AI Art Examples

AI Art Examples — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • Clone tool

    Clone tool

    The clone tool, as it is known in Adobe Photoshop, Inkscape, GIMP, and Corel PhotoPaint, is used in digital image editing to replace information for one part of a picture with information from another part. In other image editing software, its equivalent is sometimes called a rubber stamp tool or a clone brush. == Applications == The clone tool can remove objects by copying a nearby background. The user selects a matching location as the source, then paints over the element to be hidden. A typical use for the tool is in object removal – more colloquially, "airbrushing" or "photoshopping" out an unwanted part of the image. If a part of an image is removed simply by cutting it out, then a hole is left in the background. The Clone tool can fill in this hole convincingly with a copy of the existing background from elsewhere in the image. A common use for this tool is to retouch skin, particularly in portraits, to remove blemishes and make skin tones more even. Cloning can also be used to remove other unwanted elements, such as telephone wires, an unwanted bird in the sky, and the like. A more automated method of object removal uses texture synthesis to fill in gaps. Of these, patch-based texture synthesis or "image quilting" is essentially an automated application of the clone tool, choosing the optimal source area so as to patch over with a minimal seam. In some cases, the undesired object is mixed with the remainder of the image, and a simple circular brush, even with feathering, would not work. For these cases, some programs allow an object to be selected by color/outline so other areas are not affected. Other programs allow edge/color sensitive brushes to deal with such objects. == Healing tool == A similar tool is the healing tool, which occurs in variants such as the healing brush or spot healing tool. These incorporate the existing texture, rather than painting it over.

    Read more →
  • NRENum.net

    NRENum.net

    The NRENum.net service is an end-user ENUM service run by TERENA and the participating national research and education networking organisations (NRENs), primarily for academia. NRENum.net is considered as a complementary service and a valid alternative to the Golden ENUM tree. The domain nrenum.net is being populated in order to provide the infrastructure in DNS for storage of E.164 numbers. The NRENum.net service includes the operation of the Tier-0 root Domain Name Server(s) and the delegation of county codes to NRENum.net Registries. NRENum.net is a registered community trademark of TERENA. == Service description == E.164 Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) is a standard protocol that is the result of work of the Internet Engineering Task Force's Telephone Number Mapping working group. ENUM translates a telephone number into a domain name. This allows users to continue to use the existing phone number formats they are familiar with, while allowing the call to be routed using DNS. This makes ENUM a quick, stable and cheap link between telecommunications systems and the Internet. RFC 3761 discusses the use of the Domain Name System for storage of E.164 numbers. More specifically, how DNS can be used for identifying available services connected to one E.164 number. The RIPE NCC provides DNS operations for e164.arpa (known as Golden ENUM tree) in accordance with the instructions from the Internet Architecture Board. The NRENum.net service is an end-user ENUM service run by TERENA and the participating NRENs primarily for academia. NRENum.net is considered as a complementary service and a valid alternative to the Golden ENUM tree. The domain nrenum.net is being populated in order to provide the infrastructure in DNS for storage of E.164 numbers. The NRENum.net service includes the operation of the Tier-0 root Domain Name Servers and the delegation of county codes to NRENum.net Registries. NRENum.net is a registered community trademark of TERENA. NRENum.net facilitates services such as Voice over IP and videoconferencing. NRENum.net tree refers to the tree structure where: Tier-0 root Domain Name Servers (technically one master and several secondary servers ensuring resilience) are run by the hosting organisations and coordinated by the NRENum.net Operations Team. Tier-1 Domain Name Servers are run by the NRENum.net (national or regional) Registries responsible for the country code(s) delegated. Tier-2 and lower DNS sub-delegations may be implemented, regulated by the national service policies. An NRENum.net Registry is an entity that is authorised by the NRENum.net Operations Team to operate the national or regional Tier-1 Domain Name Server and be responsible for the county code(s) delegated. In many countries there is a National Research and Education Networking organisation (NREN) that acts as the Registry of the country. An NRENum.net Registrar is responsible for the number/block registration in the Tier-1 DNS and a Number Validation Entity is responsible for the validation of the E.164 telephone numbers to be registered. The NREN may at the same time have the role of the NRENum.net Registry, Registrar and Validation Entity for the country code(s) delegated. A Registrant (end user) is an E.164 telephone number holder. Holders of E.164 numbers who want to be listed in the service must contact the appropriate NRENum.net Registrar. Number (block) delegation is the technical process of assigning country codes to national registries, or number blocks under country codes to end users. Number (block) registration is the technical process of configuring DNS and populating it with the appropriate ENUM records (i.e., adding NAPTR records to DNS) via registrars. The ITU-T strictly regulates the number structure of valid E.164 telephone numbers and assigns number blocks to national authorities (telecom regulators) or recently to global entities directly. The national authorities can further delegate the number ranges to local operators within the country or region. A virtual number has either a non-valid E.164 number structure (e.g., longer than 15 digits) or has a valid structure but is not assigned to any national authorities or operators. The number Validation Entity is responsible for checking the numbers to be registered to NRENum.net. == History == The idea for the NRENum.net service was conceived in 2006. NRENum.net became operational in August 2006, and was run by Bernie Höneisen, a staff member of SWITCH, and Kewin Stöckigt, a staff member of AARNet, as a private service, with technical support from SWITCH and the participants in the TERENA Task Force on Enhanced Communication Services (TF-ECS). When that task force completed its activities in 2008, TERENA agreed to take over the coordination of the NRENum.net service. By that time, nine NRENs had joined NRENum.net. The service continued to grow during the next years, and in March 2012 NRENum.net went global when RNP from Brazil joined the service as its 14th partificpant and the first outside Europe. In 2011, the participants decided to migrate the operation of the service's master Domain Name Server to NIIF and the operation of the two secondary DNSs to CARNET and SWITCH. In 2013, Internet2, AARNet and NORDUnet set up additional secondary Domain Name Servers for their regions, thereby completing the global distribution of DNS slaves and bringing the resilience of the NRENum.net infrastructure to a high level. == Governance == TERENA has established a lightweight global governance structure. The Global NRENum.net Governance Committee (GNGC) is the highest-level strategic body responsible for overall NRENum.net service definition, sustainability and long-term strategy. This includes formulating and recommending service governance principles and policies. Its members are nominated by the NRENum.net Registries in the various world regions, and are appointed by TERENA. The GNGC is composed of two members representing Europe, two representing the Asia-Pacific region, and two representing the Americas. The NRENum.net Operations Team is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Tier-0 root DNSs and the handling of country code delegation requests. It may escalate technical or policy issues to the GNGC for discussion. TERENA is responsible for ensuring the correct and secure operations of the NRENum.net service performed by the NRENum.net Operations Team and governance by the GNGC. TERENA also supports the development of technical improvements to the NRENum.net service and promotes the deployment of NRENum.net worldwide. == Geographical deployment == Thirty-two county codes are delegated in the NRENum.net service. Below these are listed per world region. === Europe === === Asia-Pacific === === North America === +1 United States (Internet2) === Latin America === === Caribbean === === Africa === +262 Réunion, Mayotte (RENATER)

    Read more →
  • Critical security parameter

    Critical security parameter

    In cryptography, a critical security parameter (CSP) is information that is either user or system defined and is used to operate a cryptography module in processing encryption functions including cryptographic keys and authentication data, such as passwords, the disclosure or modification of which can compromise the security of a cryptographic module or the security of the information protected by the module.

    Read more →
  • POODLE

    POODLE

    POODLE (which stands for "Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption") is a security vulnerability which takes advantage of the fallback to SSL 3.0. If attackers successfully exploit this vulnerability, on average, they only need to make 256 SSL 3.0 requests to reveal one byte of encrypted messages. Bodo Möller, Thai Duong and Krzysztof Kotowicz from the Google Security Team discovered this vulnerability; they disclosed the vulnerability publicly on October 14, 2014 (despite the paper being dated "September 2014"). On December 8, 2014, a variation of the POODLE vulnerability that affected TLS was announced. The CVE-ID associated with the original POODLE attack is CVE-2014-3566. F5 Networks filed for CVE-2014-8730 as well, see POODLE attack against TLS section below. == Prevention == To mitigate the POODLE attack, one approach is to completely disable SSL 3.0 on the client side and the server side. However, some old clients and servers do not support TLS 1.0 and above. Thus, the authors of the paper on POODLE attacks also encourage browser and server implementation of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, which will make downgrade attacks impossible. Another mitigation is to implement "anti-POODLE record splitting". It splits the records into several parts and ensures none of them can be attacked. However the problem of the splitting is that, though valid according to the specification, it may also cause compatibility issues due to problems in server-side implementations. A full list of browser versions and levels of vulnerability to different attacks (including POODLE) can be found in the article Transport Layer Security. Opera 25 implemented this mitigation in addition to TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google's Chrome browser and their servers had already supported TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google stated in October 2014 it was planning to remove SSL 3.0 support from their products completely within a few months. Fallback to SSL 3.0 has been disabled in Chrome 39, released in November 2014. SSL 3.0 has been disabled by default in Chrome 40, released in January 2015. Mozilla disabled SSL 3.0 in Firefox 34 and ESR 31.3, which were released in December 2014, and added support of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV in Firefox 35. Microsoft published a security advisory to explain how to disable SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer and Windows OS, and on October 29, 2014, Microsoft released a fix which disables SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer on Windows Vista / Server 2003 and above and announced a plan to disable SSL 3.0 by default in their products and services within a few months. Microsoft disabled fallback to SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer 11 for Protect Mode sites on February 10, 2015, and for other sites on April 14, 2015. Apple's Safari (on OS X 10.8, iOS 8.1 and later) mitigated against POODLE by removing support for all CBC protocols in SSL 3.0, however, this left RC4 which is also completely broken by the RC4 attacks in SSL 3.0. POODLE was completely mitigated in OS X 10.11 (El Capitan 2015) and iOS 9 (2015). To prevent the POODLE attack, some web services dropped support of SSL 3.0. Examples include CloudFlare and Wikimedia. Network Security Services version 3.17.1 (released on October 3, 2014) and 3.16.2.3 (released on October 27, 2014) introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, and NSS will disable SSL 3.0 by default in April 2015. OpenSSL versions 1.0.1j, 1.0.0o and 0.9.8zc, released on October 15, 2014, introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. LibreSSL version 2.1.1, released on October 16, 2014, disabled SSL 3.0 by default. == POODLE attack against TLS == A new variant of the original POODLE attack was announced on December 8, 2014. This attack exploits implementation flaws of CBC encryption mode in the TLS 1.0 - 1.2 protocols. Even though TLS specifications require servers to check the padding, some implementations fail to validate it properly, which makes some servers vulnerable to POODLE even if they disable SSL 3.0. SSL Pulse showed "about 10% of the servers are vulnerable to the POODLE attack against TLS" before this vulnerability was announced. The CVE-ID for F5 Networks' implementation bug is CVE-2014-8730. The entry in NIST's NVD states that this CVE-ID is to be used only for F5 Networks' implementation of TLS, and that other vendors whose products have the same failure to validate the padding mistake in their implementations like A10 Networks and Cisco Systems need to issue their own CVE-IDs for their implementation errors because this is not a flaw in the protocol but in the implementation. The POODLE attack against TLS was found to be easier to initiate than the initial POODLE attack against SSL. There is no need to downgrade clients to SSL 3.0, meaning fewer steps are needed to execute a successful attack.

    Read more →
  • Spectral shape analysis

    Spectral shape analysis

    Spectral shape analysis relies on the spectrum (eigenvalues and/or eigenfunctions) of the Laplace–Beltrami operator to compare and analyze geometric shapes. Since the spectrum of the Laplace–Beltrami operator is invariant under isometries, it is well suited for the analysis or retrieval of non-rigid shapes, i.e. bendable objects such as humans, animals, plants, etc. == Laplace == The Laplace–Beltrami operator is involved in many important differential equations, such as the heat equation and the wave equation. It can be defined on a Riemannian manifold as the divergence of the gradient of a real-valued function f: Δ f := div ⁡ grad ⁡ f . {\displaystyle \Delta f:=\operatorname {div} \operatorname {grad} f.} Its spectral components can be computed by solving the Helmholtz equation (or Laplacian eigenvalue problem): Δ φ i + λ i φ i = 0. {\displaystyle \Delta \varphi _{i}+\lambda _{i}\varphi _{i}=0.} The solutions are the eigenfunctions φ i {\displaystyle \varphi _{i}} (modes) and corresponding eigenvalues λ i {\displaystyle \lambda _{i}} , representing a diverging sequence of positive real numbers. The first eigenvalue is zero for closed domains or when using the Neumann boundary condition. For some shapes, the spectrum can be computed analytically (e.g. rectangle, flat torus, cylinder, disk or sphere). For the sphere, for example, the eigenfunctions are the spherical harmonics. The most important properties of the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions are that they are isometry invariants. In other words, if the shape is not stretched (e.g. a sheet of paper bent into the third dimension), the spectral values will not change. Bendable objects, like animals, plants and humans, can move into different body postures with only minimal stretching at the joints. The resulting shapes are called near-isometric and can be compared using spectral shape analysis. == Discretizations == Geometric shapes are often represented as 2D curved surfaces, 2D surface meshes (usually triangle meshes) or 3D solid objects (e.g. using voxels or tetrahedra meshes). The Helmholtz equation can be solved for all these cases. If a boundary exists, e.g. a square, or the volume of any 3D geometric shape, boundary conditions need to be specified. Several discretizations of the Laplace operator exist (see Discrete Laplace operator) for the different types of geometry representations. Many of these operators do not approximate well the underlying continuous operator. == Spectral shape descriptors == === ShapeDNA and its variants === The ShapeDNA is one of the first spectral shape descriptors. It is the normalized beginning sequence of the eigenvalues of the Laplace–Beltrami operator. Its main advantages are the simple representation (a vector of numbers) and comparison, scale invariance, and in spite of its simplicity a very good performance for shape retrieval of non-rigid shapes. Competitors of shapeDNA include singular values of Geodesic Distance Matrix (SD-GDM) and Reduced BiHarmonic Distance Matrix (R-BiHDM). However, the eigenvalues are global descriptors, therefore the shapeDNA and other global spectral descriptors cannot be used for local or partial shape analysis. === Global point signature (GPS) === The global point signature at a point x {\displaystyle x} is a vector of scaled eigenfunctions of the Laplace–Beltrami operator computed at x {\displaystyle x} (i.e. the spectral embedding of the shape). The GPS is a global feature in the sense that it cannot be used for partial shape matching. === Heat kernel signature (HKS) === The heat kernel signature makes use of the eigen-decomposition of the heat kernel: h t ( x , y ) = ∑ i = 0 ∞ exp ⁡ ( − λ i t ) φ i ( x ) φ i ( y ) . {\displaystyle h_{t}(x,y)=\sum _{i=0}^{\infty }\exp(-\lambda _{i}t)\varphi _{i}(x)\varphi _{i}(y).} For each point on the surface the diagonal of the heat kernel h t ( x , x ) {\displaystyle h_{t}(x,x)} is sampled at specific time values t j {\displaystyle t_{j}} and yields a local signature that can also be used for partial matching or symmetry detection. === Wave kernel signature (WKS) === The WKS follows a similar idea to the HKS, replacing the heat equation with the Schrödinger wave equation. === Improved wave kernel signature (IWKS) === The IWKS improves the WKS for non-rigid shape retrieval by introducing a new scaling function to the eigenvalues and aggregating a new curvature term. === Spectral graph wavelet signature (SGWS) === SGWS is a local descriptor that is not only isometric invariant, but also compact, easy to compute and combines the advantages of both band-pass and low-pass filters. An important facet of SGWS is the ability to combine the advantages of WKS and HKS into a single signature, while allowing a multiresolution representation of shapes. == Spectral Matching == The spectral decomposition of the graph Laplacian associated with complex shapes (see Discrete Laplace operator) provides eigenfunctions (modes) which are invariant to isometries. Each vertex on the shape could be uniquely represented with a combinations of the eigenmodal values at each point, sometimes called spectral coordinates: s ( x ) = ( φ 1 ( x ) , φ 2 ( x ) , … , φ N ( x ) ) for vertex x . {\displaystyle s(x)=(\varphi _{1}(x),\varphi _{2}(x),\ldots ,\varphi _{N}(x)){\text{ for vertex }}x.} Spectral matching consists of establishing the point correspondences by pairing vertices on different shapes that have the most similar spectral coordinates. Early work focused on sparse correspondences for stereoscopy. Computational efficiency now enables dense correspondences on full meshes, for instance between cortical surfaces. Spectral matching could also be used for complex non-rigid image registration, which is notably difficult when images have very large deformations. Such image registration methods based on spectral eigenmodal values indeed capture global shape characteristics, and contrast with conventional non-rigid image registration methods which are often based on local shape characteristics (e.g., image gradients).

    Read more →
  • Manufacturing Automation Protocol

    Manufacturing Automation Protocol

    Manufacturing Automation Protocol (MAP) was a computer network standard released in 1982 for interconnection of devices from multiple manufacturers. It was developed by General Motors to combat the proliferation of incompatible communications standards used by suppliers of automation products such as programmable controllers. By 1985 demonstrations of interoperability were carried out and 21 vendors offered MAP products. In 1986 the Boeing corporation merged its Technical Office Protocol with the MAP standard, and the combined standard was referred to as "MAP/TOP". The standard was revised several times between the first issue in 1982 and MAP 3.0 in 1987, with significant technical changes that made interoperation between different revisions of the standard difficult. Although promoted and used by manufacturers such as General Motors, Boeing, and others, it lost market share to the contemporary Ethernet standard and was not widely adopted. Difficulties included changing protocol specifications, the expense of MAP interface links, and the speed penalty of a token-passing network. The token bus network protocol used by MAP became standardized as IEEE standard 802.4 but this committee disbanded in 2004 due to lack of industry attention.

    Read more →
  • Viral marketing

    Viral marketing

    Viral marketing is a business strategy that uses existing social networks to promote a product or service on social media platforms. Its name refers to how consumers spread information about a product with other people, much in the same way that a virus spreads from one person to another. It can be delivered by word of mouth, or enhanced by the network effects of the Internet and mobile networks. The concept is often misused or misunderstood, as people apply it to any successful enough story without taking into account the word "viral". Viral advertising is personal and, while coming from an identified sponsor, it does not mean businesses pay for its distribution. Most of the well-known viral ads circulating online are ads paid by a sponsor company, launched either on their own platform (company web page or social media profile) or on social media websites such as YouTube. Consumers receive the page link from a social media network or copy the entire ad from a website and pass it along through e-mail or posting it on a blog, web page or social media profile. Viral marketing may take the form of video clips, advergames, ebooks, brandable software, images, text messages, email messages, or web pages. The most commonly utilized transmission vehicles for viral messages include pass-along based, incentive based, trendy based, and undercover based. However, the creative nature of viral marketing enables an "endless amount of potential forms and vehicles the messages can utilize for transmission", including mobile devices. The ultimate goal of marketers interested in creating successful viral marketing programs is to create viral messages that appeal to individuals with high social networking potential (SNP) and that have a high probability of being presented and spread by these individuals and their competitors in their communications with others in a short period. The term "viral marketing" has also been used pejoratively to refer to stealth marketing campaigns—marketing strategies that advertise a product to people without them knowing they are being marketed to. == History == The emergence of "viral marketing", as an approach to advertisement, has been tied to the popularization of the notion that ideas spread like viruses. The field that developed around this notion, memetics, peaked in popularity in the 1990s. As this then began to influence marketing gurus, it took on a life of its own in that new context. The brief career of Australian pop singer Marcus Montana is largely remembered as an early example of viral marketing. In early 1989, thousands of posters declaring "Marcus is Coming" were placed around Sydney, generating discussion and interest within the media and the community about the meaning of the mysterious advertisements. The campaign successfully made Montana's musical debut a talking point, but his subsequent music career was a failure. The term is found in PC User magazine in 1989 with a somewhat differing meaning. It was later used by Jeffrey Rayport in the 1996 Fast Company article "The Virus of Marketing", and Tim Draper and Steve Jurvetson of the venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson in 1997 to describe Hotmail's practice of appending advertising to outgoing mail from their users. Doug Rushkoff, a media critic, wrote about viral marketing on the Internet in 1996. Bob Gerstley wrote about algorithms designed to identify people with high "social networking potential." Gerstley employed SNP algorithms in quantitative marketing research. In 2004, the concept of the alpha user was coined to indicate that it had now become possible to identify the focal members of any viral campaign, the "hubs" who were most influential. Alpha users could be targeted for advertising purposes most accurately in mobile phone networks, due to their personal nature. In early 2013, the first ever Viral Summit was held in Las Vegas. == Factors == Marketer Jonah Berger defines six key factors that drive virality, organized in an acronym called STEPPS: Social currency – the better something makes people look, the more likely they will be to share it Triggers – things that are "top of mind" are more likely to be "tip of the tongue" Emotion – when people care, they share Public – the easier something is to see, the more likely people are to imitate it Practical value – people share useful information to help others Stories – like a Trojan Horse, stories carry messages and ideas along for the ride. Another important factor that drives virality is the propagativity of the content, referring to the ease with which consumers can redistribute it. == Psychology == To form deeper connections with viewers and increase the chances of virality, many marketers use psychological principles. They argue that this approach is scientific and can foster an environment where the odds of gaining traction are much higher. People find psychological safety and can develop a sense of trust when more people interact with online content. For this reason, marketers work to develop media that resonates with viewers on a deeper, emotional level as this approach frequently results in higher engagement. This level of interaction serves as a sign of approval, reducing the personal risk that is subconsciously linked to associating oneself with a company or brand’s content. Professor Jonah Berger at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business affirms that marketing campaigns that trigger psychological responses linked to strong emotions tend to perform better. In particular, Berger found that positive emotions like happiness, joy, and excitement have more successful share rates than their negative counterparts. This outcome results from the human instinct to respond more positively to content with activating emotions, increasing the desire to share content, which contributes to its virality. Viral marketing utilizes the primitive feeling of frisson to increase their view and share counts. This feeling of excitement is considered powerful because of its ability to cause a physical response. From increased heart rates to full body chills, Professor Brent Coker at the University of Melbourne describes that this approach to marketing triggers a primitive response that immerses the viewer in the content on a deeper level. Researchers Juliana Fernandes from the University of Florida and Sigal Segev from the Florida International University also found that people are more inclined to share emotional campaigns over those that are heavily informational. They claim that consumers do not often care to learn about a product’s actual features and benefits. Instead, people prefer to be immersed in experience-based content that creates an emotional impact. Companies and brands can benefit from treating their content in this manner and go viral more frequently than those who do not. Social proof is another psychological phenomenon that impacts viral content. Experts in this field argue that it is a natural instinct to want to behave similarly to others because it results in positive validation. This phenomenon explains the human need to conform, so marketers focus on creating engaging content that encourages interactions and causes a snowball effect. This subconsciously influences people to like, comment, and share if they already see others doing the same. Social proof goes further by providing people with a form of social currency. When individuals interact with and share content, they become associated with the topics at hand. People naturally tend to perceive one another, and this pattern carries over to the digital world. As a result, many people tend to be vigilant about the viral marketing they engage with, since they want to be perceived positively. Companies and brands have the opportunity to develop social currency themselves by aligning with their target audiences and creating marketing campaigns that fit their interests or match their values. == Methods and metrics == According to marketing professors Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein, to make viral marketing work, three basic criteria must be met, i.e., giving the right message to the right messengers in the right environment: Messenger: Three specific types of messengers are required to ensure the transformation of an ordinary message into a viral one: market mavens, social hubs, and salespeople. Market mavens are individuals who are continuously 'on the pulse' of things (information specialists); they are usually among the first to get exposed to the message and who transmit it to their immediate social network. Social hubs are people with an exceptionally large number of social connections; they often know hundreds of different people and have the ability to serve as connectors or bridges between different subcultures. Salespeople might be needed who receive the message from the market maven, amplify it by making it more relevant and persuasive, and then transmit it to the social hub for further distr

    Read more →
  • Electronic lab notebook

    Electronic lab notebook

    An electronic lab notebook or electronic laboratory notebook (ELN) is a computer program designed to replace paper laboratory notebooks. Lab notebooks in general are used by scientists, engineers, and technicians to document research, experiments, and procedures performed in a laboratory. A lab notebook is often maintained to be a legal document and may be used in a court of law as evidence. Similar to an inventor's notebook, the lab notebook is also often referred to in patent prosecution and intellectual property litigation. Electronic lab notebooks offer many benefits to the user as well as organizations; they are easier to search upon, simplify data copying and backups, and support collaboration amongst many users. ELNs can have fine-grained access controls, and can be more secure than their paper counterparts. They also allow the direct incorporation of data from instruments, replacing the practice of printing out data to be stapled into a paper notebook. == Types == ELNs can be divided into two categories: "Specific ELNs" contain features designed to work with specific applications, scientific instrumentation or data types. "Cross-disciplinary ELNs" or "Generic ELNs" are designed to support access to all data and information that needs to be recorded in a lab notebook. Lab Platforms that combine an ELN, LIMS, and scientific data management together, all-in-one configurable software environment. Solutions range from specialized programs designed from the ground up for use as an ELN, to modifications or direct use of more general programs. Examples of using more general software as an ELN include using OpenWetWare, a MediaWiki install (running the same software that Wikipedia uses), WordPress, or the use of general note taking software such as OneNote as an ELN. ELN's come in many different forms. They can be standalone programs, use a client-server model, or be entirely web-based. Some use a lab-notebook approach, others resemble a blog. ELNs are embracing artificial intelligence and LLM technology to provide scientific AI chat assistants. A good many variations on the "ELN" acronym have appeared. Differences between systems with different names are often subtle, with considerable functional overlap between them. Examples include "ERN" (Electronic Research Notebook), "ERMS" (Electronic Resource (or Research or Records) Management System (or Software) and SDMS (Scientific Data (or Document) Management System (or Software). Ultimately, these types of systems all strive to do the same thing: Capture, record, centralize and protect scientific data in a way that is highly searchable, historically accurate, and legally stringent, and which also promotes secure collaboration, greater efficiency, reduced mistakes and lowered total research costs. == Objectives == A good electronic laboratory notebook should offer a secure environment to protect the integrity of both data and process, whilst also affording the flexibility to adopt new processes or changes to existing processes without recourse to further software development. The package architecture should be a modular design, so as to offer the benefit of minimizing validation costs of any subsequent changes that you may wish to make in the future as your needs change. A good electronic laboratory notebook should be an "out of the box" solution that, as standard, has fully configurable forms to comply with the requirements of regulated analytical groups through to a sophisticated ELN for inclusion of structures, spectra, chromatograms, pictures, text, etc. where a preconfigured form is less appropriate. All data within the system may be stored in a database (e.g. MySQL, MS-SQL, Oracle) and be fully searchable. The system should enable data to be collected, stored and retrieved through any combination of forms or ELN that best meets the requirements of the user. The application should enable secure forms to be generated that accept laboratory data input via PCs and/or laptops / palmtops, and should be directly linked to electronic devices such as laboratory balances, pH meters, etc. Networked or wireless communications should be accommodated for by the package which will allow data to be interrogated, tabulated, checked, approved, stored and archived to comply with the latest regulatory guidance and legislation. A system should also include a scheduling option for routine procedures such as equipment qualification and study related timelines. It should include configurable qualification requirements to automatically verify that instruments have been cleaned and calibrated within a specified time period, that reagents have been quality-checked and have not expired, and that workers are trained and authorized to use the equipment and perform the procedures. == Regulatory and legal aspects == The laboratory accreditation criteria found in the ISO 17025 standard needs to be considered for the protection and computer backup of electronic records. These criteria can be found specifically in clause 4.13.1.4 of the standard. Electronic lab notebooks used for development or research in regulated industries, such as medical devices or pharmaceuticals, are expected to comply with FDA regulations related to software validation. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure the integrity of the entries in terms of time, authorship, and content. Unlike ELNs for patent protection, FDA is not concerned with patent interference proceedings, but is concerned with avoidance of falsification. Typical provisions related to software validation are included in the medical device regulations at 21 CFR 820 (et seq.) and Title 21 CFR Part 11. Essentially, the requirements are that the software has been designed and implemented to be suitable for its intended purposes. Evidence to show that this is the case is often provided by a Software Requirements Specification (SRS) setting forth the intended uses and the needs that the ELN will meet; one or more testing protocols that, when followed, demonstrate that the ELN meets the requirements of the specification and that the requirements are satisfied under worst-case conditions. Security, audit trails, prevention of unauthorized changes without substantial collusion of otherwise independent personnel (i.e., those having no interest in the content of the ELN such as independent quality unit personnel) and similar tests are fundamental. Finally, one or more reports demonstrating the results of the testing in accordance with the predefined protocols are required prior to release of the ELN software for use. If the reports show that the software failed to satisfy any of the SRS requirements, then corrective and preventive action ("CAPA") must be undertaken and documented. Such CAPA may extend to minor software revisions, or changes in architecture or major revisions. CAPA activities need to be documented as well. Aside from the requirements to follow such steps for regulated industry, such an approach is generally a good practice in terms of development and release of any software to assure its quality and fitness for use. There are standards related to software development and testing that can be applied (see ref.).

    Read more →
  • Software agent

    Software agent

    In computer science, a software agent is a computer program that acts for a user or another program in a relationship of agency. The term agent is derived from the Latin agere (to do): an agreement to act on one's behalf. Such "action on behalf of" implies the authority to decide which, if any, action is appropriate. Some agents are colloquially known as bots, from robot. They may be embodied, as when execution is paired with a robot body, or as software such as a chatbot executing on a computer, such as a mobile device, e.g. Siri. Software agents may be autonomous or work together with other agents or people. Software agents interacting with people (e.g. chatbots, human-robot interaction environments) may possess human-like qualities such as natural language understanding and speech, personality or embody humanoid form (see Asimo). Related and derived concepts include intelligent agents (in particular exhibiting some aspects of artificial intelligence, such as reasoning), autonomous agents (capable of modifying the methods of achieving their objectives), distributed agents (being executed on physically distinct computers), multi-agent systems (distributed agents that work together to achieve an objective that could not be accomplished by a single agent acting alone), and mobile agents (agents that can relocate their execution onto different processors). == Concepts == The basic attributes of an autonomous software agent are that agents: are not strictly invoked for a task, but activate themselves, may reside in wait status on a host, perceiving context, may get to run status on a host upon starting conditions, do not require interaction of user, may invoke other tasks including communication. The concept of an agent provides a method of describing a complex software entity that is capable of acting with a certain degree of autonomy in order to accomplish tasks on behalf of its host. But unlike objects, which are defined in terms of methods and attributes, an agent is defined in terms of its behavior. Various authors have proposed different definitions of agents, these commonly include concepts such as: persistence: code is not executed on demand but runs continuously and decides for itself when it should perform some activity; autonomy: agents have capabilities of task selection, prioritization, goal-directed behavior, decision-making without human intervention; social ability: agents are able to engage other components through some sort of communication and coordination, they may collaborate on a task; reactivity: agents perceive the context in which they operate and react to it appropriately. === Distinguishing agents from programs === All agents are programs, but not all programs are agents. Contrasting the term with related concepts may help clarify its meaning. Franklin & Graesser (1997) discuss four key notions that distinguish agents from arbitrary programs: reaction to the environment, autonomy, goal-orientation and persistence. === Intuitive distinguishing agents from objects === Agents are more autonomous than objects. Agents have flexible behavior: reactive, proactive, social. Agents have at least one thread of control but may have more. === Distinguishing agents from expert systems === Expert systems are not coupled to their environment. Expert systems are not designed for reactive, proactive behavior. Expert systems do not consider social ability. === Distinguishing intelligent software agents from intelligent agents in AI === Intelligent agents (also known as rational agents) are not just computer programs: they may also be machines, human beings, communities of human beings (such as firms) or anything that is capable of goal-directed behavior. == Impact of software agents == Software agents may offer various benefits to their end users by automating complex or repetitive tasks. However, there are organizational and cultural impacts of this technology that need to be considered prior to implementing software agents. === Organizational impact === === Work contentment and job satisfaction impact === People like to perform easy tasks providing the sensation of success unless the repetition of the simple tasking is affecting the overall output. In general implementing software agents to perform administrative requirements provides a substantial increase in work contentment, as administering their own work does never please the worker. The effort freed up serves for a higher degree of engagement in the substantial tasks of individual work. Hence, software agents may provide the basics to implement self-controlled work, relieved from hierarchical controls and interference. Such conditions may be secured by application of software agents for required formal support. === Cultural impact === The cultural effects of the implementation of software agents include trust affliction, skills erosion, privacy attrition and social detachment. Some users may not feel entirely comfortable fully delegating important tasks to software applications. Those who start relying solely on intelligent agents may lose important skills, for example, relating to information literacy. In order to act on a user's behalf, a software agent needs to have a complete understanding of a user's profile, including his/her personal preferences. This, in turn, may lead to unpredictable privacy issues. When users start relying on their software agents more, especially for communication activities, they may lose contact with other human users and look at the world with the eyes of their agents. These consequences are what agent researchers and users must consider when dealing with intelligent agent technologies. === History === The concept of an agent can be traced back to Hewitt's Actor Model (Hewitt, 1977) - "A self-contained, interactive and concurrently-executing object, possessing internal state and communication capability." To be more academic, software agent systems are a direct evolution of Multi-Agent Systems (MAS). MAS evolved from Distributed Artificial Intelligence (DAI), Distributed Problem Solving (DPS) and Parallel AI (PAI), thus inheriting all characteristics (good and bad) from DAI and AI. John Sculley's 1987 "Knowledge Navigator" video portrayed an image of a relationship between end-users and agents. Being an ideal first, this field experienced a series of unsuccessful top-down implementations, instead of a piece-by-piece, bottom-up approach. The range of agent types is now (from 1990) broad: WWW, search engines, etc. == Examples of intelligent software agents == === Buyer agents (shopping bots) === Buyer agents travel around a network (e.g. the internet) retrieving information about goods and services. These agents, also known as 'shopping bots', work very efficiently for commodity products such as CDs, books, electronic components, and other one-size-fits-all products. Buyer agents are typically optimized to allow for digital payment services used in e-commerce and traditional businesses. === User agents (personal agents) === User agents, or personal agents, are intelligent agents that take action on your behalf. In this category belong those intelligent agents that already perform, or will shortly perform, the following tasks: Check your e-mail, sort it according to the user's order of preference, and alert you when important emails arrive. Play computer games as your opponent or patrol game areas for you. Assemble customized news reports for you. There are several versions of these, including CNN. Find information for you on the subject of your choice. Fill out forms on the Web automatically for you, storing your information for future reference Scan Web pages looking for and highlighting text that constitutes the "important" part of the information there Discuss topics with you ranging from your deepest fears to sports Facilitate with online job search duties by scanning known job boards and sending the resume to opportunities who meet the desired criteria Profile synchronization across heterogeneous social networks === Monitoring-and-surveillance (predictive) agents === Monitoring and surveillance agents are used to observe and report on equipment, usually computer systems. The agents may keep track of company inventory levels, observe competitors' prices and relay them back to the company, watch stock manipulation by insider trading and rumors, etc. For example, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has an agent that monitors inventory, planning, schedules equipment orders to keep costs down, and manages food storage facilities. These agents usually monitor complex computer networks that can keep track of the configuration of each computer connected to the network. A special case of monitoring-and-surveillance agents are organizations of agents used to automate decision-making process during tactical operations. The agents monitor the status of assets (ammunition, weapons available, platforms for transport, etc.) and receive goals from hi

    Read more →
  • WYSIWYS

    WYSIWYS

    In cryptography, What You See Is What You Sign (WYSIWYS) is a property of digital signature systems that ensures the semantic content of signed messages can not be changed, either by accident or intent. == Mechanism of WYSIWYS == When digitally signing a document, the integrity of the signature relies not just on the soundness of the digital signature algorithms that are used, but also on the security of the computing platform used to sign the document. The WYSIWYS property of digital signature systems aims to tackle this problem by defining a desirable property that the visual representation of a digital document should be consistent across computing systems, particularly at the points of digital signature and digital signature verification. It is relatively easy to change the interpretation of a digital document by implementing changes on the computer system where the document is being processed, and the greater the semantic distance, the easier it gets. From a semantic perspective this creates uncertainty about what exactly has been signed. WYSIWYS is a property of a digital signature system that ensures that the semantic interpretation of a digitally signed message cannot be changed, either by accident or by intent. This property also ensures that a digital document to be signed can not contain hidden semantic content that can be revealed after the signature has been applied. Though a WYSIWYS implementation is only as secure as the computing platform it is running on, various methods have been proposed to make WYSIWYS more robust. The term WYSIWYS was coined by Peter Landrock and Torben Pedersen to describe some of the principles in delivering secure and legally binding digital signatures for Pan-European projects.

    Read more →
  • Knapsack problem

    Knapsack problem

    The knapsack problem is the following problem in combinatorial optimization: Given a set of items, each with a weight and a value, determine which items to include in the collection so that the total weight is less than or equal to a given limit and the total value is as large as possible. It derives its name from the problem faced by someone who is constrained by a fixed-size knapsack and must fill it with the most valuable items. The problem often arises in resource allocation where the decision-makers have to choose from a set of non-divisible projects or tasks under a fixed budget or time constraint, respectively. The knapsack problem has been studied for more than a century, with early works dating back to 1897. The subset sum problem is a special case of the decision and 0-1 problems where for each kind of item, the weight equals the value: w i = v i {\displaystyle w_{i}=v_{i}} . In the field of cryptography, the term knapsack problem is often used to refer specifically to the subset sum problem. The subset sum problem is one of Karp's 21 NP-complete problems. == Applications == Knapsack problems appear in real-world decision-making processes in a wide variety of fields, such as finding the least wasteful way to cut raw materials, selection of investments and portfolios, selection of assets for asset-backed securitization, and generating keys for the Merkle–Hellman and other knapsack cryptosystems. One early application of knapsack algorithms was in the construction and scoring of tests in which the test-takers have a choice as to which questions they answer. For small examples, it is a fairly simple process to provide the test-takers with such a choice. For example, if an exam contains 12 questions each worth 10 points, the test-taker need only answer 10 questions to achieve a maximum possible score of 100 points. However, on tests with a heterogeneous distribution of point values, it is more difficult to provide choices. Feuerman and Weiss proposed a system in which students are given a heterogeneous test with a total of 125 possible points. The students are asked to answer all of the questions to the best of their abilities. Of the possible subsets of problems whose total point values add up to 100, a knapsack algorithm would determine which subset gives each student the highest possible score. A 1999 study of the Stony Brook University Algorithm Repository showed that, out of 75 algorithmic problems related to the field of combinatorial algorithms and algorithm engineering, the knapsack problem was the 19th most popular and the third most needed after suffix trees and the bin packing problem. == Definition == The most common problem being solved is the 0-1 knapsack problem, which restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to zero or one. Given a set of n {\displaystyle n} items numbered from 1 up to n {\displaystyle n} , each with a weight w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} and a value v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} , along with a maximum weight capacity W {\displaystyle W} , maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1\}} . Here x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} represents the number of instances of item i {\displaystyle i} to include in the knapsack. Informally, the problem is to maximize the sum of the values of the items in the knapsack so that the sum of the weights is less than or equal to the knapsack's capacity. The bounded knapsack problem (BKP) removes the restriction that there is only one of each item, but restricts the number x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} of copies of each kind of item to a maximum non-negative integer value c {\displaystyle c} : maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , … , c } . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \{0,1,2,\dots ,c\}.} The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no upper bound on the number of copies of each kind of item and can be formulated as above except that the only restriction on x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is that it is a non-negative integer. maximize ∑ i = 1 n v i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}} subject to ∑ i = 1 n w i x i ≤ W {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^{n}w_{i}x_{i}\leq W} and x i ∈ N . {\displaystyle x_{i}\in \mathbb {N} .} One example of the unbounded knapsack problem is given using the figure shown at the beginning of this article and the text "if any number of each book is available" in the caption of that figure. == Computational complexity == The knapsack problem is interesting from the perspective of computer science for many reasons: The decision problem form of the knapsack problem (Can a value of at least V be achieved without exceeding the weight W?) is NP-complete, thus there is no known algorithm that is both correct and fast (polynomial-time) in all cases. There is no known polynomial algorithm which can tell, given a solution, whether it is optimal (which would mean that there is no solution with a larger V). This problem is co-NP-complete. There is a pseudo-polynomial time algorithm using dynamic programming. There is a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme, which uses the pseudo-polynomial time algorithm as a subroutine, described below. Many cases that arise in practice, and "random instances" from some distributions, can nonetheless be solved exactly. There is a link between the "decision" and "optimization" problems in that if there exists a polynomial algorithm that solves the "decision" problem, then one can find the maximum value for the optimization problem in polynomial time by applying this algorithm iteratively while increasing the value of k. On the other hand, if an algorithm finds the optimal value of the optimization problem in polynomial time, then the decision problem can be solved in polynomial time by comparing the value of the solution output by this algorithm with the value of k. Thus, both versions of the problem are of similar difficulty. One theme in research literature is to identify what the "hard" instances of the knapsack problem look like, or viewed another way, to identify what properties of instances in practice might make them more amenable than their worst-case NP-complete behaviour suggests. The goal in finding these "hard" instances is for their use in public-key cryptography systems, such as the Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem. More generally, better understanding of the structure of the space of instances of an optimization problem helps to advance the study of the particular problem and can improve algorithm selection. Furthermore, notable is the fact that the hardness of the knapsack problem depends on the form of the input. If the weights and profits are given as integers, it is weakly NP-complete, while it is strongly NP-complete if the weights and profits are given as rational numbers. However, in the case of rational weights and profits it still admits a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme. === Unit-cost models === The NP-hardness of the Knapsack problem relates to computational models in which the size of integers matters (such as the Turing machine). In contrast, decision trees count each decision as a single step. Dobkin and Lipton show an 1 2 n 2 {\displaystyle {1 \over 2}n^{2}} lower bound on linear decision trees for the knapsack problem, that is, trees where decision nodes test the sign of affine functions. This was generalized to algebraic decision trees by Steele and Yao. If the elements in the problem are real numbers or rationals, the decision-tree lower bound extends to the real random-access machine model with an instruction set that includes addition, subtraction and multiplication of real numbers, as well as comparison and either division or remaindering ("floor"). This model covers more algorithms than the algebraic decision-tree model, as it encompasses algorithms that use indexing into tables. However, in this model all program steps are counted, not just decisions. An upper bound for a decision-tree model was given by Meyer auf der Heide who showed that for every n there exists an O(n4)-deep linear decision tree that solves the subset-sum problem with n items. Note that this does not imply any upper bound for an algorithm that should solve the problem for any given n. == Solving == Several algorithms are available to solve knapsack problems, based on the dynamic programming approach, the branch and bound approach or hybridizations of both approaches. === Dynamic programming in-advance algorithm === The unbounded knapsack problem (UKP) places no restriction on the number of copies of each kind of item. Besides, here we assume that x i > 0 {\displaystyle x_{i}>0} m [ w ′ ] = max ( ∑ i = 1 n v i x i ) {\displaystyle m[w']=\max \left(\sum _{i=1}^{n}v_{i}x_{i}\right)} subject to ∑

    Read more →
  • Data marketplace

    Data marketplace

    Data marketplace is an online platform for sharing and consuming data in the form of data assets or data products. Part of the data management stack, it aims to bring together data producers and data consumers (including business users and AI) in a single space, with the objective of increasing access to understandable, high-quality data. Included within its Data Marketplaces and Exchange (DME) category by Gartner, data marketplaces can provide data internally within an organization, externally with partners, or as open data. == Concept == Digitization has dramatically increased data volumes within organizations, with IDC predicting that by 2025 the world will contain 175 zettabytes of data. This has created a need to both manage this data and provide access to it to enable business intelligence and data analysis. However, data is often scattered within multiple systems (such as data warehouses and data lakes), and is in formats that are only understandable by technical experts, such as data scientists. According to IDC, 81% of IT leaders cite data silos as a major barrier to digital transformation. This means that data is not freely available to business users or external audiences such as partners or citizens, limiting its value, and holding back AI deployments. Data marketplaces solve this issue, providing seamless, self-service access to high-quality data in an understandable, secure and auditable manner. They break down data silos, reduce friction in data access, and enable a broader range of users, including non-technical profiles, to find, understand, and consume data autonomously. Data assets on the marketplace can be raw data, data visualizations or data products. Data marketplaces combine data management functions such as data governance with the user-friendly experience offered by e-commerce marketplaces in order to increase the usage of data. These include features such as powerful search engines, feedback, ratings, subscriptions and product description sheets. According to Gartner, data marketplaces provide infrastructure, transactional capabilities, and services for both consumers and providers of data assets. == History and timeline == Data marketplaces have evolved since they first emerged in terms of both their scope and usage. === 2000s === With the rise of the internet, data brokers began collecting, aggregating, distributing and selling personal, financial and marketing data to third parties online. Data marketplaces were deployed to monetize this data, making it discoverable and accessible to users, either through subscriptions or one-off purchases. At the same time, regulations, such as the US Open Government Initiative of 2009 and others around the world mandated greater transparency and data sharing with the public. Data sharing portals were created by public and government bodies to make this information available through self-service to all users. === 2010s === Due to the growth of big data and cloud platforms, cloud-based data exchange platforms emerged. These were offered by major infrastructure providers, and included Amazon Web Services (AWS) Data Exchange, Snowflake Data Marketplace, and the Google Cloud Platform. These platforms moved beyond simple data brokerage or open data by providing structured, catalogued data sharing between organizations. === 2020s === Driven by a need to increase internal data sharing with both business users and AI, organizations are now looking to adopt internal data marketplaces. These aim to democratize data consumption by providing seamless access for all employees and AI to trusted data, including data products, through an intuitive, e-commerce style experience. According to Gartner analyst Richa Jha, "by providing a single, governed platform for discovering, sharing, and scaling data products, data marketplaces drive productivity, collaboration, and ROI across the enterprise." == Data marketplaces within the overall data architecture == Data marketplaces provide a consumption and collaboration layer for data. That means they complement and integrate with other parts of the overall data architecture, including: === Data warehouses and data lakes === Data marketplaces connect to data sources, such as data warehouses or data lakes, to provide intuitive access to the data stored within them, enabling data to be shared and distributed to non-technical audiences. Access can be direct, with data and data products stored within the data marketplace or virtualized. === Data catalog === A data catalog provides a technical inventory of an organization's data estate. It collects technical information on all available data assets within an organization, based on metadata descriptions. This ensures traceability, and supports compliance and governance requirements. Unlike a data marketplace, a data catalog does not provide access to data, and is designed to be used by data professionals, rather than the business. This means it lacks an intuitive, understandable interface and is consequently not easily accessible by business users. === Data mesh === Data mesh is an architecture and framework for data management, first defined by Zhamak Dehghani in 2019. It aims to decentralize data ownership to delegate responsibility, empowering teams and focusing on delivering data to users in the form of self-service data products. The data marketplace is a central pillar of data mesh, providing intuitive access to these data products, and creating a collaboration space for data owners and data consumers. === Data product === Data products are high-value, consumable data assets that package high-quality data and associated tools to enable seamless usage by business users at scale. First defined by McKinsey in 2022, they have an identified owner, a service level agreement (SLA), and a reusability logic. == Core components of a data marketplace == A data marketplace typically includes specific core components: === E-commerce style interface === An e-commerce style experience that engages non-technical users, minimizes the need for training and builds confidence and trust in data. Look and feel should be customizable to incorporate corporate design guidelines to ensure consistency with other organizational applications. === Built-in data catalog === As in a standalone data catalog, this indexes all available data, based on metadata that includes type, source, owner, freshness, and quality level. === Discovery and search engine === This enables users to search, filter, explore and discover available data intuitively. As in an e-commerce marketplace, it should be intelligent, and provide relevant results based on natural language queries. === Access control and security management === Data marketplaces will contain data that needs to be protected under regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States, and sector-specific frameworks in industries such as finance and healthcare. To ensure both security and compliance while maximizing data consumption, the data marketplace should include granular access management and a full audit trail. === Semantic layer and business glossary === Different parts of the business are likely to use different terms to describe data. This leads to inconsistencies and an inability to share data across systems and teams. The semantic layer and business glossary standardize a shared vocabulary and common definitions of business indicators and concepts, providing a single language for data across the business and for AI agents. === Data governance mechanisms === These enforce corporate data governance policies, ensuring data traceability through data lineage, quality certification, usage monitoring, and continuous improvement through user feedback loops. === Collaboration features === As on an e-commerce website, a data marketplace should provide collaboration features that bring together data users and data owners. This includes the ability to rate data products, share use cases, and provide feedback to data owners, creating a community around data and supporting a data-driven culture. == Types of data marketplace == While they share the same underlying technology, data marketplaces can be deployed in three broad ways: === Internal data marketplaces === These bring together data from across an organization and make it available via self-service to employees from across the business. They aim to widen access to data and consequently to improve decision-making and reporting, increase performance and maximize efficiency. === Ecosystem data marketplaces === These extend sharing beyond a single organization, enabling multiple partners (public institutions, industry players, research bodies) to share and consume data within a governed framework. Data can be provided by all parties or simply by one organization and consumed by others. Ecosystem data marketplaces are particularly relevant in

    Read more →
  • Symbolic artificial intelligence

    Symbolic artificial intelligence

    In artificial intelligence, symbolic artificial intelligence (also known as classical artificial intelligence or logic-based artificial intelligence) is the term for the collection of all methods in artificial intelligence research that are based on high-level symbolic (human-readable) representations of problems, logic, and search. Symbolic AI used tools such as logic programming, production rules, semantic nets and frames, and it developed applications such as knowledge-based systems (in particular, expert systems), symbolic mathematics, automated theorem provers, ontologies, the semantic web, and automated planning and scheduling systems. The Symbolic AI paradigm led to important ideas in search, symbolic programming languages, agents, multi-agent systems, the semantic web, and the strengths and limitations of formal knowledge and reasoning systems. Symbolic AI was the dominant paradigm of AI research from the mid-1950s until the mid-1990s. Researchers in the 1960s and the 1970s were convinced that symbolic approaches would eventually succeed in creating a machine with artificial general intelligence and considered this the ultimate goal of their field. An early boom, with early successes such as the Logic Theorist and Samuel's Checkers Playing Program, led to unrealistic expectations and promises and was followed by the first AI Winter as funding dried up. A second boom (1969–1986) occurred with the rise of expert systems, their promise of capturing corporate expertise, and an enthusiastic corporate embrace. That boom, and some early successes, e.g., with XCON at DEC, was followed again by later disappointment. Problems with difficulties in knowledge acquisition, maintaining large knowledge bases, and brittleness in handling out-of-domain problems arose. Another, second, AI Winter (1988–2011) followed. Subsequently, AI researchers focused on addressing underlying problems in handling uncertainty and in knowledge acquisition. Uncertainty was addressed with formal methods such as hidden Markov models, Bayesian reasoning, and statistical relational learning. Symbolic machine learning addressed the knowledge acquisition problem with contributions including Version Space, Valiant's PAC learning, Quinlan's ID3 decision-tree learning, case-based learning, and inductive logic programming to learn relations. Neural networks, a subsymbolic approach, had been pursued from early days and reemerged strongly in 2012. Early examples are Rosenblatt's perceptron learning work, the backpropagation work of Rumelhart, Hinton and Williams, and work in convolutional neural networks by LeCun et al. in 1989. However, neural networks were not viewed as successful until about 2012: "Until Big Data became commonplace, the general consensus in the Al community was that the so-called neural-network approach was hopeless. Systems just didn't work that well, compared to other methods. ... A revolution came in 2012, when a number of people, including a team of researchers working with Hinton, worked out a way to use the power of GPUs to enormously increase the power of neural networks." Over the next several years, deep learning had spectacular success in handling vision, speech recognition, speech synthesis, image generation, and machine translation, though symbolic approaches continue to be useful in a few domains such as computer algebra systems and proof assistants. == History == A short history of symbolic AI to the present day follows below. Time periods and titles are drawn from Henry Kautz's 2020 AAAI Robert S. Engelmore Memorial Lecture and the longer Wikipedia article on the History of AI, with dates and titles differing slightly for increased clarity. === The first AI summer: irrational exuberance, 1948–1966 === Success at early attempts in AI occurred in three main areas: artificial neural networks, knowledge representation, and heuristic search, contributing to high expectations. This section summarizes Kautz's reprise of early AI history. ==== Approaches inspired by human or animal cognition or behavior ==== Cybernetic approaches attempted to replicate the feedback loops between animals and their environments. A robotic turtle, with sensors, motors for driving and steering, and seven vacuum tubes for control, based on a preprogrammed neural net, was built as early as 1948. This work can be seen as an early precursor to later work in neural networks, reinforcement learning, and situated robotics. An important early symbolic AI program was the Logic theorist, written by Allen Newell, Herbert Simon and Cliff Shaw in 1955–56, as it was able to prove 38 elementary theorems from Whitehead and Russell's Principia Mathematica. Newell, Simon, and Shaw later generalized this work to create a domain-independent problem solver, GPS (General Problem Solver). GPS solved problems represented with formal operators via state-space search using means-ends analysis. During the 1960s, symbolic approaches achieved great success at simulating intelligent behavior in structured environments such as game-playing, symbolic mathematics, and theorem-proving. AI research was concentrated in four institutions in the 1960s: Carnegie Mellon University, Stanford, MIT and (later) University of Edinburgh. Each one developed its own style of research. Earlier approaches based on cybernetics or artificial neural networks were abandoned or pushed into the background. Herbert Simon and Allen Newell studied human problem-solving skills and attempted to formalize them, and their work laid the foundations of the field of artificial intelligence, as well as cognitive science, operations research and management science. Their research team used the results of psychological experiments to develop programs that simulated the techniques that people used to solve problems. This tradition, centered at Carnegie Mellon University would eventually culminate in the development of the Soar architecture in the middle 1980s. ==== Heuristic search ==== In addition to the highly specialized domain-specific kinds of knowledge that we will see later used in expert systems, early symbolic AI researchers discovered another more general application of knowledge. These were called heuristics, rules of thumb that guide a search in promising directions: "How can non-enumerative search be practical when the underlying problem is exponentially hard? The approach advocated by Simon and Newell is to employ heuristics: fast algorithms that may fail on some inputs or output suboptimal solutions." Another important advance was to find a way to apply these heuristics that guarantees a solution will be found, if there is one, not withstanding the occasional fallibility of heuristics: "The A algorithm provided a general frame for complete and optimal heuristically guided search. A is used as a subroutine within practically every AI algorithm today but is still no magic bullet; its guarantee of completeness is bought at the cost of worst-case exponential time. ==== Early work on knowledge representation and reasoning ==== Early work covered both applications of formal reasoning emphasizing first-order logic, along with attempts to handle common-sense reasoning in a less formal manner. ===== Modeling formal reasoning with logic: the "neats" ===== Unlike Simon and Newell, John McCarthy felt that machines did not need to simulate the exact mechanisms of human thought, but could instead try to find the essence of abstract reasoning and problem-solving with logic, regardless of whether people used the same algorithms. His laboratory at Stanford (SAIL) focused on using formal logic to solve a wide variety of problems, including knowledge representation, planning and learning. Logic was also the focus of the work at the University of Edinburgh and elsewhere in Europe which led to the development of the programming language Prolog and the science of logic programming. ===== Modeling implicit common-sense knowledge with frames and scripts: the "scruffies" ===== Researchers at MIT (such as Marvin Minsky and Seymour Papert) found that solving difficult problems in vision and natural language processing required ad hoc solutions—they argued that no simple and general principle (like logic) would capture all the aspects of intelligent behavior. Roger Schank described their "anti-logic" approaches as "scruffy" (as opposed to the "neat" paradigms at CMU and Stanford). Commonsense knowledge bases (such as Doug Lenat's Cyc) are an example of "scruffy" AI, since they must be built by hand, one complicated concept at a time. === The first AI winter: crushed dreams, 1967–1977 === The first AI winter was a shock: During the first AI summer, many people thought that machine intelligence could be achieved in just a few years. The Defense Advance Research Projects Agency (DARPA) launched programs to support AI research to use AI to solve problems of national security; in particular, to automate the translation of Russian to English for inte

    Read more →
  • Open Data-Link Interface

    Open Data-Link Interface

    The Open Data-Link Interface (ODI) is an application programming interface (API) for network interface controllers (NICs) developed by Apple and Novell. The API serves the same function as Microsoft and 3COM's Network Driver Interface Specification (NDIS). Originally, ODI was written for NetWare and Macintosh environments. Like NDIS, ODI provides rules that establish a vendor-neutral interface between the protocol stack and the adapter driver. It resides in Layer 2, the Data Link layer, of the OSI model. This interface also enables one or more network drivers to support one or more protocol stacks.

    Read more →
  • Web presence

    Web presence

    A web presence is a location on the World Wide Web where a person, business, or some other entity is represented (see also web property and point of presence). Examples of a web presence for a person could be a personal website, a blog, a profile page, a wiki page, or a social media point of presence (e.g. a LinkedIn profile, a Facebook account, or a Twitter account). Examples of a web presence for a business or some other entity could be a corporate website, a microsite, a page on a review site, a wiki page, or a social media point of presence (e.g., a LinkedIn company page and/or group, a Facebook business/brand/product page, or a Twitter account). Every web presence is associated with a unique web address to distinguish one point of presence from another. == Owned vs. unowned == Web presence can either be owned or unowned. Owned media exists when a single person or group can control the content that is published on its web presence (e.g. a corporate website or a personal Twitter account). However, when a single person or group cannot solely control the content, the creator is different from the owner. This is considered unowned media (see earned media). A Wikipedia page or a Yelp page about a person, company, or product would be an example of a known (or "earned") web presence. Occasionally, a first form of media known as "paid media" is often included in the discussion of media types: "earned vs. owned vs. paid". Paid media is commonly found in the form of advertisements, but it is not considered a form of web presence. == Management == Web presence management is the process of establishing and maintaining a digital footprint on the web. The three factors that are considered include the following: where a person or business has web presence; how each web presence represents its enterprise; and what is published at a point of presence. Web presence management is the discipline of determining and governing: the distribution of policy documents which platforms are most appropriate (e.g. internal vs. external blog, YouTube vs. Vimeo) the single inventory of personal or corporate web presence (e.g. partners or advocates) where on the web a business and any relatable assets are represented where on the web a business and any relatable assets are impersonated or pirated web properties with the particular entities they represent who has control over which web properties new web properties which are not in the personal or corporate inventory (e.g. someone creates a new presence) authorized and unauthorized changes to the creation (e.g. branding) of a web presence a workflow for creating a web property that follows its corporate standards === Management system === The purpose of a web presence management system is to manage the web presence of a person or business. This includes the collection of domain names, websites, social media, and other web pages where he, she, or it is being represented. The tool generally offers the following key functions: new presence discovery, inventory management, change detection, access control, stakeholder coordination, and compliance workflow. A web presence management system is meant to have a broader reach so that it emphasizes where a presence has been established, will be established, must be maintained, or must be remediated. An example of a web presence management system is the Brandle Presence Manager. In order to publish content to the various points of web presence, multiple content management systems and sometimes even social media management systems are often used. The primary focus of most content and social media management systems is limited to their specific web platforms. === Domain names === Another aspect of web presence management is managing the collection of domain names registered to the person or business. Any entity may register multiple domain names for the same property. As a result, they can link alternative spellings, different top-level domains, aliases, brands, or products to the same website. Similarly, negative or derogatory domain names may also be registered. This is done to prevent certain domain names from being used against the person or business. It is common for a larger business to have domain names registered by multiple employees at multiple domain name registrars, possibly a result of organizational or geographical requirements. Consequently, a web presence management system can be used to monitor all domain names registered by the business, regardless of the registrars used. == Discovery == Web presence discovery is the process of monitoring the web for a new point of presence about a person or business. Web presence discovery is often included in a web presence management system. Whether a new domain is registered, a new website is published, or a new social media account is established, it occurs outside of the person's or business’ control. As a result, its purpose is to assess a new point of presence and appropriately handle any violations. Web presence discovery differs from content listening. The former involves looking for new properties on the web, whereas the latter refers to analyzing content that already exists to hear how a person or business is seen often in near real time. Examples of content listening systems include Sysomos and Radian6, which is now a subsidiary of Salesforce.com. === Brand protection === A person or business may choose to watch for a new web presence that might appear to misrepresent or mislead an audience, such as counterfeiters, spoofers, or malicious hackers. One of the early software in the online brand protection marketplace was MarkMonitor, now part of Thomson Reuters. This software helped detect rogue domain names and websites. However, the modern day growth of social media has seen a rise in the number of fraudulent brand impersonations. It has become much easier for a new web presence to be created on those platforms, which results in a greater frequency of them today. As a preventive measure, online brand protection providers are now adding social media to their domain and website discovery options. === Security === The widespread growth of social media has also made it easier for unauthorized individuals to impersonate an employee. Consequently, social media has now become a recognized threat vector in that it can be used to socially engineer an attack on a business. To counter this, companies are able to use web presence monitoring tools to detect new points of presence on the web and thereby defend against socially engineered attacks. === Distributed inventory management === A web presence monitoring system can be used by a business to associate a new web property with its corporate inventory. It is designed to address autonomous, distributed behaviors. This usually applies to larger businesses whose geographically diverse employees are more prone to creating new points of presence on the web. For example, a retail chain may allow each local store to create and manage their web presence to market to and communicate with their local customer base. Similarly, a global business may have teams in each country or region who create and manage a web presence to adapt to local languages or cultures. == Monitoring == Web presence monitoring is the process of monitoring a known inventory of web presence to detect any changes that are made. Web presence monitoring is often included in a web presence management system and can serve multiple purposes for both larger corporations and certain individuals, such as celebrities. It is important to note that presence monitoring differs from content listening. The former involves monitoring the properties (e.g. branding) of a web property in an established inventory, whereas the latter refers to analyzing content that already exists to hear how a person or business is seen often in near real time. Additionally, presence monitoring focuses on owned media and content listening on earned media. === Corporate, brand, and regulatory compliance === Many companies ensure that certain standards are met for a property on the web that represents their business. For companies in regulated industries, such as finance and healthcare, the company may be required by law to ensure that all publicized content, regardless of platform or technology, follow specific requirements. The widespread growth of social media has seen a rise in the number of fraudulent corporate impersonations. It has become much easier for a new web presence to be created on these platforms, and so these are much more prevalent than they used to be. As a preventive measure, a web presence monitoring system alerts the company when a known property is changed, allowing for the property to be reviewed and amended so that it follows the proper standards. . A web presence monitoring system helps alert the company when a known property is changed, so it can be reviewed and brought back, if necessary, into compliance with the appro

    Read more →