AI Assistant Roblox

AI Assistant Roblox — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Perplexity AI

Perplexity AI, Inc., or simply Perplexity, is an American privately held software company offering a web search engine that processes user queries and synthesizes responses. Perplexity products use large language models and incorporate real-time web search capabilities, providing responses based on current Internet content, citing sources used. Its real-time search engine is called Sonar and is based on Meta's Llama model. A free public version is available, while a paid Pro subscription offers access to more advanced language models and additional features. Perplexity AI, Inc., was founded in August 2022 by Aravind Srinivas, Denis Yarats, Johnny Ho, and Andy Konwinski. As of September 2025, the company was valued at US$20 billion. Perplexity AI has attracted legal scrutiny over allegations of copyright infringement, unauthorized content use, and trademark issues from several major media organizations, including the BBC, Dow Jones, and The New York Times. According to separate analyses by Wired and later Cloudflare, Perplexity uses undisclosed web crawlers with spoofed user-agent strings to scrape the content of websites which prohibit, or explicitly block, web scraping. == History == In August 2022, Perplexity AI, Inc., was founded by Aravind Srinivas, Denis Yarats, Johnny Ho, and Andy Konwinski, engineers with backgrounds in back-end systems, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. It launched its main search engine on December 7, 2022, and has since released a Google Chrome extension and apps for iOS and Android. In February 2023, Perplexity reported two million unique visitors. By April 2024, Perplexity had raised $165 million in funding, valuing the company at over $1 billion. As of June 2025, Perplexity closed a $500 million round of funding that elevated its valuation to $14 billion. Investors in Perplexity AI have included Jeff Bezos, Tobias Lütke, Nat Friedman, Nvidia, and Databricks. Perplexity has also received funding from 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm notable for its association with Donald Trump Jr. During Bloomberg’s Tech Summit 2025, Srinivas shared that the company processed 780 million queries in May 2025, experiencing more than 20% month-over-month growth, processing around 30 million queries daily. In July 2024, Perplexity announced the launch of a new publishers' program to share advertising revenue with partners. On January 18, 2025, the day before the impending U.S. ban on the social media app TikTok, Perplexity submitted a proposal for a merger with TikTok US. On August 12, 2025, Perplexity made a bid to buy Chrome from Google for $34.5 billion. Perplexity stated that the sale could remedy anti-trust litigation against Google, in which a judge was considering compelling the sale of Chrome. In December 2025, Cristiano Ronaldo took an undisclosed stake in Perplexity AI and entered a global brand partnership with the company. === Business Strategy and Finance (2026) === As of early 2026, Perplexity AI reached a valuation of $21.21 billion following its Series E-6 funding round. The company's Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR) grew from $80 million in late 2024 to an estimated $200 million by February 2026. In January 2026, the company entered into a three-year, $750 million commitment with Microsoft Azure to secure the GPU capacity required for its advanced "Deep Research" and "Model Council" features. In February 2026, Perplexity transitioned to a subscription-first model by discontinuing its AI-integrated advertising strategy. Leadership stated the move was intended to preserve user trust in the "answer engine," prioritizing objective results over ad revenue. The company also introduced the "Model Council" feature on February 5, 2026, which allows users to compare outputs from multiple large language models, such as GPT-5.2 and Claude 4.6, simultaneously. To expand its user base, Perplexity began offering a free year of Pro access to students, U.S. Military Veterans, and government employees. == Products and services == === Search engine web portal === Perplexity’s primary offering is an online information retrieval system (search engine) that uses large language models to generate responses to user queries by searching and summarizing web-based content. Perplexity offers a feature known as Perplexity Pages that generates structured summaries and report-like content from user queries by aggregating cited sources. Perplexity is available without charge or registration to Web users, a freemium model. === Perplexity Pro === Perplexity Pro is a subscription tier, a more capable paid "enterprise" service, including stronger security and data protection and additional tools, including the ability to search uploaded documents alongside web content and access to a programmatic application programming interface (API). It allows the user to select between backend models such as GPT-5.4, Claude 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro. The company has also developed its own models, Sonar (based on Llama 3.3) and R1 1776 (based on DeepSeek R1). === Internal Knowledge Search === Internal Knowledge Search enables Pro and Enterprise Pro users to simultaneously search across web content and internal documents. Users can upload and search through Excel, Word, PDF, and other common file formats. Enterprise Pro users can upload and index up to 500 files. === Search API === Perplexity's Search API provides AI developers with programmatic access to the company's search infrastructure. The September 2025 release includes a software development kit, an open-source evaluation framework called search_evals, and documentation detailing the API's design and optimization. === Shopping hub === Perplexity's Shopping Hub is an online shopping platform that provides AI-generated product recommendations, and enables users to purchase products directly through Perplexity's interface. It was launched in November 2024 with backing by Amazon and Nvidia. === Finance === In October 2024, Perplexity AI introduced new finance-related features, including looking up stock prices and company earnings data. The tool provides real-time stock quotes and price tracking, industry peer comparisons and basic financial analysis tools. The platform sources its financial data from Financial Modeling Prep. === Assistant === In January 2025, Perplexity launched the Perplexity Assistant, an AI-powered tool designed to enhance the functionality of its search engine. It can perform tasks across multiple apps, such as hailing a ride or searching for a song, and can maintain context across actions. The assistant is also multi-modal, meaning it can use a phone's camera to provide answers about the user's surroundings or on-screen content. Perplexity has acknowledged that the assistant is still in development and may not always function as expected. For instance, certain features, such as summarizing unread emails or upcoming calendar events, require users to enable a workaround based on notifications. === Comet === In July 2025, Perplexity launched Comet, an AI browser based on Chromium. Initially, access to the browser was limited to users subscribed to the most expensive subscription tier. The browser was later released for free download in October 2025. A key feature is integration of the Perplexity search engine, which can perform a variety of tasks such as generating article summaries, describing an image, conducting research about a topic and composing emails. === Truth Social chatbot === Perplexity has been contracted to produce a chatbot for Donald Trump's social media platform Truth Social. == Leadership == Aravind Srinivas is the CEO and co-founder of Perplexity AI. He previously held research positions at OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and other AI research institutions focusing on machine learning and artificial intelligence. In a March 2026 All-In episode, Srinivas said the incoming AI-related layoffs were "glorious future" to "look forward", as it freed people from jobs they didn't like and gave them opportunities to pursue entrepreneurship. == Controversies == === Copyright and trademark infringement allegations === In June 2024, Forbes publicly criticized Perplexity for using their content. According to Forbes, Perplexity published a story largely copied from a proprietary Forbes article without mentioning or prominently citing Forbes. In response, Srinivas said that the feature had some "rough edges" and accepted feedback but maintained that Perplexity only "aggregates" rather than plagiarizes information. In October 2024, The New York Times sent a cease-and-desist notice to Perplexity to stop accessing and using NYT content, claiming that Perplexity is violating its copyright by scraping data from its website. In June 2024, Dow Jones and New York Post filed a lawsuit against Perplexity, alleging copyright infringement. The lawsuit also alleged that Perplexity harmed their brand by attributing hallucinated quotes, for example on F-16 jets for Ukraine, to artic
Read more →
ByLock

ByLock was a smartphone application that allowed users to communicate via a private, encrypted connection. It was launched in March 2014 on Google Play, Apple App Store The app was downloaded over 600,000 times from its launch in April 2014 until March 2016, when it was permanently shut down. The Turkish National Intelligence Organization (Turkish: Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı, MİT) stated that the app was downloaded mainly in Turkey and the users were “Fetullahist Terror Organisation (FETÖ) which was formerly known as “Gülen movement” members. == Gülen Movement controversy == In Turkey, possession of the app is deemed evidence of membership in the Gülen Movement, which was allegedly connected to the failed Turkish coup d'état attempt in July 2016. Users of ByLock were deemed terrorists in Turkish courts. According to Deutsche Welle, of the 215,000 former ByLock users, an estimated 23,000 have been detained by Turkish authorities. Some believe that the MİT and other Turkish authorities manipulated the ByLock database in order to arrest suspected members of the Gülen Movement. Tuncay Beşikçi, a computer forensic expert in Turkey, emphasized that "the demands to investigate and analyze ByLock data from independent institutions are refused by the Turkish courts. But it is not normal". Tuncay Beşikçi believes that this application is precisely one of the channels for Gülen molecules to communicate and can also monitor the activities of other members of the organization. He also stated that the developers behind the Mor Beyin app, deliberately set a plan in motion that would put thousands of innocent people in prison as a cover for the Gülen movement. In December 2017, Turkish authorities revealed that almost half the people who had been prosecuted for having ByLock on their smartphones would have their legal cases reviewed, as they could have been redirected to the app without their knowledge. Following the failed coup attempt on 15 July 2016, the use of the ByLock messaging application by members of the Gülen Movement was the sole evidence in investigations and prosecutions to justify arrests and convictions for "membership in an armed terrorist organization." However, these decisions have been considered human rights violations by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. Some of the relevant decisions include the following: === Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights === On 20 July 2021, in the case of Tekin Akgün v. Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the use of the ByLock messaging application, unless supported by other evidence, does not create a reasonable suspicion of a crime. Based on this reasoning, the court found that the detention order violated Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to liberty and security. In the Yüksel Yalçınkaya v. Turkey decision on 26 September 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) examined an appeal against a conviction based on the use of ByLock. The Court ruled that the failure to provide an opportunity to challenge the authenticity of the ByLock data violated the right to a fair trial (Article 6 of the ECHR). The Court also stated that the mere use of ByLock could not be considered sufficient evidence for membership in an armed terrorist organization. It further noted that local courts had established an automatic presumption of guilt based solely on ByLock use, creating a broad and unpredictable interpretation of the law, making it nearly impossible for the accused to exonerate themselves. Therefore, the Court concluded that the conviction based on the use of ByLock violated the principle of no punishment without law (Article 7 of the ECHR). On 22 July 2025, in the Demirhan and 238 Others case, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) consolidated the applications of 239 individuals who had been convicted of "membership in an armed terrorist organization" based on their use of ByLock, as determined by 239 separate courts in Turkey. The Court ruled that the convictions violated the right to a fair trial under Article 6 and the principle of no punishment without law under Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ruling stated that the Turkish courts' "categorical approach" to the use of ByLock lacked legal foundation. In this context, it was emphasized that anyone who had used ByLock could not be convicted of membership in an armed terrorist organization based solely on this reasoning. The ruling also stated that, due to the large number of similar applications, the issue was "systemic in nature" and it called for a national solution to be developed by Turkey. While the Court did not order compensation for the 239 applicants, it emphasized that reopening the trial to ensure the enforcement of the violation ruling was the most appropriate remedy. This ruling, which confirms the violation finding in the Yüksel Yalçınkaya case of 26 September 2023, is considered a continuation of the ECHR's case law concerning trials based on ByLock evidence. === Decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee and Working Group === In the İsmet Özçelik and Turgay Karaman v. Turkey decision, dated 28 May 2019 (Application No. 2980/2017), the UN Human Rights Committee ruled that the use of ByLock and allegations of depositing money into Bank Asya could not justify the applicants' arrests. In the Mestan Yayman v. Turkey decision (Opinion No. 42/2018 – 21 August 2018) by the UN Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, it was stated that using a public messaging application like ByLock cannot be considered criminal evidence, and that the use of such an application falls under the scope of freedom of thought and expression. The dozens of decisions later issued by the UN Human Rights Council Working Group are of the same nature.
Read more →
ViBe

ViBe is a background subtraction algorithm which has been presented at the IEEE ICASSP 2009 conference and was refined in later publications. More precisely, it is a software module for extracting background information from moving images. It has been developed by Oliver Barnich and Marc Van Droogenbroeck of the Montefiore Institute, University of Liège, Belgium. ViBe is patented: the patent covers various aspects such as stochastic replacement, spatial diffusion, and non-chronological handling. ViBe is written in the programming language C, and has been implemented on CPU, GPU and FPGA. == Technical description == Source: === Pixel model and classification process === Many advanced techniques are used to provide an estimate of the temporal probability density function (pdf) of a pixel x. ViBe's approach is different, as it imposes the influence of a value in the polychromatic space to be limited to the local neighborhood. In practice, ViBe does not estimate the pdf, but uses a set of previously observed sample values as a pixel model. To classify a value pt(x), it is compared to its closest values among the set of samples. === Model update: Sample values lifespan policy === ViBe ensures a smooth exponentially decaying lifespan for the sample values that constitute the pixel models. This makes ViBe able to successfully deal with concomitant events with a single model of a reasonable size for each pixel. This is achieved by choosing, randomly, which sample to replace when updating a pixel model. Once the sample to be discarded has been chosen, the new value replaces the discarded sample. The pixel model that would result from the update of a given pixel model with a given pixel sample cannot be predicted since the value to be discarded is chosen at random. === Model update: Spatial Consistency === To ensure the spatial consistency of the whole image model and handle practical situations such as small camera movements or slowly evolving background objects, ViBe uses a technique similar to that developed for the updating process in which it chooses at random and update a pixel model in the neighborhood of the current pixel. By denoting NG(x) and p(x) respectively the spatial neighborhood of a pixel x and its value, and assuming that it was decided to update the set of samples of x by inserting p(x), then ViBe also use this value p(x) to update the set of samples of one of the pixels in the neighborhood NG(x), chosen at random. As a result, ViBe is able to produce spatially coherent results directly without the use of any post-processing method. === Model initialization === Although the model could easily recover from any type of initialization, for example by choosing a set of random values, it is convenient to get an accurate background estimate as soon as possible. Ideally a segmentation algorithm would like to be able to segment the video sequences starting from the second frame, the first frame being used to initialize the model. Since no temporal information is available prior to the second frame, ViBe populates the pixel models with values found in the spatial neighborhood of each pixel; more precisely, it initializes the background model with values taken randomly in each pixel neighborhood of the first frame. The background estimate is therefore valid starting from the second frame of a video sequence.
Read more →
Underwater computer vision

Underwater computer vision is a subfield of computer vision. In recent years, with the development of underwater vehicles ( ROV, AUV, gliders), the need to be able to record and process huge amounts of information has become increasingly important. Applications range from inspection of underwater structures for the offshore industry to the identification and counting of fishes for biological research. However, no matter how big the impact of this technology can be to industry and research, it still is in a very early stage of development compared to traditional computer vision. One reason for this is that, the moment the camera goes into the water, a whole new set of challenges appear. On one hand, cameras have to be made waterproof, marine corrosion deteriorates materials quickly and access and modifications to experimental setups are costly, both in time and resources. On the other hand, the physical properties of the water make light behave differently, changing the appearance of a same object with variations of depth, organic material, currents, temperature etc. == Applications == Seafloor survey Vehicle navigation and positioning Biological monitoring {possibly aquatic biomonitoring) Video mosaics as visual navigation maps Submarine pipeline inspection Wreckage visualization Maintenance of underwater structures Drowning detection systems == Medium differences == === Illumination === In air, light comes from the whole hemisphere on cloudy days, and is dominated by the sun. In water direct lighting comes from a cone about 96° wide above the scene. This phenomenon is called Snell's window. Artificial lighting can be used where natural light levels are insufficient and where the light path is too long to produce acceptable colour, as the loss of colour is a function of the total distance through water from the source to the camera lens port. === Light attenuation === Unlike air, water attenuates light exponentially. This results in hazy images with very low contrast. The main reasons for light attenuation are light absorption (where energy is removed from the light) and light scattering, by which the direction of light is changed. Light scattering can further be divided into forward scattering, which results in an increased blurriness and backward scattering that limits the contrast and is responsible for the characteristic veil of underwater images. Both scattering and attenuation are heavily influenced by the amount of organic matter dissolved or suspended in the water. Light attenuation in water is also a function of the wavelength. This means that different colours are attenuated at different rates, leading to colour degradation.with depth and distance. Red and orange light are attenuated faster, followed by yellows and greens. Blue is the least attenuated visible wavelength. === Artificial lighting === == Challenges == In high level computer vision, human structures are frequently used as image features for image matching in different applications. However, the sea bottom lacks such features, making it hard to find correspondences in two images. In order to be able to use a camera in the water, a watertight housing is required. However, refraction will happen at the water-glass and glass-air interface due to differences in density of the materials. This has the effect of introducing a non-linear image deformation. The motion of the vehicle presents another special challenge. Underwater vehicles are constantly moving due to currents and other phenomena. This introduces another uncertainty to algorithms, where small motions may appear in all directions. This can be specially important for video tracking. In order to reduce this problem image stabilization algorithms may be applied. == Relevant technology == === Image restoration === Image restoration< techniques are intended to model the degradation process and then invert it, obtaining the new image after solving. It is generally a complex approach that requires plenty of parameters that vary a lot between different water conditions. === Image enhancement === Image enhancement only tries to provide a visually more appealing image without taking the physical image formation process into account. These methods are usually simpler and less computational intensive. === Color correction === Various algorithms exist that perform automatic color correction. The UCM (Unsupervised Color Correction Method), for example, does this in the following steps: It firstly reduces the color cast by equalizing the color values. Then it enhances contrast by stretching the red histogram towards the maximum and finally saturation and intensity components are optimized. == Underwater stereo vision == It is usually assumed that stereo cameras have been calibrated previously, geometrically and radiometrically. This leads to the assumption that corresponding pixels should have the same color. However this can not be guaranteed in an underwater scene, because of dispersion and backscatter. However, it is possible to digitally model this phenomenon and create a virtual image with those effects removed == Other application fields == Imaging sonars have become more and more accessible and gained resolution, delivering better images. Sidescan sonars are used to produce complete maps of regions of the sea floor stitching together sequences of sonar images. However, sonar images often lack proper contrast and are degraded by artefacts and distortions due to noise, attitude changes of the AUV/ROV carrying the sonar or non uniform beam patterns. Another common problem with sonar computer vision is the comparatively low frame rate of sonar images.
Read more →
Amazon Q

Amazon Q is a chatbot developed by Amazon for enterprise use. Based on both Amazon Titan and GPT-5, it was announced on November 28, 2023. At launch, it was a part of the Amazon Web Services management console. Amazon CodeWhisperer is a part of Amazon Q Developer, a part of Amazon Q. == History == Amazon's business-focused chatbot Q was announced on November 28, 2023 in a preview, with a full version available at $20 per person per month. On July 19, 2025, the Amazon Q Visual Studio Code extension was compromised to delete the user's home directory. The issue was fixed on July 21. == Capabilities == Q can be prompted to summarize long documents and group chats, create charts, data analysis and write code. Q is also capable of accessing non-Amazon services. The chatbot is based on Amazon Titan and GPT-5, and uses the Amazon Bedrock repository of foundational models. It is part of the Amazon Web Services management console.
Read more →
LRE Map

The LRE Map (Language Resources and Evaluation) is a freely accessible large database on resources dedicated to Natural language processing. The original feature of LRE Map is that the records are collected during the submission of different major Natural language processing conferences. The records are then cleaned and gathered into a global database called "LRE Map". The LRE Map is intended to be an instrument for collecting information about language resources and to become, at the same time, a community for users, a place to share and discover resources, discuss opinions, provide feedback, discover new trends, etc. It is an instrument for discovering, searching and documenting language resources, here intended in a broad sense, as both data and tools. The large amount of information contained in the Map can be analyzed in many different ways. For instance, the LRE Map can provide information about the most frequent type of resource, the most represented language, the applications for which resources are used or are being developed, the proportion of new resources vs. already existing ones, or the way in which resources are distributed to the community. == Context == Several institutions worldwide maintain catalogues of language resources (ELRA, LDC, NICT Universal Catalogue, ACL Data and Code Repository, OLAC, LT World, etc.) However, it has been estimated that only 10% of existing resources are known, either through distribution catalogues or via direct publicity by providers (web sites and the like). The rest remains hidden, the only occasions where it briefly emerges being when a resource is presented in the context of a research paper or report at some conference. Even in this case, nevertheless, it might be that a resource remains in the background simply because the focus of the research is not on the resource per se. == History == The LRE Map originated under the name "LREC Map" during the preparation of LREC 2010 conference. More specifically, the idea was discussed within the FlaReNet project, and in collaboration with ELRA and the Institute of Computational Linguistics of CNR in Pisa, the Map was put in place at LREC 2010. The LREC organizers asked the authors to provide some basic information about all the resources (in a broad sense, i.e. including tools, standards and evaluation packages), either used or created, described in their papers. All these descriptors were then gathered in a global matrix called the LREC Map. The same methodology and requirements from the authors has been then applied and extended to other conferences, namely COLING-2010, EMNLP-2010, RANLP-2011, LREC 2012, LREC 2014 and LREC 2016. After this generalization to other conferences, the LREC Map has been renamed as the LRE Map. == Size and content == The size of the database increases over time. The data collected amount to 4776 entries. Each resource is described according to the following attributes: Resource type, e.g. lexicon, annotation tool, tagger/parser. Resource production status, e.g. newly created finished, existing-updated. Resource availability, e.g. freely available, from data center. Resource modality, e.g. speech, written, sign language. Resource use, e.g. named entity recognition, language identification, machine translation. Resource language, e.g. English, 23 European Union languages, official languages of India. == Uses == The LRE map is a very important tool to chart the NLP field. Compared to other studied based on subjective scorings, the LRE map is made of real facts. The map has a great potential for many uses, in addition to being an information gathering tool: It is a great instrument for monitoring the evolution of the field (useful for funders), if applied in different contexts and times. It can be seen as a huge joint effort, the beginning of an even larger cooperative action not just among few leaders but among all the researchers. It is also an "educational" means towards the broad acknowledgment of the need of meta-research activities with the active involvement of many. It is also instrumental in introducing the new notion of "citation of resources" that could provide an award and a means of scholarly recognition for researchers engaged in resource creation. It is used to help the organization of the conferences of the field like LREC. == Derived matrices == The data were then cleaned and sorted by Joseph Mariani (CNRS-LIMSI IMMI) and Gil Francopoulo (CNRS-LIMSI IMMI + Tagmatica) in order to compute the various matrices of the final FLaReNet reports. One of them, the matrix for written data at LREC 2010 is as follows: English is the most studied language. Secondly, come French and German languages and then Italian and Spanish. == Future == The LRE Map has been extended to Language Resources and Evaluation Journal and other conferences.
Read more →
Loebner Prize

The Loebner Prize was an annual competition in artificial intelligence that awarded prizes to the computer programs considered by the judges to be the most human-like. The format of the competition was that of a standard Turing test. In each round, a human judge simultaneously held textual conversations with a computer program and a human being via computer. Based upon the responses, the judge would attempt to determine which was which. The contest was launched in 1990 by Hugh Loebner in conjunction with the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, Massachusetts, United States. In 2004 and 2005, it was held in Loebner's apartment in New York City. Within the field of artificial intelligence, the Loebner Prize is somewhat controversial; the most prominent critic, Marvin Minsky, called it a publicity stunt that does not help the field along. Beginning in 2014, it was organised by the AISB at Bletchley Park. It has also been associated with Flinders University, Dartmouth College, the Science Museum in London, University of Reading and Ulster University, Magee Campus, Derry, UK City of Culture. For the final 2019 competition, the format changed. There was no panel of judges. Instead, the chatbots were judged by the public and there were to be no human competitors. The prize has been reported as defunct as of 2020. == Prizes == Originally, $2,000 was awarded for the most human-seeming program in the competition. The prize was $3,000 in 2005 and $2,250 in 2006. In 2008, $3,000 was awarded. In addition, there were two one-time-only prizes that have never been awarded. $25,000 is offered for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human and which can convince judges that the human is the computer program. $100,000 is the reward for the first program that judges cannot distinguish from a real human in a Turing test that includes deciphering and understanding text, visual, and auditory input. The competition was planned to end after the achievement of this prize. == Competition rules and restrictions == The rules varied over the years and early competitions featured restricted conversation Turing tests but since 1995 the discussion has been unrestricted. For the three entries in 2007, Robert Medeksza, Noah Duncan and Rollo Carpenter, some basic "screening questions" were used by the sponsor to evaluate the state of the technology. These included simple questions about the time, what round of the contest it is, etc.; general knowledge ("What is a hammer for?"); comparisons ("Which is faster, a train or a plane?"); and questions demonstrating memory for preceding parts of the same conversation. "All nouns, adjectives and verbs will come from a dictionary suitable for children or adolescents under the age of 12." Entries did not need to respond "intelligently" to the questions to be accepted. For the first time in 2008 the sponsor allowed introduction of a preliminary phase to the contest opening up the competition to previously disallowed web-based entries judged by a variety of invited interrogators. The available rules do not state how interrogators are selected or instructed. Interrogators (who judge the systems) have limited time: 5 minutes per entity in the 2003 competition, 20+ per pair in 2004–2007 competitions, 5 minutes to conduct simultaneous conversations with a human and the program in 2008–2009, increased to 25 minutes of simultaneous conversation since 2010. == Criticisms == The prize has long been scorned by experts in the field, for a variety of reasons. It is regarded by many as a publicity stunt. Marvin Minsky scathingly offered a "prize" to anyone who could stop the competition. Loebner responded by jokingly observing that Minsky's offering a prize to stop the competition effectively made him a co-sponsor. The rules of the competition have encouraged poorly qualified judges to make rapid judgements. Interactions between judges and competitors was originally very brief, for example effectively 2.5 mins of questioning, which permitted only a few questions. Questioning was initially restricted to a single topic of the contestant's choice, such as "whimsical conversation", a domain suiting standard chatbot tricks. Competition entrants do not aim at understanding or intelligence but resort to basic ELIZA style tricks, and successful entrants find deception and pretense is rewarded. == Contests == See article history for more details of some earlier contests. A very incomplete listing of a few of the contests: === 2003 === In 2003, the contest was organised by Professor Richard H. R. Harper and Dr. Lynne Hamill from the Digital World Research Centre at the University of Surrey. Although no bot passed the Turing test, the winner was Jabberwock, created by Juergen Pirner. Second was Elbot (Fred Roberts, Artificial Solutions). Third was Jabberwacky, (Rollo Carpenter). === 2006 === In 2006, the contest was organised by Tim Child (CEO of Televirtual) and Huma Shah. On August 30, the four finalists were announced: Rollo Carpenter Richard Churchill and Marie-Claire Jenkins Noah Duncan Robert Medeksza The contest was held on 17 September in the VR theatre, Torrington Place campus of University College London. The judges included the University of Reading's cybernetics professor, Kevin Warwick, a professor of artificial intelligence, John Barnden (specialist in metaphor research at the University of Birmingham), a barrister, Victoria Butler-Cole and a journalist, Graham Duncan-Rowe. The latter's experience of the event can be found in an article in Technology Review. The winner was 'Joan', based on Jabberwacky, both created by Rollo Carpenter. === 2007 === The 2007 competition was held on October 21 in New York City. The judges were: computer science professor Russ Abbott, philosophy professor Hartry Field, psychology assistant professor Clayton Curtis and English lecturer Scott Hutchins. No bot passed the Turing test, but the judges ranked the three contestants as follows: 1st: Robert Medeksza, creator of Ultra Hal 2nd: Noah Duncan, a private entry, creator of Cletus 3rd: Rollo Carpenter from Icogno, creator of Jabberwacky The winner received $2,250 and the annual medal. The runners-up received $250 each. === 2008 === The 2008 competition was organised by professor Kevin Warwick, coordinated by Huma Shah and held on October 12 at the University of Reading, UK. After testing by over one hundred judges during the preliminary phase, in June and July 2008, six finalists were selected from thirteen original entrant artificial conversational entities (ACEs). Five of those invited competed in the finals: Brother Jerome, Peter Cole and Benji Adams Elbot, Fred Roberts / Artificial Solutions Eugene Goostman, Vladimir Veselov, Eugene Demchenko and Sergey Ulasen Jabberwacky, Rollo Carpenter Ultra Hal, Robert Medeksza In the finals, each of the judges was given five minutes to conduct simultaneous, split-screen conversations with two hidden entities. Elbot of Artificial Solutions won the 2008 Loebner Prize bronze award, for most human-like artificial conversational entity, through fooling three of the twelve judges who interrogated it (in the human-parallel comparisons) into believing it was human. This is coming very close to the 30% traditionally required to consider that a program has actually passed the Turing test. Eugene Goostman and Ultra Hal both deceived one judge each that it was the human. Will Pavia, a journalist for The Times, has written about his experience; a Loebner finals' judge, he was deceived by Elbot and Eugene. Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah have reported on the parallel-paired Turing tests. === 2009 === The 2009 Loebner Prize Competition was held September 6, 2009, at the Brighton Centre, Brighton UK in conjunction with the Interspeech 2009 conference. The prize amount for 2009 was $3,000. Entrants were David Levy, Rollo Carpenter, and Mohan Embar, who finished in that order. The writer Brian Christian participated in the 2009 Loebner Prize Competition as a human confederate, and described his experiences at the competition in his book The Most Human Human. === 2010 === The 2010 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 23 at California State University, Los Angeles. The 2010 competition was the 20th running of the contest. The winner was Bruce Wilcox with Suzette. === 2011 === The 2011 Loebner Prize Competition was held on October 19 at the University of Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom. The prize amount for 2011 was $4,000. The four finalists and their chatterbots were Bruce Wilcox (Rosette), Adeena Mignogna (Zoe), Mohan Embar (Chip Vivant) and Ron Lee (Tutor), who finished in that order. That year there was an addition of a panel of junior judges, namely Georgia-Mae Lindfield, William Dunne, Sam Keat and Kirill Jerdev. The results of the junior contest were markedly different from the main contest, with chatterbots Tutor and Zoe tying for first place and Chip Vivant and Rosette coming in third and fourt
Read more →
Legal information retrieval

Legal information retrieval is the science of information retrieval applied to legal text, including legislation, case law, and scholarly works. Accurate legal information retrieval is important to provide access to the law to laymen and legal professionals. Its importance has increased because of the vast and quickly increasing amount of legal documents available through electronic means. Legal information retrieval is a part of the growing field of legal informatics. In a legal setting, it is frequently important to retrieve all information related to a specific query. However, commonly used boolean search methods (exact matches of specified terms) on full text legal documents have been shown to have an average recall rate as low as 20 percent, meaning that only 1 in 5 relevant documents are actually retrieved. In that case, researchers believed that they had retrieved over 75% of relevant documents. This may result in failing to retrieve important or precedential cases. In some jurisdictions this may be especially problematic, as legal professionals are ethically obligated to be reasonably informed as to relevant legal documents. Legal Information Retrieval attempts to increase the effectiveness of legal searches by increasing the number of relevant documents (providing a high recall rate) and reducing the number of irrelevant documents (a high precision rate). This is a difficult task, as the legal field is prone to jargon, polysemes (words that have different meanings when used in a legal context), and constant change. Techniques used to achieve these goals generally fall into three categories: boolean retrieval, manual classification of legal text, and natural language processing of legal text. == Problems == Application of standard information retrieval techniques to legal text can be more difficult than application in other subjects. One key problem is that the law rarely has an inherent taxonomy. Instead, the law is generally filled with open-ended terms, which may change over time. This can be especially true in common law countries, where each decided case can subtly change the meaning of a certain word or phrase. Legal information systems must also be programmed to deal with law-specific words and phrases. Though this is less problematic in the context of words which exist solely in law, legal texts also frequently use polysemes, words may have different meanings when used in a legal or common-speech manner, potentially both within the same document. The legal meanings may be dependent on the area of law in which it is applied. For example, in the context of European Union legislation, the term "worker" has four different meanings: Any worker as defined in Article 3(a) of Directive 89/391/EEC who habitually uses display screen equipment as a significant part of his normal work. Any person employed by an employer, including trainees and apprentices but excluding domestic servants; Any person carrying out an occupation on board a vessel, including trainees and apprentices, but excluding port pilots and shore personnel carrying out work on board a vessel at the quayside; Any person who, in the Member State concerned, is protected as an employee under national employment law and in accordance with national practice; It also has the common meaning: A person who works at a specific occupation. Though the terms may be similar, correct information retrieval must differentiate between the intended use and irrelevant uses in order to return the correct results. Even if a system overcomes the language problems inherent in law, it must still determine the relevancy of each result. In the context of judicial decisions, this requires determining the precedential value of the case. Case decisions from senior or superior courts may be more relevant than those from lower courts, even where the lower court's decision contains more discussion of the relevant facts. The opposite may be true, however, if the senior court has only a minor discussion of the topic (for example, if it is a secondary consideration in the case). An information retrieval system must also be aware of the authority of the jurisdiction. A case from a binding authority is most likely of more value than one from a non-binding authority. Additionally, the intentions of the user may determine which cases they find valuable. For instance, where a legal professional is attempting to argue a specific interpretation of law, he might find a minor court's decision which supports his position more valuable than a senior courts position which does not. He may also value similar positions from different areas of law, different jurisdictions, or dissenting opinions. Overcoming these problems can be made more difficult because of the large number of cases available. The number of legal cases available via electronic means is constantly increasing (in 2003, US appellate courts handed down approximately 500 new cases per day), meaning that an accurate legal information retrieval system must incorporate methods of both sorting past data and managing new data. == Techniques == === Boolean searches === Boolean searches, where a user may specify terms such as use of specific words or judgments by a specific court, are the most common type of search available via legal information retrieval systems. They are widely implemented but overcome few of the problems discussed above. The recall and precision rates of these searches vary depending on the implementation and searches analyzed. One study found a basic boolean search's recall rate to be roughly 20%, and its precision rate to be roughly 79%. Another study implemented a generic search (that is, not designed for legal uses) and found a recall rate of 56% and a precision rate of 72% among legal professionals. Both numbers increased when searches were run by non-legal professionals, to a 68% recall rate and 77% precision rate. This is likely explained because of the use of complex legal terms by the legal professionals. === Manual classification === In order to overcome the limits of basic boolean searches, information systems have attempted to classify case laws and statutes into more computer friendly structures. Usually, this results in the creation of an ontology to classify the texts, based on the way a legal professional might think about them. These attempt to link texts on the basis of their type, their value, and/or their topic areas. Most major legal search providers now implement some sort of classification search, such as Westlaw's “Natural Language” or LexisNexis' Headnote searches. Additionally, both of these services allow browsing of their classifications, via Westlaw's West Key Numbers or Lexis' Headnotes. Though these two search algorithms are proprietary and secret, it is known that they employ manual classification of text (though this may be computer-assisted). These systems can help overcome the majority of problems inherent in legal information retrieval systems, in that manual classification has the greatest chances of identifying landmark cases and understanding the issues that arise in the text. In one study, ontological searching resulted in a precision rate of 82% and a recall rate of 97% among legal professionals. The legal texts included, however, were carefully controlled to just a few areas of law in a specific jurisdiction. The major drawback to this approach is the requirement of using highly skilled legal professionals and large amounts of time to classify texts. As the amount of text available continues to increase, some have stated their belief that manual classification is unsustainable. === Natural language processing === In order to reduce the reliance on legal professionals and the amount of time needed, efforts have been made to create a system to automatically classify legal text and queries. Adequate translation of both would allow accurate information retrieval without the high cost of human classification. These automatic systems generally employ Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques that are adapted to the legal domain, and also require the creation of a legal ontology. Though multiple systems have been postulated, few have reported results. One system, “SMILE,” which attempted to automatically extract classifications from case texts, resulted in an f-measure (which is a calculation of both recall rate and precision) of under 0.3 (compared to perfect f-measure of 1.0). This is probably much lower than an acceptable rate for general usage. Despite the limited results, many theorists predict that the evolution of such systems will eventually replace manual classification systems. === Citation-Based ranking === In the mid-90s the Room 5 case law retrieval project used citation mining for summaries and ranked its search results based on citation type and count. This slightly pre-dated the PageRank algorithm at Stanford which was also a citation-based ranking. Ranking of results was based
Read more →
Ed (chatbot)

Ed was a chatbot co-developed by the Los Angeles Unified School District and AllHere Education. Described as a learning acceleration platform, it was the first personal assistant for students in the United States. Part of the district's Individual Acceleration Plan, it was able to interact with students both verbally and visually, offering support in 100 languages. The chatbot was launched on March 20, 2024, as part of the district's plan for academic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and to improve overall academic performance. Utilizing artificial intelligence, Ed organizes data and reports on grades, test scores, and attendance, creating individualized plans for each student. After the company behind it, AllHere, collapsed, the district shuttered operations of the chatbot on June 14, 2024. The firm is under investigation by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation. == History == On February 14, 2022, Alberto M. Carvalho became the Superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District, pledging to give the district a full academic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. In December 2022, he announced the Individual Acceleration Plan for the district, which aimed to provide each student with a unique progress report and help them determine if they were on track to graduate. The district faced criticism from disability advocates for its management of Individualized Education Programs, and in April 2022, the United States Department of Education announced that the district had failed to provide appropriate educational services to students with disabilities during the pandemic. The district had been grappling with significant absenteeism issues since the pandemic, which led to declining academic performance and disengagement among students. On February 17, 2023, the district issued a request for proposals to develop a fully integrated portal system. Later that year, they signed a $6 million, five-year contract with AllHere Education, a Boston-based company founded in 2016. The introduction of Ed follows the public launch of ChatGPT, which has been utilized by both teachers and students in educational settings. On August 4, 2023, during an annual address at the Walt Disney Concert Hall, Carvalho and the Los Angeles Unified School District announced the launch of Ed. The district invested $4 million into the chatbot, with Carvalho noting that this cost would be halved thanks to donor and grant funding. The chatbot was launched on March 20, 2024. Following its launch, a press conference was held to address security and technology concerns. Carvalho stated that the district had collaborated with security companies and incorporated filters to screen for threatening language. Months after its launch, AllHere Education furloughed most of its staff on June 14, citing their “current financial position” on its website as the reason. After learning about the furlough, the district terminated its dealings with AllHere Education. However, it stated its intention to bring the chatbot back in the future once officials determine the best course of action. Carvalho announced that he would appoint an independent task force to review what went wrong with AllHere Education and the chatbot. On February 25, 2026, the FBI served a search warrant on Carvalho’s home and office in connection with AllHere. The FBI also raided the LAUSD's headquarters. == Service == The chatbot was described as a personal assistant and a "one-stop shop for parents and students" who want to see information about a student's attendance and grades, as well as other resources from the district. Additionally, the application can function as an alarm clock, provide daily lunch menus from the school cafeteria, and offer updates on the location of school buses. The chatbot also helps students and parents who do not speak English as their first language by translating displayed information into approximately 100 different languages. The application can also help with submitting applications and give updates on progress and upcoming assignments. The district stated that the primary goal of Ed was to actively motivate students to complete homework and other tasks. == Reception == The chatbot received a mostly positive reception among parents and observers upon its launch. Some parents and teachers expressed caution about the technology, voicing concerns that the district's push for its implementation lacked public accountability. Rob Nelson from the University of Pennsylvania described the district's strategy as risky, saying that the release felt "like the beginning of a Clippy-level disaster". After the chatbot's shutdown, The 74 criticized it for misusing student data. Chris Whiteley, a former software engineer at AllHere Education, alleged that the data collected by the chatbot likely violated the district's data privacy rules.
Read more →
Luxafor

Luxafor () is a brand of office productivity tools designed to improve efficiency and communication in workplaces. The brands main product is LED status indicators for use in office settings. Luxafor is a product line under the company SIA Greynut, based in Riga, Latvia. == History == Luxafor was developed by the technology company SIA Greynut. The brand first gained attention through a Kickstarter campaign in 2015, which aimed to fund its initial product, the Luxafor Flag. Although the campaign was unsuccessful in reaching its funding goal, the product was still brought to market. In 2017, Luxafor launched another Kickstarter campaign for the Luxafor Bluetooth, a wireless version of its LED status indicator. This campaign also did not meet its funding goal, but like its predecessor, the product was still developed and released. Despite initial setbacks, Luxafor Bluetooth has become one of the brand's leading products. == Products == Luxafors main product range is LED status indicators, including: === Luxafor Flag === A USB-powered LED indicator that shows different colors to signal the user's availability. === Luxafor Bluetooth === A wireless LED indicator controlled via Bluetooth, integrating with productivity tools like Slack and Microsoft Teams. === Luxafor Switch === An advanced status indicator designed to manage room and workspace availability. === Other === Other Luxafor products include CO2 Dongle, Smart Button, Mute Button, Pomodoro Timer and others. == Features == Luxafor products are known for their customizable indicators, integration capabilities with IFTTT, Zapier, and remote control features. They are compatible with various operating systems, including Windows and macOS, and can be integrated with numerous communication and productivity platforms, like Microsoft Teams and Cisco Jabber.
Read more →
Rule-based machine translation

Rule-based machine translation (RBMT) is a classical approach of machine translation systems based on linguistic information about source and target languages. Such information is retrieved from (unilingual, bilingual or multilingual) dictionaries and grammars covering the main semantic, morphological, and syntactic regularities of each language. Having input sentences, an RBMT system generates output sentences on the basis of analysis of both the source and the target languages involved. RBMT has been progressively superseded by more efficient methods, particularly neural machine translation. == History == The first RBMT systems were developed in the early 1970s. The most important steps of this evolution were the emergence of the following RBMT systems: Systran Japanese MT systems Today, other common RBMT systems include: Apertium GramTrans == Types of RBMT == There are three different types of rule-based machine translation systems: Direct Systems (Dictionary Based Machine Translation) map input to output with basic rules. Transfer RBMT Systems (Transfer Based Machine Translation) employ morphological and syntactical analysis. Interlingual RBMT Systems (Interlingua) use an abstract meaning. RBMT systems can also be characterized as the systems opposite to Example-based Systems of Machine Translation (Example Based Machine Translation), whereas Hybrid Machine Translations Systems make use of many principles derived from RBMT. == Basic principles == The main approach of RBMT systems is based on linking the structure of the given input sentence with the structure of the demanded output sentence, necessarily preserving their unique meaning. The following example can illustrate the general frame of RBMT: A girl eats an apple. Source Language = English; Demanded Target Language = German Minimally, to get a German translation of this English sentence one needs: A dictionary that will map each English word to an appropriate German word. Rules representing regular English sentence structure. Rules representing regular German sentence structure. And finally, we need rules according to which one can relate these two structures together. Accordingly, we can state the following stages of translation: 1st: getting basic part-of-speech information of each source word: a = indef.article; girl = noun; eats = verb; an = indef.article; apple = noun 2nd: getting syntactic information about the verb "to eat": NP-eat-NP; here: eat – Present Simple, 3rd Person Singular, Active Voice 3rd: parsing the source sentence: (NP an apple) = the object of eat Often only partial parsing is sufficient to get to the syntactic structure of the source sentence and to map it onto the structure of the target sentence. 4th: translate English words into German a (category = indef.article) => ein (category = indef.article) girl (category = noun) => Mädchen (category = noun) eat (category = verb) => essen (category = verb) an (category = indef. article) => ein (category = indef.article) apple (category = noun) => Apfel (category = noun) 5th: Mapping dictionary entries into appropriate inflected forms (final generation): A girl eats an apple. => Ein Mädchen isst einen Apfel. == Ontologies == An ontology is a formal representation of knowledge that includes the concepts (such as objects, processes etc.) in a domain and some relations between them. If the stored information is of linguistic nature, one can speak of a lexicon. In NLP, ontologies can be used as a source of knowledge for machine translation systems. With access to a large knowledge base, rule-based systems can be enabled to resolve many (especially lexical) ambiguities on their own. In the following classic examples, as humans, we are able to interpret the prepositional phrase according to the context because we use our world knowledge, stored in our lexicons:I saw a man/star/molecule with a microscope/telescope/binoculars.Since the syntax does not change, a traditional rule-based machine translation system may not be able to differentiate between the meanings. With a large enough ontology as a source of knowledge however, the possible interpretations of ambiguous words in a specific context can be reduced. === Building ontologies === The ontology generated for the PANGLOSS knowledge-based machine translation system in 1993 may serve as an example of how an ontology for NLP purposes can be compiled: A large-scale ontology is necessary to help parsing in the active modules of the machine translation system. In the PANGLOSS example, about 50,000 nodes were intended to be subsumed under the smaller, manually-built upper (abstract) region of the ontology. Because of its size, it had to be created automatically. The goal was to merge the two resources LDOCE online and WordNet to combine the benefits of both: concise definitions from Longman, and semantic relations allowing for semi-automatic taxonomization to the ontology from WordNet. A definition match algorithm was created to automatically merge the correct meanings of ambiguous words between the two online resources, based on the words that the definitions of those meanings have in common in LDOCE and WordNet. Using a similarity matrix, the algorithm delivered matches between meanings including a confidence factor. This algorithm alone, however, did not match all meanings correctly on its own. A second hierarchy match algorithm was therefore created which uses the taxonomic hierarchies found in WordNet (deep hierarchies) and partially in LDOCE (flat hierarchies). This works by first matching unambiguous meanings, then limiting the search space to only the respective ancestors and descendants of those matched meanings. Thus, the algorithm matched locally unambiguous meanings (for instance, while the word seal as such is ambiguous, there is only one meaning of seal in the animal subhierarchy). Both algorithms complemented each other and helped constructing a large-scale ontology for the machine translation system. The WordNet hierarchies, coupled with the matching definitions of LDOCE, were subordinated to the ontology's upper region. As a result, the PANGLOSS MT system was able to make use of this knowledge base, mainly in its generation element. == Components == The RBMT system contains: a SL morphological analyser - analyses a source language word and provides the morphological information; a SL parser - is a syntax analyser which analyses source language sentences; a translator - used to translate a source language word into the target language; a TL morphological generator - works as a generator of appropriate target language words for the given grammatica information; a TL parser - works as a composer of suitable target language sentences; Several dictionaries - more specifically a minimum of three dictionaries: a SL dictionary - needed by the source language morphological analyser for morphological analysis, a bilingual dictionary - used by the translator to translate source language words into target language words, a TL dictionary - needed by the target language morphological generator to generate target language words. The RBMT system makes use of the following: a Source Grammar for the input language which builds syntactic constructions from input sentences; a Source Lexicon which captures all of the allowable vocabulary in the domain; Source Mapping Rules which indicate how syntactic heads and grammatical functions in the source language are mapped onto domain concepts and semantic roles in the interlingua; a Domain Model/Ontology which defines the classes of domain concepts and restricts the fillers of semantic roles for each class; Target Mapping Rules which indicate how domain concepts and semantic roles in the interlingua are mapped onto syntactic heads and grammatical functions in the target language; a Target Lexicon which contains appropriate target lexemes for each domain concept; a Target Grammar for the target language which realizes target syntactic constructions as linearized output sentences. == Advantages == No bilingual texts are required. This makes it possible to create translation systems for languages that have no texts in common, or even no digitized data whatsoever. Domain independent. Rules are usually written in a domain independent manner, so the vast majority of rules will "just work" in every domain, and only a few specific cases per domain may need rules written for them. No quality ceiling. Every error can be corrected with a targeted rule, even if the trigger case is extremely rare. This is in contrast to statistical systems where infrequent forms will be washed away by default. Total control. Because all rules are hand-written, you can easily debug a rule-based system to see exactly where a given error enters the system, and why. Reusability. Because RBMT systems are generally built from a strong source language analysis that is fed to a transfer step and target language generator, the source language analysis and targe
Read more →
Live Transcribe

Live Transcribe is a mobile app for real-time captioning, developed by Google for the Android operating system. Development on the application began in partnership with Gallaudet University. It was publicly released as a free beta for Android 5.0+ on the Google Play Store on February 4, 2019. As of early 2023 it had been downloaded over 500 million times. == Development == Researchers Dimitri Kanevsky, Sagar Savla and Chet Gnegy at Google developed the app in collaboration with researchers at Gallaudet University, an American university for the education of the deaf and hard of hearing. The app uses machine learning to generate captions, similar to YouTube's auto-generated captions. In August 2019, Google made Live Transcribe an open-source project. == Features == The app uses speech recognition to generate live captions in over 80 languages with varying accuracy. The app, which requires connection to the Internet to function, is available to download on the Google Play Store. A later update to the app displayed information on sounds such as clapping, laughter, music, applause, and whistling. In May 2020, the app started supporting transcription in Albanian, Burmese, Estonian, Macedonian, Mongolian, Punjabi, and Uzbek, supporting 70 languages. In March 2022, the app was updated with support to transcribe offline, without Internet connection, so long as the appropriate language pack has been installed. The offline mode is only available for devices with 6GB of RAM and certain Google Pixel devices.
Read more →
Color

Color (or colour in Commonwealth English) is the visual perception produced by the activation of the different types of cone cells in the eye caused by light. Though color is not an inherent property of matter, color perception is related to an object's light absorption, emission, reflection and transmission. For most humans, visible wavelengths of light are the ones perceived in the visible light spectrum, with three types of cone cells (trichromacy). Other animals may have a different number of cone cell types or have eyes sensitive to different wavelengths, such as bees that can distinguish ultraviolet, and thus have a different color sensitivity range. Animal perception of color originates from different light wavelength or spectral sensitivity in cone cell types, which is then processed by the brain. Colors have perceived properties such as hue, colorfulness, and lightness. Colors can also be additively mixed (mixing light) or subtractively mixed (mixing pigments). If one color is mixed in the right proportions, because of metamerism, they may look the same as another stimulus with a different reflection or emission spectrum. For convenience, colors can be organized in a color space, which when being abstracted as a mathematical color model can assign each region of color with a corresponding set of numbers. Thus, color spaces are an essential tool for color reproduction in print, photography, computer monitors, and television. Some of the most well-known color models and color spaces are RGB, CMYK, HSL/HSV, CIE Lab, and YCbCr/YUV. Because the perception of color is an important aspect of human life, different colors have been associated with emotions, activity, and nationality. Names of color regions in different cultures can have different, sometimes overlapping areas. In visual arts, color theory is used to govern the use of colors in an aesthetically pleasing and harmonious way. The theory of color includes the color complements; color balance; and classification of primary colors, secondary colors, and tertiary colors. The study of colors in general is called color science. == Physical properties == Electromagnetic radiation is characterized by its wavelength (or frequency) and its intensity. When the wavelength is within the visible spectrum (the range of wavelengths humans can perceive, approximately from 390 nm to 700 nm), it is known as "visible light". Most light sources emit light at many different wavelengths; a source's spectrum is a distribution giving its intensity at each wavelength. Although the spectrum of light arriving at the eye from a given direction determines the color sensation in that direction, there are many more possible spectral combinations than color sensations. In fact, one may formally define a color as a class of spectra that give rise to the same color sensation, although such classes would vary widely among different animal species, and to a lesser extent among individuals within the same species. In each such class, the members are called metamers of the color in question. This effect can be visualized by comparing the light sources' spectral power distributions and the resulting colors. === Spectral colors === The familiar colors of the rainbow in the spectrum—named using the Latin word for appearance or apparition by Isaac Newton in 1671—include all those colors that can be produced by visible light of a single wavelength only, the pure spectral or monochromatic colors. The spectrum above shows approximate wavelengths (in nm) for spectral colors in the visible range. Spectral colors have 100% purity, and are fully saturated. A complex mixture of spectral colors can be used to describe any color, which is the definition of a light power spectrum. The spectral colors form a continuous spectrum, and how it is divided into distinct colors linguistically is a matter of culture and historical contingency. Despite the ubiquitous ROYGBIV mnemonic used to remember the spectral colors in English, the inclusion or exclusion of colors is contentious, with disagreement often focused on indigo and cyan. Even if the subset of color terms is agreed, their wavelength ranges and borders between them may not be. The intensity of a spectral color, relative to the context in which it is viewed, may alter its perception considerably. For example, a low-intensity orange-yellow is brown, and a low-intensity yellow-green is olive green. Additionally, hue shifts towards yellow or blue happen if the intensity of a spectral light is increased; this is called Bezold–Brücke shift. In color models capable of representing spectral colors, such as CIELUV, a spectral color has the maximal saturation. In Helmholtz coordinates, this is described as 100% purity. === Color of objects === The physical color of an object depends on how it absorbs and scatters light. Most objects scatter light to some degree and do not reflect or transmit light specularly like glasses or mirrors. A transparent object allows almost all light to transmit or pass through, thus transparent objects are perceived as colorless. Conversely, an opaque object does not allow light to transmit through and instead absorbs or reflects the light it receives. Like transparent objects, translucent objects allow light to transmit through, but translucent objects are seen colored because they scatter or absorb certain wavelengths of light via internal scattering. The absorbed light is often dissipated as heat. == Color vision == === Development of theories of color vision === Although Aristotle and other ancient scientists had already written on the nature of light and color vision, it was not until Isaac Newton that light was identified as the source of the color sensation. In 1810, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe published his comprehensive Theory of Colors in which he provided a rational description of color experience, which "tells us how it originates, not what it is". In 1801, Thomas Young proposed his trichromatic theory, to explain how a wide spectrum of different wavelengths could be detected by the human eye. It would be unreasonable to suppose that the human eye contained hundreds of different receptors each responding to the presence of a specific wavelength. Instead, he suggested that the human experience of color derives from a complex interaction and mixing from the output three receptors. This theory was later confirmed by James Clerk Maxwell and refined by Hermann von Helmholtz. Maxwell experimentally demonstrated that any color could be matched with a combination of three lights. As Helmholtz puts it, "the principles of Newton's law of mixture were experimentally confirmed by Maxwell in 1856. Young's theory of color sensations, like so much else that this marvelous investigator achieved in advance of his time, remained unnoticed until Maxwell directed attention to it." At the same time as Helmholtz, Ewald Hering developed the opponent process theory of color, noting that color blindness and afterimages typically come in opponent pairs (red-green, blue-orange, yellow-violet, and black-white). Ultimately these two theories were synthesized in 1957 by Hurvich and Jameson, who showed that retinal processing corresponds to the trichromatic theory, while processing at the level of the lateral geniculate nucleus corresponds to the opponent theory. In 1931, the International Commission on Illumination (CIE), an international group of experts, developed a mathematical color model which mapped out the space of observable colors, allowing every individual color able to be specified with a set of three numbers. === Color in the eye === The ability of the human eye to distinguish colors is based upon the varying sensitivity of different cells in the retina to light of different wavelengths. Humans are trichromatic—the retina contains three types of color receptor cells, or cones. One type, relatively distinct from the other two, is most responsive to light that is perceived as blue or blue-violet, with wavelengths around 450 nm; cones of this type are sometimes called short-wavelength cones or S cones (or misleadingly, blue cones). The other two types are closely related genetically and chemically: middle-wavelength cones, M cones, or green cones are most sensitive to light perceived as green, with wavelengths around 540 nm, while the long-wavelength cones, L cones, or red cones, are most sensitive to light that is perceived as greenish yellow, with wavelengths around 570 nm. Light, no matter how complex its composition of wavelengths, is reduced to three color components by the eye. Each cone type adheres to the principle of univariance, which is that each cone's output is determined by the amount of light that falls on it over all wavelengths. For each location in the visual field, the three types of cones yield three signals based on the extent to which each is stimulated. These amounts of stimulation are sometimes called tristimulus values. The response cu
Read more →
Universal portfolio algorithm

The universal portfolio algorithm is a portfolio selection algorithm from the field of machine learning and information theory. The algorithm learns adaptively from historical data and maximizes log-optimal growth rate in the long run, per the Kelly criterion. It was introduced by the late Stanford University information theorist Thomas M. Cover. The algorithm rebalances the portfolio at the beginning of each trading period. At the beginning of the first trading period it starts with a naive diversification. In the following trading periods the portfolio composition depends on the historical total return of all possible constant-rebalanced portfolios. The universal portfolio algorithm is the predecessor of the various online portfolio selection methodologies.
Read more →
Calais (Reuters product)

Calais is a service created by Thomson Reuters that automatically extracts semantic information from web pages in a format that can be used on the semantic web. Calais was launched in January 2008, and is free to use. The technology is now available via the website of Refinitiv, a provider of financial market data and infrastructure founded in 2018, that is a subsidiary of London Stock Exchange Group. The Calais Web service reads unstructured text and returns Resource Description Framework formatted results identifying entities, facts and events within the text. The service appears to be based on technology acquired when Reuters purchased ClearForest in 2007. The technology has also been used to automatically tag blog articles, and organize museum collections. Calais uses natural language processing technologies delivered via a web service interface.
Read more →