AI App For Home Design

AI App For Home Design — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Perusall

  Perusall is a social web annotation tool intended for use by students at schools and universities. It allows users to annotate the margins of a text in a virtual group setting that is similar to social media—with upvoting, emojis, chat functionality, and notification. It also includes automatic AI grading. == History == Perusall began as a research project at Harvard University. It later became an educational product for students and teachers. As of 2024, Perusall states more than 5 million students have used the tool at over 5,000 educational institutions in 112 countries." == Functionality == Perusall integrates with learning management systems such as Moodle, Canvas and Blackboard to aid with collaborative annotation. The tool supports annotation of a range of media including text, images, equations, videos, PDFs and snapshots of webpages.

  Read more →
• 

  Amazon Polly

  Amazon Polly is a cloud service by Amazon Web Services, a subsidiary of Amazon.com, that converts text into spoken audio. It allows developers to create speech-enabled applications and products. It was launched in November 2016 and (as of December 2024) includes 100+ voices across 41 language variants, some of which are Neural Text-to-Speech voices of higher quality. Users include Duolingo, a language education platform.

  Read more →
• 

  Tf–idf

  In information retrieval, tf–idf (term frequency–inverse document frequency, TFIDF, TFIDF, TF–IDF, or Tf–idf) is a measure of importance of a word to a document in a collection or corpus, adjusted for the fact that some words appear more frequently in general. Like the bag-of-words model, it models a document as a multiset of words, without word order. It is a refinement over the simple bag-of-words model, by allowing the weight of words to depend on the rest of the corpus. It was often used as a weighting factor in searches of information retrieval, text mining, and user modeling. A survey conducted in 2015 showed that 83% of text-based recommender systems in digital libraries used tf–idf. Variations of the tf–idf weighting scheme were often used by search engines as a central tool in scoring and ranking a document's relevance given a user query. One of the simplest ranking functions is computed by summing the tf–idf for each query term; many more sophisticated ranking functions are variants of this simple model. == Motivations == Karen Spärck Jones (1972) conceived a statistical interpretation of term-specificity called Inverse Document Frequency (idf), which became a cornerstone of term weighting: The specificity of a term can be quantified as an inverse function of the number of documents in which it occurs.For example, the df (document frequency) and idf for some words in Shakespeare's 37 plays might be represented as follows: We see that "Romeo", "Falstaff", and "salad" appears in very few plays, so seeing these words, one could get a good idea as to which play it might be. In contrast, "good" and "sweet" appears in every play and are completely uninformative as to which play it is. == Definition == The tf–idf is the product of two statistics, term frequency and inverse document frequency. There are various ways for determining the exact values of both statistics. A formula that aims to define the importance of a keyword or phrase within a document or a web page. === Term frequency === Term frequency, tf(t,d), is the relative frequency of term t within document d, t f ( t , d ) = f t , d ∑ t ′ ∈ d f t ′ , d {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)={\frac {f_{t,d}}{\sum _{t'\in d}{f_{t',d}}}}} , where ft,d is the raw count of a term in a document, i.e., the number of times that term t occurs in document d. Note the denominator is simply the total number of terms in document d (counting each occurrence of the same term separately). There are various other ways to define term frequency: the raw count itself: tf(t,d) = ft,d Boolean "frequencies": tf(t,d) = 1 if t occurs in d and 0 otherwise; logarithmically scaled frequency: tf(t,d) = log (1 + ft,d); augmented frequency, to prevent a bias towards longer documents, e.g. raw frequency divided by the raw frequency of the most frequently occurring term in the document: t f ( t , d ) = 0.5 + 0.5 ⋅ f t , d max { f t ′ , d : t ′ ∈ d } {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)=0.5+0.5\cdot {\frac {f_{t,d}}{\max\{f_{t',d}:t'\in d\}}}} === Inverse document frequency === The inverse document frequency is a measure of how much information the word provides, i.e., how common or rare it is across all documents. It is the logarithmically scaled inverse fraction of the documents that contain the word (obtained by dividing the total number of documents by the number of documents containing the term, and then taking the logarithm of that quotient): i d f ( t , D ) = log ⁡ N n t {\displaystyle \mathrm {idf} (t,D)=\log {\frac {N}{n_{t}}}} with D {\displaystyle D} : is the set of all documents in the corpus N = | D | {\displaystyle N={|D|}} : total number of documents in the corpus n t = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle n_{t}=|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} : number of documents where the term t {\displaystyle t} appears (i.e., t f ( t , d ) ≠ 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {tf} (t,d)\neq 0} ). If the term is not in the corpus, this will lead to a division-by-zero. It is therefore common to adjust the numerator to 1 + N {\displaystyle 1+N} and the denominator to 1 + | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle 1+|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|} . === Term frequency–inverse document frequency === Then tf–idf is calculated as t f i d f ( t , d , D ) = t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t , D ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {tfidf} (t,d,D)=\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t,D)} A high weight in tf–idf is reached by a high term frequency (in the given document) and a low document frequency of the term in the whole collection of documents; the weights hence tend to filter out common terms. Since the ratio inside the idf's log function is always greater than or equal to 1, the value of idf (and tf–idf) is greater than or equal to 0. As a term appears in more documents, the ratio inside the logarithm approaches 1, bringing the idf and tf–idf closer to 0. == Justification of idf == Idf was introduced as "term specificity" by Karen Spärck Jones in a 1972 paper. Although it has worked well as a heuristic, its theoretical foundations have been troublesome for at least three decades afterward, with many researchers trying to find information theoretic justifications for it. Spärck Jones's own explanation did not propose much theory, aside from a connection to Zipf's law. Attempts have been made to put idf on a probabilistic footing, by estimating the probability that a given document d contains a term t as the relative document frequency, P ( t | D ) = | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | N , {\displaystyle P(t|D)={\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{N}},} so that we can define idf as i d f = − log ⁡ P ( t | D ) = log ⁡ 1 P ( t | D ) = log ⁡ N | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mathrm {idf} &=-\log P(t|D)\\&=\log {\frac {1}{P(t|D)}}\\&=\log {\frac {N}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}\end{aligned}}} Namely, the inverse document frequency is the logarithm of "inverse" relative document frequency. This probabilistic interpretation in turn takes the same form as that of self-information. However, applying such information-theoretic notions to problems in information retrieval leads to problems when trying to define the appropriate event spaces for the required probability distributions: not only documents need to be taken into account, but also queries and terms. == Link with information theory == Both term frequency and inverse document frequency can be formulated in terms of information theory; it helps to understand why their product has a meaning in terms of joint informational content of a document. A characteristic assumption about the distribution p ( d , t ) {\displaystyle p(d,t)} is that: p ( d | t ) = 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | {\displaystyle p(d|t)={\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}} This assumption and its implications, according to Aizawa: "represent the heuristic that tf–idf employs." The conditional entropy of a "randomly chosen" document in the corpus D {\displaystyle D} , conditional to the fact it contains a specific term t {\displaystyle t} (and assuming that all documents have equal probability to be chosen) is: H ( D | T = t ) = − ∑ d p d | t log ⁡ p d | t = − log ⁡ 1 | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | = log ⁡ | { d ∈ D : t ∈ d } | | D | + log ⁡ | D | = − i d f ( t ) + log ⁡ | D | {\displaystyle H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}}=t)=-\sum _{d}p_{d|t}\log p_{d|t}=-\log {\frac {1}{|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}}=\log {\frac {|\{d\in D:t\in d\}|}{|D|}}+\log |D|=-\mathrm {idf} (t)+\log |D|} In terms of notation, D {\displaystyle {\cal {D}}} and T {\displaystyle {\cal {T}}} are "random variables" corresponding to respectively draw a document or a term. The mutual information can be expressed as M ( T ; D ) = H ( D ) − H ( D | T ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ ( H ( D ) − H ( D | W = t ) ) = ∑ t p t ⋅ i d f ( t ) {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|{\cal {T}})=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot (H({\cal {D}})-H({\cal {D}}|W=t))=\sum _{t}p_{t}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)} The last step is to expand p t {\displaystyle p_{t}} , the unconditional probability to draw a term, with respect to the (random) choice of a document, to obtain: M ( T ; D ) = ∑ t , d p t | d ⋅ p d ⋅ i d f ( t ) = ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ 1 | D | ⋅ i d f ( t ) = 1 | D | ∑ t , d t f ( t , d ) ⋅ i d f ( t ) . {\displaystyle M({\cal {T}};{\cal {D}})=\sum _{t,d}p_{t|d}\cdot p_{d}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)=\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot {\frac {1}{|D|}}\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t)={\frac {1}{|D|}}\sum _{t,d}\mathrm {tf} (t,d)\cdot \mathrm {idf} (t).} This expression shows that summing the Tf–idf of all possible terms and documents recovers the mutual information between documents and term taking into account all the specificities of their joint distribution. Each Tf–idf hence carries the "bit of information" attached to a term x document pair. == Link with statistical theory == Tf–idf is closely related to the negative logarithmically transformed p-value from a one-tailed formulation of Fisher's exact test when the underlying corpus documents satisfy certain idealized assumptions. More recently, tf–idf variants were shown to arise as components in the test st

  Read more →
• 

  Moore machine

  In the theory of computation, a Moore machine is a finite-state machine whose current output values are determined only by its current state. This is in contrast to a Mealy machine, whose output values are determined both by its current state and by the values of its inputs. Like other finite state machines, in Moore machines, the input typically influences the next state. Thus the input may indirectly influence subsequent outputs, but not the current or immediate output. The Moore machine is named after Edward F. Moore, who presented the concept in a 1956 paper, “Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines.” == Formal definition == A Moore machine can be defined as a 6-tuple ( S , s 0 , Σ , Λ , δ , G ) {\displaystyle (S,s_{0},\Sigma ,\Lambda ,\delta ,G)} consisting of the following: A finite set of states S {\displaystyle S} A start state (also called initial state) s 0 {\displaystyle s_{0}} which is an element of S {\displaystyle S} A finite set called the input alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } A finite set called the output alphabet Λ {\displaystyle \Lambda } A transition function δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} mapping a state and the input alphabet to the next state An output function G : S → Λ {\displaystyle G:S\rightarrow \Lambda } mapping each state to the output alphabet "Evolution across time" is realized in this abstraction by having the state machine consult the time-changing input symbol at discrete "timer ticks" t 0 , t 1 , t 2 , . . . {\displaystyle t_{0},t_{1},t_{2},...} and react according to its internal configuration at those idealized instants, or else having the state machine wait for a next input symbol (as on a FIFO) and react whenever it arrives. A Moore machine can be regarded as a restricted type of finite-state transducer. == Visual representation == === Table === A state transition table is a table listing all the triples in the transition relation δ : S × Σ → S {\displaystyle \delta :S\times \Sigma \rightarrow S} . === Diagram === The state diagram for a Moore machine, or Moore diagram, is a state diagram that associates an output value with each state. == Relationship with Mealy machines == As Moore and Mealy machines are both types of finite-state machines, they are equally expressive: either type can be used to parse a regular language. The difference between Moore machines and Mealy machines is that in the latter, the output of a transition is determined by the combination of current state and current input ( S × Σ {\displaystyle S\times \Sigma } as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ), as opposed to just the current state ( S {\displaystyle S} as the domain of G {\displaystyle G} ). When represented as a state diagram, for a Moore machine, each node (state) is labeled with an output value; for a Mealy machine, each arc (transition) is labeled with an output value. Every Moore machine M {\displaystyle M} is equivalent to the Mealy machine with the same states and transitions and the output function G ( s , σ ) = G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G(s,\sigma )=G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , which takes each state-input pair ( s , σ ) {\displaystyle (s,\sigma )} and yields G M ( δ M ( s , σ ) ) {\displaystyle G_{M}(\delta _{M}(s,\sigma ))} , where G M {\displaystyle G_{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's output function and δ M {\displaystyle \delta _{M}} is M {\displaystyle M} 's transition function. However, not every Mealy machine can be converted to an equivalent Moore machine. Some can be converted only to an almost equivalent Moore machine, with outputs shifted in time. This is due to the way that state labels are paired with transition labels to form the input/output pairs. Consider a transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} from state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} to state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} . The input causing the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} labels the edge ( s i , s j ) {\displaystyle (s_{i},s_{j})} . The output corresponding to that input, is the label of state s i {\displaystyle s_{i}} . Notice that this is the source state of the transition. So for each input, the output is already fixed before the input is received, and depends solely on the present state. This is the original definition by E. Moore. It is a common mistake to use the label of state s j {\displaystyle s_{j}} as output for the transition s i → s j {\displaystyle s_{i}\rightarrow s_{j}} . == Examples == Types according to number of inputs/outputs. === Simple === Simple Moore machines have one input and one output: edge detector using XOR binary adding machine clocked sequential systems (a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes) Most digital electronic systems are designed as clocked sequential systems. Clocked sequential systems are a restricted form of Moore machine where the state changes only when the global clock signal changes. Typically the current state is stored in flip-flops, and a global clock signal is connected to the "clock" input of the flip-flops. Clocked sequential systems are one way to solve metastability problems. A typical electronic Moore machine includes a combinational logic chain to decode the current state into the outputs (lambda). The instant the current state changes, those changes ripple through that chain, and almost instantaneously the output gets updated. There are design techniques to ensure that no glitches occur on the outputs during that brief period while those changes are rippling through the chain, but most systems are designed so that glitches during that brief transition time are ignored or are irrelevant. The outputs then stay the same indefinitely (LEDs stay bright, power stays connected to the motors, solenoids stay energized, etc.), until the Moore machine changes state again. ==== Worked example ==== A sequential network has one input and one output. The output becomes 1 and remains 1 thereafter when at least two 0's and two 1's have occurred as inputs. A Moore machine with nine states for the above description is shown on the right. The initial state is state A, and the final state is state I. The state table for this example is as follows: === Complex === More complex Moore machines can have multiple inputs as well as multiple outputs. == Gedanken-experiments == In Moore's 1956 paper "Gedanken-experiments on Sequential Machines", the ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} automata (or machines) S {\displaystyle S} are defined as having n {\displaystyle n} states, m {\displaystyle m} input symbols and p {\displaystyle p} output symbols. Nine theorems are proved about the structure of S {\displaystyle S} , and experiments with S {\displaystyle S} . Later, " S {\displaystyle S} machines" became known as "Moore machines". At the end of the paper, in Section "Further problems", the following task is stated: Another directly following problem is the improvement of the bounds given at the theorems 8 and 9. Moore's Theorem 8 is formulated as: Given an arbitrary ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine S {\displaystyle S} , such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists an experiment of length n ( n − 1 ) 2 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {n(n-1)}{2}}} which determines the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. In 1957, A. A. Karatsuba proved the following two theorems, which completely solved Moore's problem on the improvement of the bounds of the experiment length of his "Theorem 8". Theorem A. If S {\displaystyle S} is an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, such that every two of its states are distinguishable from one another, then there exists a branched experiment of length at most ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} through which one may determine the state of S {\displaystyle S} at the end of the experiment. Theorem B. There exists an ( n ; m ; p ) {\displaystyle (n;m;p)} machine, every two states of which are distinguishable from one another, such that the length of the shortest experiments establishing the state of the machine at the end of the experiment is equal to ( n − 1 ) ( n − 2 ) 2 + 1 {\displaystyle {\tfrac {(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+1} . Theorems A and B were used for the basis of the course work of a student of the fourth year, A. A. Karatsuba, "On a problem from the automata theory", which was distinguished by testimonial reference at the competition of student works of the faculty of mechanics and mathematics of Moscow State University in 1958. The paper by Karatsuba was given to the journal Uspekhi Mat. Nauk on 17 December 1958 and was published there in June 1960. Until the present day (2011), Karatsuba's result on the length of experiments is the only exact nonlinear result, both in automata theory, and in similar problems of computational complexity theory.

  Read more →
• 

  Bayesian programming

  Bayesian programming is a formalism and a methodology for having a technique to specify probabilistic models and solve problems when less than the necessary information is available. Edwin T. Jaynes proposed that probability could be considered as an alternative and an extension of logic for rational reasoning with incomplete and uncertain information. In his founding book Probability Theory: The Logic of Science he developed this theory and proposed what he called "the robot," which was not a physical device, but an inference engine to automate probabilistic reasoning—a kind of Prolog for probability instead of logic. Bayesian programming is a formal and concrete implementation of this "robot". Bayesian programming may also be seen as an algebraic formalism to specify graphical models such as, for instance, Bayesian networks, dynamic Bayesian networks, Kalman filters or hidden Markov models. Indeed, Bayesian programming is more general than Bayesian networks and has a power of expression equivalent to probabilistic factor graphs. == Formalism == A Bayesian program is a means of specifying a family of probability distributions. The constituent elements of a Bayesian program are presented below: Program { Description { Specification ( π ) { Variables Decomposition Forms Identification (based on δ ) Question {\displaystyle {\text{Program}}{\begin{cases}{\text{Description}}{\begin{cases}{\text{Specification}}(\pi ){\begin{cases}{\text{Variables}}\\{\text{Decomposition}}\\{\text{Forms}}\\\end{cases}}\\{\text{Identification (based on }}\delta )\end{cases}}\\{\text{Question}}\end{cases}}} A program is constructed from a description and a question. A description is constructed using some specification ( π {\displaystyle \pi } ) as given by the programmer and an identification or learning process for the parameters not completely specified by the specification, using a data set ( δ {\displaystyle \delta } ). A specification is constructed from a set of pertinent variables, a decomposition and a set of forms. Forms are either parametric forms or questions to other Bayesian programs. A question specifies which probability distribution has to be computed. === Description === The purpose of a description is to specify an effective method of computing a joint probability distribution on a set of variables { X 1 , X 2 , ⋯ , X N } {\displaystyle \left\{X_{1},X_{2},\cdots ,X_{N}\right\}} given a set of experimental data δ {\displaystyle \delta } and some specification π {\displaystyle \pi } . This joint distribution is denoted as: P ( X 1 ∧ X 2 ∧ ⋯ ∧ X N ∣ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(X_{1}\wedge X_{2}\wedge \cdots \wedge X_{N}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)} . To specify preliminary knowledge π {\displaystyle \pi } , the programmer must undertake the following: Define the set of relevant variables { X 1 , X 2 , ⋯ , X N } {\displaystyle \left\{X_{1},X_{2},\cdots ,X_{N}\right\}} on which the joint distribution is defined. Decompose the joint distribution (break it into relevant independent or conditional probabilities). Define the forms of each of the distributions (e.g., for each variable, one of the list of probability distributions). ==== Decomposition ==== Given a partition of { X 1 , X 2 , … , X N } {\displaystyle \left\{X_{1},X_{2},\ldots ,X_{N}\right\}} containing K {\displaystyle K} subsets, K {\displaystyle K} variables are defined L 1 , ⋯ , L K {\displaystyle L_{1},\cdots ,L_{K}} , each corresponding to one of these subsets. Each variable L k {\displaystyle L_{k}} is obtained as the conjunction of the variables { X k 1 , X k 2 , ⋯ } {\displaystyle \left\{X_{k_{1}},X_{k_{2}},\cdots \right\}} belonging to the k t h {\displaystyle k^{th}} subset. Recursive application of Bayes' theorem leads to: P ( X 1 ∧ X 2 ∧ ⋯ ∧ X N ∣ δ ∧ π ) = P ( L 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ L K ∣ δ ∧ π ) = P ( L 1 ∣ δ ∧ π ) × P ( L 2 ∣ L 1 ∧ δ ∧ π ) × ⋯ × P ( L K ∣ L K − 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ L 1 ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}&P\left(X_{1}\wedge X_{2}\wedge \cdots \wedge X_{N}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)\\={}&P\left(L_{1}\wedge \cdots \wedge L_{K}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)\\={}&P\left(L_{1}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)\times P\left(L_{2}\mid L_{1}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)\times \cdots \times P\left(L_{K}\mid L_{K-1}\wedge \cdots \wedge L_{1}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)\end{aligned}}} Conditional independence hypotheses then allow further simplifications. A conditional independence hypothesis for variable L k {\displaystyle L_{k}} is defined by choosing some variable X n {\displaystyle X_{n}} among the variables appearing in the conjunction L k − 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ L 2 ∧ L 1 {\displaystyle L_{k-1}\wedge \cdots \wedge L_{2}\wedge L_{1}} , labelling R k {\displaystyle R_{k}} as the conjunction of these chosen variables and setting: P ( L k ∣ L k − 1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ L 1 ∧ δ ∧ π ) = P ( L k ∣ R k ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(L_{k}\mid L_{k-1}\wedge \cdots \wedge L_{1}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)=P\left(L_{k}\mid R_{k}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)} We then obtain: P ( X 1 ∧ X 2 ∧ ⋯ ∧ X N ∣ δ ∧ π ) = P ( L 1 ∣ δ ∧ π ) × P ( L 2 ∣ R 2 ∧ δ ∧ π ) × ⋯ × P ( L K ∣ R K ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}&P\left(X_{1}\wedge X_{2}\wedge \cdots \wedge X_{N}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)\\={}&P\left(L_{1}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)\times P\left(L_{2}\mid R_{2}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)\times \cdots \times P\left(L_{K}\mid R_{K}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)\end{aligned}}} Such a simplification of the joint distribution as a product of simpler distributions is called a decomposition, derived using the chain rule. This ensures that each variable appears at the most once on the left of a conditioning bar, which is the necessary and sufficient condition to write mathematically valid decompositions. ==== Forms ==== Each distribution P ( L k ∣ R k ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(L_{k}\mid R_{k}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)} appearing in the product is then associated with either a parametric form (i.e., a function f μ ( L k ) {\displaystyle f_{\mu }\left(L_{k}\right)} ) or a question to another Bayesian program P ( L k ∣ R k ∧ δ ∧ π ) = P ( L ∣ R ∧ δ ^ ∧ π ^ ) {\displaystyle P\left(L_{k}\mid R_{k}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)=P\left(L\mid R\wedge {\widehat {\delta }}\wedge {\widehat {\pi }}\right)} . When it is a form f μ ( L k ) {\displaystyle f_{\mu }\left(L_{k}\right)} , in general, μ {\displaystyle \mu } is a vector of parameters that may depend on R k {\displaystyle R_{k}} or δ {\displaystyle \delta } or both. Learning takes place when some of these parameters are computed using the data set δ {\displaystyle \delta } . An important feature of Bayesian programming is this capacity to use questions to other Bayesian programs as components of the definition of a new Bayesian program. P ( L k ∣ R k ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(L_{k}\mid R_{k}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)} is obtained by some inferences done by another Bayesian program defined by the specifications π ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\pi }}} and the data δ ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}} . This is similar to calling a subroutine in classical programming and provides an easy way to build hierarchical models. === Question === Given a description (i.e., P ( X 1 ∧ X 2 ∧ ⋯ ∧ X N ∣ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(X_{1}\wedge X_{2}\wedge \cdots \wedge X_{N}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)} ), a question is obtained by partitioning { X 1 , X 2 , ⋯ , X N } {\displaystyle \left\{X_{1},X_{2},\cdots ,X_{N}\right\}} into three sets: the searched variables, the known variables and the free variables. The 3 variables S e a r c h e d {\displaystyle Searched} , K n o w n {\displaystyle Known} and F r e e {\displaystyle Free} are defined as the conjunction of the variables belonging to these sets. A question is defined as the set of distributions: P ( S e a r c h e d ∣ Known ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(Searched\mid {\text{Known}}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)} made of many "instantiated questions" as the cardinal of K n o w n {\displaystyle Known} , each instantiated question being the distribution: P ( Searched ∣ Known ∧ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left({\text{Searched}}\mid {\text{Known}}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)} === Inference === Given the joint distribution P ( X 1 ∧ X 2 ∧ ⋯ ∧ X N ∣ δ ∧ π ) {\displaystyle P\left(X_{1}\wedge X_{2}\wedge \cdots \wedge X_{N}\mid \delta \wedge \pi \right)} , it is always possible to compute any possible question using the following general inference: P ( Searched ∣ Known ∧ δ ∧ π ) = ∑ Free [ P ( Searched ∧ Free ∣ Known ∧ δ ∧ π ) ] = ∑ Free [ P ( Searched ∧ Free ∧ Known ∣ δ ∧ π ) ] P ( Known ∣ δ ∧ π ) = ∑ Free [ P ( Searched ∧ Free ∧ Known ∣ δ ∧ π ) ] ∑ Free ∧ Searched [ P ( Searched ∧ Free ∧ Known ∣ δ ∧ π ) ] = 1 Z × ∑ Free [ P ( Searched ∧ Free ∧ Known ∣ δ ∧ π ) ] {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}&P\left({\text{Searched}}\mid {\text{Known}}\wedge \delta \wedge \pi \right)\\={}&\sum _{\text{Free}}\left[P\left({\text{Searched}}\wedge {\text{Free}}\mid {\text{Known}}\wedge \delta \wedge \

  Read more →
• 

  Maike Osborne

  Maike Osborne (born Michael Osborne, 1982) is an Australian academic and scientist who serves as a professor of machine learning at University of Oxford in the Machine Learning Research Group in the Department of Engineering Science. In 2016 she co-founded Mind Foundry, an artificial intelligence company, along with fellow professor Stephen Roberts. == Education == She has a BEng in Mechanical Engineering and a BSc in both Pure Mathematics and Physics from the University of Western Australia. She has a PhD in Machine Learning from the University of Oxford. == Career == Osborne has contributed to over 100 publications, and her work has received over 24,000 citations with an h-index of 46 according to Google Scholar. and has acted as principal or co-investigator for £10.6M of research funding. Her career has focused in particular on Bayesian approaches to AI and machine learning, named after the famous British statistician Thomas Bayes. Osborne's work has contributed to Probabilistic numerics, with Osborne co-authoring the first textbook on the subject. In 2013, Osborne co-authored a paper alongside Swedish-German economist Carl Benedikt Frey called "The Future of Employment: How Susceptible are Jobs to Computerisation?". The paper has received over 13,000 citations and extensive media coverage. In 2023 Osborne gave oral evidence to the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee on the subject of the "Governance of Artificial Intelligence". Her testimony received significant coverage around her warnings of the threat of "rogue AI". == Honors == She is also an Official Fellow of Exeter College, and St Peter's College, Oxford, a Fellow of the ELLIS society, and a Faculty Member of the Oxford-Man Institute of Quantitative Finance. She joined the Oxford Martin School as Lead Researcher on the Oxford Martin Programme on Technology and Employment in 2015. She is a Director of the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Autonomous Intelligent Machines and Systems.

  Read more →
• 

  Yorick Wilks

  Yorick Alexander Wilks FBCS (27 October 1939 – 14 April 2023) was a British computer scientist. He was an emeritus professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Sheffield, visiting professor of artificial intelligence at Gresham College (a post created especially for him), senior research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, senior scientist at the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, and a member of the Epiphany Philosophers. In February 2023, Wilks joined WiredVibe as Director of AI and a Board Member, with the goal of commercializing his previous research and ideas. He remained in this role until his death, which occurred shortly before WiredVibe was acquired by AKY X, a company that continues to build on his legacy and contributions. == Biography == Wilks was born in Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire in England. He was educated at Torquay Boys' Grammar School, followed by Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he read Philosophy, joined the Epiphany Philosophers and obtained his Doctor of Philosophy degree (1968) under Professor R. B. Braithwaite for the thesis 'Argument and Proof'; he was an early pioneer in meaning-based approaches to the understanding of natural language content by computers. His main early contribution in the 1970s was called "Preference Semantics" (Wilks, 1973; Wilks and Fass, 1992), an algorithmic method for assigning the "most coherent" interpretation to a sentence in terms of having the maximum number of internal preferences of its parts (normally verbs or adjectives) satisfied. That early work was hand-coded with semantic entries (of the order of some hundreds) as was normal at the time, but since then has led to the empirical determinations of preferences (chiefly of English verbs) in the 1980s and 1990s. A key component of the notion of preference in semantics was that the interpretation of an utterance is not a well- or ill-formed notion, as was argued in Chomskyan approaches, such as those of Jerry Fodor and Jerrold Katz. It was rather that a semantic interpretation was the best available, even though some preferences might not be satisfied. So, in "The machine answered the question with a low whine" the agent of "answer" does not satisfy that verb's preference for a human answerer—which would cause it to be deemed ill-formed by Fodor and Katz—but is accepted as sub-optimal or metaphorical, and, now, conventional. The function of the algorithm is not to determine well-formedness at all but to make the optimal selection of word-senses to participate in the overall interpretation. Thus, in "The Pole answered..." the system will always select the human sense of the agent and not the inanimate one if it gives a more coherent interpretation overall. Preference Semantics is thus some of the earliest computational work—with programs run at Systems Development Corporation in Santa Monica in 1967 in LISP on an IBM360—in the now established field of word sense disambiguation. This approach was used in the first operational machine translation system based principally on meaning structures and built by Wilks at Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory in the early 1970s (Wilks, 1973) at the same time and place as Roger Schank was applying his "Conceptual Dependency" approach to machine translation. The LISP code of Wilks' system was in The Computer Museum, Boston. Wilks was elected a fellow of the American and European Associations for Artificial Intelligence, of the British Computer Society, a member of the UK Computing Research Committee, and a permanent member of ICCL, the International Committee on Computational Linguistics. He was professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Sheffield and a senior research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute. In 1991 he received a Defense Advanced Projects Agency grant on interlingual pragmatics-based machine translation and in 1994 he received a grant by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council to investigate in the field of large-scale information extraction (LaSIE); in the following years he would obtain more grants to carry on exploring the field of information extraction (AVENTINUS, ECRAN, PASTA...). In the 1990s Wilks also became interested in modelling human-computer dialogue and the team led by David Levy and him as chief researcher won the Loebner Prize in 1997. He was the founding director of the EU funded Companions Project on creating long-term computer companions for people. At his Festschrift in 2007 at the British Computer Society in London a volume of his own papers was presented along with a volume of essays in his honour. He was awarded the Antonio Zampolli prize in honour of his lifetime work at the LREC 2008 conference on 28 May 2008, and the Lifetime Achievement Award at the ACL 2008 conference on 18 June 2008. In 2009, he was awarded the British Computer Society's Lovelace Medal, its annual award for research achievement, and was awarded the Fellowship of the Association for Computing Machinery. In 1998, Wilks became head of the Department of Computer Science of the University of Sheffield, where he had started working in the year 1993 as professor of artificial intelligence, a post he still held. In 1993 he became the founding director of the Institute of Language, Speech and Hearing (ILASH). Wilks also set up the Natural Language Processing Group of the University of Sheffield. In 1994 he (along with Rob Gaizauskas and Hamish Cunningham) designed GATE, an advanced NLP architecture that has been widely distributed. National Life Stories conducted an oral history interview (C1672/24) with Yorick Wilks in 2016 for its Science and Religion collection held by the British Library. Wilks died on 14 April 2023, at the age of 83. == Awards == Wilks received many awards: (2009) Elected Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery (2009) Lovelace Medal by the British Computer Society (2008) Zampolli Prize (ELRA, awarded at LREC in Marrakech, Morocco) (2008) Lifetime Achievement Award (Association for Computational Linguistics, in Columbus) (2006) Visiting Professor, University of Oxford (2004) Elected to UK Computing Research Committee (2004) Elected Fellow, British Computer Society (2003) Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute (1998) Elected Fellow of European Association for Artificial Intelligence (1997) Elected Fellow, EPSRC College of Computing (1991) Visiting Fellow, Trinity Hall, Cambridge (1991) Elected Fellow of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (1983) Royal Society Travel Fellowship (1983) Commonwealth of Australia Visiting Professor (1981) Visiting Sloan Fellow, University of California, Berkeley (1980) Invited Participant in the Nobel Symposium on Language, Stockholm (1979) NATO Senior Scientist Fellowship (1979) Visiting Sloan Fellow, Yale University (1975) SRC Senior Visiting Fellowship, University of Edinburgh == Membership == Wilks was an active member of the following associations: Association for Computational Linguistics Society for the Study of AI and Simulation of Behaviour Association for Computing Machinery Cognitive Science Society British Society for the Philosophy of Science American Association for Artificial Intelligence Aristotelian Society == Selected works == === Books === Wilks, Y. (2019) Artificial Intelligence: Modern Magic or Dangerous Future?.Icon Books. New illustrated edition, 2023, MIT Press. Wilks, Y. (2015) Machine Translation: its scope and limits. Springer Wilks, Y (ed.) (2010) Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological and Design issues. John Benjamins; Amsterdam Wilks, Y., Brewster, C. (2009) Natural Language Processing as a Foundation of the Semantic Web. Now Press: London. Wilks, Y. (2007) Words and Intelligence I, Selected papers by Yorick Wilks. In K. Ahmad, C. Brewster & M. Stevenson (eds.), Springer: Dordrecht. Wilks, Y. (ed. and with introduction and commentaries). (2006) Language, cohesion and form: selected papers of Margaret Masterman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wilks, Y., Nirenburg, S., Somers, H. (eds.) (2003) Readings in Machine Translation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wilks, Y.(ed.). (1999) Machine Conversations. Kluwer: New York. Wilks, Y., Slator, B., Guthrie, L. (1996) Electric Words: dictionaries, computers and meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ballim, A., Wilks, Y. (1991) Artificial Believers. Norwood, NJ: Erlbaum. Wilks, Y.(ed.). (1990) Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. Norwood, NJ: Erlbaum. Wilks, Y., Partridge, D. (eds. plus three YW chapters and an introduction). (1990) The Foundations of Artificial Intelligence: a sourcebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wilks, Y., Sparck-Jones, K.(eds.). (1984) Automatic Natural Language Processing, paperback edition. New York: Wiley. Originally published by Ellis Horwood. Wilks, Y., Charniak, E. (eds and principal authors). (1976) Computational Semantics—an Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Chatbot

  Looking for the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot 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 chatbot 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 →
• 

  Ware report

  Security Controls for Computer Systems, commonly called the Ware report, is a 1970 text by Willis Ware that was foundational in the field of computer security. == Development == A defense contractor in St. Louis, Missouri, had bought an IBM mainframe computer, which it was using for classified work on a fighter aircraft. To provide additional income, the contractor asked the Department of Defense (DoD) for permission to sell computer time on the mainframe to local businesses via remote terminals, while the classified work continued. At the time, the DoD did not have a policy to cover this. The DoD's Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) asked Ware - a RAND employee - to chair a committee to examine and report on the feasibility of security controls for computer systems. The committee's report was a classified document given in January 1970 to the Defense Science Board (DSB), which had taken over the project from ARPA. After declassification, the report was published by RAND in October 1979. == Influence == The IEEE Computer Society said the report was widely circulated, and the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing said that it, together with Ware's 1967 Spring Joint Computer Conference session, marked the start of the field of computer security. The report influenced security certification standards and processes, especially in the banking and defense industries, where the report was instrumental in creating the Orange Book.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Content Generators Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026

  In search of the best AI content generator? An AI content generator 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 content 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 →
• 

  Marti Hearst

  Marti Alice Hearst is a professor in the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley. She did early work in corpus-based computational linguistics, including some of the first work in automating sentiment analysis, and word sense disambiguation. She invented an algorithm that became known as "Hearst patterns" which applies lexico-syntactic patterns to recognize hyponymy (ISA) relations with high accuracy in large text collections, including an early application of it to WordNet; this algorithm is widely used in commercial text mining applications including ontology learning. Hearst also developed early work in automatic segmentation of text into topical discourse boundaries, inventing a now well-known approach called TextTiling. Hearst's research is on user interfaces for search engine technology and big data analytics. She did early work in user interfaces and information visualization for search user interfaces, inventing the TileBars query term visualization. Her Flamenco research project investigated and developed the now widely used faceted navigation approach for searching and browsing web sites and information collections. She wrote the first academic book on the topic of Search User Interfaces (Cambridge University Press, 2009). Hearst is an Edge Foundation contributing author and a member of the Usage panel of the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Hearst received her B.A., M.S., and Ph.D. in computer science, all from Berkeley. In 2013 she became a fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery. She became a member of the CHI Academy in 2017, and has previously served as president of the Association for Computational Linguistics and on the advisory council of NSF's CISE Directorate. Additionally, she has been a member of the Web Board for CACM, the Usage Panel for the American Heritage Dictionary, the Edge.org panel of experts, the research staff at Xerox PARC, and the boards of ACM Transactions on the Web, Computational Linguistics, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, and IEEE Intelligent Systems. Hearst has received an NSF CAREER award, an IBM Faculty Award, and an Okawa Foundation Fellowship. Her work on user interfaces has had a profound impact on the industry, earning Hearst two Google Research Awards and four Excellence in Teaching Awards.} She has also led projects worth over $3.5M in research grants. Hearst’s publications date back to 1990, when ‘A Hybrid Approach to Restricted Text Interpretation’ was published in Stanford University’s AAAI Spring Symposium on Text Based Intelligent Systems in March of that year.

  Read more →
• 

  Ziad Obermeyer

  Ziad Obermeyer (Arabic: زياد أوبرماير) is a Lebanese American physician and researcher whose work focuses on machine learning, health policy, and clinical decision-making in medicine. He is the Blue Cross of California Distinguished Associate Professor at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub investigator, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is known for his research on racial bias in health care algorithms and the use of artificial intelligence in health care. == Early life and education == Obermeyer was born in Beirut, Lebanon, and raised in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard College and a Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.) in History and Science from the University of Cambridge. He received his Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) from Harvard Medical School in 2008. Before pursuing medicine, Obermeyer worked as a consultant at McKinsey & Company, advising pharmaceutical and global health clients in New Jersey, Geneva, and Tokyo. After completing his medical degree, he trained as an emergency physician at Mass General Brigham (MGB) in Boston, Massachusetts. He later continued practicing emergency medicine at the Fort Defiance Indian Hospital on the Navajo Nation in Arizona. == Academic career == Obermeyer served as an Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School from 2014 to 2020. In 2020, he joined the University of California, Berkeley as an Associate Professor and the Blue Cross of California Distinguished Professor at the School of Public Health. == Research focus == === Algorithmic racial bias in healthcare === In 2019, Obermeyer and economist Sendhil Mullainathan examined a commercial healthcare algorithm by UnitedHealth Group, used in hospitals and by insurers to identify patients with complex health needs. The study found that the algorithm underestimated the health needs of Black patients compared to white patients with similar conditions and that reformulating it would reduce racial bias. In 2020, Obermeyer analyzed an algorithm used to allocate CARE Act relief funding to hospitals. The study identified allocation patterns that favored hospitals with higher revenues over hospitals serving larger numbers of COVID-19 patients who are predominantly Black. === Clinical decision-making === In 2021, Obermeyer and colleagues examined physician decision-making in cardiac care using machine learning models. The study found that physicians misdiagnose cases when they rely on symptoms representative of a heart attack, such as chest pain, over other symptoms. === Pain assessment === Obermeyer developed a deep learning approach to investigate the severity of osteoarthritis in underserved communities. == Policy and regulatory work == Following the publication of the 2019 algorithmic racial bias study, the New York Department of Financial Services and Department of Health launched an investigation into UnitedHealth Group's algorithm, requesting that the company cease using it, citing discriminatory business practices. Also related to this study, in December 2019, Democratic Senators Cory Booker and Ron Wyden released letters to the Federal Trade Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services asking to investigate potential discrimination in decision-making algorithms against marginalized communities in healthcare. The senators also wrote to major healthcare companies, including Aetna and Blue Cross Blue Shield, about their internal safeguards against racial bias in their technology. In 2021, Obermeyer and colleagues at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business released the Algorithmic Bias Playbook, a resource for policymakers and technical teams working in healthcare on how to measure and mitigate algorithmic racial bias. Obermeyer testified before the U.S. Senate Financial Committee in February 2024 on artificial intelligence in healthcare, recommending transparency requirements for AI developers and independent algorithm evaluations. In December 2025, he testified before the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the role of AI in affordable healthcare and the impact of its integration on the workforce. == Organizations == In 2021, Obermeyer cofounded Nightingale Open Science, a non-profit that creates new medical imaging datasets available for research, and Dandelion Health, a health data analytics company. In June 2023, the company launched a program to audit and evaluate the performance of algorithms to identify potential racial, ethnic, and geographic bias, funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the SCAN Foundation. Dandelion Health partnered with the American Heart Association in 2025 to power an AI assessment lab for cardiovascular algorithms. Obermeyer is a founding faculty member of the University of California, Berkeley–University of California, San Francisco joint program in computational precision health. == Recognition == TIME magazine named Obermeyer one of the 100 most influential people in artificial intelligence in 2023. He has served as a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub Investigator since 2022, and as a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research since 2023. He was designated an Emerging Leader by the National Academy of Medicine in 2020. Obermeyer's racial bias study received the Willard G. Manning Memorial Award for the Best Research in Health Econometrics from the American Society of Health Economists (ASHEcon) in 2021 and the Responsible Business Education Award from the Financial Times in 2022.

  Read more →
• 

  Digital image correlation and tracking

  Digital image correlation and tracking is an optical method that employs tracking and image registration techniques for accurate 2D and 3D measurements of changes in 2D images or 3D volumes. This method is often used to measure full-field displacement and strains, and it is widely applied in many areas of science and engineering. Compared to strain gauges and extensometers, digital image correlation methods provide finer details about deformation, due to the ability to provide both local and average data. == Overview == Digital image correlation (DIC) techniques have been increasing in popularity, especially in micro- and nano-scale mechanical testing applications due to their relative ease of implementation and use. Advances in computer technology and digital cameras have been the enabling technologies for this method and while white-light optics has been the predominant approach, DIC can be and has been extended to almost any imaging technology. The concept of using cross-correlation to measure shifts in datasets has been known for a long time, and it has been applied to digital images since at least the early 1970s. The present-day applications are almost innumerable, including image analysis, image compression, velocimetry, and strain estimation. Much early work in DIC in the field of mechanics was led by researchers at the University of South Carolina in the early 1980s and has been optimized and improved in recent years. Commonly, DIC relies on finding the maximum of the correlation array between pixel intensity array subsets on two or more corresponding images, which gives the integer translational shift between them. It is also possible to estimate shifts to a finer resolution than the resolution of the original images, which is often called "sub-pixel" registration because the measured shift is smaller than an integer pixel unit. For sub-pixel interpolation of the shift, other methods do not simply maximize the correlation coefficient. An iterative approach can also be used to maximize the interpolated correlation coefficient by using non-linear optimization techniques. The non-linear optimization approach tends to be conceptually simpler and can handle large deformations more accurately, but as with most nonlinear optimization techniques, it is slower. The two-dimensional discrete cross correlation r i j {\displaystyle r_{ij}} can be defined in several ways, one possibility being: r i j = ∑ m ∑ n [ f ( m + i , n + j ) − f ¯ ] [ g ( m , n ) − g ¯ ] ∑ m ∑ n [ f ( m , n ) − f ¯ ] 2 ∑ m ∑ n [ g ( m , n ) − g ¯ ] 2 . {\displaystyle r_{ij}={\frac {\sum _{m}\sum _{n}[f(m+i,n+j)-{\bar {f}}][g(m,n)-{\bar {g}}]}{\sqrt {\sum _{m}\sum _{n}{[f(m,n)-{\bar {f}}]^{2}}\sum _{m}\sum _{n}{[g(m,n)-{\bar {g}}]^{2}}}}}.} Here f(m, n) is the pixel intensity or the gray-scale value at a point (m, n) in the original image, g(m, n) is the gray-scale value at a point (m, n) in the translated image, f ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {f}}} and g ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {g}}} are mean values of the intensity matrices f and g respectively. However, in practical applications, the correlation array is usually computed using Fourier-transform methods, since the fast Fourier transform is a much faster method than directly computing the correlation. F = F { f } , G = F { g } . {\displaystyle \mathbf {F} ={\mathcal {F}}\{f\},\quad \mathbf {G} ={\mathcal {F}}\{g\}.} Then taking the complex conjugate of the second result and multiplying the Fourier transforms together elementwise, we obtain the Fourier transform of the correlogram, R {\displaystyle \ R} : R = F ∘ G ∗ , {\displaystyle R=\mathbf {F} \circ \mathbf {G} ^{},} where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } is the Hadamard product (entry-wise product). It is also fairly common to normalize the magnitudes to unity at this point, which results in a variation called phase correlation. Then the cross-correlation is obtained by applying the inverse Fourier transform: r = F − 1 { R } . {\displaystyle \ r={\mathcal {F}}^{-1}\{R\}.} At this point, the coordinates of the maximum of r i j {\displaystyle r_{ij}} give the integer shift: ( Δ x , Δ y ) = arg ⁡ max ( i , j ) { r } . {\displaystyle (\Delta x,\Delta y)=\arg \max _{(i,j)}\{r\}.} == Deformation mapping == For deformation mapping, the mapping function that relates the images can be derived from comparing a set of subwindow pairs over the whole images. (Figure 1). The coordinates or grid points (xi, yj) and (xi, yj) are related by the translations that occur between the two images. If the deformation is small and perpendicular to the optical axis of the camera, then the relation between (xi, yj) and (xi, yj) can be approximated by a 2D affine transformation such as: x ∗ = x + u + ∂ u ∂ x Δ x + ∂ u ∂ y Δ y , {\displaystyle x^{}=x+u+{\frac {\partial u}{\partial x}}\Delta x+{\frac {\partial u}{\partial y}}\Delta y,} y ∗ = y + v + ∂ v ∂ x Δ x + ∂ v ∂ y Δ y . {\displaystyle y^{}=y+v+{\frac {\partial v}{\partial x}}\Delta x+{\frac {\partial v}{\partial y}}\Delta y.} Here u and v are translations of the center of the sub-image in the X and Y directions respectively. The distances from the center of the sub-image to the point (x, y) are denoted by Δ x {\displaystyle \Delta x} and Δ y {\displaystyle \Delta y} . Thus, the correlation coefficient rij is a function of displacement components (u, v) and displacement gradients ∂ u ∂ x , ∂ u ∂ y , ∂ v ∂ x , ∂ v ∂ y . {\displaystyle {\frac {\partial u}{\partial x}},{\frac {\partial u}{\partial y}},{\frac {\partial v}{\partial x}},{\frac {\partial v}{\partial y}}.} DIC has proven to be very effective at mapping deformation in macroscopic mechanical testing, where the application of specular markers (e.g. paint, toner powder) or surface finishes from machining and polishing provide the needed contrast to correlate images well. However, these methods for applying surface contrast do not extend to the application of free-standing thin films for several reasons. First, vapor deposition at normal temperatures on semiconductor grade substrates results in mirror-finish quality films with RMS roughnesses that are typically on the order of several nanometers. No subsequent polishing or finishing steps are required, and unless electron imaging techniques are employed that can resolve microstructural features, the films do not possess enough useful surface contrast to adequately correlate images. Typically this challenge can be circumvented by applying paint that results in a random speckle pattern on the surface, although the large and turbulent forces resulting from either spraying or applying paint to the surface of a free-standing thin film are too high and would break the specimens. In addition, the sizes of individual paint particles are on the order of μms, while the film thickness is only several hundred nanometers, which would be analogous to supporting a large boulder on a thin sheet of paper. == Digital volume correlation == Digital Volume Correlation (DVC, and sometimes called Volumetric-DIC) extends the 2D-DIC algorithms into three dimensions to calculate the full-field 3D deformation from a pair of 3D images. This technique is distinct from 3D-DIC, which only calculates the 3D deformation of an exterior surface using conventional optical images. The DVC algorithm is able to track full-field displacement information in the form of voxels instead of pixels. The theory is similar to above except that another dimension is added: the z-dimension. The displacement is calculated from the correlation of 3D subsets of the reference and deformed volumetric images, which is analogous to the correlation of 2D subsets described above. DVC can be performed using volumetric image datasets. These images can be obtained using confocal microscopy, X-ray computed tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging or other techniques. Similar to the other DIC techniques, the images must exhibit a distinct, high-contrast 3D "speckle pattern" to ensure accurate displacement measurement. DVC was first developed in 1999 to study the deformation of trabecular bone using X-ray computed tomography images. Since then, applications of DVC have grown to include granular materials, metals, foams, composites and biological materials. To date it has been used with images acquired by MRI imaging, Computer Tomography (CT), micro-CT, confocal microscopy, and lightsheet microscopy. DVC is currently considered to be ideal in the research world for 3D quantification of local displacements, strains, and stress in biological specimens. It is preferred because of the non-invasiveness of the method over traditional experimental methods. Two of the key challenges are improving the speed and reliability of the DVC measurement. The 3D imaging techniques produce noisier images than conventional 2D optical images, which reduces the quality of the displacement measurement. Computational speed is restricted by the file sizes of 3D images, which are significantly larger than 2D images. For example, an

  Read more →
• 

  Deep Learning Studio

  Deep Learning Studio is a software tool that aims to simplify the creation of deep learning models used in artificial intelligence. It is compatible with a number of open-source programming frameworks popularly used in artificial neural networks, including MXNet and Google's TensorFlow. Prior to the release of Deep Learning Studio in January 2017, proficiency in Python, among other programming languages, was essential in developing effective deep learning models. Deep Learning Studio sought to simplify the model creation process through a visual, drag-and-drop interface and the application of pre-trained learning models on available data. Irving, Texas–based Deep Cognition Inc. is the developer behind Deep Learning Studio. In 2017, the software allowed Deep Cognition to become a finalist for Best Innovation in Deep Learning in the Alconics Awards, which are given annually to the best artificial intelligence software. Deep Cognition launched version 2.0 of Deep Learning Studio at NVIDIA's GTC 2018 Conference in San Jose, California. Fremont, California–based computing products supplier Exxact Corp provides desktop computers specifically built to handle Deep Learning Studio workloads. == Features == Source: Deep Learning Studio is available in two versions: Desktop and Cloud, both of which are free software. The Desktop version is available on Windows and Ubuntu. The Cloud version is available in single-user and multi-user configurations. A Deep Cognition account is needed to access the Cloud version. Account registration is free. Deep Learning Studio can import existing Keras models; it also takes a data set as an input. Deep Learning Studio's AutoML feature allows automatic generation of deep learning models. More advanced users may choose to generate their own models using various types of layers and neural networks. Deep Learning Studio also has a library of loss functions and optimizers for use in hyperparameter tuning, a traditionally complicated area in neural network programming. Generated models can be trained using either CPUs or GPUs. Trained models can then be used for predictive analytics.

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Virtual Assistants in 2026

  Shopping for the best AI virtual assistant? An AI virtual assistant 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 virtual assistant slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →