AI App Gemini

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

  • Trigger list

    Trigger list

    Trigger list in its most general meaning refers to a list whose items are used to initiate ("trigger") certain actions. == United States: Private financial information == In the United States, when a person applies for a mortgage loan, the lender makes a credit inquiry about the potential borrower from the national credit bureaus, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. Unless the borrower is opted out, the credit bureaus put the applicants onto a "trigger list" of "leads" about persons who are interested in new loans. These lists are sold to numerous lenders all over the United States, and soon after the application the applicant starts receiving offers from all parts of the country. The trigger lists contain a significant amount of personal financial information. Among the buyers of trigger lists are "lead generators" which resell filtered information to borrowers, e.g., of people who live in a certain area and have a certain credit score. While the Federal Trade Commission considers the market of "trigger lists" to be a legal business, many people and organizations (such as the National Association of Mortgage Brokers) consider this a serious breach of privacy and lobby for putting this practice under regulatory controls. As of now, American consumers may opt-out from "trigger lists" by calling 1-888-5-OPTOUT (1-888-567-8688). == Nuclear non-proliferation == The Zangger Committee and the Nuclear Suppliers Group maintain lists of items that may contribute to nuclear proliferation; The nuclear non-proliferation treaty forbids its members to export such items to non-treaty members. these items are said to trigger the countries' responsibilities under the NPT, hence the name.

    Read more →
  • Eugene Charniak

    Eugene Charniak

    Eugene Charniak (June 2, 1946 – June 13, 2023) was a professor of computer Science and cognitive Science at Brown University. He held an A.B. in Physics from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from M.I.T. in Computer Science. His research was in the area of language understanding or technologies which relate to it, such as knowledge representation, reasoning under uncertainty, and learning. Since the early 1990s he was interested in statistical techniques for language understanding. His research in this area included work in the subareas of part-of-speech tagging, probabilistic context-free grammar induction, and, more recently, syntactic disambiguation through word statistics, efficient syntactic parsing, and lexical resource acquisition through statistical means. He was a Fellow of the American Association of Artificial Intelligence and was previously a Councilor of the organization. He was also honored with the 2011 Association for Computational Linguistics Lifetime Achievement Award and awarded the 2011 Calvin & Rose G Hoffman Prize. In 2011, he was named a fellow of the Association for Computational Linguistics. In 2015, he won the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Classic Paper Award for a paper (“Statistical Parsing with a Context-Free Grammar and Word Statistics”) that he presented at the Fourteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence in 1997. == Books == He published six books: Computational Semantics, (with Yorick Wilks), Amsterdam: North-Holland (1976) Artificial Intelligence Programming (now in a second edition) (with Chris Riesbeck, Drew McDermott, and James Meehan), Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1980, 1987) Introduction to Artificial Intelligence (with Drew McDermott), Reading MA: Addison-Wesley (1985) Statistical Language Learning, Cambridge: MIT Press (1993) Introduction to Deep Learning, Cambridge: MIT Press (2019) AI & I: An Intellectual History of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge: MIT Press (2024)

    Read more →
  • Bernard Vauquois

    Bernard Vauquois

    Bernard Vauquois ((1929-06-14)June 14, 1929 — (1985-09-30)September 30, 1985) was a French mathematician and computer scientist. He was a pioneer of computer science and machine translation (MT) in France. An astronomer-turned-computer scientist, he is known for his work on the programming language ALGOL 60, and later for extensive work on the theoretical and practical problems of MT, of which the eponymous Vauquois triangle is one of the most widely-known contributions. He was a professor at what would become the Grenoble Alpes University. == Biography == Bernard Vauquois was initially a researcher at French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) from 1952 to 1958 at the Astrophysics Institute of the Meudon Observatory, after completing studies in mathematics, physics, and astronomy. Since 1957, his research program has also focused on methods applied to physics from the perspective of electronic computers, and he has taught programming to physicists. This double interest in astrophysics and electronic computers is reflected in the subject of his thesis and that of the complementary thesis in physical sciences that he defended in 1958. In 1960, at 31 years old, he was appointed professor of computer science at Grenoble University, where, alongside professors Jean Kuntzmann and Noël Gastinel, he began work in the field. At that time, he was also contributing to the definition of the language ALGOL 60. Also in 1960, he founded the Centre d'Étude pour la Traduction Automatique (CETA), later renamed as Groupe d'Étude pour la Traduction Automatique (GETA) and currently known as GETALP, a team at the Laboratoire d'informatique de Grenoble, and soon showed his gift for rapid understanding, synthesis, and innovation, and his taste for personal communication across linguistic borders and barriers. After visiting a number of centers, mainly in the United States, where machine translation research was conducted, he analyzed the shortcomings of the "first-generation" approach and evaluated the potential of a new generation based on grammar and formal language theory, and proposed a new approach based on a representational "pivot" and the use of (declarative) rule systems that transform a sequential sentence from one level of representation to another. He led the GETA in constructing the first large second-generation system, applied to Russian–French, from 1962 to 1971. At the end of this period, the accumulated experience led him to correct some defects of the "pure" declarative and interlingual approach, and to use heuristic programming methods, implemented with procedural grammars written in LSPLs ("specialized languages for linguistic programming", langages spécialisés pour la programmation linguistique) that were developed under his direction, and integrated into the ARIANE-78 machine translation system. In 1974, when he cofounded the Leibniz laboratory, he proposed "multilevel structure descriptors" (descripteurs de structures multiniveaux) for units larger than sentence translation. This idea, premonitory of later theoretical work (Ray Jackendoff, Gerald Gazdar) is still the cornerstone of all machine translation software built by GETA and the French national TA project. Bernard Vauquois' last contribution was "static grammar" (grammaire statique) in 1982–83, during the ESOPE project, the preparatory phase of the French national MT project. He was a key figure in the field of computational linguistics in France. At CNRS, he was a member of section 22 of the National Committee in 1963: "General Linguistics, Modern Languages and Comparative Literature", and then, in 1969, of section 28: "General Linguistics, Foreign Languages and Literature". Since 1965, he has been vice-president of the Association for Natural Language Processing (ATALA). He was its president from 1966 to 1971. He was also one of the founders, in 1965, of the ICCL (International Committee on Computational Linguistics), which organizes COLING conferences. He was its president from 1969 to 1984. From France, he often collaborated with other countries (notably Canada, the United States, the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Japan, China, Brazil, Malaysia, and Thailand), working on the specification and implementation of grammars and dictionaries. He began cooperating with Malaysia, for example, in 1979, which led to the creation of the Automatic Terjemaan Project, with a first prototype of an English-Malay MT system demonstrated in 1980. == Vauquois triangle == The Vauquois triangle is a conceptual model and diagram illustrating possible approaches to the design of machine translation systems, first proposed in 1968. == Legacy == Bernard Vauquois is regarded as a pioneer of machine translation in France. He played a key role in developing the first large-scale second-generation machine translation system, and his work influenced the field of machine translation for many years. He supervised some twenty doctoral theses, most of them concerning formal aspects of natural and artificial languages, with an emphasis on machine translation. The Center for Studies on Automatic Translation, which Vauquois founded in 1960, later became the Group for the Study of Machine Translation and Automated Processing of Languages and Speech (GETALP). It is still a research institution in natural language processing. Vauquois was a prolific writer and speaker, disseminating knowledge about machine translation and related topics. His papers and presentations were instrumental in establishing the field of machine translation in France and beyond. == Publications == Vauquois, Bernard (1973). Traduction automatique (in French). Paris: Gauthier-Villars. Vauquois, Bernard (1967). Introduction à la traduction automatique (in French). Paris: Gauthier-Villars.

    Read more →
  • Stochastic grammar

    Stochastic grammar

    A stochastic grammar (statistical grammar) is a grammar framework with a probabilistic notion of grammaticality: Stochastic context-free grammar Statistical parsing Data-oriented parsing Hidden Markov model (or stochastic regular grammar) Estimation theory The grammar is realized as a language model. Allowed sentences are stored in a database together with the frequency how common a sentence is. Statistical natural language processing uses stochastic, probabilistic and statistical methods, especially to resolve difficulties that arise because longer sentences are highly ambiguous when processed with realistic grammars, yielding thousands or millions of possible analyses. Methods for disambiguation often involve the use of corpora and Markov models. "A probabilistic model consists of a non-probabilistic model plus some numerical quantities; it is not true that probabilistic models are inherently simpler or less structural than non-probabilistic models." == Examples == A probabilistic method for rhyme detection is implemented by Hirjee & Brown in their study in 2013 to find internal and imperfect rhyme pairs in rap lyrics. The concept is adapted from a sequence alignment technique using BLOSUM (BLOcks SUbstitution Matrix). They were able to detect rhymes undetectable by non-probabilistic models.

    Read more →
  • Turret lathe

    Turret lathe

    A turret lathe is a form of metalworking lathe that is used for repetitive production of duplicate parts, which by the nature of their cutting process are usually interchangeable. It evolved from earlier lathes with the addition of the turret, which is an indexable toolholder that allows multiple cutting operations to be performed, each with a different cutting tool, in easy, rapid succession, with no need for the operator to perform set-up tasks in between (such as installing or uninstalling tools) or to control the toolpath. The latter is due to the toolpath's being controlled by the machine, either in jig-like fashion, via the mechanical limits placed on it by the turret's slide and stops, or via digitally-directed servomechanisms for computer numerical control lathes. The name derives from the way early turrets took the general form of a flattened cylindrical block mounted to the lathe's cross-slide, capable of rotating about the vertical axis and with toolholders projecting out to all sides, and thus vaguely resembled a swiveling gun turret. Capstan lathe is the usual name in the UK and Commonwealth, though the two terms are also used in contrast: see below, Capstan versus turret. == History == Turret lathes became indispensable to the production of interchangeable parts and for mass production. The first turret lathe was built by Stephen Fitch in 1845 to manufacture screws for pistol percussion parts. In the mid-nineteenth century, the need for interchangeable parts for Colt revolvers enhanced the role of turret lathes in achieving this goal as part of the "American system" of manufacturing arms. Clock-making and bicycle manufacturing had similar requirements. Christopher Spencer invented the first fully automated turret lathe in 1873, which led to designs using cam action or hydraulic mechanisms. From the late-19th through mid-20th centuries, turret lathes, both manual and automatic (i.e., screw machines and chuckers), were one of the most important classes of machine tools for mass production. They were used extensively in the mass production for the war effort in World War II. The U.S. company Warner & Swasey was one of the premier brands in heavy turret lathes between the 1910s and 1960s; it became the world's largest manufacturer of such lathes by 1928. During World War II, it employed 7,000 people and produced half of the turret lathes manufactured in the United States. == Types == There are many variants of the turret lathe. They can be most generally classified by size (small, medium, or large); method of control (manual, automated mechanically, or automated via computer (numerical control (NC) or computer numerical control (CNC)); and bed orientation (horizontal or vertical). === Archetypical: horizontal, manual === In the late 1830s a "capstan lathe" with a turret was patented in Britain. The first American turret lathe was invented by Stephen Fitch in 1845. The archetypical turret lathe, and the first in order of historical appearance, is the horizontal-bed, manual turret lathe. The term "turret lathe" without further qualification is still understood to refer to this type. The formative decades for this class of machine were the 1840s through 1860s, when the basic idea of mounting an indexable turret on a bench lathe or engine lathe was born, developed, and disseminated from the originating shops to many other factories. Some important tool-builders in this development were Stephen Fitch; Gay, Silver & Co.; Elisha K. Root of Colt; J.D. Alvord of the Sharps Armory; Frederick W. Howe, Richard S. Lawrence, and Henry D. Stone of Robbins & Lawrence; J.R. Brown of Brown & Sharpe; and Francis A. Pratt of Pratt & Whitney. Various designers at these and other firms later made further refinements. === Semi-automatic === Sometimes machines similar to those above, but with power feeds and automatic turret-indexing at the end of the return stroke, are called "semi-automatic turret lathes". This nomenclature distinction is blurry and not consistently observed. The term "turret lathe" encompasses them all. During the 1860s, when semi-automatic turret lathes were developed, they were sometimes called "automatic". What we today would call "automatics", that is, fully automatic machines, had not been developed yet. During that era both manual and semi-automatic turret lathes were sometimes called "screw machines", although we today reserve that term for fully automatic machines. === Automatic === During the 1870s through 1890s, the mechanically automated "automatic" turret lathe was developed and disseminated. These machines can execute many part-cutting cycles without human intervention. Thus the duties of the operator, which were already greatly reduced by the manual turret lathe, were even further reduced, and productivity increased. These machines use cams to automate the sliding and indexing of the turret and the opening and closing of the chuck. Thus, they execute the part-cutting cycle somewhat analogously to the way in which an elaborate cuckoo clock performs an automated theater show. Small- to medium-sized automatic turret lathes are usually called "screw machines" or "automatic screw machines", while larger ones are usually called "automatic chucking lathes", "automatic chuckers", or "chuckers". Such machine tools of the "automatic" variety, which in the pre-computer era meant mechanically automated, had already reached a highly advanced state by World War I. === Computer numerical control === When World War II ended, the digital computer was poised to develop from a colossal laboratory curiosity into a practical technology that could begin to disseminate into business and industry. The advent of computer-based automation in machine tools via numerical control (NC) and then computer numerical control (CNC) displaced to a large extent, but not at all completely, the previously existing manual and mechanically automated machines. Numerically controlled turrets allow automated selection of tools on a turret. CNC lathes may be horizontal or vertical in orientation and mount six separate tools on one or more turrets. Such machine tools can work in two axes per turret, with up to six axes being feasible for complex work. === Vertical === Vertical turret lathes have the workpiece held vertically, which allows the headstock to sit on the floor and the faceplate to become a horizontal rotating table, analogous to a huge potter's wheel. This is useful for the handling of very large, heavy, short workpieces. Vertical lathes in general are also called "vertical boring mills" or often simply "boring mills"; therefore a vertical turret lathe is a vertical boring mill equipped with a turret. == Other variations == === Capstan versus turret === The term "capstan lathe" overlaps in sense with the term "turret lathe" to a large extent. In many times and places, it has been understood to be synonymous with "turret lathe". In other times and places it has been held in technical contradistinction to "turret lathe", with the difference being in whether the turret's slide is fixed to the bed (ram-type turret) or slides on the bed's ways (saddle-type turret). The difference in terminology is mostly a matter of United Kingdom and Commonwealth usage versus United States usage. === Flat === A subtype of horizontal turret lathe is the flat-turret lathe. Its turret is flat (and analogous to a rotary table), allowing the turret to pass beneath the part. Patented by James Hartness of Jones & Lamson, and first disseminated in the 1890s, it was developed to provide more rigidity via requiring less overhang in the tool setup, especially when the part is relatively long. === Hollow-hexagon === Hollow-hexagon turret lathes competed with flat-turret lathes by taking the conventional hexagon turret and making it hollow, allowing the part to pass into it during the cut, analogously to how the part would pass over the flat turret. In both cases, the main idea is to increase rigidity by allowing a relatively long part to be turned without the tool overhang that would be needed with a conventional turret, which is not flat or hollow. === Monitor lathe === The term "monitor lathe" formerly (1860s–1940s) referred to the class of small- to medium-sized manual turret lathes used on relatively small work. The name was inspired by the monitor-class warships, which the monitor lathe's turret resembled. Today, lathes of such appearance, such as the Hardinge DSM-59 and its many clones, are still common, but the name "monitor lathe" is no longer current in the industry. === Toolpost turrets and tailstock turrets === Turrets can be added to non-turret lathes (bench lathes, engine lathes, toolroom lathes, etc.) by mounting them on the toolpost, tailstock, or both. Often these turrets are not as large as a turret lathe's, and they usually do not offer the sliding and stopping that a turret lathe's turret does; but they do offer the ability to index through successive tool

    Read more →
  • The Best Free AI Code-review Tool for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Code-review Tool for Beginners

    Curious about the best AI code-review tool? An AI code-review tool 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-review tool 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 →
  • The Best Free AI Coding Assistant for Beginners

    The Best Free AI Coding Assistant for Beginners

    Trying to pick the best AI coding assistant? An AI coding assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI coding assistant 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 →
  • Quantum finite automaton

    Quantum finite automaton

    In quantum computing, quantum finite automata (QFA) or quantum state machines are a quantum analog of probabilistic automata or a Markov decision process. They provide a mathematical abstraction of real-world quantum computers. Several types of automata may be defined, including measure-once and measure-many automata. Quantum finite automata can also be understood as the quantization of subshifts of finite type, or as a quantization of Markov chains. QFAs are, in turn, special cases of geometric finite automata or topological finite automata. The automata work by receiving a finite-length string σ = ( σ 0 , σ 1 , … , σ k ) {\displaystyle \sigma =(\sigma _{0},\sigma _{1},\dots ,\sigma _{k})} of letters σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} from a finite alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , and assigning to each such string a probability Pr ⁡ ( σ ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Pr} (\sigma )} indicating the probability of the automaton being in an accept state; that is, indicating whether the automaton accepted or rejected the string. The languages accepted by QFAs are not the regular languages of deterministic finite automata, nor are they the stochastic languages of probabilistic finite automata. Study of these quantum languages remains an active area of research. == Informal description == There is a simple, intuitive way of understanding quantum finite automata. One begins with a graph-theoretic interpretation of deterministic finite automata (DFA). A DFA can be represented as a labelled directed graph, with states as nodes in the graph, and arrows representing state transitions. Each arrow is labelled with a possible input symbol, so that, given a specific state and an input symbol, the arrow points at the next state. One way of representing such a graph is by means of a set of adjacency matrices, with one matrix for each input symbol. In this case, a list of possible DFA states is written as a column vector. For a given input symbol, the adjacency matrix indicates how any given state (row in the state vector) will transition to the next state; a state transition is given by matrix multiplication. One needs a distinct adjacency matrix for each possible input symbol, since each input symbol can result in a different transition. The entries in the adjacency matrix must be zero's and one's. For any given column in the matrix, only one entry can be non-zero: this is the entry that indicates the next (unique) state transition. Similarly, the state of the system is a column vector, in which only one entry is non-zero: this entry corresponds to the current state of the system. Let Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } denote the set of input symbols. For a given input symbol α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } , write U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} as the adjacency matrix that describes the evolution of the DFA to its next state. The set { U α | α ∈ Σ } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }|\alpha \in \Sigma \}} then completely describes the state transition function of the DFA. Let Q represent the set of possible states of the DFA. If there are N states in Q, then each matrix U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} is N by N-dimensional. The initial state q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} corresponds to a column vector with a one in the q0'th row. A general state q is then a column vector with a one in the q'th row. By abuse of notation, let q0 and q also denote these two vectors. Then, after reading input symbols α β γ ⋯ {\displaystyle \alpha \beta \gamma \cdots } from the input tape, the state of the DFA will be given by q = ⋯ U γ U β U α q 0 . {\displaystyle q=\cdots U_{\gamma }U_{\beta }U_{\alpha }q_{0}.} The state transitions are given by ordinary matrix multiplication (that is, multiply q0 by U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , etc.); the order of application is 'reversed' only because we follow the standard notation of linear algebra. The above description of a DFA, in terms of linear operators and vectors, almost begs for generalization, by replacing the state-vector q by some general vector, and the matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by some general operators. This is essentially what a QFA does: it replaces q by a unit vector, and the { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} by unitary matrices. Other, similar generalizations also become obvious: the vector q can be some distribution on a manifold; the set of transition matrices become automorphisms of the manifold; this defines a topological finite automaton. Similarly, the matrices could be taken as automorphisms of a homogeneous space; this defines a geometric finite automaton. Before moving on to the formal description of a QFA, there are two noteworthy generalizations that should be mentioned and understood. The first is the non-deterministic finite automaton (NFA). In this case, the vector q is replaced by a vector that can have more than one entry that is non-zero. Such a vector then represents an element of the power set of Q; it’s just an indicator function on Q. Likewise, the state transition matrices { U α } {\displaystyle \{U_{\alpha }\}} are defined in such a way that a given column can have several non-zero entries in it. Equivalently, the multiply-add operations performed during component-wise matrix multiplication should be replaced by Boolean and-or operations so that the semantics are kept intact. A well-known theorem states that, for each DFA, there is an equivalent NFA, and vice versa. This implies that the set of languages that can be recognized by DFA's and NFA's are the same; these are the regular languages. In the generalization to QFAs, the set of recognized languages will be different to the regular languages. Describing that set is one of the outstanding research problems in QFA theory. Another generalization that should be immediately apparent is to use a stochastic matrix for the transition matrices, and a probability vector for the state; this gives a probabilistic finite automaton. The entries in the state vector must be real numbers, positive, and sum to one, in order for the state vector to be interpreted as a probability. The transition matrices must preserve this property: this is why they must be stochastic. Each state vector should be imagined as specifying a point in a simplex; thus, this is a topological automaton, with the simplex being the manifold, and the stochastic matrices being linear automorphisms of the simplex onto itself. Since each transition is (essentially) independent of the previous (if we disregard the distinction between accepted and rejected languages), the PFA essentially becomes a kind of Markov chain. By contrast, in a QFA, the manifold is complex projective space C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} , and the transition matrices are unitary matrices. Each point in C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} corresponds to a (pure) quantum-mechanical state; the unitary matrices can be thought of as governing the time evolution of the system (viz in the Schrödinger picture). The generalization from pure states to mixed states should be straightforward: A mixed state is simply a measure-theoretic probability distribution on C P N {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{N}} . A worthy point to contemplate is the distributions that result on the manifold during the input of a language. In order for an automaton to be 'efficient' in recognizing a language, that distribution should be 'as uniform as possible'. This need for uniformity is the underlying principle behind maximum entropy methods: these simply guarantee crisp, compact operation of the automaton. Put in other words, the machine learning methods used to train hidden Markov models generalize to QFAs as well: the Viterbi algorithm and the forward–backward algorithm generalize readily to the QFA. Although the study of QFA was popularized in the work of Kondacs and Watrous in 1997 and later by Moore and Crutchfeld, they were described as early as 1971, by Ion Baianu. == Measure-once automata == Measure-once automata were introduced by Cris Moore and James P. Crutchfield. They may be defined formally as follows. As with an ordinary finite automaton, the quantum automaton is considered to have N {\displaystyle N} possible internal states, represented in this case by an N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle } . More precisely, the N {\displaystyle N} -level qudit | ψ ⟩ ∈ P ( C N ) {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle \in P(\mathbb {C} ^{N})} is an element of ( N − 1 ) {\displaystyle (N-1)} -dimensional complex projective space, carrying an inner product ‖ ⋅ ‖ {\displaystyle \Vert \cdot \Vert } that is the Fubini–Study metric. The state transitions, transition matrices or de Bruijn graphs are represented by a collection of N × N {\displaystyle N\times N} unitary matrices U α {\displaystyle U_{\alpha }} , with one unitary matrix for each letter α ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \alpha \in \Sigma } . That is, given an input letter α {\displaystyle \alpha } , the unitary matrix describe

    Read more →
  • AdTruth

    AdTruth

    AdTruth is a software product and the digital media division of 41st Parameter, a company headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona, with regional offices in San Jose, California; London, England; and Munich, Germany. AdTruth allows marketers to recognize and reach target audiences across online devices. AdTruth software identifies users for targeting, tracking, performance tracking across digital media, including mobile and desktop, by analysing patterns in large numbers of advertisements served over the internet, rather than through the use of cookies. == History == AdTruth was founded in 2011 by Ori Eisen of 41st Parameter, to repurpose the company's fraud detection and prevention technology, for use within the advertising industry to accurately target intended audiences, particularly in mobile. Eisen was joined by James Lamberti in the role of vice president and general manager. In 2012 41st Parameter raised $13 million in Series D financing from Norwest Venture Partners, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Jafco Ventures and Georgian Partners, bringing total funding to about $35 million. In May 2012, AdTruth hosted a meeting of digital media executives to discuss Apple’s UDID deprecation, with the intent of developing a device-neutral replacement standard. AdTruth joined the World Wide Web Consortium's Tracking Protection Working Group, which provides guidance for implementing and adhering to Do Not Track policies. AdTruth also worked with privacy firm Truste to create a privacy compliant Do Not Track-style mechanism for mobile. In 2013, the company Experian purchased 41st Parameter, acquiring AdTruth as part of the deal. == Product == AdTruth software helps marketers track, target and retarget consumers using more than 100 parameters, including milliseconds in differences in the internal clock setting, to recognize a particular device anonymously. AdTruth's technology uses non-UDID information to identify a wide range of devices for cookieless ad targeting. Its technology currently has about a 90 percent accuracy rate on iOS, higher on Android and desktop. AdTruth also has mobile web to app bridging capabilities as well as DeviceInsight technology, enabling marketers to identify users across mobile web and app content. 41st Parameter's patented AdTruth technology is being used by MdotM, in response to the deprecation of the UDID that included tracking and targeting capabilities. == Competitors == AdTruth's main competitor is BlueCava, which deploys a similar device-fingerprinting technology.

    Read more →
  • How to Choose an AI Humanizer

    How to Choose an AI Humanizer

    In search of the best AI humanizer? An AI humanizer 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 humanizer 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 →
  • Top 10 AI Analytics Tools Compared (2026)

    Top 10 AI Analytics Tools Compared (2026)

    Shopping for the best AI analytics tool? An AI analytics tool 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 analytics 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 →
  • Is an AI Voice Assistant Worth It in 2026?

    Is an AI Voice Assistant Worth It in 2026?

    Trying to pick the best AI voice assistant? An AI voice assistant is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI voice assistant 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 →
  • Apertus (LLM)

    Apertus (LLM)

    Apertus is a public large language model, developed by the Swiss AI Initiative (a collaboration between EPFL, ETH Zurich, and the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre). It was released on September 2, 2025, under the free and open-source Apache 2.0 license. Designed initially for business and research use cases around the world, Apertus was trained on over 1800 languages, and comes in 8 billion or 70 billion parameter versions and is available on Hugging Face for download. The model was developed aiming to adhere to European copyright law, and is one of the first examples of AI as a public good in the vein of AI Sovereignty. It is also the first large model to comply with the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act. At its launch, the model creators emphasized multilinguality, transparency, and auditability as priorities in contrast to commercial frontier model. While international reception was largely positive, the first iteration was significantly behind the capabilities of frontier models and needs adaptation for many use cases with chatbots being a secondary but not a primary use case. As of late 2025, it was considered the largest and most capable fully open model. The capability of future models will depend in part on how much more funding can be secured.

    Read more →
  • Sasha Luccioni

    Sasha Luccioni

    Alexandra Sasha Luccioni (née Vorobyova; born 1990) is a computer scientist specializing in the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and climate change. Her work focuses on quantifying the environmental impact of AI technologies and promoting sustainable practices in machine learning development. == Early life and education == Alexandra Sasha Vorobyova was born in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1990. When she was four years old, her family relocated to Ontario, Canada. Her interest in science is influenced by her family's history; her mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother all pursued careers in scientific fields. Luccioni earned a B.A. in language science from University of Paris III: Sorbonne Nouvelle in 2010. Subsequently, she completed a M.S. in cognitive science, with a minor in natural language processing, at École normale supérieure in Paris in 2012. Luccioni obtained her PhD in cognitive computing from Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) in 2018. == Career == Luccioni began her professional career at Nuance Communications in 2017, where she focused on natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) techniques to enhance conversational agents. She then joined Morgan Stanley’s AI/ML Center of Excellence in 2018, working on explainable artificial intelligence (AI) and decision-making systems. In 2019, she became a postdoctoral researcher at Université de Montréal and Mila, collaborating with computer scientist Yoshua Bengio on a project titled This Climate Does Not Exist. This initiative used generative adversarial networks to visualize the effects of climate change. During this time, she also contributed to integrating fairness and accountability into machine learning education at Mila. Luccioni briefly worked with the United Nations Global Pulse in 2021, developing tools to monitor COVID-19 misinformation. Later that year, she joined Hugging Face as a research scientist. Her role includes quantifying the carbon footprint of AI systems, co-chairing the carbon working group in the Big Science project, and advancing responsible machine learning practices. She helped create "CodeCarbon," an open-source software tool that estimates the carbon emissions produced during the training and operation of machine learning models. In addition to her research, she has developed tools to measure the environmental impact of AI models, communicated findings through media engagements, and presented at international conferences, including a TED Talk. In 2024, she was listed on BBC 100 Women and Time 100 AI.

    Read more →
  • Robert Wilensky

    Robert Wilensky

    Robert Wilensky (26 March 1951 – 15 March 2013) was an American computer scientist and professor at the UC Berkeley School of Information, with his main focus of research in artificial intelligence. == Academic career == In 1971, Wilensky received his bachelor's degree in mathematics from Yale University, and in 1978, a Ph.D. in computer science from the same institution. After finishing his thesis, "Understanding Goal-Based Stories", Wilensky joined the faculty from the EECS Department of UC Berkeley. In 1986, he worked as the doctoral advisor of Peter Norvig, who then later published the standard textbook of the field: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. From 1993 to 1997, Wilensky was the Berkeley Computer Science Division Chair. During this time, he also served as director of the Berkeley Cognitive Science Program, director of the Berkeley Artificial Intelligence Research Project, and board member of the International Computer Science Institute. In 1997, he became a fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery "for research contributions to the areas of natural language processing and digital libraries as well as outstanding leadership in Computer Science." Furthermore, he also was a Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. He retired from faculty in 2007 and died on Friday, March 15, 2013, of a bacterial infection at the Alta Bates Summit Medical Center. Wilensky was married to Ann Danforth and he is survived by her and their two children, Avi and Eli Wilensky == Research == Throughout his career, Wilensky authored and co-authored over 60 scholarly articles and technical reports on AI, natural language processing, and information dissemination. In addition to his numerous technical publications, Wilensky also published two books on the programming language LISP, LISPcraft and Common LISPcraft, and had almost completed another book manuscript when he suffered a cardiac arrest and stopped writing. Among his publications are: R. Wilensky, (1986-09-17). Common LISPcraft. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 9780393955446. T. A. Phelps and R. Wilensky, "Toward active, extensible, networked documents: Multivalent architecture and applications," in Proc. 1st ACM Intl. Conf. on Digital Libraries, E. A. Fox and G. Marchionini, Eds., New York, NY: ACM Press, 1996, pp. 100–108. J. Traupman and R. Wilensky, "Experiments in Improving Unsupervised Word Sense Disambiguation," University of California, Berkeley, Department of EECS, Computer Science Division, Tech. Rep. 03–1227, Feb. 2003. R. Wilensky, Planning and Understanding: A Computational Approach to Human Reasoning, Advanced Book Program, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1983. R. Wilensky, "Understanding Goal-Based Stories," Yale University, Sep. 1978. B. Kahn and R. Wilensky, "A Framework for Distributed Digital Object Services", May 1995.

    Read more →