AI App UI Design

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

• 

  System integrity

  In telecommunications, the term system integrity has the following meanings: That condition of a system wherein its mandated operational and technical parameters are within the prescribed limits. The quality of an AIS when it performs its intended function in an unimpaired manner, free from deliberate or inadvertent unauthorized manipulation of the system. The state that exists when there is complete assurance that under all conditions an IT system is based on the logical correctness and reliability of the operating system, the logical completeness of the hardware and software that implement the protection mechanisms, and data integrity.

  Read more →
• 

  Deterministic finite automaton

  In the theory of computation, a branch of theoretical computer science, a deterministic finite automaton (DFA)—also known as deterministic finite acceptor (DFA), deterministic finite-state machine (DFSM), or deterministic finite-state automaton (DFSA)—is a finite-state machine that accepts or rejects a given string of symbols, by running through a state sequence uniquely determined by the string. Deterministic refers to the uniqueness of the computation run. In search of the simplest models to capture finite-state machines, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts were among the first researchers to introduce a concept similar to finite automata in 1943. The figure illustrates a deterministic finite automaton using a state diagram. In this example automaton, there are three states: S0, S1, and S2 (denoted graphically by circles). The automaton takes a finite sequence of 0s and 1s as input. For each state, there is a transition arrow leading out to a next state for both 0 and 1. Upon reading a symbol, a DFA jumps deterministically from one state to another by following the transition arrow. For example, if the automaton is currently in state S0 and the current input symbol is 1, then it deterministically jumps to state S1. A DFA has a start state (denoted graphically by an arrow coming in from nowhere) where computations begin, and a set of accept states (denoted graphically by a double circle) which help define when a computation is successful. A DFA is defined as an abstract mathematical concept, but is often implemented in hardware and software for solving various specific problems such as lexical analysis and pattern matching. For example, a DFA can model software that decides whether or not online user input such as email addresses are syntactically valid. DFAs have been generalized to nondeterministic finite automata (NFA) which may have several arrows of the same label starting from a state. Using the powerset construction method, every NFA can be translated to a DFA that recognizes the same language. DFAs, and NFAs as well, recognize exactly the set of regular languages. == Formal definition == A deterministic finite automaton M is a 5-tuple, (Q, Σ, δ, q0, F), consisting of a finite set of states Q a finite set of input symbols called the alphabet Σ a transition function δ : Q × Σ → Q an initial (or start) state q 0 ∈ Q {\displaystyle q_{0}\in Q} a set of accepting (or final) states F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} Let w = a1a2...an be a string over the alphabet Σ. The automaton M accepts the string w if a sequence of states, r0, r1, ..., rn, exists in Q with the following conditions: r0 = q0 ri+1 = δ(ri, ai+1), for i = 0, ..., n − 1 r n ∈ F {\displaystyle r_{n}\in F} . In words, the first condition says that the machine starts in the start state q0. The second condition says that given each character of string w, the machine will transition from state to state according to the transition function δ. The last condition says that the machine accepts w if the last input of w causes the machine to halt in one of the accepting states. Otherwise, it is said that the automaton rejects the string. The set of strings that M accepts is the language recognized by M and this language is denoted by L(M). A deterministic finite automaton without accept states and without a starting state is known as a transition system or semiautomaton. For more comprehensive introduction of the formal definition see automata theory. == Example == The following example is of a DFA M, with a binary alphabet, which requires that the input contains an even number of 0s. M = (Q, Σ, δ, q0, F) where Q = {S1, S2} Σ = {0, 1} q0 = S1 F = {S1} and δ is defined by the following state transition table: The state S1 represents that there has been an even number of 0s in the input so far, while S2 signifies an odd number. A 1 in the input does not change the state of the automaton. When the input ends, the state will show whether the input contained an even number of 0s or not. If the input did contain an even number of 0s, M will finish in state S1, an accepting state, so the input string will be accepted. The language recognized by M is the regular language given by the regular expression (1) (0 (1) 0 (1)), where is the Kleene star, e.g., 1 denotes any number (possibly zero) of consecutive ones. == Variations == === Complete and incomplete === According to the above definition, deterministic finite automata are always complete: they define from each state a transition for each input symbol. While this is the most common definition, some authors use the term deterministic finite automaton for a slightly different notion: an automaton that defines at most one transition for each state and each input symbol; the transition function is allowed to be partial. When no transition is defined, such an automaton halts. === Local automata === A local automaton is a DFA, not necessarily complete, for which all edges with the same label lead to a single vertex. Local automata accept the class of local languages, those for which membership of a word in the language is determined by a "sliding window" of length two on the word. A Myhill graph over an alphabet A is a directed graph with vertex set A and subsets of vertices labelled "start" and "finish". The language accepted by a Myhill graph is the set of directed paths from a start vertex to a finish vertex: the graph thus acts as an automaton. The class of languages accepted by Myhill graphs is the class of local languages. === Randomness === When the start state and accept states are ignored, a DFA of n states and an alphabet of size k can be seen as a digraph of n vertices in which all vertices have k out-arcs labeled 1, ..., k (a k-out digraph). It is known that when k ≥ 2 is a fixed integer, with high probability, the largest strongly connected component (SCC) in such a k-out digraph chosen uniformly at random is of linear size and it can be reached by all vertices. It has also been proven that if k is allowed to increase as n increases, then the whole digraph has a phase transition for strong connectivity similar to Erdős–Rényi model for connectivity. In a random DFA, the maximum number of vertices reachable from one vertex is very close to the number of vertices in the largest SCC with high probability. This is also true for the largest induced sub-digraph of minimum in-degree one, which can be seen as a directed version of 1-core. == Closure properties == If DFAs recognize the languages that are obtained by applying an operation on the DFA recognizable languages then DFAs are said to be closed under the operation. The DFAs are closed under the following operations. For each operation, an optimal construction with respect to the number of states has been determined in state complexity research. Since DFAs are equivalent to nondeterministic finite automata (NFA), these closures may also be proved using closure properties of NFA. == As a transition monoid == A run of a given DFA can be seen as a sequence of compositions of a very general formulation of the transition function with itself. Here we construct that function. For a given input symbol a ∈ Σ {\displaystyle a\in \Sigma } , one may construct a transition function δ a : Q → Q {\displaystyle \delta _{a}:Q\rightarrow Q} by defining δ a ( q ) = δ ( q , a ) {\displaystyle \delta _{a}(q)=\delta (q,a)} for all q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} . (This trick is called currying.) From this perspective, δ a {\displaystyle \delta _{a}} "acts" on a state in Q to yield another state. One may then consider the result of function composition repeatedly applied to the various functions δ a {\displaystyle \delta _{a}} , δ b {\displaystyle \delta _{b}} , and so on. Given a pair of letters a , b ∈ Σ {\displaystyle a,b\in \Sigma } , one may define a new function δ ^ a b = δ a ∘ δ b {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}_{ab}=\delta _{a}\circ \delta _{b}} , where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } denotes function composition. Clearly, this process may be recursively continued, giving the following recursive definition of δ ^ : Q × Σ ⋆ → Q {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}:Q\times \Sigma ^{\star }\rightarrow Q} : δ ^ ( q , ϵ ) = q {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}(q,\epsilon )=q} , where ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the empty string and δ ^ ( q , w a ) = δ a ( δ ^ ( q , w ) ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}(q,wa)=\delta _{a}({\widehat {\delta }}(q,w))} , where w ∈ Σ ∗ , a ∈ Σ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{},a\in \Sigma } and q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} . δ ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}} is defined for all words w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle w\in \Sigma ^{}} . A run of the DFA is a sequence of compositions of δ ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\delta }}} with itself. Repeated function composition forms a monoid. For the transition functions, this monoid is known as the transition monoid, or sometimes the transformation semigroup. The construction can also be reversed: given a δ ^ {\displaystyle {\wide

  Read more →
• 

  AI Photo Editors: Free vs Paid (2026)

  Trying to pick the best AI photo editor? An AI photo editor 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 photo editor 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 →
• 

  Hidden Markov model

  A hidden Markov model (HMM) is a Markov model in which the observations are dependent on a latent (or hidden) Markov process (referred to as X {\displaystyle X} ). An HMM requires that there be an observable process Y {\displaystyle Y} whose outcomes depend on the outcomes of X {\displaystyle X} in a known way. Since X {\displaystyle X} cannot be observed directly, the goal is to learn about state of X {\displaystyle X} by observing Y {\displaystyle Y} . By definition of being a Markov model, an HMM has an additional requirement that the outcome of Y {\displaystyle Y} at time t = t 0 {\displaystyle t=t_{0}} must be "influenced" exclusively by the outcome of X {\displaystyle X} at t = t 0 {\displaystyle t=t_{0}} and that the outcomes of X {\displaystyle X} and Y {\displaystyle Y} at t < t 0 {\displaystyle t

• 

  Google Books Ngram Viewer

  The Google Books Ngram Viewer is an online search engine that charts the frequencies of any set of search strings using a yearly count of n-grams found in printed sources published between 1500 and 2022 in Google's text corpora in English, Chinese (simplified), French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Russian, or Spanish. There are also some specialized English corpora, such as American English, British English, and English Fiction. The program can search for a word or a phrase. The n-grams are matched with the text within the selected corpus, and if found in 40 or more books, are then displayed as a graph. The program supports searches for parts of speech and wildcards. It is routinely used in research. == History == The Ngram Viewer was created by Google software engineers Will Brockman and Jon Orwant , who teamed up with Harvard researchers Jean-Baptiste Michel and Erez Lieberman Aiden. The service was released on December 16, 2010. Before the release, it was difficult to quantify the rate of linguistic change because of the absence of a database that was designed for this purpose, said Steven Pinker, a well-known linguist who was one of the co-authors of the Science paper published on the same day. The Google Books Ngram Viewer was developed in the hope of opening a new window to quantitative research in the humanities field, and the database contained 500 billion words from 5.2 million books publicly available from the very beginning. The intended audience was scholarly, but the Google Books Ngram Viewer made it possible for anyone with a computer to see a graph that represents the diachronic change of the use of words and phrases with ease. Lieberman said in response to The New York Times that the developers aimed to provide even children with the ability to browse cultural trends throughout history. In the Science paper, Lieberman and his collaborators called the method of high-volume data analysis in digitized texts "culturomics". == Usage == Commas delimit user-entered search terms, where each comma-separated term is searched in the database as an n-gram (for example, "nursery school" is a 2-gram or bigram). The Ngram Viewer then returns a plotted line chart. Due to limitations on the size of the Ngram database, only matches found in at least 40 books are indexed. == Limitations == The data sets of the Ngram Viewer have been criticized for their reliance upon inaccurate optical character recognition (OCR) and for including large numbers of incorrectly dated and categorized texts. Because of these errors, and because they are uncontrolled for bias (such as the increasing amount of scientific literature, which causes other terms to appear to decline in popularity), care must be taken in using the corpora to study language or test theories. Furthermore, the data sets may not reflect general linguistic or cultural change and can only hint at such an effect because they do not involve any metadata like date published, author, length, or genre, to avoid any potential copyright infringements. Systemic errors like the confusion of s and f in pre-19th century texts (due to the use of ſ, the long s, which is similar in appearance to f) can cause systemic bias. Although the Google Books team claims that the results are reliable from 1800 onwards, poor OCR and insufficient data mean that frequencies given for languages such as Chinese may only be accurate from 1970 onward, with earlier parts of the corpus showing no results at all for common terms, and data for some years containing more than 50% noise. Guidelines for doing research with data from Google Ngram have been proposed that try to address some of the issues discussed above.

  Read more →
• 

  Muller automaton

  In automata theory, a Muller automaton is a type of an ω-automaton. The acceptance condition separates a Muller automaton from other ω-automata. The Muller automaton is defined using a Muller acceptance condition, i.e. the set of all states visited infinitely often must be an element of the acceptance set. Both deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata recognize the ω-regular languages. They are named after David E. Muller, an American mathematician and computer scientist, who invented them in 1963. == Formal definition == Formally, a deterministic Muller-automaton is a tuple A = (Q,Σ,δ,q0,F) that consists of the following information: Q is a finite set. The elements of Q are called the states of A. Σ is a finite set called the alphabet of A. δ: Q × Σ → Q is a function, called the transition function of A. q0 is an element of Q, called the initial state. F is a set of sets of states. Formally, F ⊆ P(Q) where P(Q) is powerset of Q. F defines the acceptance condition. A accepts exactly those runs in which the set of infinitely often occurring states is an element of F In a non-deterministic Muller automaton, the transition function δ is replaced with a transition relation Δ that returns a set of states and the initial state q0 is replaced by a set of initial states Q0. Generally, 'Muller automaton' refers to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. For more comprehensive formalisation look at ω-automaton. == Equivalence with other ω-automata == The Muller automata are equally expressive as parity automata, Rabin automata, Streett automata, and non-deterministic Büchi automata, to mention some, and strictly more expressive than the deterministic Büchi automata. The equivalence of the above automata and non-deterministic Muller automata can be shown very easily as the accepting conditions of these automata can be emulated using the acceptance condition of Muller automata and vice versa. McNaughton's theorem demonstrates the equivalence of non-deterministic Büchi automaton and deterministic Muller automaton. Thus, deterministic and non-deterministic Muller automata are equivalent in terms of the languages they can accept. == Transformation to non-deterministic Muller automata == Following is a list of automata constructions that each transforms a type of ω-automata to a non-deterministic Muller automaton. From Büchi automata If B is the set of final states in a Büchi automaton with the set of states Q, we can construct a Muller automaton with same set of states, transition function and initial state with the Muller accepting condition as F = { X | X ∈ P(Q) ∧ X ∩ B ≠ ∅}. From Rabin automata/parity automata Similarly, the Rabin conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } and F ∩ F j ≠ ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}\neq \emptyset } , for some j. Note that this covers the case of parity automata too, as the parity acceptance condition can be expressed as a Rabin acceptance condition easily. From Streett automata The Streett conditions ( E j , F j ) {\displaystyle (E_{j},F_{j})} can be emulated by constructing the acceptance set in the Muller automaton as all sets F ⊆ Q {\displaystyle F\subseteq Q} that satisfy F ∩ F j = ∅ ⟹ F ∩ E j = ∅ {\displaystyle F\cap F_{j}=\emptyset \implies F\cap E_{j}=\emptyset } , for all j. == Transformation to deterministic Muller automata == From Büchi automaton McNaughton's theorem provides a procedure to transform any non-deterministic Büchi automaton into a deterministic Muller automaton.

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Analytics Tools in 2026

  Curious about the best AI analytics tool? An AI analytics 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 analytics 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 →
• 

  AI Video Editors: Free vs Paid (2026)

  Trying to pick the best AI video editor? An AI video editor 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 video editor 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 →
• 

  Line detection

  In image processing, line detection is an algorithm that takes a collection of n edge points and finds all the lines on which these edge points lie. The most popular line detectors are the Hough transform and convolution-based techniques. == Hough transform == The Hough transform can be used to detect lines and the output is a parametric description of the lines in an image, for example ρ = r cos(θ) + c sin(θ). If there is a line in a row and column based image space, it can be defined ρ, the distance from the origin to the line along a perpendicular to the line, and θ, the angle of the perpendicular projection from the origin to the line measured in degrees clockwise from the positive row axis. Therefore, a line in the image corresponds to a point in the Hough space. The Hough space for lines has therefore these two dimensions θ and ρ, and a line is represented by a single point corresponding to a unique set of these parameters. The Hough transform can then be implemented by choosing a set of values of ρ and θ to use. For each pixel (r, c) in the image, compute r cos(θ) + c sin(θ) for each values of θ, and place the result in the appropriate position in the (ρ, θ) array. At the end, the values of (ρ, θ) with the highest values in the array will correspond to strongest lines in the image == Convolution-based technique == In a convolution-based technique, the line detector operator consists of a convolution masks tuned to detect the presence of lines of a particular width n and a θ orientation. Here are the four convolution masks to detect horizontal, vertical, oblique (+45 degrees), and oblique (−45 degrees) lines in an image. a) Horizontal mask(R1) (b) Vertical (R3) (C) Oblique (+45 degrees)(R2) (d) Oblique (−45 degrees)(R4) In practice, masks are run over the image and the responses are combined given by the following equation: R(x, y) = max(|R1 (x, y)|, |R2 (x, y)|, |R3 (x, y)|, |R4 (x, y)|) If R(x, y) > T, then discontinuity As can be seen below, if mask is overlay on the image (horizontal line), multiply the coincident values, and sum all these results, the output will be the (convolved image). For example, (−1)(0)+(−1)(0)+(−1)(0) + (2)(1) +(2)(1)+(2)(1) + (−1)(0)+(−1)(0)+(−1)(0) = 6 pixels on the second row, second column in the (convolved image) starting from the upper left corner of the horizontal lines. page 82 == Example == These masks above are tuned for light lines against a dark background, and would give a big negative response to dark lines against a light background. == Code example == The code was used to detect only the vertical lines in an image using Matlab and the result is below. The original image is the one on the top and the result is below it. As can be seen on the picture on the right, only the vertical lines were detected

  Read more →
• 

  Self-verifying finite automaton

  In automata theory, a self-verifying finite automaton (SVFA) is a special kind of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) with a symmetric kind of nondeterminism introduced by Hromkovič and Schnitger. Generally, in self-verifying nondeterminism, each computation path is concluded with any of the three possible answers: yes, no, and I do not know. For each input string, no two paths may give contradictory answers, namely both answers yes and no on the same input are not possible. At least one path must give answer yes or no, and if it is yes then the string is considered accepted. SVFA accept the same class of languages as deterministic finite automata (DFA) and NFA but have different state complexity. == Formal definition == An SVFA is represented formally by a 6-tuple, A=(Q, Σ, Δ, q0, Fa, Fr) such that (Q, Σ, Δ, q0, Fa) is an NFA, and Fa, Fr are disjoint subsets of Q. For each word w = a1a2 … an, a computation is a sequence of states r0,r1, …, rn, in Q with the following conditions: r0 = q0 ri+1 ∈ Δ(ri, ai+1), for i = 0, …, n−1. If rn ∈ Fa then the computation is accepting, and if rn ∈ Fr then the computation is rejecting. There is a requirement that for each w there is at least one accepting computation or at least one rejecting computation but not both. == Results == Each DFA is a SVFA, but not vice versa. Jirásková and Pighizzini proved that for every SVFA of n states, there exists an equivalent DFA of g ( n ) = Θ ( 3 n / 3 ) {\displaystyle g(n)=\Theta (3^{n/3})} states. Furthermore, for each positive integer n, there exists an n-state SVFA such that the minimal equivalent DFA has exactly g ( n ) {\displaystyle g(n)} states. Other results on the state complexity of SVFA were obtained by Jirásková and her colleagues.

  Read more →
• 

  Ernst Dickmanns

  Ernst Dieter Dickmanns is a German pioneer of dynamic computer vision and of driverless cars. Dickmanns has been a professor at the University of the Bundeswehr Munich (1975–2001), and visiting professor to Caltech and to MIT, teaching courses on "dynamic vision". == Biography == Dickmanns was born in 1936. He studied aerospace and aeronautics at RWTH Aachen (1956–1961), and control engineering at Princeton University (1964/65); from 1961 to 1975 he was associated with the German Aero-Space Research Establishment (now DLR) Oberpfaffenhofen, working in the fields of flight dynamics and trajectory optimization. In 1971/72 he spent a Post-Doc Research Associateship with the NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville (orbiter re-entry). From 1975 to 2001 he was with UniBw Munich, where he initiated the 'Institut fuer Flugmechanik und Systemdynamik' (IFS), the Institut fuer die 'Technik Autonomer Systeme' (TAS), and the research activities in machine vision for vehicle guidance. == Pioneering work in autonomous driving == In the early 1980s his team equipped a Mercedes-Benz van with cameras and other sensors. The 5-ton van was re-engineered that it was possible to control steering wheel, throttle, and brakes through computer commands based on real-time evaluation of image sequences. Software was written that translated the sensory data into appropriate driving commands. For safety reasons, initial experiments in Bavaria took place on streets without traffic. In 1986 the Robot Car "VaMoRs" managed to drive all by itself and by 1987 was capable of driving itself at speeds up to 96 kilometres per hour (60 mph). One of the greatest challenges in high-speed autonomous driving arises through the rapidly changing visual street scenes. Back then, computers were much slower than they are today (~1% of 1%); therefore, sophisticated computer vision strategies were necessary to react in real time. The team of Dickmanns solved the problem through an innovative approach to dynamic vision. Spatiotemporal models were used right from the beginning, dubbed '4-D approach', which did not need storing previous images but nonetheless was able to yield estimates of all 3-D position and velocity components. Attention control including artificial saccadic movements of the platform carrying the cameras allowed the system to focus its attention on the most relevant details of the visual input. Kalman filters have been extended to perspective imaging and were used to achieve robust autonomous driving even in presence of noise and uncertainty. Feedback of prediction errors allowed bypassing the (ill-conditioned) inversion of perspective projection by least-squares parameter fits. When in 1986/83 the EUREKA-project 'PROgraMme for a European Traffic of Highest Efficiency and Unprecedented Safety' (PROMETHEUS) was initiated by the European car manufacturing industry (funding in the range of several hundred million Euros), the initially planned autonomous lateral guidance by buried cables was dropped and substituted by the much more flexible machine vision approach proposed by Dickmanns, and partially encouraged by his successes. Most of the major car companies participated; so did Dickmanns and his team in cooperation with the Daimler-Benz AG. Substantial progress was made in the following 7 years. In particular, Dickmanns' robot cars learned to drive in traffic under various conditions. An accompanying human driver with a "red button" made sure the robot vehicle could not get out of control and become a danger to the public. Since 1992, driving in public traffic was standard as final step in real-world testing. Several dozen Transputers, a special breed of parallel computers, were used to deal with the (by 1990s standards) enormous computational demands. Two culmination points were achieved in 1994/95, when Dickmanns´ re-engineered autonomous S-Class Mercedes-Benz performed international demonstrations. The first was the final presentation of the PROMETHEUS project in October 1994 on Autoroute 1 near the airport Charles-de-Gaulle in Paris. With guests on board, the twin vehicles of Daimler-Benz (VITA-2) and UniBwM (VaMP) drove more than 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) on the three-lane highway in standard heavy traffic at speeds up to 130 kilometres per hour (81 mph). Driving in free lanes, convoy driving with distance keeping depending on speed, and lane changes left and right with autonomous passing have been demonstrated; the latter required interpreting the road scene also in the rear hemisphere. Two cameras with different focal lengths for each hemisphere have been used in parallel for this purpose. The second culmination point was a 1,758 kilometres (1,092 mi) trip in the fall of 1995 from Munich in Bavaria to Odense in Denmark to a project meeting and back. Both longitudinal and lateral guidance were performed autonomously by vision. On highways, the robot achieved speeds exceeding 175 kilometres per hour (109 mph) (there is no general speed limit on the Autobahn). Publications from Dickmann's research group indicate a mean autonomously driven distance without resets of ~9 kilometres (5.6 mi); the longest autonomously driven stretch reached 158 kilometres (98 mi). More than half of the resets required were achieved autonomously (no human intervention). This is particularly impressive considering that the system used black-and-white video-cameras and did not model situations like road construction sites with yellow lane markings; lane-changes at over 140 kilometres per hour (87 mph), and other traffic with more than 40 kilometres per hour (25 mph) relative speed have been handled. In total, 95% autonomous driving (by distance) was achieved. In the years 1994 to 2004 the elder 5-ton van 'VaMoRs' was used to develop the capabilities needed for driving on networks of minor (also unsealed) roads and for cross-country driving including avoidance of negative obstacles like ditches. Turning off onto crossroads of unknown width and intersection angles required a big effort, but has been achieved with "Expectation-based, Multi-focal, Saccadic vision" (EMS-vision). This vertebrate-type vision uses animation capabilities based on knowledge about subject classes (including the autonomous vehicle itself) and their potential behaviour in certain situations. This rich background is used for control of gaze and attention as well as for locomotion. Beside ground vehicle guidance, also applications of the 4-D approach to dynamic vision for unmanned air vehicles (conventional aircraft and helicopters) have been investigated. Autonomous visual landing approaches and landings have been demonstrated in hardware-in-the-loop simulations with visual/inertial data fusion. Real-world autonomous visual landing approaches till shortly before touchdown have been performed in 1992 with the twin-propeller aircraft Dornier 128 of the University of Brunswick at the airport there. Another success of this machine vision technology was the first ever visually controlled grasping experiment of a free-floating object in weightlessness on board the Space Shuttle Columbia D2-mission in 1993 as part of the 'Rotex'-experiment of DLR.

  Read more →
• 

  Android Auto

  Android Auto is a mobile app developed by Google to mirror features of a smartphone (or other Android device) on a car's dashboard information and entertainment head unit. Once an Android device is paired with the car's head unit, the system can mirror some apps on the vehicle's display. Supported apps include GPS mapping and navigation, music playback, SMS, telephone, and Web search. The system supports both touchscreen and button-controlled head units. Hands-free operation through voice commands is available and recommended to reduce driver distraction. Android Auto is part of the Open Automotive Alliance, a joint effort of 28 automobile manufacturers, with Nvidia as tech supplier, available in 36 countries. == History == Android Auto was revealed at Google I/O 2014. The app was released to the public on March 19, 2015. In November 2016, Google implemented an app that would run the Android Auto UI on the mobile device. In July 2019, Android Auto received its first major UI rework, which among other changes, brought an app drawer to Android Auto for the first time. Google also announced that the app's ability to be used on a phone would be discontinued in favor of Google Assistant's drive mode. In December 2020, Google announced the expansion of Android Auto to 36 additional countries in Europe, Indonesia, and more. In April 2021, Android Auto launched in Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and Sweden. Google announced in May 2022 a user interface redesign for Android Auto, codenamed CoolWalk, which aims to simplify the app's usage, and make it more adaptable to screens of different orientations and aspect ratios. The redesign incorporates a new split-screen layout, where Google Maps can be displayed alongside a music player. CoolWalk was originally slated to launch in Q3 2022. In June 2022, Android Auto no longer ran directly on a mobile device; the app permitting this was decommissioned, in favor of a Driving Mode built into the Google Assistant app for a similar purpose. In November 2022, the CoolWalk user interface was released in Android Auto's beta program. == Functionality == Android Auto is software that can be utilized from an Android mobile device, acting as a vehicle's dashboard head unit. Once the user's Android device is connected to the vehicle, the head unit will serve as an external display for the Android device, presenting supported software in a car-specific user interface provided by the Android Auto app. In Android Auto's first iterations, the device was required to be connected via USB to the car. For some time, starting in November 2016, Google added the option to run Android Auto as a regular app on an Android device, allowing users to choose whether to use Android Auto on a personal phone or tablet, rather than on a compatible automotive head unit. This app was decommissioned in June 2022 in favor of a Driving Mode built into the Google Assistant app. At CES 2018, Google confirmed that the Google Assistant would be coming to Android Auto later in the year. An Android Auto SDK has been released, allowing third parties to modify their apps to work with Android Auto; initially, only APIs for music and messaging apps were available. == Head unit support == In May 2015, Hyundai became the first manufacturer to offer Android Auto support, making it first available in the 2015 Hyundai Sonata. Automobile manufacturers that will offer Android Auto support in their cars include Abarth, Acura, Alfa Romeo, Aston Martin, Audi, Bentley, Buick, BMW, BYD, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, Ferrari, Fiat, Ford, GMC, Genesis, Holden, Honda, Hyundai, Infiniti, Jaguar Land Rover, Jeep, Kia, Lamborghini, Lexus, Lincoln, Mahindra and Mahindra, Maserati, Maybach, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Opel, Peugeot, Porsche, RAM, Renault, SEAT, Škoda, SsangYong, Subaru, Suzuki, Tata Motors Cars, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo. Additionally, aftermarket car-audio systems supporting Android Auto add the technology into host vehicles, including Pioneer, Kenwood, Panasonic, and Sony. == Criticism == In May 2019, Italy filed an antitrust complaint targeting Android Auto, citing a Google policy of allowing third-parties to only offer media and messaging apps on the platform, preventing Enel from offering an app for locating vehicle charging stations. Google announced a new SDK, to be released to select partners in August 2020 and made generally available by the end of the year. == Availability == As of December 2025, Android Auto is available in 46 countries:

  Read more →
• 

  Description logic

  Description logics (DL) are a family of formal knowledge representation languages. Many DLs are more expressive than propositional logic but less expressive than first-order logic. In contrast to the latter, the core reasoning problems for DLs are (usually) decidable, and efficient decision procedures have been designed and implemented for these problems. There are general, spatial, temporal, spatiotemporal, and fuzzy description logics, and each description logic features a different balance between expressive power and reasoning complexity by supporting different sets of mathematical constructors. DLs are used in artificial intelligence to describe and reason about the relevant concepts of an application domain (known as terminological knowledge). It is of particular importance in providing a logical formalism for ontologies and the Semantic Web: the Web Ontology Language (OWL) and its profiles are based on DLs. A major area of application of DLs and OWL is in biomedical informatics, where they assist in the codification of biomedical knowledge. DLs and OWL are also applied in other domains, including defense, climate modeling, and large-scale industrial knowledge graphs. == Introduction == A DL models concepts, roles and individuals, and their relationships. The fundamental modeling concept of a DL is the axiom—a logical statement relating roles and/or concepts. This is a key difference from the frames paradigm where a frame specification declares and completely defines a class. == Nomenclature == === Terminology compared to FOL and OWL === The description logic community uses different terminology than the first-order logic (FOL) community for operationally equivalent notions; some examples are given below. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) uses again a different terminology, also given in the table below. === Naming convention === There are many varieties of description logics and there is an informal naming convention, roughly describing the operators allowed. The expressivity is encoded in the label for a logic starting with one of the following basic logics: Followed by any of the following extensions: ==== Exceptions ==== Some canonical DLs that do not exactly fit this convention are: ==== Examples ==== As an example, A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is a centrally important description logic from which comparisons with other varieties can be made. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is simply A L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {AL}}} with complement of any concept allowed, not just atomic concepts. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is used instead of the equivalent A L U E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALUE}}} . A further example, the description logic S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} is the logic A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} plus extended cardinality restrictions, and transitive and inverse roles. The naming conventions aren't purely systematic so that the logic A L C O I N {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCOIN}}} might be referred to as A L C N I O {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCNIO}}} and other abbreviations are also made where possible. The Protégé ontology editor supports S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Three major biomedical informatics terminology bases, SNOMED CT, GALEN, and GO, are expressible in E L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {EL}}} (with additional role properties). OWL 2 provides the expressiveness of S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , OWL-DL is based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , and for OWL-Lite it is S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . == History == Description logic was given its current name in the 1980s. Previous to this it was called (chronologically): terminological systems, and concept languages. === Knowledge representation === Frames and semantic networks lack formal (logic-based) semantics. DL was first introduced into knowledge representation (KR) systems to overcome this deficiency. The first DL-based KR system was KL-ONE (by Ronald J. Brachman and Schmolze, 1985). During the '80s other DL-based systems using structural subsumption algorithms were developed including KRYPTON (1983), LOOM (1987), BACK (1988), K-REP (1991) and CLASSIC (1991). This approach featured DL with limited expressiveness but relatively efficient (polynomial time) reasoning. In the early '90s, the introduction of a new tableau based algorithm paradigm allowed efficient reasoning on more expressive DL. DL-based systems using these algorithms — such as KRIS (1991) — show acceptable reasoning performance on typical inference problems even though the worst case complexity is no longer polynomial. From the mid '90s, reasoners were created with good practical performance on very expressive DL with high worst case complexity. Examples from this period include FaCT, RACER (2001), CEL (2005), and KAON 2 (2005). DL reasoners, such as FaCT, FaCT++, RACER, DLP and Pellet, implement the method of analytic tableaux. KAON2 is implemented by algorithms which reduce a SHIQ(D) knowledge base to a disjunctive datalog program. === Semantic web === The DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) and Ontology Inference Layer (OIL) ontology languages for the Semantic Web can be viewed as syntactic variants of DL. In particular, the formal semantics and reasoning in OIL use the S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} DL. The DAML+OIL DL was developed as a submission to—and formed the starting point of—the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Ontology Working Group. In 2004, the Web Ontology Working Group completed its work by issuing the OWL recommendation. The design of OWL is based on the S H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SH}}} family of DL with OWL DL and OWL Lite based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} and S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} respectively. The W3C OWL Working Group began work in 2007 on a refinement of - and extension to - OWL. In 2009, this was completed by the issuance of the OWL2 recommendation. OWL2 is based on the description logic S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Practical experience demonstrated that OWL DL lacked several key features necessary to model complex domains. == Modeling == === TBox vs Abox === In DL, a distinction is drawn between the so-called TBox (terminological box) and the ABox (assertional box). In general, the TBox contains sentences describing concept hierarchies (i.e., relations between concepts) while the ABox contains ground sentences stating where in the hierarchy, individuals belong (i.e., relations between individuals and concepts). For example, the statement: belongs in the TBox, while the statement: belongs in the ABox. Note that the TBox/ABox distinction is not significant, in the same sense that the two "kinds" of sentences are not treated differently in first-order logic (which subsumes most DL). When translated into first-order logic, a subsumption axiom like (1) is simply a conditional restriction to unary predicates (concepts) with only variables appearing in it. Clearly, a sentence of this form is not privileged or special over sentences in which only constants ("grounded" values) appear like (2). === Motivation for having Tbox and Abox === So why was the distinction introduced? The primary reason is that the separation can be useful when describing and formulating decision-procedures for various DL. For example, a reasoner might process the TBox and ABox separately, in part because certain key inference problems are tied to one but not the other one ('classification' is related to the TBox, 'instance checking' to the ABox). Another example is that the complexity of the TBox can greatly affect the performance of a given decision-procedure for a certain DL, independently of the ABox. Thus, it is useful to have a way to talk about that specific part of the knowledge base. The secondary reason is that the distinction can make sense from the knowledge base modeler's perspective. It is plausible to distinguish between our conception of terms/concepts in the world (class axioms in the TBox) and particular manifestations of those terms/concepts (instance assertions in the ABox). In the above example: when the hierarchy within a company is the same in every branch but the assignment to employees is different in every department (because there are other people working there), it makes sense to reuse the TBox for different branches that do not use the same ABox. There are two features of description logic that are not shared by most other data description formalisms: DL does not make the unique name assumption (UNA) or the closed-world assumption (CWA). Not having UNA means that two concepts with different names may be allowed by some inference to be shown to be equivalent. Not having CWA, or rather having the open world assumption (OWA) means that

  Read more →
• 

  Halbert White

  Halbert Lynn White Jr. (November 19, 1950 – March 31, 2012) was the Chancellor's Associates Distinguished Professor of Economics at the University of California, San Diego, and a Fellow of the Econometric Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. == Education and career == White, a native of Kansas City, Missouri, graduated salutatorian from Southwest High School in 1968. He went on to study at Princeton University, receiving his B.A. in economics in 1972. He earned his Ph.D. in economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1976, under the supervision of Jerry A. Hausman and Robert Solow. White spent his first years as an assistant professor in the University of Rochester before moving to University of California, San Diego (UCSD) in 1979. He remained at UCSD until his untimely death from cancer. == Research == White was well known in the field of econometrics for his 1980 paper on robust standard errors (which is among the most-cited paper in economics since 1970), and for the heteroscedasticity-consistent estimator and the test for heteroskedasticity that are named after him. A 1982 paper by White contributed strongly to the development of quasi-maximum likelihood estimation. He also contributed to numerous other areas such as neural networks and medicine. In 1999, White co-founded an economic consulting firm, Bates White, which is based in Washington, D.C.

  Read more →
• 

  Ann Copestake

  Ann Alicia Copestake is professor of computational linguistics and head of the Department of Computer Science and Technology at the University of Cambridge and a fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge. == Education == Copestake was educated at the University of Cambridge where she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in Natural Sciences. After two years working for Unilever Research she completed the Cambridge Diploma in Computer Science. She went on to study at the University of Sussex where she was awarded a PhD in 1992 for research on lexical semantics supervised by Gerald Gazdar. == Career and research == Copestake started doing research in Natural language processing and Computational Linguistics at the University of Cambridge in 1985. Since then she has been a visiting researcher at Xerox PARC (1993/4) and the University of Stuttgart (1994/5). From July 1994 to October 2000 she worked at the Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at Stanford University, as a Senior Researcher. Copestake was appointed a University Lecturer at Cambridge in October 2000. In the UK, her research has been funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). According to Google Scholar and Scopus her most cited publications include papers on minimal recursion semantics, multiword expressions, polysemy, named-entity recognition and feature structure grammars.

  Read more →