AI Art Museum Los Angeles

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

• 

  List of robotics journals

  List of robotics journals includes notable academic and scientific journals that focus on research in the field of robotics and automation. == Journals == Acta Mechanica et Automatica Advanced Robotics Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters IEEE Transactions on Robotics IEEE Transactions on Field Robotics The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology International Journal of Humanoid Robotics International Journal of Robotics Research Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making Journal of Field Robotics Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems Paladyn Robotics and Autonomous Systems Robotics Science Robotics SLAS Technology

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy concept

  A fuzzy concept is an idea of which the boundaries of application can vary considerably according to context or conditions, instead of being fixed once and for all. That means the idea is somewhat vague or imprecise. Yet it is not unclear or meaningless. It has a definite meaning, which can often be made more exact with further elaboration and specification — including a closer definition of the context in which the concept is used. The inverse of a "fuzzy concept" is a "crisp concept" (i.e. a precise concept). Fuzzy concepts are often used to navigate imprecision in the real world, when precise information is not available and an approximate indication is sufficient to be helpful. Although the linguist George Philip Lakoff already defined the semantics of a fuzzy concept in 1973 (inspired by an unpublished 1971 paper by Eleanor Rosch,) the term "fuzzy concept" rarely received a standalone entry in dictionaries, handbooks and encyclopedias. Sometimes it was defined in encyclopedia articles on fuzzy logic, or it was simply equated with a mathematical “fuzzy set”. A fuzzy concept can be "fuzzy" for many different reasons in different contexts. This makes it harder to provide a precise definition that covers all cases. Paradoxically, the definition of fuzzy concepts may itself be somewhat "fuzzy". Lotfi A. Zadeh, known as "the father of fuzzy logic", claimed that "vagueness connotes insufficient specificity, whereas fuzziness connotes unsharpness of class boundaries". Not all scholars agree. With increasing academic literature on the subject, the term "fuzzy concept" is now more widely recognized as a philosophical, linguistic or scientific category, and the study of the characteristics of fuzzy concepts and fuzzy language is known as fuzzy semantics. “Fuzzy logic” has become a generic term for many different kinds of many-valued logics, and is applied in many different areas of research, computer programming and industrial design. For engineers, "Fuzziness is imprecision or vagueness of definition." For computer scientists, a fuzzy concept is an idea which is "to an extent applicable" in a situation. It means that the concept can have gradations of significance or unsharp (variable) boundaries of application — a "fuzzy statement" is a statement which is true "to some extent", and that extent can often be represented by a scaled value (a score). For mathematicians, a "fuzzy concept" is usually a fuzzy set or a combination of such sets (see fuzzy mathematics and fuzzy set theory). In cognitive linguistics, the things that belong to a "fuzzy category" exhibit gradations of family resemblance, and the borders of the category are not clearly defined. Through most of the 20th century, the idea of reasoning with fuzzy concepts faced considerable resistance from Western academic elites. They did not want to endorse the use of imprecise concepts in research or argumentation, and they often regarded fuzzy logic with suspicion, derision or even hostility. That may partly explain why the idea of a "fuzzy concept" did not get a separate entry in encyclopedias, handbooks and dictionaries. Yet although people might not be aware of it, the use of fuzzy concepts has risen gigantically in all walks of life from the 1970s onward. That is mainly due to advances in electronic engineering, fuzzy mathematics and digital computer programming. The new technology allows very complex inferences about "variations on a theme" to be anticipated and fixed in a program. The Perseverance Mars rover, a driverless NASA vehicle used to explore the Jezero crater on the planet Mars, features fuzzy logic programming that steers it through rough terrain. Similarly, to the North, the Chinese Mars rover Zhurong used fuzzy logic algorithms to calculate its travel route in Utopia Planitia from sensor data. New neuro-fuzzy computational methods make it possible for machines to identify, measure, adjust and respond to fine gradations of significance with great precision. It means that practically useful concepts can be coded, sharply defined, and applied to all kinds of tasks, even if ordinarily these concepts are never exactly defined. Nowadays engineers, statisticians and programmers often represent fuzzy concepts mathematically, using fuzzy logic, fuzzy values, fuzzy variables and fuzzy sets (see also fuzzy set theory). Fuzzy logic is not "woolly thinking", but a "precise logic of imprecision" which reasons with graded concepts and gradations of truth. Fuzzy concepts and fuzzy logic often play a significant role in artificial intelligence programming, for example because they can model human cognitive processes more easily than other methods. == Origins == Vagueness and fuzziness have probably always been a part of human experience. In the West, ancient texts show that philosophers and scientists were already thinking critically about this in classical antiquity. Most often, they regarded vagueness as a problem: as an obstacle to clear thinking, as a source of confusion, or as an evasive tactic. It got in the way of providing clear orientation, guidance, direction and leadership. Therefore, vagueness became associated with a hermeneutic of suspicion — it was considered as something to avoid, as something undesirable. By contrast, in the ancient Chinese tradition of Daoist thought of Laozi and Zhuang Zhou, "vagueness is not regarded with suspicion, but is simply an acknowledged characteristic of the world around us" — a subject for meditation and a source of insight. === Sorites paradox === The ancient Sorites paradox raised the logical problem, of how we could exactly define the threshold at which a change in quantitative gradation turns into a qualitative or categorical difference. With some physical processes, this threshold seems relatively easy to identify. For example, water turns into steam at 100 °C or 212 °F. Of course, the boiling point depends partly on atmospheric pressure, which decreases at higher altitudes; it is also affected by the level of humidity — in that sense, the boiling point is "somewhat fuzzy", because it can vary under different conditions. Nevertheless, for every altitude, level of air pressure and degree of humidity, we can predict accurately what the boiling point will be, if we know the relevant conditions. With many other processes and gradations, however, the point of change is much more difficult to locate, and remains somewhat vague. Thus, the boundaries between qualitatively different things may be unsharp: we know that there are boundaries, but we cannot define them exactly. For example, to identify "the oldest city in the world", we have to define what counts as a city, and at what point a growing human settlement becomes a city. === The continuum fallacy and Loki's wager === According to the modern idea of the continuum fallacy, the fact that a statement is to an extent vague, does not automatically mean that it has no validity. The question then arises, of how (by what method or approach) we could ascertain and define the validity that the fuzzy statement does have. The Nordic myth of Loki's wager suggested that concepts that lack precise meanings or lack precise boundaries of application cannot be operated with, because they evade any clear definition. However, the 20th-century idea of "fuzzy concepts" proposes that "somewhat vague terms" can be operated with, because we can explicate and define the variability of their application — by assigning numbers to gradations of applicability. This idea sounds simple enough, but it had large implications. === Precursors and pioneers === In Western civilization, the intellectual recognition of fuzzy concepts has been traced back to a diversity of famous and less well-known thinkers, including (among many others) Eubulides, Epicurus, Plato, Cicero, William Ockham and John Buridan, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Friedrich Nietzsche, William James, Hugh MacColl, Charles S. Peirce, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Gustav Hempel, Max Black, Arto Salomaa, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Jan Łukasiewicz, Emil Leon Post, Alfred Tarski, Georg Cantor, Nicolai A. Vasiliev, Kurt Gödel, Stanisław Jaśkowski, Willard Van Orman Quine, George J. Klir, Petr Hájek, Joseph Goguen, Ronald R. Yager, Enrique Héctor Ruspini, Jan Pavelka, Didier Dubois, Bernadette Bouchon-Meunier, and Donald Knuth. Across at least two and a half millennia, all of them had something to say about graded concepts with unsharp boundaries. This suggests at least that the awareness of the existence of concepts with "fuzzy" characteristics, in one form or another, has a very long history in human thought. Quite a few 20th century logicians, mathematicians and philosophers also tried to analyze the characteristics of fuzzy concepts as a recognized species, sometimes with the aid of some kind of many-valued logic or substructural logic. An early attempt in the post-WW2 era to create a mathematical theory of sets with gradations of

  Read more →
• 

  Taylor Swift deepfake pornography controversy

  In late January 2024, sexually explicit AI-generated deepfake images of American musician Taylor Swift were proliferated on social media platforms 4chan and X (formerly Twitter). Several artificial images of Swift of a sexual or violent nature were quickly spread, with one post reported to have been seen over 47 million times before its eventual removal. The images led Microsoft to enhance Microsoft Designer's text-to-image model to prevent future abuse. Moreover, these images prompted responses from anti-sexual assault advocacy groups, US politicians, Swifties, and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, among others, and it has been suggested that Swift's influence could result in new legislation regarding the creation of deepfake pornography. A similar controversy emerged in August 2025, when The Verge reported AI image and video tool Grok Imagine generated sexually explicit images and videos of Swift from an otherwise innocuous text prompt. == Background == American musician Taylor Swift has been the target of misogyny and slut-shaming throughout her career. American technology corporation Microsoft offers AI image creators called Microsoft Designer and Bing Image Creator, which employ censorship safeguards to prevent users from generating unsafe or objectionable content. Members of a Telegram group discussed ways to circumvent these censors to create pornographic images of celebrities. Graphika, a disinformation research firm, traced the creation of the images back to a 4chan community. == Reactions == For some, the deepfake images of Swift immediately became a source of controversy and outrage. Other internet users found them humorous and absurd, such as the image making it appear as though Swift was to engage in sexual intercourse with Oscar the Grouch. The images drew condemnations from Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network and SAG-AFTRA. The latter group, who had been following issues regarding AI-generated media prior to Swift's involvement, considered the images "upsetting, harmful and deeply concerning." Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, whose company's products were believed to be used to make these images, responded to the controversy as "alarming and terrible", further stating his belief that "we all benefit when the online world is a safe world." === Taylor Swift === A source close to Swift told the Daily Mail that she would be considering legal action, saying, "Whether or not legal action will be taken is being decided, but there is one thing that is clear: These fake AI-generated images are abusive, offensive, exploitative, and done without Taylor's consent and/or knowledge." === Politicians === White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre expressed concern over the counterfeit images, deeming them "alarming", and emphasized the obligation of social media platforms to curb the dissemination of misinformation. Several members of American politics called for legislation against AI-generated pornography. Later in the month, a bipartisan bill was introduced by US senators Dick Durbin, Lindsey Graham, Amy Klobuchar and Josh Hawley. The bill would allow victims to sue individuals who produced or possessed "digital forgeries" with intent to distribute, or those who received the material knowing it was made without consent. The European Union struck a deal in February 2024 on a similar bill that would criminalize deepfake pornography, as well as online harassment and revenge porn, by mid-2027. === Social media platforms === X responded to the sharing of these images on their own website with claims they would suspend accounts that participated in their spread. Despite this, the photos continued to be reshared among accounts of X, and spread to other platforms including Instagram and Reddit. X enforces a "synthetic and manipulated media policy", which has been criticized for its efficacy. They briefly blocked searches of Swift's name on January 27, 2024, reinstating them two days later. === Swifties === Fans of Taylor Swift, known as Swifties, responded to the circulation of these images by pushing the hashtag #ProtectTaylorSwift to trend on X. They also flooded other hashtags related to the images with more positive images and videos of her live performances. == Cultural significance == Deepfake pornography has remained highly controversial and has affected figures from other celebrities to ordinary people, most of whom are women. Journalists have opined that the involvement of a prominent public figure such as Swift in the dissemination of AI-generated pornography could bring public awareness and political reform to the issue.

  Read more →
• 

  Sinewave synthesis

  Sinewave synthesis, or sine wave speech, is a technique for synthesizing speech by replacing the formants (main bands of energy) with pure tone whistles. The first sinewave synthesis program (SWS) for the automatic creation of stimuli for perceptual experiments was developed by Philip Rubin at Haskins Laboratories in the 1970s. This program was subsequently used by Robert Remez, Philip Rubin, David Pisoni, and other colleagues to show that listeners can perceive continuous speech without traditional speech cues, i.e., pitch, stress, and intonation. This work paved the way for a view of speech as a dynamic pattern of trajectories through articulatory-acoustic space.

  Read more →
• 

  Inception (deep learning architecture)

  Inception is a family of convolutional neural network (CNN) for computer vision, introduced by researchers at Google in 2014 as GoogLeNet (later renamed Inception v1). The series was historically important as an early CNN that separates the stem (data ingest), body (data processing), and head (prediction), an architectural design that persists in all modern CNN. == Version history == === Inception v1 === In 2014, a team at Google developed the GoogLeNet architecture, an instance of which won the ImageNet Large-Scale Visual Recognition Challenge 2014 (ILSVRC14). The name came from the LeNet of 1998, since both LeNet and GoogLeNet are CNNs. They also called it "Inception" after a "we need to go deeper" internet meme, a phrase from Inception (2010) the film. Because later, more versions were released, the original Inception architecture was renamed again as "Inception v1". The models and the code were released under Apache 2.0 license on GitHub. The Inception v1 architecture is a deep CNN composed of 22 layers. Most of these layers were "Inception modules". The original paper stated that Inception modules are a "logical culmination" of Network in Network and (Arora et al, 2014). Since Inception v1 is deep, it suffered from the vanishing gradient problem. The team solved it by using two "auxiliary classifiers", which are linear-softmax classifiers inserted at 1/3-deep and 2/3-deep within the network, and the loss function is a weighted sum of all three: L = 0.3 L a u x , 1 + 0.3 L a u x , 2 + L r e a l {\displaystyle L=0.3L_{aux,1}+0.3L_{aux,2}+L_{real}} These were removed after training was complete. This was later solved by the ResNet architecture. The architecture consists of three parts stacked on top of one another: The stem (data ingestion): The first few convolutional layers perform data preprocessing to downscale images to a smaller size. The body (data processing): The next many Inception modules perform the bulk of data processing. The head (prediction): The final fully-connected layer and softmax produces a probability distribution for image classification. This structure is used in most modern CNN architectures. === Inception v2 === Inception v2 was released in 2015, in a paper that is more famous for proposing batch normalization. It had 13.6 million parameters. It improves on Inception v1 by adding batch normalization, and removing dropout and local response normalization which they found became unnecessary when batch normalization is used. === Inception v3 === Inception v3 was released in 2016. It improves on Inception v2 by using factorized convolutions. As an example, a single 5×5 convolution can be factored into 3×3 stacked on top of another 3×3. Both has a receptive field of size 5×5. The 5×5 convolution kernel has 25 parameters, compared to just 18 in the factorized version. Thus, the 5×5 convolution is strictly more powerful than the factorized version. However, this power is not necessarily needed. Empirically, the research team found that factorized convolutions help. It also uses a form of dimension-reduction by concatenating the output from a convolutional layer and a pooling layer. As an example, a tensor of size 35 × 35 × 320 {\displaystyle 35\times 35\times 320} can be downscaled by a convolution with stride 2 to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} , and by maxpooling with pool size 2 × 2 {\displaystyle 2\times 2} to 17 × 17 × 320 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 320} . These are then concatenated to 17 × 17 × 640 {\displaystyle 17\times 17\times 640} . Other than this, it also removed the lowest auxiliary classifier during training. They found that the auxiliary head worked as a form of regularization. They also proposed label-smoothing regularization in classification. For an image with label c {\displaystyle c} , instead of making the model to predict the probability distribution δ c = ( 0 , 0 , … , 0 , 1 ⏟ c -th entry , 0 , … , 0 ) {\displaystyle \delta _{c}=(0,0,\dots ,0,\underbrace {1} _{c{\text{-th entry}}},0,\dots ,0)} , they made the model predict the smoothed distribution ( 1 − ϵ ) δ c + ϵ / K {\displaystyle (1-\epsilon )\delta _{c}+\epsilon /K} where K {\displaystyle K} is the total number of classes. === Inception v4 === In 2017, the team released Inception v4, Inception ResNet v1, and Inception ResNet v2. Inception v4 is an incremental update with even more factorized convolutions, and other complications that were empirically found to improve benchmarks. Inception ResNet v1 and v2 are both modifications of Inception v4, where residual connections are added to each Inception module, inspired by the ResNet architecture. === Xception === Xception ("Extreme Inception") was published in 2017. It is a linear stack of depthwise separable convolution layers with residual connections. The design was proposed on the hypothesis that in a CNN, the cross-channels correlations and spatial correlations in the feature maps can be entirely decoupled. Training each network took 3 days on 60 K80 GPUs, or approximately 0.5 petaFLOP-days.

  Read more →
• 

  Dartmouth workshop

  The Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence was a 1956 summer workshop widely considered to be the founding event of artificial intelligence as a field. The workshop has been referred to as "the Constitutional Convention of AI". The project's four organizers, Claude Shannon, John McCarthy, Nathaniel Rochester and Marvin Minsky, are considered some of the "founding fathers" of AI. However it was not the first conference devoted to what would now be described as the question of artificial intelligence: it postdated meetings such as the 1951 Paris cybernetics conference and the Macy meetings. The project lasted approximately six to eight weeks and consisted largely of brainstorming sessions. Eleven mathematicians and scientists originally planned to attend; not all of them attended, but more than ten others came for short times. == Background == In the early 1950s, there were various names for the field of "thinking machines": cybernetics, automata theory, and complex information processing. The variety of names suggests the variety of conceptual orientations. In 1955, John McCarthy, then a young Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Dartmouth College, decided to organize a group to clarify and develop ideas about thinking machines. He picked the name 'Artificial Intelligence' for the new field. He chose the name partly for its neutrality; avoiding a focus on narrow automata theory, and avoiding cybernetics which was heavily focused on analog feedback, as well as him potentially having to accept the assertive Norbert Wiener as guru or having to argue with him. In early 1955, McCarthy approached the Rockefeller Foundation to request funding for a summer seminar at Dartmouth for about 10 participants. In June, he and Claude Shannon, a founder of information theory then at Bell Labs, met with Robert Morison, Director of Biological and Medical Research to discuss the idea and possible funding, though Morison was unsure whether money would be made available for such a visionary project. On September 2, 1955, the project was formally proposed by McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Nathaniel Rochester and Claude Shannon. The proposal is credited with introducing the term 'artificial intelligence'. The Proposal states: We propose that a 2-month, 10-man study of artificial intelligence be carried out during the summer of 1956 at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. The study is to proceed on the basis of the conjecture that every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it. An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves. We think that a significant advance can be made in one or more of these problems if a carefully selected group of scientists work on it together for a summer. The proposal goes on to discuss computers, natural language processing, neural networks, theory of computation, abstraction and creativity (these areas within the field of artificial intelligence are considered still relevant to the work of the field). On May 26, 1956, McCarthy notified Robert Morison of the planned 11 attendees: For the full period: 1) Dr. Marvin Minsky 2) Dr. Julian Bigelow 3) Professor D.M. Mackay 4) Mr. Ray Solomonoff 5) Mr. John Holland 6) Dr. John McCarthy For four weeks: 7) Dr. Claude Shannon 8) Mr. Nathaniel Rochester 9) Mr. Oliver Selfridge For the first two weeks: 10) Dr. Allen Newell 11) Professor Herbert Simon He noted, "we will concentrate on a problem of devising a way of programming a calculator to form concepts and to form generalizations. This of course is subject to change when the group gets together." The actual participants came at different times, mostly for much shorter times. Trenchard More replaced Rochester for three weeks and MacKay and Holland did not attend—but the project was set to begin. Around June 18, 1956, the earliest participants (perhaps only Ray Solomonoff, maybe with Tom Etter) arrived at the Dartmouth campus in Hanover, N.H., to join John McCarthy who already had an apartment there. Solomonoff and Minsky stayed at Professors' apartments, but most would stay at the Hanover Inn. == Dates == The Dartmouth Workshop is usually said to have run for six weeks. Ray Solomonoff's notes taken during the workshop, however, indicate that it ran for roughly eight weeks, from about June 18 to August 17. Solomonoff's notes start on June 22; June 28 mentions Minsky, June 30 mentions Hanover, N.H., July 1 mentions Tom Etter. On August 17, Solomonoff gave a final talk. == Participants == Initially, McCarthy lost his list of attendees. Instead, after the workshop, McCarthy sent Solomonoff a preliminary list of participants and visitors plus those interested in the subject. 47 people were listed. Solomonoff, however, made a list of participants in his notes of the summer project: Ray Solomonoff Marvin Minsky John McCarthy Claude Shannon Trenchard More Nat Rochester Oliver Selfridge Julian Bigelow W. Ross Ashby W.S. McCulloch Abraham Robinson Tom Etter John Nash David Sayre Arthur Samuel Kenneth R. Shoulders Shoulders' friend Alex Bernstein Herbert Simon Allen Newell Shannon attended Solomonoff's talk on July 10 and Bigelow gave a talk on August 15. Solomonoff doesn't mention Bernard Widrow, but in 1994 Widrow said that he and an unidentified colleague from the same lab in MIT had attended for one week. In the same interview Widrow recalled that "I think [Wesley] Clark and [Belmont] Farley were there from Lincoln Lab." Trenchard mentions R. Culver and Solomonoff mentions Bill Shutz. Herb Gelernter didn't attend, but was influenced later by what Rochester learned. In an article in IEEE Spectrum, Grace Solomonoff additionally identifies Peter Milner in a photo taken by Nathaniel Rochester in front of Dartmouth Hall. Ray Solomonoff, Marvin Minsky, and John McCarthy were the only three who stayed for the full time. Trenchard took attendance during two weeks of his three-week visit. From three to about eight people would attend the daily sessions. == Event and aftermath == They had the entire top floor of the Dartmouth Math Department to themselves, and most weekdays they would meet at the main math classroom where someone might lead a discussion focusing on his ideas, or more frequently, a general discussion would be held. It was not a directed group research project; discussions covered many topics, but several directions are considered to have been initiated or encouraged by the Workshop: the rise of symbolic methods, systems focused on limited domains (early expert systems), and deductive systems versus inductive systems. One participant, Arthur Samuel, said, "It was very interesting, very stimulating, very exciting". Ray Solomonoff kept notes giving his impression of the talks and the ideas from various discussions. === McCarthy's 1956 AI distribution list === This is the list in the "People Interested in the Artificial Intelligence Problem" document which McCarthy produced in 1956, partly in lieu of a list of attendees at the Dartmouth workshop. According to McCarthy the list was "being sent to the people on the list and a few others", and its purpose was "to let those on it know who is interested in receiving documents on the problem" of artificial intelligence. McCarthy also promised to deliver them a report on the Dartmouth conference, and to send an updated list soon afterwards. It includes people who did not attend the conference and does not include everyone who did attend it.

  Read more →
• 

  Speech-generating device

  Speech-generating devices (SGDs), also known as voice output communication aids, are electronic augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems used to supplement or replace speech or writing for individuals with severe speech impairments, enabling them to verbally communicate. SGDs are important for people who have limited means of interacting verbally, as they allow individuals to become active participants in communication interactions. They are particularly helpful for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) but recently have been used for children with predicted speech deficiencies. There are several input and display methods for users of varying abilities to make use of SGDs. Some SGDs have multiple pages of symbols to accommodate a large number of utterances, and thus only a portion of the symbols available are visible at any one time, with the communicator navigating the various pages. Speech-generating devices can produce electronic voice output by using digitized recordings of natural speech or through speech synthesis—which may carry less emotional information but can permit the user to speak novel messages. The content, organization, and updating of the vocabulary on an SGD is influenced by a number of factors, such as the user's needs and the contexts that the device will be used in. The development of techniques to improve the available vocabulary and rate of speech production is an active research area. Vocabulary items should be of high interest to the user, be frequently applicable, have a range of meanings, and be pragmatic in functionality. There are multiple methods of accessing messages on devices: directly or indirectly, or using specialized access devices—although the specific access method will depend on the skills and abilities of the user. SGD output is typically much slower than speech, although rate enhancement strategies can increase the user's rate of output, resulting in enhanced efficiency of communication. The first known SGD was prototyped in the mid-1970s, and rapid progress in hardware and software development has meant that SGD capabilities can now be integrated into devices like smartphones. Notable users of SGDs include Stephen Hawking, Roger Ebert, Tony Proudfoot, and Pete Frates (founder of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge). Speech-generating systems may be dedicated devices developed solely for AAC, or non-dedicated devices such as computers running additional software to allow them to function as AAC devices. == History == SGDs have their roots in early electronic communication aids. The first such aid was a sip-and-puff typewriter controller named the patient-operated selector mechanism (Naman) prototyped by Reg Maling in the United Kingdom in 1960. POSSUM scanned through a set of symbols on an illuminated display. Researchers at Delft University in the Netherlands created the lightspot-operated typewriter (LOT) in 1970, which made use of small movements of the head to point a small spot of light at a matrix of characters, each equipped with a photoelectric cell. Although it was commercially unsuccessful, the LOT was well received by its users. In 1966, Barry Romich, a freshman engineering student at Case Western Reserve University, and Ed Prentke, an engineer at Highland View Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio, formed a partnership, creating the Prentke Romich Company. In 1969, the company produced its first communication device, a typing system based on a discarded Teletype machine. In 1979, Mark Dahmke developed software for a vocal communication aid program using the Computalker CT-1 analog speech synthesizer with a microcomputer. The software utilized phonemes to generate speech, assisting individuals with communication impairments in constructing words and sentences. Dahmke's work contributed to the advancement of assistive technology for people with disabilities. Notably, he designed the "Vocabulary Management System" for Bill Rush, a student with cerebral palsy. This early speech synthesis technology facilitated improved communication for Rush and was featured in a 1980 issue of LIFE Magazine. Dahmke's contributions have influenced the development of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) technologies. During the 1970s and early 1980s, several other companies emerged that have since become prominent manufacturers of SGDs. Toby Churchill founded Toby Churchill Ltd in 1973, after losing his speech following encephalitis. In the US, Dynavox (then known as Sentient Systems Technology) grew out of a student project at Carnegie-Mellon University, created in 1982 to help a young woman with cerebral palsy to communicate. Beginning in the 1980s, improvements in technology led to a greatly increased number, variety, and performance of commercially available communication devices, and a reduction in their size and price. Alternative methods of access such as Target Scanning (also known as eye pointing) calibrate the movement of a user's eyes to direct an SGD to produce the desired speech. Scanning, in which alternatives are presented to the user sequentially, became available on communication devices. Speech output possibilities included both digitized and synthesized speech. Rapid progress in hardware and software development continued, including projects funded by the European Community. The first commercially available dynamic screen speech-generating devices were developed in the 1990s. Software was developed that allowed the computer-based production of communication boards. High-tech devices have continued to become smaller and lighter, while increasing accessibility and capability; communication devices can be accessed using eye-tracking systems, perform as a computer for word-processing and Internet use, and as an environmental control device for independent access to other equipment such as TV, radio and telephones. Stephen Hawking came to be associated with the unique voice of his particular synthesis equipment. Hawking was unable to speak due to a combination of disabilities caused by ALS, and an emergency tracheotomy. In the past 20 or so years SGD have gained popularity amongst young children with speech deficiencies, such as autism, Down syndrome, and predicted brain damage due to surgery. Starting in the early 2000s, specialists saw the benefit of using SGDs not only for adults but for children, as well. Neuro-linguists found that SGDs were just as effective in helping children who were at risk for temporary language deficits after undergoing brain surgery as it is for patients with ALS. In particular, digitized SGDs have been used as communication aids for pediatric patients during the recovery process. == Access methods == There are many methods of accessing messages on devices: directly, indirectly, and with specialized access devices. Direct access methods involve physical contact with the system, by using a keyboard or a touch screen. Users accessing SGDs indirectly and through specialized devices must manipulate an object in order to access the system, such as maneuvering a joystick, head mouse, optical head pointer, light pointer, infrared pointer, or switch access scanner. The specific access method will depend on the skills and abilities of the user. With direct selection a body part, pointer, adapted mouse, joystick, or eye tracking could be used, whereas switch access scanning is often used for indirect selection. Unlike direct selection (e.g., typing on a keyboard, touching a screen), users of Target Scanning can only make selections when the scanning indicator (or cursor) of the electronic device is on the desired choice. Those who are unable to point typically calibrate their eyes to use eye gaze as a way to point and blocking as a way to select desired words and phrases. The speed and pattern of scanning, as well as the way items are selected, are individualized to the physical, visual and cognitive capabilities of the user. == Message construction == Augmentative and alternative communication is typically much slower than speech, with users generally producing 8–10 words per minute. Rate enhancement strategies can increase the user's rate of output to around 12–15 words per minute, and as a result enhance the efficiency of communication. In any given SGD there may be a large number of vocal expressions that facilitate efficient and effective communication, including greetings, expressing desires, and asking questions. Some SGDs have multiple pages of symbols to accommodate a large number of vocal expressions, and thus only a portion of the symbols available are visible at any one time, with the communicator navigating the various pages. Speech-generating devices generally display a set of selections either using a dynamically changing screen, or a fixed display. There are two main options for increasing the rate of communication for an SGD: encoding, and prediction. Encoding permits a user to produce a word, sentence or phrase using only on

  Read more →
• 

  Terminator (franchise)

  Terminator is an American media franchise created by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd. It is considered to be of the cyberpunk subgenre of science fiction. The franchise primarily focuses on the events leading to a future post-apocalyptic war between a synthetic intelligence known as Skynet, and a surviving resistance of humans led by John Connor. In this future, Skynet uses an arsenal of cyborgs known as Terminators, designed to mimic humans and infiltrate the resistance. Much of the franchise takes place in time periods prior to the Skynet takeover, with both humans and Terminators using time travel to attempt to alter the past and change the outcome of the future. A prominent Terminator model throughout the films is the T-800, commonly known as "the Terminator", with instances of this model portrayed by Arnold Schwarzenegger. The franchise began with the 1984 film The Terminator, written and directed by Cameron, with Hurd as producer. They would return for the 1991 sequel Terminator 2: Judgment Day (or T2). Both films were critical and commercial successes. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (or T3) was released in 2003 to positive reviews, followed by Terminator Salvation in 2009 to more negative reviews. Salvation was intended as the first in a new trilogy, which was later scrapped after the film rights were sold. Cameron was consulted for the 2015 film Terminator Genisys, a reboot branching off from the timeline of the original film. It was negatively received and performed poorly at the box-office. Cameron had a larger role as a producer of the 2019 film Terminator: Dark Fate, a direct sequel to T2 that ignores the three preceding films. As with Salvation, both Genisys and Dark Fate were planned as first installments of new trilogies, with the plans scrapped each time due to the films' poor box-office performances. Outside of the theatrical films, Cameron co-directed T2-3D: Battle Across Time, a 1996 theme park film-based attraction. It was produced as the original sequel to T2 and reunited its main cast. A television series, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, was developed without Cameron's involvement and aired for two seasons in 2008 and 2009. It was also produced as a T2 sequel, taking place in an alternate timeline that ignores the third film and subsequent events. Terminator Zero, an anime series, premiered in August 2024. The franchise has also inspired several lines of comic books since 1988, and numerous video games since 1991. By 2010, the franchise had generated $3 billion in revenue. == Themes and setting == The central theme of the franchise is the battle for survival between the nearly-extinct human race and the world-spanning, synthetic intelligence that is Skynet. Skynet is positioned in the first film, The Terminator (1984), as a U.S. strategic "Global Digital Defense Network" computer system by Cyberdyne Systems which becomes self-aware. Shortly after activation, Skynet seemingly perceives all humans as a threat to its existence and formulates a plan to systematically wipe out humanity itself. The system initiates a nuclear first strike against Russia, thereby ensuring a devastating second strike and a nuclear holocaust which wipes out much of humanity in the resulting nuclear war. In the post-apocalyptic aftermath, Skynet later builds up its own autonomous machine-based military capability which includes the Terminators used against individual human targets and thereafter proceeds to wage a persistent total war against the surviving elements of humanity, some of whom have militarily organized themselves into a Resistance. At some point in this future, Skynet develops the capability of time travel and both it and the Resistance seek to use this technology in order to win the war; either by altering or accelerating past events or by preventing the apocalyptic timeline. === Judgment Day === In the franchise, Judgment Day (a reference to the biblical Day of Judgment) is the date on which Skynet becomes self-aware, in which case its creators panic and attempt to deactivate the network. As a result, Skynet perceives humanity as a threat and attempts to exterminate them. Skynet launches an all-out nuclear attack on Russia in order to provoke a nuclear counter-strike against the United States, knowing this will eliminate its human enemies. Due to time travel and the consequent ability to change the future, several differing dates are given for Judgment Day. In Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991), Sarah Connor states that Judgment Day will occur on August 29, 1997. However, this date is delayed following the attack on Cyberdyne Systems in the same film. Judgment Day has various different dates in different timelines of the subsequent films, as well as the television series, creating a multiverse of temporal phenomena. In Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) and Terminator Salvation (2009), Judgment Day was postponed to July 2003. In Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (2008–2009), the attack on Cyberdyne Systems in the second film delayed Judgment Day to April 21, 2011. In Terminator Genisys (2015), the fifth film in the franchise, Judgment Day was postponed to an unspecified day in October 2017, attributed to altered events in both the future and the past. Sarah and Kyle Reese travel through time to the year 2017 and seemingly defeat Skynet, but the system core, contained inside a subterranean blast shelter, survives unknown to them, thus further delaying, rather than preventing, Judgment Day. In Terminator: Dark Fate (2019), the direct sequel to Terminator 2: Judgment Day, a date is not given for the new Judgment Day though it is named as such by Grace. Since Grace is a ten-year-old in 2020 and shown as a teenager in the post-Judgment Day world in flash-forwards throughout the film, Judgment Day occurs sometime in the early 2020s in this timeline. == Franchise rights == Before the first film was created, director James Cameron sold the rights for $1 to Gale Anne Hurd, his future wife, who produced the film, under the strict provision that he be allowed to direct it. Hemdale Film Corporation also became a 50-percent owner of the franchise rights, until its share was sold in 1990 to Carolco Pictures, a company founded by Andrew G. Vajna and Mario Kassar. Terminator 2: Judgment Day was released a year later. Carolco filed for bankruptcy in 1995 and its library was subsequently acquired by StudioCanal, which continues to own the franchise today. However, the rights to future Terminator films were ultimately put up for auction. By that time, Cameron had become interested in making a Terminator 3 film. The rights were ultimately auctioned to Vajna in 1997, for $8 million. Vajna and Kassar spent another $8 million to purchase Hurd's half of the rights in 1998, becoming the full owners of the franchise. Hurd was initially opposed to the sale of the rights, while Cameron had lost interest in the franchise and a third film. After the 2003 release of Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, the franchise rights were sold in 2007 for about $25 million to The Halcyon Company, which produced Terminator Salvation in 2009. Later that year, the company faced legal issues and filed for bankruptcy, putting the franchise rights up for sale. The rights were valued at about $70 million. In 2010, the rights were sold for $29.5 million to Pacificor, a hedge fund that was Halcyon's largest creditor. In 2012, the rights were sold to Megan Ellison and her production company Annapurna Pictures for less than $20 million, a lower price than what was previously offered. The low price was because of the possibility of Cameron regaining the rights in 2019, as a result of new North American copyright laws. Megan's brother David Ellison and Skydance Productions produced Terminator Genisys in 2015. Cameron worked together with David Ellison to produce the 2019 film Terminator: Dark Fate. As the film neared its release, Hurd filed to terminate a copyright grant made 35 years earlier. Under this move, Hurd would again become a 50-percent owner of the rights with Cameron and Skydance could lose the rights to make any additional Terminator films beginning in November 2020, unless a new deal is worked out. Skydance responded that it had a deal in place with Cameron and that it "controls the rights to the Terminator franchise for the foreseeable future". == Films == === The Terminator (1984) === The Terminator is a 1984 science fiction action film released by Orion Pictures, co-written and directed by James Cameron and starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn. It is the first work in the Terminator franchise. In the film, robots take over the world in the near future, directed by the artificial intelligence Skynet. With its sole mission to completely annihilate humanity, it develops android assassins called Terminators that outwardly appear human. A man named John Connor starts the Tech-Com resistance to fight the machi

  Read more →
• 

  Molecular graphics

  Molecular graphics is the discipline and philosophy of studying molecules and their properties through graphical representation. IUPAC limits the definition to representations on a "graphical display device". Ever since Dalton's atoms and Kekulé's benzene, there has been a rich history of hand-drawn atoms and molecules, and these representations have had an important influence on modern molecular graphics. Colour molecular graphics are often used on chemistry journal covers artistically. == History == Prior to the use of computer graphics in representing molecular structure, Robert Corey and Linus Pauling developed a system for representing atoms or groups of atoms from hard wood on a scale of 1 inch = 1 angstrom connected by a clamping device to maintain the molecular configuration. These early models also established the CPK coloring scheme that is still used today to differentiate the different types of atoms in molecular models (e.g. carbon = black, oxygen = red, nitrogen = blue, etc). This early model was improved upon in 1966 by W.L. Koltun and are now known as Corey-Pauling-Koltun (CPK) models. The earliest efforts to produce models of molecular structure was done by Project MAC using wire-frame models displayed on a cathode ray tube in the mid 1960s. In 1965, Carroll Johnson distributed the Oak Ridge thermal ellipsoid plot (ORTEP) that visualized molecules as a ball-and-stick model with lines representing the bonds between atoms and ellipsoids to represent the probability of thermal motion. Thermal ellipsoid plots quickly became the de facto standard used in the display of X-ray crystallography data, and are still in wide use today. The first practical use of molecular graphics was a simple display of the protein myoglobin using a wireframe representation in 1966 by Cyrus Levinthal and Robert Langridge working at Project MAC. Among the milestones in high-performance molecular graphics was the work of Nelson Max in "realistic" rendering of macromolecules using reflecting spheres. Initially much of the technology concentrated on high-performance 3D graphics. During the 1970s, methods for displaying 3D graphics using cathode ray tubes were developed using continuous tone computer graphics in combination with electro-optic shutter viewing devices. The first devices used an active shutter 3D system, generating different perspective views for the left and right channel to provide the illusion of three-dimensional viewing. Stereoscopic viewing glasses were designed using lead lanthanum zirconate titanate (PLZT) ceramics as electronically controlled shutter elements. Active 3D glasses require batteries and work in concert with the display to actively change the presentation by the lenses to the wearer's eyes. Many modern 3D glasses use a passive, polarized 3D system that enables the wearer to visualize 3D effects based on their own perception. Passive 3D glasses are more common today since they are less expensive. The requirements of macromolecular crystallography also drove molecular graphics because the traditional techniques of physical model-building could not scale. The first two protein structures solved by molecular graphics without the aid of the Richards' Box were built with Stan Swanson's program FIT on the Vector General graphics display in the laboratory of Edgar Meyer at Texas A&M University: First Marge Legg in Al Cotton's lab at A&M solved a second, higher-resolution structure of staph. nuclease (1975) and then Jim Hogle solved the structure of monoclinic lysozyme in 1976. A full year passed before other graphics systems were used to replace the Richards' Box for modelling into density in 3-D. Alwyn Jones' FRODO program (and later "O") were developed to overlay the molecular electron density determined from X-ray crystallography and the hypothetical molecular structure. === Timeline === == Types == === Ball-and-stick models === In the ball-and-stick model, atoms are drawn as small sphered connected by rods representing the chemical bonds between them. === Space-filling models === In the space-filling model, atoms are drawn as solid spheres to suggest the space they occupy, in proportion to their van der Waals radii. Atoms that share a bond overlap with each other. === Surfaces === In some models, the surface of the molecule is approximated and shaded to represent a physical property of the molecule, such as electronic charge density. === Ribbon diagrams === Ribbon diagrams are schematic representations of protein structure and are one of the most common methods of protein depiction used today. The ribbon shows the overall path and organization of the protein backbone in 3D, and serves as a visual framework on which to hang details of the full atomic structure, such as the balls for the oxygen atoms bound to the active site of myoglobin in the adjacent image. Ribbon diagrams are generated by interpolating a smooth curve through the polypeptide backbone. α-helices are shown as coiled ribbons or thick tubes, β-strands as arrows, and non-repetitive coils or loops as lines or thin tubes. The direction of the polypeptide chain is shown locally by the arrows, and may be indicated overall by a colour ramp along the length of the ribbon.

  Read more →
• 

  SpreeAI

  SpreeAI (stylized as SPREEAI) is an American fashion technology company headquartered in Incline Village, Nevada that develops artificial intelligence software for the apparel and retail industries, including photorealistic virtual try-on, AI-powered sizing recommendations, and digital model generation. Founded in 2022 by John Imah and Bob Davidson, the company achieved unicorn status in 2025 following a Series B round led by Davidson Group that valued the company at approximately US$1.5 billion. TechCrunch identified SpreeAI as one of the more than 100 new tech unicorns minted in 2025. Its board of directors includes supermodel Naomi Campbell and hospitality executive Larry Ruvo. == History == SpreeAI was founded in 2022 by John Imah and Bob Davidson with a focus on artificial intelligence applications in fashion retail. By 2024, the company had raised approximately US$60 million in venture funding. In May 2025, SpreeAI announced a Series B round led by Davidson Group; reporting at the time placed the company's valuation at approximately US$1.5 billion, making it one of a small number of fashion-technology companies to reach unicorn status. In January 2026, TechCrunch listed SpreeAI among the more than 100 new tech unicorns minted in 2025. == Technology == SpreeAI develops a suite of artificial intelligence tools for the apparel industry. Its consumer-facing platform allows shoppers to upload a single photograph or select a digital model and then visualize clothing items on that figure with photorealistic rendering, while a complementary sizing engine generates fit recommendations intended to reduce returns. The platform is designed for integration with online retailers so that shoppers can preview garments before purchase. The company has stated that its models were developed in part through research collaborations with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon University. == Leadership and board == John Imah, a Nigerian-American technology executive who previously held roles at Samsung, Twitch, Meta Platforms, and Snap Inc., is co-founder and chief executive officer. Co-founder Bob Davidson, through Davidson Group, led the company's Series B financing. The company's board of directors includes supermodel Naomi Campbell, who joined in 2024, and Las Vegas hospitality executive Larry Ruvo. == Partnerships == SpreeAI has formed partnerships across both academia and the fashion industry. Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA). In 2025, SpreeAI entered a partnership with the CFDA to support American designers and brands with AI-driven tools; the CFDA described SpreeAI as "a fashion technology leader delivering innovative solutions to help designers and brands thrive." Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon University. The company has cited ongoing research and talent collaborations with both institutions. Sergio Hudson and Kai Collective. In 2025, SpreeAI made what WWD described as its Met Gala debut through a custom collaboration with designer Sergio Hudson and Nigerian-British label Kai Collective; the collaboration paired Hudson's couture with SpreeAI's virtual try-on platform. == Recognition == In 2025, TechCrunch named SpreeAI among the new tech unicorns of the year. In 2025, SpreeAI was named an honoree in Inc.'s Best in Business awards, and CEO John Imah was included on Inc.'s list of 40 business leaders who "propelled their organizations to success." In 2025, Imah was named to the Observer's AI Power Index, a list of 100 leaders shaping the future of artificial intelligence. In 2025, Imah was included in AfroTech's Future 50, recognizing Black innovators in technology. SpreeAI and Imah have been the subject of profile coverage in The Washington Post, Rolling Stone UK, WWD, Vogue UA, L'Officiel Arabia, GQ South Africa, and Inc..

  Read more →
• 

  Science Fiction Thinking Machines

  Science Fiction Thinking Machines: Robots, Androids, Computers is an anthology of science fiction short stories edited by American anthologist Groff Conklin. It was first published in hardcover by Vanguard Press in May 1954. An abridged paperback edition titled, Selections from Science Fiction Thinking Machines was later published by Bantam Books in August 1955 and was reprinted in September 1964. The book consists of twenty-two novelettes and short stories by various science fiction authors, together with an introduction and bibliography by the editor. The stories were previously published from 1899-1954, in various science fiction and other magazines. == Contents == Note: stories also appearing in the abridged edition annotated A. "Introduction" (Groff Conklin) "Automata: I" (S. Fowler Wright) "Moxon's Master" (Ambrose Bierce) "Robbie" (Isaac Asimov) A "The Scarab" (Raymond Z. Gallun) "The Mechanical Bride" (Fritz Leiber) "Virtuoso" (Herbert Goldstone) A "Automata: II" (S. Fowler Wright) "Boomerang" (Eric Frank Russell) A "The Jester" (William Tenn) A "R. U. R." (Karel Čapek) "Skirmish" (Clifford D. Simak) A "Soldier Boy" (Michael Shaara) "Automata: III" (S. Fowler Wright) "Men Are Different" (Alan Bloch) A "Letter to Ellen" (Chan Davis) A "Sculptors of Life" (Wallace West) "The Golden Egg" (Theodore Sturgeon) A "Dead End" (Wallace Macfarlane) A "Answer" (Hal Clement) "Sam Hall" (Poul Anderson) A "Dumb Waiter" (Walter M. Miller Jr.) A "Problem for Emmy" (Robert Sherman Townes) A "Selected List of Tales About Robots, Androids, and Computers" (Groff Conklin)

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy differential inclusion

  Fuzzy differential inclusion is the extension of differential inclusion to fuzzy sets introduced by Lotfi A. Zadeh. x ′ ( t ) ∈ [ f ( t , x ( t ) ) ] α {\displaystyle x'(t)\in [f(t,x(t))]^{\alpha }} with x ( 0 ) ∈ [ x 0 ] α {\displaystyle x(0)\in [x_{0}]^{\alpha }} Suppose f ( t , x ( t ) ) {\displaystyle f(t,x(t))} is a fuzzy valued continuous function on Euclidean space. Then it is the collection of all normal, upper semi-continuous, convex, compactly supported fuzzy subsets of R n {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}} . == Second order differential == The second order differential is x ″ ( t ) ∈ [ k x ] α {\displaystyle x''(t)\in [kx]^{\alpha }} where k ∈ [ K ] α {\displaystyle k\in [K]^{\alpha }} , K {\displaystyle K} is trapezoidal fuzzy number ( − 1 , − 1 / 2 , 0 , 1 / 2 ) {\displaystyle (-1,-1/2,0,1/2)} , and x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is a trianglular fuzzy number (-1,0,1). == Applications == Fuzzy differential inclusion (FDI) has applications in Cybernetics Artificial intelligence, Neural network, Medical imaging Robotics Atmospheric dispersion modeling Weather forecasting Cyclone Pattern recognition Population biology

  Read more →
• 

  Speculative decoding

  Speculative decoding is an inference-time optimization for autoregressive large language models (LLMs) that generates multiple tokens per decoding step instead of one. A smaller draft model proposes a sequence of candidate tokens, and the larger target model verifies them in a single forward pass through a modified rejection sampling scheme. The verification preserves the target model's original output distribution, so the technique produces the same results as standard decoding while cutting latency by roughly two to three times. The name is an analogy to speculative execution in CPU design, where a processor runs instructions along a predicted branch before the outcome is known. == Background == Standard autoregressive decoding in large language models generates one token at a time. The model computes a probability distribution over its vocabulary, samples the next token, and feeds that token back as input. For large models, this process is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth rather than arithmetic throughput: loading the model's parameters from high-bandwidth memory (HBM) to the processor takes up most of the wall-clock time at each step. Because of this, a forward pass over one token and a forward pass over several tokens in a batch take roughly the same time. Speculative decoding relies on this property. == Mechanism == The technique alternates between two phases: drafting and verification. During drafting, a fast approximation model generates a short run of K candidate tokens, typically between 3 and 12. The draft model is usually a much smaller version of the target model or a lightweight auxiliary network. During verification, the target model scores the entire draft sequence in one batched forward pass. A modified rejection sampling algorithm compares the draft and target probabilities at each position. If the target model would have been at least as likely to produce a given token, that token is accepted; the first token that fails is resampled from a corrected distribution, and everything after it is thrown out. The result is that the output distribution is the same as if each token had been generated one at a time. How many tokens get accepted per cycle depends on how well the draft model matches the target. For common words and predictable continuations the match tends to be good, so the target model can confirm several tokens at once. == History == An early precursor was blockwise parallel decoding, proposed in 2018 by Stern, Shazeer, and Uszkoreit. Their method predicted multiple future tokens through auxiliary prediction heads and validated them against the autoregressive model, but it only worked with greedy decoding and did not preserve the full sampling distribution. The modern form of the technique came from Yaniv Leviathan, Matan Kalman, and Yossi Matias at Google Research, who posted "Fast Inference from Transformers via Speculative Decoding" on arXiv in November 2022. Separately and at about the same time, Charlie Chen and colleagues at DeepMind arrived at a closely related method they called speculative sampling, published in February 2023. Both papers introduced the use of rejection sampling to guarantee that the output distribution is unchanged. Leviathan et al. showed roughly 2–3x speedup on T5-XXL (11 billion parameters); Chen et al. reported 2–2.5x on the Chinchilla model (70 billion parameters). The Leviathan et al. paper was presented as an oral at the International Conference on Machine Learning in July 2023. == Variants == SpecInfer (Miao et al., 2024) uses multiple small language models to jointly build a tree of candidate continuations rather than a single chain. The target model verifies the whole tree in parallel and keeps the longest valid path, with reported speedups of 1.5–3.5x. Medusa (Cai et al., 2024) takes a different approach by not using a separate draft model at all. Extra lightweight decoding heads are attached to the target model itself, and each one predicts a token at a different future position. The candidates are evaluated through a tree-structured attention mechanism. The authors measured 2.2–3.6x speedup. EAGLE (Li et al., 2024) performs autoregression on the target model's internal feature representations (specifically the second-to-top layer) rather than on tokens directly. On LLaMA 2 Chat 70B, this gave a 2.7–3.5x latency reduction. Later versions added dynamic draft trees (EAGLE-2) and further optimizations (EAGLE-3), reaching 3–6.5x speedup. == Adoption == By 2024, speculative decoding had become a standard part of production LLM serving. Google uses it in the AI Overviews feature of Google Search. Open-source inference frameworks such as vLLM, NVIDIA's TensorRT-LLM, and SGLang all include built-in support for speculative decoding and its variants. Apple, AWS, and Meta have also published research extending the method or deploying it at scale.

  Read more →
• 

  Kialo

  Kialo is an online structured debate platform with argument maps in the form of debate trees. It is a collaborative reasoning tool for thoughtful discussion, understanding different points of view, and collaborative decision-making, showing arguments for and against claims underneath user-submitted theses or questions. The deliberative discourse platform is designed to present hundreds of supporting or opposing arguments in a dynamic argument tree and is streamlined for rational civil debate on topics such as philosophical questions, policy deliberations, entertainment, ethics, science questions, and unsolved problems or subjects of disagreement in general. Argument-boxes are structured into hierarchical branches where the root is the main thesis (or theses) of the debate, enabling deliberation and navigable debates between opposing perspectives. A debate is divided into Pro (supporting) and Con (refuting or devaluing) columns where registered users can add arguments and rate the impact on the weight or validity of the parent claim. The arguments are sorted according to the rating average. Its argument tree structure enables detailed scrutiny of claims at all levels of the tree and allows users to for example quickly understand why a decision was made or which of the aggregated arguments swayed it this way. Newcomers can join a debate at any time and look back at the structured discussion history, and then weigh in at the right place with their new argument or their comment on a specific argument. The design presets a structure on debates "that allows participants to easily see, process, and ultimately assess the many facets of competing claims". The word Kialo is Esperanto for "reason". The platform is the world's largest argument mapping and structured debate site. == Overview == Users can comment on every Pro or Con, for example for requesting sources or expansions. Recent activities of a debate are shown in a panel on the right side of the respective debate. Debates can be found through the search or on the Explore page through their descriptions and topic-tags. Mere comments that do not make a constructive point (a self-contained argument backed by reasoning) are not allowed and are picked up by other users and moderators. "Civil language and sensible observations from opposing perspectives" can be seen also in debates about controversial topics. The site by-design incentivizes fair, rigorous, open-minded dialogue. Contributors making claims often also write counterpoints to their own contribution. Claims need to be shorter than 500 characters and can link to external sources. Debate trees can also start off with multiple theses – such as different policy options or hypotheses. Claims can link to related debates or include segments of them. In the discussion tab of each claim, users can make edit proposals (e.g. for accuracy, improving sources, or changing scope), decide if the argument should be moved or copied to another branch, call for archiving a claim, and ask for extra evidence or clarification. Debates can grow large and complex for which a sunburst diagram visualization of the topology of the debate and the search functionality can be useful. Each debate also has a chat-box. In cases where e.g. a "Con" is a point against multiple in the "Pros", users – through moderators – can link these arguments at the respective places to avoid duplication of content and allowing a clean chain for people to understand which points are arguments against each other. Contributions of users are tracked, enabling a board of thought-leaders for every debate. Other gamification elements include a feature to thank users for their contributions. The "Perspectives" feature allows users to see 'Impact' ratings of supporters and opposers of a thesis as well as of the debate's moderators and individual contributors. It thereby enables participants to see a debate from other participants' perspectives and to sort by them. In Kialo Edu, this feature lets teachers view votes for a whole class, individuals, or supporters/opponents of a specific thesis. Users in both versions of Kialo can vote on the overall debate topic as well as on individual claims to express their perspectives or conclusions, with the rationale (i.e. the main causal arguments) why they voted on the veracity of the thesis as they did not being captured. Voting can be done by any registered user while navigating through any debate that has voting enabled or via using the Guided Voting wizard user interface that automatically walks through branches. As of 2021, Kialo doesn't have a mobile app. == Contents == A 2018 report stated the collaborative argument platform hosts more than 10,000 debates in various languages. It also hosts private debates. The website claims that it has over 18,000 public debates as of July 2023, as well as over 1 million votes and over 720,000 claims. Debates can be found via the site's internal search and up to six tags per debate. Preprint studies have scraped public debates on over 1.4K issues with over 130K statements as of October 2019 and 1628 debates, related to over 1120 categories, with 124,312 unique claims as of June 26, 2020. == Kialo Inc. == The site is run by Kialo Inc. It was founded by German-born entrepreneur and London School of Economics and Political Science graduate Errikos Pitsos in August 2017 and is based in Brooklyn and Berlin. According to a 2018 report, the site does not show advertisements and does not sell user's data. The for-profit company was founded in 2011, Pitsos began to develop the concept in 2012 and described various specifics of the system in 2014. In 2018, he stated that they intend to make money by selling the platform to companies as a deliberation and decision-making tool. The site is free to use for the public and in education. According to the site, as of 2023 Kialo.com is a non-revenue generating site with no ads and no reselling of user data. == Applications and adoption == === Adopted applications === Applications of its content or the platform in society include: Teachers and professors, especially in high schools – including the universities Harvard and Princeton, are using Kialo for class discussions and exercises in critical thinking and reasoning, as consolidating understanding of materials covered in recent classes, more useful and engaging learning experiences, for remote/e-learning, for clearing up misconceptions, teaching logical fallacies and rational argumentation, for academic dialogue, teaching media literacy, and for teaching to sufficiently reflect or research before posting online. Like for debaters of the main site, access for schools and universities is free. Kialo Edu is the custom version of Kialo specifically designed for classroom use where debates are private and locked to invited students. Kialo allows teachers to provide feedback to students on their ideas, argument structure, and research quality while it is left to other students to rate the impacts of their peers' arguments. Students can be allowed to contribute anonymously which may be useful for controversial issues as well as for safeguarding privacy in education. Students are or can be encouraged to back up their claims with evidence which can foster digital literacy and research skills. Students and teachers can use it to arrange their thoughts when structuring an essay or project. The site's name was decided on internally using the software. === Prototypical and theoretical applications === Potential, theoretical, prototypical or little-used applications include: Education Improving critical thinking skills of society at large as well as facilitating deep or efficient thinking and deepening research and debates where e.g. discussions are less shallow and the well-known or many arguments have already been made and in many cases aren't unreasonably over- or underrated. Pitsos claimed that "we're training students to be very good test-takers instead of critical thinkers", suggesting teaching people to think things through may be more important or neglected compared to essay writing skills. Many young people and adults are "submerged into a sea of dispersed information", "[b]rowsing and engaging in superficial thinking activities". Kialo could counteract this issue and help people develop good sane reasoning. Academia, R&D and policy Three scholars from three prestigious U.S. universities outlined possible benefits in this domain, including applications beyond higher education such as for academic communication. They suggest the debate platform could be used for structuring the communication of open peer-review by helping those giving feedback to "hone in on[sic] core arguments and pieces of evidence in an even more direct way" than annotated commenting. It could be used to evaluate extracted argument structures and sequences from raw texts, as in a Semantic Web for arguments. Such "argument mining", to which Kialo is the lar

  Read more →
• 

  AI Safety Summit 2023

  The AI Safety Summit 2023 was an international conference on the safety and regulation of artificial intelligence. Organized by the British government, it was held in November 2023 at Bletchley Park, Milton Keynes, England. The event was the first ever global summit on artificial intelligence. The event led to the release of the Bletchley Declaration, which focused on "identifying AI safety risks of shared concern" and "building respective risk-based policies" to "ensure that the benefits of the technology can be harnessed responsibly for good and for all." == Background == The prime minister of the United Kingdom at the time, Rishi Sunak, made AI one of the priorities of his government, announcing that the UK would host a global AI Safety conference in autumn 2023. == Venue == Bletchley Park was a World War II codebreaking facility established by the British government on the site of a Victorian manor and is in the British city of Milton Keynes. It has played an important role in the history of computing, with some of the first modern computers being built at the facility. == Outcomes == 28 countries at the summit, including the United States, China, Australia, and the European Union, have issued an agreement known as the Bletchley Declaration, calling for international co-operation to manage the challenges and risks of artificial intelligence. The Bletchley Declaration affirms that AI should be designed, developed, deployed, and used in a manner that is safe, human-centric, trustworthy and responsible. Emphasis has been placed on regulating "Frontier AI", a term for the latest and most powerful AI systems. Concerns that have been raised at the summit include the potential use of AI for terrorism, criminal activity, and warfare, as well as existential risk posed to humanity as a whole.The president of the United States, Joe Biden, signed an executive order requiring AI developers to share safety results with the US government. The US government also announced the creation of an American AI Safety Institute, as part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The tech entrepreneur Elon Musk and Sunak did a live interview on AI safety on 2 November on X. == Notable attendees == The following individuals attended the summit: Rishi Sunak, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States Charles III, King of the United Kingdom (attending virtually) Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, owner of X, SpaceX, Neuralink, and xAI Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister of Italy Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI Nick Clegg, former British politician and president of global affairs at Meta Platforms Mustafa Suleyman, co-founder of DeepMind Michelle Donelan, UK secretary of state for Science, Innovation and Technology Věra Jourová, the European Commission’s vice-president for Values and Transparency Gina Raimondo, United States secretary of commerce Wu Zhaohui, Chinese vice-minister of science and technology == Global AI Summit series ==

  Read more →