A.i. And Xr Marketing

A.i. And Xr Marketing — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  DevOps toolchain

  A DevOps toolchain is a set or combination of tools that aid in the delivery, development, and management of software applications throughout the systems development life cycle, as coordinated by an organization that uses DevOps practices. Generally, DevOps tools fit into one or more activities, which supports specific DevOps initiatives: Plan, Create, Verify, Package, Release, Configure, Monitor, and Version Control. == Toolchains == In software, a toolchain is the set of programming tools that is used to perform a complex software development task or to create a software product, which is typically another computer program or a set of related programs. In general, the tools forming a toolchain are executed consecutively so the output or resulting environment state of each tool becomes the input or starting environment for the next one, but the term is also used when referring to a set of related tools that are not necessarily executed consecutively. As DevOps is a set of practices that emphasizes the collaboration and communication of both software developers and other information technology (IT) professionals, while automating the process of software delivery and infrastructure changes, its implementation can include the definition of the series of tools used at various stages of the lifecycle; because DevOps is a cultural shift and collaboration between development and operations, there is no one product that can be considered a single DevOps tool. Instead a collection of tools, potentially from a variety of vendors, are used in one or more stages of the lifecycle. == Stages of DevOps == === Plan === Plan consists of two elements: "define" and "plan". This activity refers to the business value and application requirements. Specifically "Plan" activities include: Production metrics, objects and feedback Requirements Business metrics Update release metrics Release plan, timing and business case Security policy and requirement A combination of the IT personnel will be involved in these activities: business application owners, software development, software architects, continual release management, security officers and the organization responsible for managing the production of IT infrastructure. === Create === Create consists of the building, coding, and configuring of the software development process. The specific activities are: Design of the software and configuration Coding including code quality and performance Software build and build performance Release candidate Tools and vendors in this category often overlap with other categories. Because DevOps is about breaking down silos, this is reflective in the activities and product solutions. === Verify === Verify is directly associated with ensuring the quality of the software release; activities designed to ensure code quality is maintained and the highest quality is deployed to production. The main activities in this are: Acceptance testing Regression testing Security and vulnerability analysis Performance Configuration testing Solutions for verify-related activities generally fall under four main categories: Test automation, Static analysis, Test Lab, and Security. === Package === Package refers to the activities involved once the release is ready for deployment, often also referred to as staging or Preproduction / "preprod". This often includes tasks and activities such as: Approval/preapprovals Package configuration Triggered releases Release staging and holding === Release === Release related activities include schedule, orchestration, provisioning and deploying software into production and targeted environment. The specific Release activities include: Release coordination Deploying and promoting applications Fallbacks and recovery Scheduled/timed releases Solutions that cover this aspect of the toolchain include application release automation, deployment automation and release management. === Configure === Configure activities fall under the operation side of DevOps. Once software is deployed, there may be additional IT infrastructure provisioning and configuration activities required. Specific activities including: Infrastructure storage, database and network provisioning and configuring Application provision and configuration. The main types of solutions that facilitate these activities are continuous configuration automation, configuration management, and infrastructure as code tools. === Monitor === Monitoring is an important link in a DevOps toolchain. It allows IT organization to identify specific issues of specific releases and to understand the impact on end-users. A summary of Monitor related activities are: Performance of IT infrastructure End-user response and experience Production metrics and statistics Information from monitoring activities often impacts Plan activities required for changes and for new release cycles. === Version Control === Version Control is an important link in a DevOps toolchain and a component of software configuration management. Version Control is the management of changes to documents, computer programs, large web sites, and other collections of information. A summary of Version Control related activities are: Non-linear development Distributed development Compatibility with existent systems and protocols Toolkit-based design Information from Version Control often supports Release activities required for changes and for new release cycles.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Headshot Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  Looking for the best AI headshot generator? An AI headshot generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI headshot generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Tree transducer

  In theoretical computer science and formal language theory, a tree transducer (TT) is an abstract machine taking as input a tree, and generating output – generally other trees, but models producing words or other structures exist. Roughly speaking, tree transducers extend tree automata in the same way that word transducers extend word automata. Manipulating tree structures instead of words enable TT to model syntax-directed transformations of formal or natural languages. However, TT are not as well-behaved as their word counterparts in terms of algorithmic complexity, closure properties, etcetera. In particular, most of the main classes are not closed under composition. The main classes of tree transducers are: == Top-Down Tree Transducers (TOP) == A TOP T is a tuple (Q, Σ, Γ, I, δ) such that: Q is a finite set, the set of states; Σ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the input alphabet; Γ is a finite ranked alphabet, called the output alphabet; I is a subset of Q, the set of initial states; and δ is a set of rules of the form q ( f ( x 1 , … , x n ) ) → u {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}))\to u} , where f is a symbol of Σ, n is the arity of f, q is a state, and u is a tree on Γ and Q × 1.. n {\displaystyle Q\times 1..n} , such pairs being nullary. === Examples of rules and intuitions on semantics === For instance, q ( f ( x 1 , … , x 3 ) ) → g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},\dots ,x_{3}))\to g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} is a rule – one customarily writes q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} instead of the pair ( q , x i ) {\displaystyle (q,x_{i})} – and its intuitive semantics is that, under the action of q, a tree with f at the root and three children is transformed into g ( a , q ′ ( x 1 ) , h ( q ″ ( x 3 ) ) ) {\displaystyle g(a,q'(x_{1}),h(q''(x_{3})))} where, recursively, q ′ ( x 1 ) {\displaystyle q'(x_{1})} and q ″ ( x 3 ) {\displaystyle q''(x_{3})} are replaced, respectively, with the application of q ′ {\displaystyle q'} on the first child and with the application of q ″ {\displaystyle q''} on the third. === Semantics as term rewriting === The semantics of each state of the transducer T, and of T itself, is a binary relation between input trees (on Σ) and output trees (on Γ). A way of defining the semantics formally is to see δ {\displaystyle \delta } as a term rewriting system, provided that in the right-hand sides the calls are written in the form q ( x i ) {\displaystyle q(x_{i})} , where states q are unary symbols. Then the semantics [ [ q ] ] {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]} of a state q is given by [ [ q ] ] = { u ↦ v ∣ u is a tree on Σ , v is a tree on Γ , and q ( u ) → δ ∗ v } . {\displaystyle [\![q]\!]=\{u\mapsto v\mid u{\text{ is a tree on }}\Sigma ,\ v{\text{ is a tree on }}\Gamma {\text{, and }}q(u)\to _{\delta }^{}v\}.} The semantics of T is then defined as the union of the semantics of its initial states: [ [ T ] ] = ⋃ q ∈ I [ [ q ] ] . {\displaystyle [\![T]\!]=\bigcup _{q\in I}[\![q]\!].} === Determinism and domain === As with tree automata, a TOP is said to be deterministic (abbreviated DTOP) if no two rules of δ share the same left-hand side, and there is at most one initial state. In that case, the semantics of the DTOP is a partial function from input trees (on Σ) to output trees (on Γ), as are the semantics of each of the DTOP's states. The domain of a transducer is the domain of its semantics. Likewise, the image of a transducer is the image of its semantics. === Properties of DTOP === DTOP are not closed under union: this is already the case for deterministic word transducers. The domain of a DTOP is a regular tree language. Furthermore, the domain is recognisable by a deterministic top-down tree automaton (DTTA) of size at most exponential in that of the initial DTOP. That the domain is DTTA-recognizable is not surprising, considering that the left-hand sides of DTOP rules are the same as for DTTA. As for the reason for the exponential explosion in the worst case (that does not exist in the word case), consider the rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → g ( p 1 ( x 1 ) , p 2 ( x 1 ) , p 3 ( x 2 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to g(p_{1}(x_{1}),p_{2}(x_{1}),p_{3}(x_{2}))} . In order for the computation to succeed, it must succeed for both children. That means that the right child must be in the domain of p 3 {\displaystyle p_{3}} . As for the left child, it must be in the domain of both p 1 {\displaystyle p_{1}} and p 2 {\displaystyle p_{2}} . Generally, since subtrees can be copied, a single subtree can be evaluated by multiple states during a run, despite the determinism, and unlike DTTA. Thus the construction of the DTTA recognising the domain of a DTOP must account for sets of states and compute the intersections of their domains, hence the exponential. In the special case of linear DTOP, that is to say DTOP where each x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} appears at most once in the right-hand side of each rule, the construction is linear in time and space. The image of a DTOP is not a regular tree language. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x ) → g ( x , x ) {\displaystyle f(x)\to g(x,x)} ; that is, duplicate the child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 ) ) → g ( p ( x 1 ) , p ( x 1 ) ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1}))\to g(p(x_{1}),p(x_{1}))} , where p encodes the identity. Then, absent any restrictions on the first child of the input, the image is a classical non-regular tree language. However, the domain of a DTOP cannot be restricted to a regular tree language. That is to say, given a DTOP T and a language L, one cannot in general build a DTOP T ′ {\displaystyle T'} such that the semantics of T ′ {\displaystyle T'} is that of T, restricted to L. This property is linked to the reason deterministic top-down tree automata are less expressive than bottom-up automata: once you go down a given path, information from other paths is inaccessible. Consider the transducer coding the transformation f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} ; that is, output the right child of the input. This is easily done by a rule q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2})} , where p encodes the identity. Now let's say we want to restrict this transducer to the finite (and thus, in particular, regular) domain { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} . We must use the rules q ( f ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) → p ( x 2 ) , p ( a ) → a , p ( b ) → b {\displaystyle q(f(x_{1},x_{2}))\to p(x_{2}),\ p(a)\to a,\ p(b)\to b} . But in the first rule, x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} does not appear at all, since nothing is produced from the left child. Thus, it is not possible to test that the left child is c. In contrast, since we produce from the right child, we can test that it is a or b. In general, the criterion is that DTOP cannot test properties of subtrees from which they do not produce output. DTOP are not closed under composition. However this problem can be solved by the addition of a lookahead: a tree automaton, coupled to the transducer, that can perform tests on the domain which the transducer is incapable of. This follows from the point about domain restriction: composing the DTOP encoding identity on { f ( c , a ) , f ( c , b ) } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a),\ f(c,b)\}} with the one encoding f ( x , y ) → y {\displaystyle f(x,y)\to y} must yield a transducer with the semantics { f ( c , a ) ↦ a , f ( c , b ) ↦ b } {\displaystyle \{f(c,a)\mapsto a,\ f(c,b)\mapsto b\}} , which we know is not expressible by a DTOP. The typechecking problem—testing whether the image of a regular tree language is included in another regular tree language—is decidable. The equivalence problem—testing whether two DTOP define the same functions—is decidable. == Bottom-Up Tree Transducers (BOT) == As in the simpler case of tree automata, bottom-up tree transducers are defined similarly to their top-down counterparts, but proceed from the leaves of the tree to the root, instead of from the root to the leaves. Thus the main difference is in the form of the rules, which are of the form f ( q 1 ( x 1 ) , … , q n ( x n ) ) → q ( u ) {\displaystyle f(q_{1}(x_{1}),\dots ,q_{n}(x_{n}))\to q(u)} .

  Read more →
• 

  Amebis

  Amebis from Kamnik is a company in Slovenia in the field of language technologies. The company has published several electronic dictionaries and encyclopedic dictionaries (e.g. ASP (32) dictionaries) and developed spell checkers, grammar checker Besana, hyphenators and lemmatizers for Slovene, Serbian and Albanian languages. The company maintains and edits the largest Slovenian dictionary portal Termania, which contains more than 135 dictionaries. The most used terminological dictionary on Termania is the Slovenian medical dictionary. In co-operation with company Alpineon and the Jožef Stefan Institute they have developed a speech synthesizer and screen reader Govorec (Speaker). They have also provided technical support for the largest text corpus of Slovene, called FidaPLUS, Fran and Franček. Amebis also developed the system of machine translation Amebis Presis, which incorporates the Slovenian language. On 11 October 2023 Amebis received award of the Father Stanislav Škrabec Foundation for special achievements in Slovene linguistics.

  Read more →
• 

  Apache Drill

  Apache Drill is an open-source software framework that supports data-intensive distributed applications for interactive analysis of large-scale datasets. Built chiefly by contributions from developers from MapR, Drill is inspired by Google's Dremel system. Drill is an Apache top-level project. Drill supports a variety of NoSQL databases and file systems, including Alluxio, HBase, MongoDB, MapR-DB, HDFS, MapR-FS, Amazon S3, Azure Blob Storage, Google Cloud Storage, Swift, NAS and local files. A single query can join data from multiple datastores. Drill's datastore-aware optimizer automatically restructures a query plan to leverage the datastore's internal processing capabilities. In addition, Drill supports data locality, if Drill and the datastore are on the same nodes. Tom Shiran is the founder of the Apache Drill Project. It was designated an Apache Software Foundation top-level project in December 2016. == Features == One explicitly stated design goal is that Drill is able to scale to 10,000 servers or more and to be able to process petabytes of data and trillions of records in seconds. Schema-free JSON document model similar to MongoDB and Elasticsearch, without requiring a formal schema to be declared Industry-standard APIs: ANSI SQL, ODBC/JDBC, RESTful APIs Extremely user and developer friendly Pluggable architecture enables connectivity to multiple datastores Version 1.9 added dynamic user-defined functions Version 1.11 added cryptographic-related functions and PCAP file format support == Back-end support == Drill is primarily focused on non-relational datastores, including Apache Hadoop text files, NoSQL, and cloud storage. A notable feature also includes in situ querying of local JSON and Apache Parquet files. Some additional datastores that it supports include: All Hadoop distributions (HDFS API 2.3+), including Apache Hadoop, MapR, CDH and Amazon EMR NoSQL: MongoDB, Apache HBase, Apache Cassandra Online Analytical Processing: Apache Kudu, Apache Druid, OpenTSDB Cloud storage: Amazon S3, Google Cloud Storage, Azure Blob Storage, Swift, IBM Cloud Object Storage Diverse data formats, including Apache Avro, Apache Parquet and JSON RDBMs storage plugins (Using JDBC to connect to MySQL, PostgreSQL, and others) A new datastore can be added by developing a storage plugin. Drill's "schema-free" JSON data model enables it to query non-relational datastores in-situ . == Front-end support == Drill itself can be queried via JDBC, ODBC, or REST through a variety of methods and languages including Python and Java. The default install includes a web interface allowing end-users to execute ANSI SQL directly and export data tables as CSV files without any programming. The dashboard library, Apache Superset, is particularly well suited for visualization of data queried with Drill.

  Read more →
• 

  Monica S. Lam

  Monica Sin-Ling Lam is an American computer scientist. She is a professor in the Computer Science Department at Stanford University. == Education == Monica Lam received a B.Sc. from University of British Columbia in 1980 and a Ph.D. in computer science from Carnegie Mellon University in 1987. == Career == Lam joined the faculty of Computer Science at Stanford University in 1988. She has contributed to the research of a wide range of computer systems topics including compilers, program analysis, operating systems, security, computer architecture, and high-performance computing. More recently, she is working in natural language processing, and virtual assistants with an emphasis on privacy protection. She is the faculty director of the Open Virtual Assistant Lab, which organized the first workshop for the World Wide Voice Web. The lab developed the open-source Almond voice assistant, which is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Almond received Popular Science's Best of What's New award in 2019. Previously, Lam led the SUIF (Stanford University Intermediate Format) Compiler project, which produced a widely used compiler infrastructure known for its locality optimizations and interprocedural parallelization. Many of the compiler techniques she developed have been adopted by industry. Her other research projects included the architecture and compiler for the CMU Warp machine, a systolic array of VLIW processors, and the Stanford DASH distributed shared memory machine. In 1998, she took a sabbatical leave from Stanford to help start Tensilica Inc., a company that specializes in configurable processor cores. In another research project, her program analysis group developed a collection of tools for improving software security and reliability. They developed the first scalable context-sensitive inclusion-based pointer analysis and a freely available tool called BDDBDDB, that allows programmers to express context-sensitive analyses simply by writing Datalog queries. Other tools developed include Griffin, static and dynamic analysis for finding security vulnerabilities in Web applications such as SQL injection, a static and dynamic program query language called QL, a static memory leak detector called Clouseau, a dynamic buffer overrun detector called CRED, and a dynamic error diagnosis tool called DIDUCE. In the Collective project, her research group and she developed the concept of a livePC: subscribers of the livePC will automatically run the latest of the published PC virtual images with each reboot. This approach allows computers to be managed scalably and securely. In 2005, the group started a company called MokaFive to transfer the technology to industry. She also directed the MobiSocial laboratory at Stanford, as part of the Programmable Open Mobile Internet 2020 initiative. Lam is also the cofounder of Omlet, which launched in 2014. Omlet is the first product from MobiSocial. Omlet is an open, decentralized social networking tool, based on an extensible chat platform. Lam chaired the ACM SIGPLAN Programming Languages Design and Implementation Conference in 2000, served on the Editorial Board of ACM Transactions on Computer Systems and numerous program committees for conferences on languages and compilers (PLDI, POPL), operating systems (SOSP), and computer architecture (ASPLOS, ISCA). == Awards and honors == National Academy of Engineering member, 2019 University of British Columbia Computer Science 50th Anniversary Research Award, 2018 Fellow of the ACM, 2007 ACM Programming Language Design and Implementation Best Paper Award in 2004 ACM SIGSOFT Distinguished Paper Award in 2002 ACM Most Influential Programming Language Design and Implementation Paper Award in 2001 NSF Young Investigator award in 1992 Two of her papers were recognized in "20 Years of PLDI--a Selection (1979-1999)" One of her papers was recognized in the "25 Years of the International Symposia on Computer Architecture", 1988. == Selected works == Compilers: Principles, Techniques and Tools (2d Ed) (2006) (the "Dragon Book") by Alfred V. Aho, Monica S. Lam, Ravi Sethi, and Jeffrey D. Ullman (ISBN 0-321-48681-1) A Systolic Array Optimizing Compiler (1989) (ISBN 0-89838-300-5) Monica Lam, Dissertation

  Read more →
• 

  Dan Hendrycks

  Dan Hendrycks (born 1994 or 1995) is an American machine learning researcher. He serves as the director of the Center for AI Safety, a nonprofit research organization based in San Francisco, California. == Early life and education == Hendrycks was raised in a Christian evangelical household in Marshfield, Missouri. He received a B.S. from the University of Chicago in 2018 and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley in Computer Science in 2022. == Career and research == Hendrycks' research focuses on topics that include machine learning safety, machine ethics, and robustness. He credits his participation in the effective altruism (EA) movement-linked 80,000 Hours program for his career focus towards AI safety, though denies being an advocate for EA. Hendrycks is the main author of the research paper that introduced the activation function GELU in 2016, and of the paper that introduced the language model benchmark MMLU (Massive Multitask Language Understanding) in 2020. In February 2022, Hendrycks co-authored recommendations for the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to inform the management of risks from artificial intelligence. In September 2022, Hendrycks wrote a paper providing a framework for analyzing the impact of AI research on societal risks. He later published a paper in March 2023 examining how natural selection and competitive pressures could shape the goals of artificial agents. This was followed by "An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks", which discusses four categories of risks: malicious use, AI race dynamics, organizational risks, and rogue AI agents. Hendrycks is the safety adviser of xAI, an AI startup company founded by Elon Musk in 2023. To avoid any potential conflicts of interest, he receives a symbolic one-dollar salary and holds no company equity. In November 2024, he also joined Scale AI as an advisor collecting a one-dollar salary. Hendrycks is the creator of Humanity's Last Exam, a benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of large language models, which he developed in collaboration with Scale AI. In 2024, Hendrycks published the textbook Introduction to AI Safety, Ethics, and Society, based on courseware he had previously developed. == Selected publications == Hendrycks, Dan; Gimpel, Kevin (2020-07-08). "Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)". arXiv:1606.08415 [cs.LG]. Hendrycks, Dan; Gimpel, Kevin (2018-10-03). "A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks". International Conference on Learning Representations 2017. arXiv:1610.02136. Hendrycks, Dan; Mazeika, Mantas; Dietterich, Thomas (2019-01-28). "Deep Anomaly Detection with Outlier Exposure". International Conference on Learning Representations 2019. arXiv:1812.04606. Hendrycks, Dan; Mazeika, Mantas; Zou, Andy (2021-10-25). "What Would Jiminy Cricket Do? Towards Agents That Behave Morally". Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021. arXiv:2110.13136.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Code Generators Compared (2026)

  Curious about the best AI code generator? An AI code generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

  Read more →
• 

  Something Big Is Happening

  "Something Big Is Happening" is an essay by Matt Shumer, an AI entrepreneur, about the impact of artificial intelligence, published in February 2026, that has since been reportedly viewed more than 80 million times and widely discussed. Shumer noted that the technology has crossed an important threshold, where AI has become capable of creating self-improving systems. Referring to one the most recent AI models, he wrote: "It was making intelligent decisions. It had something that felt, for the first time, like judgment. Like taste." Speaking to CNBC's Power Lunch, Shumer said that his "core message" is "people in the workforce should start to use and experiment with AI tools so they can understand what’s coming". Even as the essay was widely shared and discussed, the essay also elicited criticism. Paulo Carvao, in an essay published by the Forbes Magazine stated that some of his advice is sound, but added: "It reads at times like a sales pitch. He urges readers to subscribe to the most advanced AI tools. He implies that those with access to premium models will outpace those without. He frames paid AI subscriptions as a form of insurance against obsolescence." Writing in The Guardian, Dan Milmo and Aisha Down mentioned Shumer as having a history of AI hype and stated, "He previously excited the internet by announcing the release of the world's "top open-source model", which it was not". Many workers in the technology sector criticized the article in blog posts shared on Hacker News; Edward Zitron commented that "while coding LLMs can test products, or scan/fix some bugs, this suggests they A) do this autonomously without human input, B) they do this correctly every time (or ever!)." In an article alluding to Shumer's original post, Ari Colaprete wrote "the LLM is fundamentally a writing machine, it does everything via text, and if you make it produce writing that exists purely to serve some sort of mechanical function, and you train it to succeed in that task, then it will tend to do so, even with vast intricacy."

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Art Generators Compared (2026)

  Shopping for the best AI art generator? An AI art generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI art generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Glottochronology

  Glottochronology (from Attic Greek γλῶττα 'tongue, language' and χρόνος 'time') is the part of lexicostatistics which involves comparative linguistics and deals with the chronological relationship between languages. The idea was developed by Morris Swadesh in the 1950s in his article on Salish internal relationships. He developed the idea under two assumptions: there indeed exists a relatively stable basic vocabulary (referred to as Swadesh lists) in all languages of the world; and, any replacements happen in a way analogous to radioactive decay in a constant percentage per time elapsed. Using mathematics and statistics, Swadesh developed an equation to determine when languages separated and give an approximate time of when the separation occurred. His methods aimed to aid linguistic anthropologists by giving them a definitive way to determine a separation date between two languages. The formula provides an approximate number of centuries since two languages were supposed to have separated from a singular common ancestor. His methods also purported to provide information on when ancient languages may have existed. Despite multiple studies and literature containing the information of glottochronology, it is not widely used today and is surrounded with controversy. Glottochronology tracks language separation from thousands of years ago but many linguists are skeptical of the concept because it is more of a 'probability' rather than a 'certainty.' On the other hand, some linguists may say that glottochronology is gaining traction because of its relatedness to archaeological dates. Glottochronology is not as accurate as archaeological data, but some linguists still believe that it can provide a solid estimate. Over time many different extensions of the Swadesh method evolved; however, Swadesh's original method is so well known that 'glottochronology' is usually associated with him. == Methodology == The original method of glottochronology presumed that the core vocabulary of a language is replaced at a constant (or constant average) rate across all languages and cultures and so can be used to measure the passage of time. The process makes use of a list of lexical terms and morphemes which are similar to multiple languages. Lists were compiled by Morris Swadesh and assumed to be resistant against borrowing (originally designed in 1952 as a list of 200 items, but the refined 100-word list in Swadesh (1955) is much more common among modern day linguists). The core vocabulary was designed to encompass concepts common to every human language such as personal pronouns, body parts, heavenly bodies and living beings, verbs of basic actions, numerals, basic adjectives, kin terms, and natural occurrences and events. Through a basic word list, one eliminates concepts that are specific to a particular culture or time period. It has been found through differentiating word lists that the ideal is really impossible and that the meaning set may need to be tailored to the languages being compared. Word lists are not homogenous throughout studies and they are often changed and designed to suit both languages being studied. Linguists find that it is difficult to find a word list where all words used are culturally unbiased. Many alternative word lists have been compiled by other linguists and often use fewer meaning slots. The percentage of cognates (words with a common origin) in the word lists is then measured. The larger the percentage of cognates, the more recently the two languages being compared are presumed to have separated. === Glottochronologic constant === Determining word lists rely on morpheme decay or change in vocabulary. Morpheme decay must stay at a constant rate for glottochronology to be applied to a language. This leads to a critique of the glottochronologic formula because some linguists argue that the morpheme decay rate is not guaranteed to stay the same throughout history. American Linguist Robert Lees obtained a value for the "glottochronological constant" (r) of words by considering the known changes in 13 pairs of languages using the 200 word list. He obtained a value of 0.8048 ± 0.0176 with 90% confidence. For his 100-word list Swadesh obtained a value of 0.86, the higher value reflecting the elimination of semantically unstable words. === Divergence time === The basic formula of glottochronology proposed by Morris Swadesh is: t = − ln ⁡ ( c ) 2 ln ⁡ ( r ) {\displaystyle t=-{\frac {\ln(c)}{2\ln(r)}}} t = a given period of time from one stage of the language to another (measured in millennia), c = proportion of wordlist items retained at the end of that period and r = rate of replacement for that word list. By testing historically verifiable cases in which t is known by nonlinguistic data (such as the approximate distance from Classical Latin to modern Romance languages), Swadesh arrived at the empirical value of approximately 0.14 for L, (c?) which means that the rate of replacement constitutes around 14 words from the 100-wordlist per millennium. This is represented in the table below. === Results === Glottochronology was applied to a range of language families, including Salishan, Indo-European, Japonic, Afro-Asiatic, Chinese and Mayan and other American languages. For Amerind, correlations have been obtained with radiocarbon dating and blood groups as well as archaeology. === Example Wordlist === Below is an example of a basic word list composed of basic Turkish words and their English translations. == Discussion == The concept of language change is old, and its history is reviewed in Hymes (1973) and Wells (1973). In some sense, glottochronology is a reconstruction of history and can often be closely related to archaeology. Many linguistic studies find the success of glottochronology to be found alongside archaeological data. Glottochronology itself dates back to the mid-20th century. An introduction to the subject is given in Embleton (1986) and in McMahon and McMahon (2005). Glottochronology has been controversial ever since, partly because of issues of accuracy but also because of the question of whether its basis is sound (for example, Bergsland 1958; Bergsland and Vogt 1962; Fodor 1961; Chrétien 1962; Guy 1980). The concerns have been addressed by Dobson et al. (1972), Dyen (1973) and Kruskal, Dyen and Black (1973). The assumption of a single-word replacement rate can distort the divergence-time estimate when borrowed words are included (Thomason and Kaufman 1988). The presentations vary from "Why linguists don't do dates" to the one by Starostin discussed below. Since its original inception, glottochronology has been rejected by many linguists, mostly Indo-Europeanists of the school of the traditional comparative method. Criticisms have been answered in particular around three points of discussion: Criticism levelled against the higher stability of lexemes in Swadesh lists alone (Haarmann 1990) misses the point because a certain amount of losses only enables the computations (Sankoff 1970). The non-homogeneity of word lists often leads to lack of understanding between linguists. Linguists also have difficulties finding a completely unbiased list of basic cultural words. it can take a long time for linguists to find a viable word list which can take several test lists to find a usable list. Traditional glottochronology presumes that language changes at a stable rate. Thus, in Bergsland & Vogt (1962), the authors make an impressive demonstration, on the basis of actual language data verifiable by extralinguistic sources, that the "rate of change" for Icelandic constituted around 4% per millennium, but for closely connected Riksmal (Literary Norwegian), it would amount to as much as 20% (Swadesh's proposed "constant rate" was supposed to be around 14% per millennium). That and several other similar examples effectively proved that Swadesh's formula would not work on all available material, which is a serious accusation since evidence that can be used to "calibrate" the meaning of L (language history recorded during prolonged periods of time) is not overwhelmingly large in the first place. It is highly likely that the chance of replacement is different for every word or feature ("each word has its own history", among hundreds of other sources:). That global assumption has been modified and downgraded to single words, even in single languages, in many newer attempts (see below). There is a lack of understanding of Swadesh's mathematical/statistical methods. Some linguists reject the methods in full because the statistics lead to 'probabilities' when linguists trust 'certainties' more. A serious argument is that language change arises from socio-historical events that are, of course, unforeseeable and, therefore, uncomputable. == Modifications == Somewhere in between the original concept of Swadesh and the rejection of glottochronology in its entirety lies the idea that glottochronology as a formal method of linguistic

  Read more →
• 

  AI Paraphrasing Tools: Free vs Paid (2026)

  In search of the best AI paraphrasing tool? An AI paraphrasing tool is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paraphrasing tool slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.

  Read more →
• 

  Mistral Vibe

  Mistral Vibe or Vibe (Le Chat until May 2026), is a chatbot that uses generative artificial intelligence developed in France by Mistral AI. Mistral Vibe is available in iOS and Android. Its services are operated on a freemium model. == History == In February 2024, Mistral AI released Le Chat. In January 2025, Mistral AI made a content deal with Agence France-Presse (AFP) that lets Le Chat query AFP's entire archive dating back to 1983. On 6 February 2025, a mobile app for Le Chat was released for iOS and Android, and a subscription tier, Pro, was introduced at a cost of $14.99 per month. In July 2025, Mistral AI released Voxtral, an open-source language model that understands and generates audio. Mistral introduced a voice mode for chatting that uses Voxtral, and projects, which allows grouping chats and files. In September 2025, Le Chat introduced the capability to remember previous conversations. In May 2026, Mistral AI announced the rebrand from Le Chat to Mistral Vibe and new features were introduced at the same time.

  Read more →
• 

  Rob Fergus

  Rob Fergus is a British-American computer scientist working primarily in the fields of machine learning, deep learning, representational learning, and generative models. He is a professor of computer science at Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University (NYU) and a research scientist at DeepMind. Fergus developed ZFNet in 2013 together with M.D. Zeiler, his PhD student in NYU. Fergus co-founded Meta AI (then known as Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research (FAIR)) along with Yann Le Cun in September 2013. In 2009, Rob Fergus co-founded the Computational Intelligence, Learning, Vision, and Robotics (CILVR) Lab at NYU along with Yann Le Cun. == Awards and recognition == Rob Fergus has been recognized in academia and received the following awards: NSF Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER) Sloan Research Fellowship Test-of-time awards at ECCV, CVPR and ICLR == Notable PhD students == Matt Zeiler (Clarifai founder) Wojciech Zaremba (OpenAI co-founder) Denis Yarats (Perplexity co-founder) Alex Rives (EvolutionaryScale co-founder; faculty at MIT)

  Read more →
• 

  Levenshtein automaton

  In computer science, a Levenshtein automaton for a string w and a number n is a finite-state automaton that can recognize the set of all strings whose Levenshtein distance from w is at most n. That is, a string x is in the formal language recognized by the Levenshtein automaton if and only if x can be transformed into w by at most n single-character insertions, deletions, and substitutions. == Applications == Levenshtein automata may be used for spelling correction, by finding words in a given dictionary that are close to a misspelled word. In this application, once a word is identified as being misspelled, its Levenshtein automaton may be constructed, and then applied to all of the words in the dictionary to determine which ones are close to the misspelled word. If the dictionary is stored in compressed form as a trie, the time for this algorithm (after the automaton has been constructed) is proportional to the number of nodes in the trie, significantly faster than using dynamic programming to compute the Levenshtein distance separately for each dictionary word. It is also possible to find words in a regular language, rather than a finite dictionary, that are close to a given target word, by computing the Levenshtein automaton for the word, and then using a Cartesian product construction to combine it with an automaton for the regular language, giving an automaton for the intersection language. Alternatively, rather than using the product construction, both the Levenshtein automaton and the automaton for the given regular language may be traversed simultaneously using a backtracking algorithm. Levenshtein automata are used in Lucene for full-text searches that can return relevant documents even if the query is misspelled. == Construction == For any fixed constant n, the Levenshtein automaton for w and n may be constructed in time O(|w|). Mitankin studies a variant of this construction called the universal Levenshtein automaton, determined only by a numeric parameter n, that can recognize pairs of words (encoded in a certain way by bitvectors) that are within Levenshtein distance n of each other. Touzet proposed an effective algorithm to build this automaton. Yet a third finite automaton construction of Levenshtein (or Damerau–Levenshtein) distance are the Levenshtein transducers of Hassan et al., who show finite state transducers implementing edit distance one, then compose these to implement edit distances up to some constant.

  Read more →