEp} ). This is again not enough to ensure that everybody feels safe to drive on the right. Indeed, it might still be possible that agent i {\displaystyle i} considers possible that agent j {\displaystyle j} considers possible that agent i {\displaystyle i} does not know p {\displaystyle p} (formally ¬ K i K j K i p {\displaystyle \neg K_{i}K_{j}K_{i}p} ). In that case and from i {\displaystyle i} ’s point of view, j {\displaystyle j} considers possible that i {\displaystyle i} , not knowing p {\displaystyle p} , will drive on the left. So from i {\displaystyle i} ’s point of view, j {\displaystyle j} might drive on the left as well (by the same argument as abov
Automated parking system
An automated (car) parking system (APS) is a mechanical system designed to minimize the area and/or volume required for parking cars. Like a multi-story parking garage, an APS provides parking for cars on multiple levels stacked vertically to maximize the number of parking spaces while minimizing land usage. The APS, however, utilizes a mechanical system to transport cars to and from parking spaces (rather than the driver) in order to eliminate much of the space wasted in a multi-story parking garage. While a multi-story parking garage is similar to multiple parking lots stacked vertically, an APS is more similar to an automated storage and retrieval system for cars. Parking systems are generally powered by electric motors or hydraulic pumps that move vehicles into a storage position.The paternoster (shown animated at the right) is an example of one of the earliest and most common types of APS. APS are also generically known by a variety of other names, including:automated parking facility (APF), automated vehicle storage and retrieval system (AVSRS), car parking system, mechanical parking, and robotic parking garage. == History == The concept for the automated parking system was and is driven by two factors: a need for parking spaces and a scarcity of available land. The earliest use of an APS was in Paris, France in 1905 at the Garage Rue de Ponthieu. The APS consisted of a groundbreaking multi-story concrete structure with an internal car elevator to transport cars to upper levels where attendants parked the cars. In the 1920s, a Ferris wheel-like APS (for cars rather than people) called a paternoster system became popular as it could park eight cars in the ground space normally used for parking two cars. Mechanically simple with a small footprint, the paternoster was easy to use in many places, including inside buildings. At the same time, Kent Automatic Garages was installing APS with capacities exceeding 1,000 cars. The “ferris-wheel,” or paternoster system — was created by the Westinghouse Corporation in 1923 and subsequently built in 1932 on Chicago's Monroe Street. The Nash Motor Company created the first glass-enclosed version of this system for the Chicago Century of Progress Exhibition in 1933 The first driverless parking garage opened in 1951 in Washington, D.C., but was replaced with office space due to increasing land values. APS saw a spurt of interest in the U.S. in the late 1940s and 1950s with the Bowser, Pigeon Hole and Roto Park systems. In 1957, 74 Bowser, Pigeon Hole systems were installed, and some of these systems remain in operation. However, interest in APS in the U.S. waned due to frequent mechanical problems and long waiting times for patrons to retrieve their cars. In the United Kingdom, the Auto Stacker opened in 1961 in Woolwich, south east London, but proved equally difficult to operate. Interest in APS in the U.S. was renewed in the 1990s, and there were 25 major current and planned APS projects (representing nearly 6,000 parking spaces) in 2012. The first American robotic parking garage opened in 2002 in Hoboken, New Jersey. While interest in the APS in the U.S. languished until the 1990s, Europe, Asia and Central America had been installing more technically advanced APS since the 1970s. In the early 1990s, nearly 40,000 parking spaces were being built annually using the paternoster APS in Japan. In 2012, there are an estimated 1.6 million APS parking spaces in Japan. The ever-increasing scarcity of available urban land (urbanization) and increase of the number of cars in use (motorization) have combined with sustainability and other quality-of-life issues to renew interest in APS as alternatives to multi-storey car parks, on-street parking, and parking lots. == Largest systems == The largest Automated Parking Facility in the world is in Al Jahra, Kuwait, and provides 2,314 parking spaces. The world's fastest Automated Parking System is in Wolfsburg, Germany, with a retrieval time of 1 minute and 44 seconds. The largest APS in Europe is at Dokk1 in Aarhus, Denmark, and provides 1,000 parking spaces via 20 car lifts. == Space saving == All APS take advantage of a common concept to decrease the area of parking spaces - removing the driver and passengers from the car before it is parked. With either fully automated or semi-automated APS, the car is driven up to an entry point to the APS and the driver and passengers exit the car. The car is then moved automatically or semi-automatically (with some attendant action required) to its parking space. The space-saving provided by the APS, compared to the multi-story parking garage, is derived primarily from a significant reduction in space not directly related to the parking of the car: Parking space width and depth (and distances between parking spaces) are dramatically reduced since no allowance need be made for driving the car into the parking space or for the opening of car doors (for drivers and passengers) No driving lanes or ramps are needed to drive the car to/from the entrance/exit to a parking space Ceiling height is minimized since there is no pedestrian traffic (drivers and passengers) in the parking area, and No walkways, stairways or elevators are needed to accommodate pedestrians in the parking area. With the elimination of ramps, driving lanes, pedestrians and the reduction in ceiling heights, the APS requires substantially less structural material than the multi-story parking garage. Many APS utilize a steel framework (some use thin concrete slabs) rather than the monolithic concrete design of the multi-story parking garage. These factors contribute to an overall volume reduction and further space savings for the APS. == Other considerations == In addition to the space saving, many APS designs provide a number of secondary benefits: The parked cars and their contents are more secure since there is no public access to parked cars Minor parking lot damage such as scrapes and dents are eliminated Drivers and passengers are safer not having to walk through parking lots or garages Driving around in search of a parking space is eliminated, thereby reducing engine emissions and wasted time Only minimal ventilation and lighting systems are needed Handicap access is improved The volume and visual impact of the parking structure is minimized Shorter construction time === Problems === There have been a number of problems with robotic parking systems, particularly in the United States. The systems work well in balanced throughput situations like shopping malls and train stations, but they are unsuited to high peak volume applications like rush hour usage or stadiums and they suffer from technical problems. Further, parkers not familiar with the system may cause problems, for example by failing to push the button to alert a fully automated system to the presence of a car to be parked. In London around 40 vehicles were trapped for two years in CBRE's system. == Fully automated vs semi-automated == Fully automated parking systems operate much like robotic valet parking. The driver drives the car into an APS entry (transfer) area. The driver and all passengers exit the car. The driver uses an automated terminal nearby for payment and receipt of a ticket. When driver and passengers have left the entry area, the mechanical system lifts the car and transports it to a pre-determined parking space in the system. More sophisticated fully automated APS will obtain the dimensions of cars on entry in order to place them in the smallest available parking space. The driver retrieves a car by inserting a ticket or code into an automated terminal. The APS lifts the car from its parking space and delivers it to an exit area. Most often, the retrieved car has been oriented to eliminate the need for the driver to back out. Fully automated APS theoretically eliminate the need for parking attendants. Semi-automated APS also use a mechanical system of some type to move a car to its parking space, however putting the car into and/or the operation of the system requires some action by an attendant or the driver. The choice between fully and semi-automated APS is often a matter of space and cost, however large capacity (> 100 cars) tend to be fully automated. == Applications == By virtue of their relatively smaller volume and mechanized parking systems, APS are often used in locations where a multi-story parking garage would be too large, too costly or impractical. Examples of such applications include, under or inside existing or new structures, between existing structures and in irregularly shaped areas. APS can also be applied in situations similar to multi-storey parking garages such as freestanding above ground, under buildings above grade and under buildings below grade. == Costs == The direct comparison of costs between an APS and a multi-story parking garage can be complicated by many variables such as capacity, land costs, area shape, number and location of entranc
Plotting algorithms for the Mandelbrot set
There are many programs and algorithms used to plot the Mandelbrot set and other fractals, some of which are described in fractal-generating software. These programs use a variety of algorithms to determine the color of individual pixels efficiently. == Escape time algorithm == The simplest algorithm for generating a representation of the Mandelbrot set is known as the "escape time" algorithm. A repeating calculation is performed for each x, y point in the plot area and based on the behavior of that calculation, a color is chosen for that pixel. === Unoptimized naïve escape time algorithm === In both the unoptimized and optimized escape time algorithms, the x and y locations of each point are used as starting values in a repeating, or iterating calculation (described in detail below). The result of each iteration is used as the starting values for the next. The values are checked during each iteration to see whether they have reached a critical "escape" condition, or "bailout". If that condition is reached, the calculation is stopped, the pixel is drawn, and the next x, y point is examined. For some starting values, escape occurs quickly, after only a small number of iterations. For starting values very close to but not in the set, it may take hundreds or thousands of iterations to escape. For values within the Mandelbrot set, escape will never occur. The programmer or user must choose how many iterations–or how much "depth"–they wish to examine. The higher the maximal number of iterations, the more detail and subtlety emerge in the final image, but the longer time it will take to calculate the fractal image. Escape conditions can be simple or complex. Because no complex number with a real or imaginary part greater than 2 can be part of the set, a common bailout is to escape when either coefficient exceeds 2. A more computationally complex method that detects escapes sooner, is to compute distance from the origin using the Pythagorean theorem, i.e., to determine the absolute value, or modulus, of the complex number. If this value exceeds 2, or equivalently, when the sum of the squares of the real and imaginary parts exceed 4, the point has reached escape. More computationally intensive rendering variations include the Buddhabrot method, which finds escaping points and plots their iterated coordinates. The color of each point represents how quickly the values reached the escape point. Often black is used to show values that fail to escape before the iteration limit, and gradually brighter colors are used for points that escape. This gives a visual representation of how many cycles were required before reaching the escape condition. To render such an image, the region of the complex plane we are considering is subdivided into a certain number of pixels. To color any such pixel, let c {\displaystyle c} be the midpoint of that pixel. We now iterate the critical point 0 under P c {\displaystyle P_{c}} , checking at each step whether the orbit point has modulus larger than 2. When this is the case, we know that c {\displaystyle c} does not belong to the Mandelbrot set, and we color our pixel according to the number of iterations used to find out. Otherwise, we keep iterating up to a fixed number of steps, after which we decide that our parameter is "probably" in the Mandelbrot set, or at least very close to it, and color the pixel black. In pseudocode, this algorithm would look as follows. The algorithm does not use complex numbers and manually simulates complex-number operations using two real numbers, for those who do not have a complex data type. The program may be simplified if the programming language includes complex-data-type operations. for each pixel (Px, Py) on the screen do x0 := scaled x coordinate of pixel (scaled to lie in the Mandelbrot X scale (-2.00, 0.47)) y0 := scaled y coordinate of pixel (scaled to lie in the Mandelbrot Y scale (-1.12, 1.12)) x := 0.0 y := 0.0 iteration := 0 max_iteration := 1000 while (xx + yy ≤ 22 AND iteration < max_iteration) do xtemp := xx - yy + x0 y := 2xy + y0 x := xtemp iteration := iteration + 1 color := palette[iteration] plot(Px, Py, color) Here, relating the pseudocode to c {\displaystyle c} , z {\displaystyle z} and P c {\displaystyle P_{c}} : z = x + i y {\displaystyle z=x+iy\ } z 2 = x 2 + 2 i x y {\displaystyle z^{2}=x^{2}+2ixy} - y 2 {\displaystyle y^{2}\ } c = x 0 + i y 0 {\displaystyle c=x_{0}+iy_{0}\ } and so, as can be seen in the pseudocode in the computation of x and y: x = R e ( z 2 + c ) = x 2 − y 2 + x 0 {\displaystyle x=\mathop {\mathrm {Re} } (z^{2}+c)=x^{2}-y^{2}+x_{0}} and y = I m ( z 2 + c ) = 2 x y + y 0 . {\displaystyle y=\mathop {\mathrm {Im} } (z^{2}+c)=2xy+y_{0}.\ } To get colorful images of the set, the assignment of a color to each value of the number of executed iterations can be made using one of a variety of functions (linear, exponential, etc.). One practical way, without slowing down calculations, is to use the number of executed iterations as an entry to a palette initialized at startup. If the color table has, for instance, 500 entries, then the color selection is n mod 500, where n is the number of iterations. === Optimized escape time algorithms === The code in the previous section uses an unoptimized inner while loop for clarity. In the unoptimized version, one must perform five multiplications per iteration. To reduce the number of multiplications the following code for the inner while loop may be used instead: x2:= 0 y2:= 0 w:= 0 while (x2 + y2 ≤ 4 and iteration < max_iteration) do x:= x2 - y2 + x0 y:= w - x2 - y2 + y0 x2:= x x y2:= y y w:= (x + y) (x + y) iteration:= iteration + 1 The above code works via some algebraic simplification of the complex multiplication: ( i y + x ) 2 = − y 2 + 2 i y x + x 2 = x 2 − y 2 + 2 i y x {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}(iy+x)^{2}&=-y^{2}+2iyx+x^{2}\\&=x^{2}-y^{2}+2iyx\end{aligned}}} Using the above identity, the number of multiplications can be reduced to three instead of five. The above inner while loop can be further optimized by expanding w to w = x 2 + 2 x y + y 2 {\displaystyle w=x^{2}+2xy+y^{2}} Substituting w into y = w − x 2 − y 2 + y 0 {\displaystyle y=w-x^{2}-y^{2}+y_{0}} yields y = 2 x y + y 0 {\displaystyle y=2xy+y_{0}} and hence calculating w is no longer needed. The further optimized pseudocode for the above is: x:= 0 y:= 0 x2:= 0 y2:= 0 while (x2 + y2 ≤ 4 and iteration < max_iteration) do x2:= x x y2:= y y y:= 2 x y + y0 x:= x2 - y2 + x0 iteration:= iteration + 1 Note that in the above pseudocode, 2 x y {\displaystyle 2xy} seems to increase the number of multiplications by 1, but since 2 is the multiplier the code can be optimized via ( x + x ) y {\displaystyle (x+x)y} . == Coloring algorithms == In addition to plotting the set, a variety of algorithms have been developed to efficiently color the set in an aesthetically pleasing way show structures of the data (scientific visualisation) === Histogram coloring === A more complex coloring method involves using a histogram which pairs each pixel with said pixel's maximum iteration count before escape/bailout. This method will equally distribute colors to the same overall area, and, importantly, is independent of the maximum number of iterations chosen. This algorithm has four passes. The first pass involves calculating the iteration counts associated with each pixel (but without any pixels being plotted). These are stored in an array IterationCounts[x][y], where x and y are the x and y coordinates of said pixel on the screen respectively. The first step of the second pass is to create an array NumIterationsPerPixel[n], where the array size n is the maximum iteration count. Next, one must iterate over the array of pixel-iteration count pairs IterationCounts[x][y], and retrieve each pixel's saved iteration count, i, via e.g. i = IterationCounts[x][y]. After each pixel's iteration count i is retrieved, it is necessary to index the NumIterationsPerPixel array at i and increment the indexed value (which is initially zero) -- e.g. NumIterationsPerPixel[i] = NumIterationsPerPixel[i] + 1. for (x = 0; x < width; x++) do for (y = 0; y < height; y++) do i:= IterationCounts[x][y] NumIterationsPerPixel[i]++ The third pass iterates through the NumIterationsPerPixel array and adds up all the stored values, saving them in total. The array index represents the number of pixels that reached that iteration count before bailout. total: = 0 for (i = 0; i < max_iterations; i++) do total += NumIterationsPerPixel[i] After this, the fourth pass begins and all the values in the IterationCounts array are indexed, and, for each iteration count i, associated with each pixel, the count is added to a global sum of all the iteration counts from 1 to i in the NumIterationsPerPixel array . This value is then normalized by dividing the sum by the total value computed earlier. hue[][]:= 0.0 for (x = 0; x < width; x++) do for (y = 0; y < height; y++) do iteration:= Iteration
Behavior-based robotics
Behavior-based robotics (BBR) or behavioral robotics is an approach in robotics that focuses on robots that are able to exhibit complex-appearing behaviors despite little internal variable state to model its immediate environment, mostly gradually correcting its actions via sensory-motor links. == Principles == Behavior-based robotics sets itself apart from traditional artificial intelligence by using biological systems as a model. Classic artificial intelligence typically uses a set of steps to solve problems, it follows a path based on internal representations of events compared to the behavior-based approach. Rather than use preset calculations to tackle a situation, behavior-based robotics relies on adaptability. This advancement has allowed behavior-based robotics to become commonplace in researching and data gathering. Most behavior-based systems are also reactive, which means they need no programming of what a chair looks like, or what kind of surface the robot is moving on. Instead, all the information is gleaned from the input of the robot's sensors. The robot uses that information to gradually correct its actions according to the changes in immediate environment. Behavior-based robots (BBR) usually show more biological-appearing actions than their computing-intensive counterparts, which are very deliberate in their actions. A BBR often makes mistakes, repeats actions, and appears confused, but can also show the anthropomorphic quality of tenacity. Comparisons between BBRs and insects are frequent because of these actions. BBRs are sometimes considered examples of weak artificial intelligence, although some have claimed they are models of all intelligence. == Features == Most behavior-based robots are programmed with a basic set of features to start them off. They are given a behavioral repertoire to work with dictating what behaviors to use and when, obstacle avoidance and battery charging can provide a foundation to help the robots learn and succeed. Rather than build world models, behavior-based robots simply react to their environment and problems within that environment. They draw upon internal knowledge learned from their past experiences combined with their basic behaviors to resolve problems. == History == The school of behavior-based robots owes much to work undertaken in the 1980s at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology by Rodney Brooks, who with students and colleagues built a series of wheeled and legged robots utilizing the subsumption architecture. Brooks' papers, often written with lighthearted titles such as "Planning is just a way of avoiding figuring out what to do next", the anthropomorphic qualities of his robots, and the relatively low cost of developing such robots, popularized the behavior-based approach. Brooks' work builds—whether by accident or not—on two prior milestones in the behavior-based approach. In the 1950s, W. Grey Walter, an English scientist with a background in neurological research, built a pair of vacuum tube-based robots that were exhibited at the 1951 Festival of Britain, and which have simple but effective behavior-based control systems. The second milestone is Valentino Braitenberg's 1984 book, "Vehicles – Experiments in Synthetic Psychology" (MIT Press). He describes a series of thought experiments demonstrating how simply wired sensor/motor connections can result in some complex-appearing behaviors such as fear and love. Later work in BBR is from the BEAM robotics community, which has built upon the work of Mark Tilden. Tilden was inspired by the reduction in the computational power needed for walking mechanisms from Brooks' experiments (which used one microcontroller for each leg), and further reduced the computational requirements to that of logic chips, transistor-based electronics, and analog circuit design. A different direction of development includes extensions of behavior-based robotics to multi-robot teams. The focus in this work is on developing simple generic mechanisms that result in coordinated group behavior, either implicitly or explicitly.
GeneXus
GeneXus is a low code, cross-platform, knowledge representation-based development tool, mainly oriented towards enterprise-class applications for web applications, smart devices, and the Microsoft Windows platform. GeneXus uses mostly declarative language to generate native code for multiple environments. It includes a normalization module, which creates and maintains an optimal database structure based on user views. The languages for which code can be generated include COBOL, Java, Objective-C, RPG, Ruby, Visual Basic, and Visual FoxPro. Some of the DBMSs supported are Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, IBM Db2, Informix, PostgreSQL, and MySQL. GeneXus was developed by Uruguayan company ARTech Consultores SRL which later renamed to Genexus SA. The latest version is GeneXus 18, which was released on November 10, 2022.
Tensor operator
In pure and applied mathematics, quantum mechanics and computer graphics, a tensor operator generalizes the notion of operators which are scalars and vectors. A special class of these are spherical tensor operators which apply the notion of the spherical basis and spherical harmonics. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. The coordinate-free generalization of a tensor operator is known as a representation operator. == The general notion of scalar, vector, and tensor operators == In quantum mechanics, physical observables that are scalars, vectors, and tensors, must be represented by scalar, vector, and tensor operators, respectively. Whether something is a scalar, vector, or tensor depends on how it is viewed by two observers whose coordinate frames are related to each other by a rotation. Alternatively, one may ask how, for a single observer, a physical quantity transforms if the state of the system is rotated. Consider, for example, a system consisting of a molecule of mass M {\displaystyle M} , traveling with a definite center of mass momentum, p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} , in the z {\displaystyle z} direction. If we rotate the system by 90 ∘ {\displaystyle 90^{\circ }} about the y {\displaystyle y} axis, the momentum will change to p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} , which is in the x {\displaystyle x} direction. The center-of-mass kinetic energy of the molecule will, however, be unchanged at p 2 / 2 M {\displaystyle p^{2}/2M} . The kinetic energy is a scalar and the momentum is a vector, and these two quantities must be represented by a scalar and a vector operator, respectively. By the latter in particular, we mean an operator whose expected values in the initial and the rotated states are p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} and p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} . The kinetic energy on the other hand must be represented by a scalar operator, whose expected value must be the same in the initial and the rotated states. In the same way, tensor quantities must be represented by tensor operators. An example of a tensor quantity (of rank two) is the electrical quadrupole moment of the above molecule. Likewise, the octupole and hexadecapole moments would be tensors of rank three and four, respectively. Other examples of scalar operators are the total energy operator (more commonly called the Hamiltonian), the potential energy, and the dipole-dipole interaction energy of two atoms. Examples of vector operators are the momentum, the position, the orbital angular momentum, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} , and the spin angular momentum, S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} . (Fine print: Angular momentum is a vector as far as rotations are concerned, but unlike position or momentum it does not change sign under space inversion, and when one wishes to provide this information, it is said to be a pseudovector.) Scalar, vector and tensor operators can also be formed by products of operators. For example, the scalar product L ⋅ S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }\cdot {\mathbf {S} }} of the two vector operators, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} and S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} , is a scalar operator, which figures prominently in discussions of the spin–orbit interaction. Similarly, the quadrupole moment tensor of our example molecule has the nine components Q i j = ∑ α q α ( 3 r α , i r α , j − r α 2 δ i j ) . {\displaystyle Q_{ij}=\sum _{\alpha }q_{\alpha }\left(3r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}-r_{\alpha }^{2}\delta _{ij}\right).} Here, the indices i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} can independently take on the values 1, 2, and 3 (or x {\displaystyle x} , y {\displaystyle y} , and z {\displaystyle z} ) corresponding to the three Cartesian axes, the index α {\displaystyle \alpha } runs over all particles (electrons and nuclei) in the molecule, q α {\displaystyle q_{\alpha }} is the charge on particle α {\displaystyle \alpha } , and r α , i {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}} is the i {\displaystyle i} -th component of the position of this particle. Each term in the sum is a tensor operator. In particular, the nine products r α , i r α , j {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}} together form a second rank tensor, formed by taking the outer product of the vector operator r α {\displaystyle {\mathbf {r} }_{\alpha }} with itself. == Rotations of quantum states == === Quantum rotation operator === The rotation operator about the unit vector n (defining the axis of rotation) through angle θ is U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right)} where J = (Jx, Jy, Jz) are the rotation generators (also the angular momentum matrices): J x = ℏ 2 ( 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 ) J y = ℏ 2 ( 0 i 0 − i 0 i 0 − i 0 ) J z = ℏ ( − 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ) {\displaystyle J_{x}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&1&0\\1&0&1\\0&1&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{y}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&i&0\\-i&0&i\\0&-i&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{z}=\hbar {\begin{pmatrix}-1&0&0\\0&0&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}} and let R ^ = R ^ ( θ , n ^ ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {R}}={\widehat {R}}(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})} be a rotation matrix. According to the Rodrigues' rotation formula, the rotation operator then amounts to U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = 1 1 − i sin θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J − 1 − cos θ ℏ 2 ( n ^ ⋅ J ) 2 . {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=1\!\!1-{\frac {i\sin \theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} -{\frac {1-\cos \theta }{\hbar ^{2}}}({\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} )^{2}.} An operator Ω ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}} is invariant under a unitary transformation U if Ω ^ = U † Ω ^ U ; {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U;} in this case for the rotation U ^ ( R ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {U}}(R)} , Ω ^ = U ( R ) † Ω ^ U ( R ) = exp ( i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) Ω ^ exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) . {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U(R)}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U(R)=\exp \left({\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right){\widehat {\Omega }}\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right).} === Angular momentum eigenkets === The orthonormal basis set for total angular momentum is | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |j,m\rangle } , where j is the total angular momentum quantum number and m is the magnetic angular momentum quantum number, which takes values −j, −j + 1, ..., j − 1, j. A general state within the j subspace | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}|j,m\rangle } rotates to a new state by: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =U(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}U(R)|j,m\rangle } Using the completeness condition: I = ∑ m ′ | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | {\displaystyle I=\sum _{m'}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|} we have | ψ ¯ ⟩ = I U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =IU(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } Introducing the Wigner D matrix elements: D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) = ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle {D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}=\langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } gives the matrix multiplication: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m D m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ ⇒ | ψ ¯ ⟩ = D ( j ) | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}D_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle \quad \Rightarrow \quad |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =D^{(j)}|\psi \rangle } For one basis ket: | j , m ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m ′ D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\overline {j,m}}\rangle =\sum _{m'}{D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle } For the case of orbital angular momentum, the eigenstates | ℓ , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\ell ,m\rangle } of the orbital angular momentum operator L and solutions of Laplace's equation on a 3d sphere are spherical harmonics: Y ℓ m ( θ , ϕ ) = ⟨ θ , ϕ | ℓ , m ⟩ = ( 2 ℓ + 1 ) 4 π ( ℓ − m ) ! ( ℓ + m ) ! P ℓ m ( cos θ ) e i m ϕ {\displaystyle Y_{\ell }^{m}(\theta ,\phi )=\langle \theta ,\phi |\ell ,m\rangle ={\sqrt {{(2\ell +1) \over 4\pi }{(\ell -m)! \over (\ell +m)!}}}\,P_{\ell }^{m}(\cos {\theta })\,e^{im\phi }} where Pℓm is an associated Legendre polynomial, ℓ is the orbital angular momentum quantum number, and m is the orbital magnetic quantum number which takes the values −ℓ, −ℓ + 1, ... ℓ − 1, ℓ The formalism of spherical harmonics have wide applications in applied mathematics, and are closely related to the formalism of spherical tensors, as shown below. Spherical harmonics are functions of the polar and azimuthal angles, ϕ and θ respectively, which can be conveniently collected into a unit vector n(θ, ϕ) pointing in the direction of those angles, in the Cartesian basis it is: n ^ ( θ , ϕ ) = cos ϕ sin θ e x + s