How to Choose an AI Presentation Maker

How to Choose an AI Presentation Maker

Comparing the best AI presentation maker? An AI presentation maker is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI presentation maker slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

GEPIR

GEPIR (Global Electronic Party Information Registry) was a distributed database operated and owned by GS1 that contains basic information on over 1,000,000 companies in over 100 countries. The database could be searched by Global Trade Item Number (GTIN) code (including Universal Product Code (UPC) and EAN-13 codes), container Code (Serial Shipping Container Code (SSCC)), location number (Global Location Number (GLN)), and (in some countries) the company name. A SOAP webservice existed for API access. As of end December 2023, GEPIR was replaced by a service called Verified by GS1. While it operated, GEPIR had more than 1 million members in more than 100 countries. In 2013, all GS1 111 member organisations joined GEPIR. == Access == GEPIR was accessible for free in almost all countries but the number of request per day was limited (from 20 to 30). Since October 2013, GS1 France restricts access to GEPIR to companies (registration with SIREN code was required to use it). A premium access service had been created by GS1 France in January 2010 which allows companies to use GS1 web and SOAP interface without any limit. == System architecture == GEPIR was a lookup service coordinated by the GS1 GO that provided all end users with the ability to look up information about GS1 Identification Keys. Depending on the service, systems were provided by GS1 Member Organisations (MOs) or 3rd party service providers, or both. Where a GS1 MO did not choose to provide the service directly to its end users, the GS1 Global Office provided the service for that geography. Some services involved a technical component deployed by the GS1 Global Office that coordinates the systems provided by GS1 MOs and/or 3rd party service providers. The GEPIR service was provided by systems deployed by GS1 MOs, with the GS1 GO providing a central point of coordination to federate the local systems. The GS1 GO also provides the MO-level service for MOs that could not or did not wish to deploy their own system.

Quality of experience

Quality of experience (QoE) is a measure of the delight or annoyance of a customer's experiences with a service (e.g., web browsing, phone call, TV broadcast). QoE focuses on the entire service experience; it is a holistic concept, similar to the field of user experience, but with its roots in telecommunication. QoE is an emerging multidisciplinary field based on social psychology, cognitive science, economics, and engineering science, focused on understanding overall human quality requirements. == Definition and concepts == In 2013, within the context of the COST Action QUALINET, QoE has been defined as:The degree of delight or annoyance of the user of an application or service. It results from the fulfillment of his or her expectations with respect to the utility and / or enjoyment of the application or service in the light of the user’s personality and current state.This definition has been adopted in 2016 by the International Telecommunication Union in Recommendation ITU-T P.10/G.100. Before, various definitions of QoE had existed in the domain, with the above-mentioned definition now finding wide acceptance in the community. QoE has historically emerged from Quality of Service (QoS), which attempts to objectively measure service parameters (such as packet loss rates or average throughput). QoS measurement is most of the time not related to a customer, but to the media or network itself. QoE however is a purely subjective measure from the user's perspective of the overall quality of the service provided, by capturing people's aesthetic and hedonic needs. QoE looks at a vendor's or purveyor's offering from the standpoint of the customer or end user, and asks, "What mix of goods, services, and support, do you think will provide you with the perception that the total product is providing you with the experience you desired and/or expected?" It then asks, "Is this what the vendor/purveyor has actually provided?" If not, "What changes need to be made to enhance your total experience?" In short, QoE provides an assessment of human expectations, feelings, perceptions, cognition and satisfaction with respect to a particular product, service or application. QoE is a blueprint of all human subjective and objective quality needs and experiences arising from the interaction of a person with technology and with business entities in a particular context. Although QoE is perceived as subjective, it is an important measure that counts for customers of a service. Being able to measure it in a controlled manner helps operators understand what may be wrong with their services and how to improve them. == QoE factors == QoE aims at taking into consideration every factor that contributes to a user's perceived quality of a system or service. This includes system, human and contextual factors. The following so-called "influence factors" have been identified and classified by Reiter et al.: Human Influence Factors Low-level processing (visual and auditory acuity, gender, age, mood, …) Higher-level processing (cognitive processes, socio-cultural and economic background, expectations, needs and goals, other personality traits…) System Influence Factors Content-related Media-related (encoding, resolution, sample rate, …) Network-related (bandwidth, delay, jitter, …) Device-related (screen resolution, display size, …) Context Influence Factors Physical context (location and space) Temporal context (time of day, frequency of use, …) Social context (inter-personal relations during experience) Economic context Task context (multitasking, interruptions, task type) Technical and information context (relationship between systems) Studies in the field of QoE have typically focused on system factors, primarily due to its origin in the QoS and network engineering domains. Through the use of dedicated test laboratories, the context is often sought to be kept constant. == QoE versus User Experience == QoE is strongly related to but different from the field of User Experience (UX), which also focuses on users' experiences with services. Historically, QoE has emerged from telecommunication research, while UX has its roots in Human–Computer Interaction. Both fields can be considered multi-disciplinary. In contrast to UX, the goal of improving QoE for users was more strongly motivated by economic needs. Wechsung and De Moor identify the following key differences between the fields: == QoE measurement == As a measure of the end-to-end performance at the service level from the user's perspective, QoE is an important metric for the design of systems and engineering processes. This is particularly relevant for video services because – due to their high traffic demands –, bad network performance may highly affect the user's experience. So, when designing systems, the expected output, i.e. the expected QoE, is often taken into account – also as a system output metric and optimization goal. To measure this level of QoE, human ratings can be used. The mean opinion score (MOS) is a widely used measure for assessing the quality of media signals. It is a limited form of QoE measurement, relating to a specific media type, in a controlled environment and without explicitly taking into account user expectations. The MOS as an indicator of experienced quality has been used for audio and speech communication, as well as for the assessment of quality of Internet video, television and other multimedia signals, and web browsing. Due to inherent limitations in measuring QoE in a single scalar value, the usefulness of the MOS is often debated. Subjective quality evaluation requires a lot of human resources, establishing it as a time-consuming process. Objective evaluation methods can provide quality results faster, but require dedicated computing resources. Since such instrumental video quality algorithms are often developed based on a limited set of subjective data, their QoE prediction accuracy may be low when compared to human ratings. QoE metrics are often measured at the end devices and can conceptually be seen as the remaining quality after the distortion introduced during the preparation of the content and the delivery through the network, until it reaches the decoder at the end device. There are several elements in the media preparation and delivery chain, and some of them may introduce distortion. This causes degradation of the content, and several elements in this chain can be considered as "QoE-relevant" for the offered services. The causes of degradation are applicable for any multimedia service, that is, not exclusive to video or speech. Typical degradations occur at the encoding system (compression degradation), transport network, access network (e.g., packet loss or packet delay), home network (e.g. WiFi performance) and end device (e.g. decoding performance). == QoE management == Several QoE-centric network management and bandwidth management solutions have been proposed, which aim to improve the QoE delivered to the end-users. When managing a network, QoE fairness may be taken into account in order to keep the users sufficiently satisfied (i.e., high QoE) in a fair manner. From a QoE perspective, network resources and multimedia services should be managed in order to guarantee specific QoE levels instead of classical QoS parameters, which are unable to reflect the actual delivered QoE. A pure QoE-centric management is challenged by the nature of the Internet itself, as the Internet protocols and architecture were not originally designed to support today's complex and high demanding multimedia services. As an example for an implementation of QoE management, network nodes can become QoE-aware by estimating the status of the multimedia service as perceived by the end-users. This information can then be used to improve the delivery of the multimedia service over the network and proactively improve the users' QoE. This can be achieved, for example, via traffic shaping. QoE management gives the service provider and network operator the capability to minimize storage and network resources by allocating only the resources that are sufficient to maintain a specific level of user satisfaction. As it may involve limiting resources for some users or services in order to increase the overall network performance and QoE, the practice of QoE management requires that net neutrality regulations are considered.

Radio code

A radio code is any code that is commonly used over a telecommunication system such as Morse code, brevity codes and procedure words. == Brevity code == Brevity codes are designed to convey complex information with a few words or codes. Specific brevity codes include: ACP-131 Aeronautical Code signals ARRL Numbered Radiogram Multiservice tactical brevity code Ten-code Phillips Code NOTAM Code === Operating signals === Brevity codes that are specifically designed for use between communications operators and to support communication operations are referred to as "operating signals". These include: Prosigns for Morse code 92 Code, Western Union telegraph brevity codes Q code, initially developed for commercial radiotelegraph communication, later adopted by other radio services, especially amateur radio. Used since circa 1909. QN Signals, published by the ARRL and used by Amateur radio operators to assist in the transmission of ARRL Radiograms in the National Traffic System. R and S brevity codes, published by the British Post Office in 1908 for coastal wireless stations and ships, superseded in 1912 by Q codes X code, used by European military services as a wireless telegraphy code in the 1930s and 1940s Z code, also used in the early days of radiotelegraph communication. == Other == Morse code is commonly used in amateur radio. Morse code abbreviations are a type of brevity code. Procedure words used in radiotelephony procedure, are a type of radio code. Spelling alphabets, including the ICAO spelling alphabet, are commonly used in communication over radios and telephones. == Other meanings == Many car audio systems (car radios) have a so-called 'radio code' number which needs to be entered after a power disconnection. This was introduced as a measure to deter theft of these devices. If the code is entered correctly, the radio is activated for use. Entering the code incorrectly several times in a row will cause a temporary or permanent lockout. Some car radios have another check which operates in conjunction with car electronics. If the VIN or another vehicle ID matches the previously stored one, the radio is activated. If the radio cannot verify the vehicle, it is considered to be moved into another vehicle. The radio will then request for the code number or simply refuse to operate and display an error message such as "CANCHECK" or "SECURE".

Universal Plug and Play

UPnP (originally Universal Plug and Play) is a set of Internet Protocol-based networking protocols that permits networked devices, such as personal computers, printers, Internet gateways, Wi-Fi access points and mobile devices, to seamlessly discover each other's presence on the network and establish functional network services. UPnP is intended primarily for residential networks without enterprise-class devices. Officially, only the abbreviations UPnP and UPnP+ are trademarked. UPnP assumes the network runs IP, and then uses HTTP on top of IP to provide device/service description, actions, data transfer and event notification. Device search requests and advertisements are supported by running HTTP on top of UDP (port 1900) using multicast (known as HTTPMU). Responses to search requests are also sent over UDP, but are instead sent using unicast (known as HTTPU). Conceptually, UPnP extends plug and play—a technology for dynamically attaching devices directly to a computer—to zero-configuration networking for residential and SOHO wireless networks. UPnP devices are plug-and-play in that, when connected to a network, they automatically establish working configurations with other devices, removing the need for users to manually configure and add devices through IP addresses. UPnP is generally regarded as unsuitable for deployment in business settings for reasons of economy, complexity, and consistency: the multicast foundation makes it chatty, consuming too many network resources on networks with a large population of devices; the simplified access controls do not map well to complex environments. == Overview == The UPnP architecture allows device-to-device networking of consumer electronics, mobile devices, personal computers, and networked home appliances. It is a distributed, open architecture protocol based on established standards such as the Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP), HTTP, XML, and SOAP. UPnP control points (CPs) are devices which use UPnP protocols to control UPnP controlled devices (CDs). The UPnP architecture supports zero-configuration networking. A UPnP-compatible device from any vendor can dynamically join a network, obtain an IP address, announce its name, advertise or convey its capabilities upon request, and learn about the presence and capabilities of other devices. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) and Domain Name System (DNS) servers are optional and are only used if they are available on the network. Devices can disconnect from the network automatically without leaving state information. UPnP was published as a 73-part international standard ISO/IEC 29341 in December 2008. Other UPnP features include: Media and device independence UPnP technology can run on many media that support IP, including Ethernet, FireWire, Infrared (IrDA), home wiring (G.hn) and Radiofrequency (Bluetooth, Wi-Fi). No special device driver support is necessary; common network protocols are used instead. User interface (UI) control Optionally, the UPnP architecture enables devices to present a user interface through a web browser (see Presentation below). Operating system and programming language independence Any operating system and any programming language can be used to build UPnP products. UPnP stacks are available for most platforms and operating systems in both closed- and open-source forms. Programmatic control UPnP architecture also enables conventional application programmatic control. Extensibility Each UPnP product can have device-specific services layered on top of the basic architecture. In addition to combining services defined by the UPnP Forum in various ways, vendors can define their own device and service types. They can extend standard devices and services with vendor-defined actions, state variables, data structure elements, and variable values. == Protocol == UPnP uses common Internet technologies. It assumes the network must run Internet Protocol (IP) and then uses HTTP, SOAP and XML on top of IP, to provide device/service description, actions, data transfer and eventing. Device search requests and advertisements are supported by running HTTP on top of UDP using multicast (known as HTTPMU). Responses to search requests are also sent over UDP, but are instead sent using unicast (known as HTTPU). UPnP uses UDP due to its lower overhead, as it does not require confirmation of received data and retransmission of corrupt packets. HTTPU and HTTPMU specifications were initially submitted as an Internet Draft, but it expired in 2001; These specifications have since been integrated into the actual UPnP specifications. UPnP uses UDP port 1900, and all used TCP ports are derived from the SSDP alive and response messages. === Addressing === The foundation for UPnP networking is IP addressing. Each device must implement a DHCP client and search for a DHCP server when the device is first connected to the network. If no DHCP server is available, the device must assign itself an address. The process by which a UPnP device assigns itself an address is known within the UPnP Device Architecture as AutoIP. In UPnP Device Architecture Version 1.0, AutoIP is defined within the specification itself; in UPnP Device Architecture Version 1.1, AutoIP references IETF RFC 3927. If during the DHCP transaction, the device obtains a domain name, for example, through a DNS server or via DNS forwarding, the device should use that name in subsequent network operations; otherwise, the device should use its IP address. === Discovery === Once a device has established an IP address, the next step in UPnP networking is discovery. The UPnP discovery protocol is known as the Simple Service Discovery Protocol (SSDP). When a device is added to the network, SSDP allows that device to advertise its services to control points on the network. This is achieved by sending SSDP alive messages. When a control point is added to the network, SSDP enables that control point to actively search for devices of interest on the network or listen passively to SSDP alive messages from devices. The fundamental exchange is a discovery message containing a few essential details about the device or one of its services, such as its type, identifier, and a pointer (network location) to more detailed information. === Description === After a control point has discovered a device, it still knows very little about the device. For the control point to learn more about the device and its capabilities, or to interact with the device, it must retrieve the device's description from the location (URL) provided by the device in the discovery message. The UPnP Device Description is expressed in XML. It includes vendor-specific manufacturer information like the model name and number, serial number, manufacturer name, (presentation) URLs to vendor-specific websites, etc. The description also includes a list of any embedded services. For each service, the Device Description document lists the URLs for control, eventing and service description. Each service description includes a list of the commands, or actions, to which the service responds, and parameters, or arguments, for each action; the description for a service also includes a list of variables; these variables model the state of the service at run time and are described in terms of their data type, range, and event characteristics. === Control === Having retrieved a description of the device, the control point can send actions to a device's service. To do this, a control point sends a suitable control message to the control URL for the service (provided in the device description). Control messages are also expressed in XML using the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). Much like function calls, the service returns any action-specific values in response to the control message. The effects of the action, if any, are modeled by changes in the variables that describe the run-time state of the service. === Event notification === Another capability of UPnP networking is event notification, or eventing. The event notification protocol defined in the UPnP Device Architecture is known as General Event Notification Architecture (GENA). A UPnP description for a service includes a list of actions the service responds to and a list of variables that model the state of the service at runtime. The service publishes updates when these variables change, and a control point may subscribe to receive this information. The service publishes updates by sending event messages. Event messages contain the names of one or more state variables and their current values. These messages are also expressed in XML. A special initial event message is sent when a control point first subscribes; this event message contains the names and values for all evented variables and allows the subscriber to initialize its model of the state of the service. To support scenarios with multiple control points, eventing is designed to keep all control points equally informed

Acoustic model

An acoustic model is used in automatic speech recognition to represent the relationship between an audio signal and the phonemes or other linguistic units that make up speech. The model is learned from a set of audio recordings and their corresponding transcripts. It is created by taking audio recordings of speech, and their text transcriptions, and using software to create statistical representations of the sounds that make up each word. == Background == Modern speech recognition systems use both an acoustic model and a language model to represent the statistical properties of speech. The acoustic model models the relationship between the audio signal and the phonetic units in the language. The language model is responsible for modeling the word sequences in the language. These two models are combined to get the top-ranked word sequences corresponding to a given audio segment. Most modern speech recognition systems operate on the audio in small chunks known as frames with an approximate duration of 10ms per frame. The raw audio signal from each frame can be transformed by applying the mel-frequency cepstrum. The coefficients from this transformation are commonly known as mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs) and are used as an input to the acoustic model along with other features. Recently, the use of convolutional neural networks has led to major improvements in acoustic modeling. == Speech audio characteristics == Audio can be encoded at different sampling rates (i.e. samples per second – the most common being: 8, 16, 32, 44.1, 48, and 96 kHz), and different bits per sample (the most common being: 8-bits, 16-bits, 24-bits or 32-bits). Speech recognition engines work best if the acoustic model they use was trained with speech audio which was recorded at the same sampling rate/bits per sample as the speech being recognized. == Telephony-based speech recognition == The limiting factor for telephony based speech recognition is the bandwidth at which speech can be transmitted. For example, a standard land-line telephone only has a bandwidth of 64 kbit/s at a sampling rate of 8 kHz and 8-bits per sample (8000 samples per second 8-bits per sample = 64000 bit/s). Therefore, for telephony based speech recognition, acoustic models should be trained with 8 kHz/8-bit speech audio files. In the case of voice over IP, the codec determines the sampling rate/bits per sample of speech transmission. Codecs with a higher sampling rate/bits per sample for speech transmission (which improve the sound quality) necessitate acoustic models trained with audio data that matches that sampling rate/bits per sample. == Desktop-based speech recognition == For speech recognition on a standard desktop PC, the limiting factor is the sound card. Most sound cards today can record at sampling rates of between 16–48 kHz of audio, with bit rates of 8- to 16-bits per sample, and playback at up to 96 kHz. As a general rule, a speech recognition engine works better with acoustic models trained with speech audio data recorded at higher sampling rates/bits per sample. But using audio with too high a sampling rate/bits per sample can slow the recognition engine down. A compromise is needed. Thus for desktop speech recognition, the current standard is acoustic models trained with speech audio data recorded at sampling rates of 16 kHz/16 bits per sample.

Frictionless sharing

Frictionless sharing refers to the transparent or automatic dissemination of user activity across social media platforms, typically without requiring explicit action from the user each time content is shared. The concept gained prominence in 2011 after Mark Zuckerberg announced a series of new features for Facebook at the F8 developers conference, framing the changes as enabling “real-time serendipity in a friction-less experience.” == History and concept == Before 2011, the term “frictionless sharing” was occasionally used in academic and technical contexts to describe sharing of resources with minimal effort, such as through social bookmarking or Creative Commons licensing to reduce barriers to reuse of research data. The concept took on a broader cultural meaning when Facebook introduced its Timeline interface and new “social apps” in 2011. These features enabled third-party applications to automatically publish user activity to the platform—effectively shifting sharing from a deliberate act to a passive process. For example, integrating music streaming service Spotify meant that any song a user listened to could automatically appear in a Facebook “Ticker,” allowing friends to see the activity and click through to play the song themselves. == Zuckerberg’s vision == Zuckerberg articulated a vision of a Web in which sharing occurs by default rather than by choice: “You read, you watch, you listen, you buy—and everyone you know will hear all about it on Facebook.” This “frictionless” model assumes ongoing consent after an initial opt-in. Once users connect an app to their profile, any future activity with that app may be automatically shared. This shift from intentional posting to ambient sharing represented a significant evolution in how personal data is distributed online. == Criticism and debate == Many commentators and users have raised concerns about frictionless sharing. While some criticism centers on online privacy, others focus on how automatic updates can flood news feeds and erode the social value of sharing. Critics argue that when sharing becomes automatic, it dilutes the personal curation that makes social media exchanges meaningful. According to Slate, this approach risks “killing taste,” because users typically choose to share only select content they find worth highlighting, rather than everything they consume. AL.com similarly observed that the frictionless model encourages over-sharing, overwhelming both users and their networks with minor or trivial activities. For example, integrating multiple platforms—such as Twitter, Foursquare, Pinterest, Spotify, and others—can create an incessant stream of updates that some users may find intrusive or irritating. This can lead to what critics describe as “narcissistic” or noisy timelines, potentially undermining the “social” nature of social media. == Business model and data implications == For Facebook, frictionless sharing offers clear business advantages. More frequent and detailed sharing provides valuable data that can be used to refine targeted advertising and personalize content delivery. The model also encourages users to spend more time on the platform, reinforcing its position as a central hub of online social activity. Other technology companies have experimented with similar approaches. Google has introduced forms of cross-platform integration that facilitate automatic activity sharing, though with a more explicit opt-in structure compared to Facebook. This approach has been described as “friction with consent,” allowing users to manually enable or disable integrations on a per-service basis.