AI Assistant Zalando

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

• 

  Data commingling

  Data commingling, in computer science, occurs when different items or kinds of data are stored in such a way that they become commonly accessible when they are supposed to remain separated. In cloud computing, this can occur where different customer data sits on the same server. Data that is commingled can present a security vulnerability. Data commingling can also occur due to high speed data transmission mixing. In this situation, data of one security level can inadvertently or purposely be mixed with data of a lower or higher security level on the same transmission portal. Portal vehicles can be wire, fiber optics, microwave or various radio frequency transmission portals. This commingling can cause breaches of security and become a source of legal issues to any entity, corporation or individual. Data commingling can also occur when personal computers and personal software programs are used for business, security, government, etc. uses. In the early formulation stages of entities, non-profit or profit corporations, LLC's, LLP's, etc., the creation and use of stand-alone computers and stand-alone networks, "absolutely unconnected" to involved individuals, is the easiest, and safest way to prevent Data Commingling.

  Read more →
• 

  Top 10 AI Paragraph Rewriters Compared (2026)

  Trying to pick the best AI paragraph rewriter? An AI paragraph rewriter is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it scales effortlessly from a single task to thousands. The best picks balance beginner-friendly simplicity with the depth power users need, and they ship updates often. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paragraph rewriter slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.

  Read more →
• 

  Machine-readable medium and data

  In communications and computing, a machine-readable medium (or computer-readable medium) is a medium capable of storing data in a format easily readable by a digital computer or a sensor. It contrasts with human-readable medium and data. The result is called machine-readable data or computer-readable data, and the data itself can be described as having machine-readability. == Data == Machine-readable data must be structured data. Attempts to create machine-readable data occurred as early as the 1960s. At the same time that seminal developments in machine-reading and natural-language processing were releasing (like Weizenbaum's ELIZA), people were anticipating the success of machine-readable functionality and attempting to create machine-readable documents. One such example was musicologist Nancy B. Reich's creation of a machine-readable catalog of composer William Jay Sydeman's works in 1966. In the United States, the OPEN Government Data Act of 14 January 2019 defines machine-readable data as "data in a format that can be easily processed by a computer without human intervention while ensuring no semantic meaning is lost." The law directs U.S. federal agencies to publish public data in such a manner, ensuring that "any public data asset of the agency is machine-readable". Machine-readable data may be classified into two groups: human-readable data that is marked up so that it can also be read by machines (e.g. microformats, RDFa, HTML), and data file formats intended principally for processing by machines (CSV, RDF, XML, JSON). These formats are only machine readable if the data contained within them is formally structured; exporting a CSV file from a badly structured spreadsheet does not meet the definition. Machine readable is not synonymous with digitally accessible. A digitally accessible document may be online, making it easier for humans to access via computers, but its content is much harder to extract, transform, and process via computer programming logic if it is not machine-readable. Extensible Markup Language (XML) is designed to be both human- and machine-readable, and Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) is used to improve the presentation of the data for human readability. For example, XSLT can be used to automatically render XML in Portable Document Format (PDF). Machine-readable data can be automatically transformed for human-readability but, generally speaking, the reverse is not true. For purposes of implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Modernization Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) defines "machine readable format" as follows: "Format in a standard computer language (not English text) that can be read automatically by a web browser or computer system. (e.g.; xml). Traditional word processing documents and portable document format (PDF) files are easily read by humans but typically are difficult for machines to interpret. Other formats such as extensible markup language (XML), (JSON), or spreadsheets with header columns that can be exported as comma separated values (CSV) are machine readable formats. As HTML is a structural markup language, discreetly labeling parts of the document, computers are able to gather document components to assemble tables of contents, outlines, literature search bibliographies, etc. It is possible to make traditional word processing documents and other formats machine readable but the documents must include enhanced structural elements." == Media == Examples of machine-readable media include magnetic media such as magnetic disks, cards, tapes, and drums, punched cards and paper tapes, optical discs, barcodes and magnetic ink characters. Common machine-readable technologies include magnetic recording, processing waveforms, and barcodes. Optical character recognition (OCR) can be used to enable machines to read information available to humans. Any information retrievable by any form of energy can be machine-readable. Examples include: Acoustics Chemical Photochemical Electrical Semiconductor used in volatile RAM microchips Floating-gate transistor used in non-volatile memory cards Radio transmission Magnetic storage Mechanical Tins And Swins Punched card Paper tape Music roll Music box cylinder or disk Grooves (See also: Audio Data) Phonograph cylinder Gramophone record DictaBelt (groove on plastic belt) Capacitance Electronic Disc Optics Optical storage Thermodynamic == Applications == === Documents === === Catalogs === === Dictionaries === === Passports ===

  Read more →
• 

  How to Choose an AI Chatbot

  Looking for the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it can save you hours every week by automating repetitive work. Most options offer a generous free tier, with paid plans unlocking higher limits, faster processing, and team features. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI chatbot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Read on for hands-on impressions, pricing tiers, and the standout features that matter.

  Read more →
• 

  Action model learning

  Action model learning (sometimes abbreviated action learning) is an area of machine learning concerned with the creation and modification of a software agent's knowledge about the effects and preconditions of the actions that can be executed within its environment. This knowledge is usually represented in a logic-based action description language and used as input for automated planners. Learning action models is important when goals change. When an agent acted for a while, it can use its accumulated knowledge about actions in the domain to make better decisions. Thus, learning action models differs from reinforcement learning. It enables reasoning about actions instead of expensive trials in the world. Action model learning is a form of inductive reasoning, where new knowledge is generated based on the agent's observations. The usual motivation for action model learning is the fact that manual specification of action models for planners is often a difficult, time-consuming, and error-prone task (especially in complex environments). == Action models == Given a training set E {\displaystyle E} consisting of examples e = ( s , a , s ′ ) {\displaystyle e=(s,a,s')} , where s , s ′ {\displaystyle s,s'} are observations of a world state from two consecutive time steps t , t ′ {\displaystyle t,t'} and a {\displaystyle a} is an action instance observed in time step t {\displaystyle t} , the goal of action model learning in general is to construct an action model ⟨ D , P ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle D,P\rangle } , where D {\displaystyle D} is a description of domain dynamics in action description formalism like STRIPS, ADL or PDDL and P {\displaystyle P} is a probability function defined over the elements of D {\displaystyle D} . However, many state of the art action learning methods assume determinism and do not induce P {\displaystyle P} . In addition to determinism, individual methods differ in how they deal with other attributes of domain (e.g. partial observability or sensoric noise). == Action learning methods == === State of the art === Recent action learning methods take various approaches and employ a wide variety of tools from different areas of artificial intelligence and computational logic. As an example of a method based on propositional logic, we can mention SLAF (Simultaneous Learning and Filtering) algorithm, which uses agent's observations to construct a long propositional formula over time and subsequently interprets it using a satisfiability (SAT) solver. Another technique, in which learning is converted into a satisfiability problem (weighted MAX-SAT in this case) and SAT solvers are used, is implemented in ARMS (Action-Relation Modeling System). Two mutually similar, fully declarative approaches to action learning were based on logic programming paradigm Answer Set Programming (ASP) and its extension, Reactive ASP. In another example, bottom-up inductive logic programming approach was employed. Several different solutions are not directly logic-based. For example, the action model learning using a perceptron algorithm or the multi level greedy search over the space of possible action models. In the older paper from 1992, the action model learning was studied as an extension of reinforcement learning. Nonetheless, further algorithms can be found that operate under different assumptions: FAMA can work even when some observations are missing, and it produces a general (lifted) planning model. It treats learning an action model like a planning problem, making sure the learned model matches the observations given. NOLAM can learn general action models even from noisy or imperfect data. LOCM focuses only on the order of actions in the data, ignoring any details about the states between those actions. The family of safe action model (SAM) learning methods create models that guarantee any plans made with them will actually work in the real world. There's also an extension called N-SAM that can learn action models with numeric conditions and effects. Additionally, numeric action models like N-SAM can be used to improve reinforcement learning (RL) performance through the RAMP algorithm. === Literature === Most action learning research papers are published in journals and conferences focused on artificial intelligence in general (e.g. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR), Artificial Intelligence, Applied Artificial Intelligence (AAI) or AAAI conferences). Despite mutual relevance of the topics, action model learning is usually not addressed in planning conferences like the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS).

  Read more →
• 

  Bidyut Baran Chaudhuri

  Bidyut Baran Chaudhuri (B. B. Chauduri) is a senior computer scientist and an emeritus professor of Techno India University in West Bengal, India. He is also adjuncted to Indian Statistical Institute, where he was a professor for about three decades. He was the founding Head of Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Unit (which was established in 1994) of ISI. Moreover, he was a J.C. Bose Fellow and Indian National Academy of Engineering Distinguished Professor at ISI. He was the vice-president of the Society for Natural Language Technology Research (SNLTR). His primary research contributes to the fields of computer vision, image processing and pattern recognition. He is a pioneer of "Indian language script OCR". == Education == Chaudhuri received his BSc (Hons.), BTech and MTech degrees from University of Calcutta, India in 1969, 1972 and 1974, respectively and PhD Degree from Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur in 1980. He did his post-doc work during 1981-1982 from Queen's University, U.K, through Leverhulme Overseas Fellowship. He also worked as a visiting faculty at Tech University, Hannover during 1986-87 as well as at GSF Institute of Radiation Protection (now Leibnitz Institute), Munich in 1990 and 1992. == Awards and recognition == Chaudhuri has been elected as a Life Fellow of IEEE "for contributions to pattern recognition, especially Indian language script OCR, document processing and natural language processing". He has become a Fellow of International Association for Pattern Recognition (IAPR) "for contributions to character recognition and speech synthesis in Indian language". He is also Fellow of The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS), Indian National Science Academy (INSA), Indian National Academy of Engineering (INAE), National Academy of Sciences (NASI), and Institute of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering (IETE). In 2011, Chaudhuri received the Om Prakash Bhasin Award for his contribution in the field of electronics and information technology. Chaudhuri's interview on some of his works has been reported in Indian newspaper as well. He is within world's top 2% scientists and top-10 Indian AI scientists according to a study conducted by Stanford University. He has also been featured as top-10 machine learning researcher from India.

  Read more →
• 

  Evaluation of machine translation

  Various methods for the evaluation for machine translation have been employed. This article focuses on the evaluation of the output of machine translation, rather than on performance or usability evaluation. == Round-trip translation == A typical way for lay people to assess machine translation quality is to translate from a source language to a target language and back to the source language with the same engine. Though intuitively this may seem like a good method of evaluation, it has been shown that round-trip translation is a "poor predictor of quality". The reason why it is such a poor predictor of quality is reasonably intuitive. A round-trip translation is not testing one system, but two systems: the language pair of the engine for translating into the target language, and the language pair translating back from the target language. Consider the following examples of round-trip translation performed from English to Italian and Portuguese from Somers (2005): In the first example, where the text is translated into Italian then back into English—the English text is significantly garbled, but the Italian is a serviceable translation. In the second example, the text translated back into English is perfect, but the Portuguese translation is meaningless; the program thought "tit" was a reference to a tit (bird), which was intended for a "tat", a word it did not understand. While round-trip translation may be useful to generate a "surplus of fun," the methodology is deficient for serious study of machine translation quality. == Human evaluation == This section covers two of the large scale evaluation studies that have had significant impact on the field—the ALPAC 1966 study and the ARPA study. === Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee (ALPAC) === One of the constituent parts of the ALPAC report was a study comparing different levels of human translation with machine translation output, using human subjects as judges. The human judges were specially trained for the purpose. The evaluation study compared an MT system translating from Russian into English with human translators, on two variables. The variables studied were "intelligibility" and "fidelity". Intelligibility was a measure of how "understandable" the sentence was, and was measured on a scale of 1–9. Fidelity was a measure of how much information the translated sentence retained compared to the original, and was measured on a scale of 0–9. Each point on the scale was associated with a textual description. For example, 3 on the intelligibility scale was described as "Generally unintelligible; it tends to read like nonsense but, with a considerable amount of reflection and study, one can at least hypothesize the idea intended by the sentence". Intelligibility was measured without reference to the original, while fidelity was measured indirectly. The translated sentence was presented, and after reading it and absorbing the content, the original sentence was presented. The judges were asked to rate the original sentence on informativeness. So, the more informative the original sentence, the lower the quality of the translation. The study showed that the variables were highly correlated when the human judgment was averaged per sentence. The variation among raters was small, but the researchers recommended that at the very least, three or four raters should be used. The evaluation methodology managed to separate translations by humans from translations by machines with ease. The study concluded that, "highly reliable assessments can be made of the quality of human and machine translations". === Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) === As part of the Human Language Technologies Program, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) created a methodology to evaluate machine translation systems, and continues to perform evaluations based on this methodology. The evaluation programme was instigated in 1991, and continues to this day. Details of the programme can be found in White et al. (1994) and White (1995). The evaluation programme involved testing several systems based on different theoretical approaches; statistical, rule-based and human-assisted. A number of methods for the evaluation of the output from these systems were tested in 1992 and the most recent suitable methods were selected for inclusion in the programmes for subsequent years. The methods were; comprehension evaluation, quality panel evaluation, and evaluation based on adequacy and fluency. Comprehension evaluation aimed to directly compare systems based on the results from multiple choice comprehension tests, as in Church et al. (1993). The texts chosen were a set of articles in English on the subject of financial news. These articles were translated by professional translators into a series of language pairs, and then translated back into English using the machine translation systems. It was decided that this was not adequate for a standalone method of comparing systems and as such abandoned due to issues with the modification of meaning in the process of translating from English. The idea of quality panel evaluation was to submit translations to a panel of expert native English speakers who were professional translators and get them to evaluate them. The evaluations were done on the basis of a metric, modelled on a standard US government metric used to rate human translations. This was good from the point of view that the metric was "externally motivated", since it was not specifically developed for machine translation. However, the quality panel evaluation was very difficult to set up logistically, as it necessitated having a number of experts together in one place for a week or more, and furthermore for them to reach consensus. This method was also abandoned. Along with a modified form of the comprehension evaluation (re-styled as informativeness evaluation), the most popular method was to obtain ratings from monolingual judges for segments of a document. The judges were presented with a segment, and asked to rate it for two variables, adequacy and fluency. Adequacy is a rating of how much information is transferred between the original and the translation, and fluency is a rating of how good the English is. This technique was found to cover the relevant parts of the quality panel evaluation, while at the same time being easier to deploy, as it didn't require expert judgment. Measuring systems based on adequacy and fluency, along with informativeness is now the standard methodology for the ARPA evaluation program. == Automatic evaluation == In the context of this article, a metric is a measurement. A metric that evaluates machine translation output represents the quality of the output. The quality of a translation is inherently subjective, there is no objective or quantifiable "good." Therefore, any metric must assign quality scores so they correlate with the human judgment of quality. That is, a metric should score highly translations that humans score highly, and give low scores to those humans give low scores. Human judgment is the benchmark for assessing automatic metrics, as humans are the end-users of any translation output. The measure of evaluation for metrics is correlation with human judgment. This is generally done at two levels, at the sentence level, where scores are calculated by the metric for a set of translated sentences, and then correlated against human judgment for the same sentences. And at the corpus level, where scores over the sentences are aggregated for both human judgments and metric judgments, and these aggregate scores are then correlated. Figures for correlation at the sentence level are rarely reported, although Banerjee et al. (2005) do give correlation figures that show that, at least for their metric, sentence-level correlation is substantially worse than corpus level correlation. While not widely reported, it has been noted that the genre, or domain, of a text has an effect on the correlation obtained when using metrics. Coughlin (2003) reports that comparing the candidate text against a single reference translation does not adversely affect the correlation of metrics when working in a restricted domain text. Even if a metric correlates well with human judgment in one study on one corpus, this successful correlation may not carry over to another corpus. Good metric performance, across text types or domains, is important for the reusability of the metric. A metric that only works for text in a specific domain is useful, but less useful than one that works across many domains—because creating a new metric for every new evaluation or domain is undesirable. Another important factor in the usefulness of an evaluation metric is to have a good correlation, even when working with small amounts of data, that is candidate sentences and reference translations. Turian et al. (2003) point out that, "Any MT evaluation measure is less reliable on shorter translations", and

  Read more →
• 

  Ernst Dickmanns

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

  Read more →
• 

  Clone tool

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

  Read more →
• 

  Restricted Boltzmann machine

  A restricted Boltzmann machine (RBM) (also called a restricted Sherrington–Kirkpatrick model with external field or restricted stochastic Ising–Lenz–Little model) is a generative stochastic artificial neural network that can learn a probability distribution over its set of inputs. RBMs were initially proposed under the name Harmonium by Paul Smolensky in 1986, and rose to prominence after Geoffrey Hinton and collaborators used fast learning algorithms for them in the mid-2000s. RBMs have found applications in dimensionality reduction, classification, collaborative filtering, feature learning, topic modelling, immunology, and even many‑body quantum mechanics. They can be trained in either supervised or unsupervised ways, depending on the task. As their name implies, RBMs are a variant of Boltzmann machines, with the restriction that their neurons must form a bipartite graph: a pair of nodes from each of the two groups of units (commonly referred to as the "visible" and "hidden" units respectively) may have a symmetric connection between them; and there are no connections between nodes within a group. By contrast, "unrestricted" Boltzmann machines may have connections between hidden units. This restriction allows for more efficient training algorithms than are available for the general class of Boltzmann machines, in particular the gradient-based contrastive divergence algorithm. Restricted Boltzmann machines can also be used in deep learning networks. In particular, deep belief networks can be formed by "stacking" RBMs and optionally fine-tuning the resulting deep network with gradient descent and backpropagation. == Structure == The standard type of RBM has binary-valued (Boolean) hidden and visible units, and consists of a matrix of weights W {\displaystyle W} of size m × n {\displaystyle m\times n} . Each weight element ( w i , j ) {\displaystyle (w_{i,j})} of the matrix is associated with the connection between the visible (input) unit v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} and the hidden unit h j {\displaystyle h_{j}} . In addition, there are bias weights (offsets) a i {\displaystyle a_{i}} for v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} and b j {\displaystyle b_{j}} for h j {\displaystyle h_{j}} . Given the weights and biases, the energy of a configuration (pair of Boolean vectors) (v,h) is defined as E ( v , h ) = − ∑ i a i v i − ∑ j b j h j − ∑ i ∑ j v i w i , j h j {\displaystyle E(v,h)=-\sum _{i}a_{i}v_{i}-\sum _{j}b_{j}h_{j}-\sum _{i}\sum _{j}v_{i}w_{i,j}h_{j}} or, in matrix notation, E ( v , h ) = − a T v − b T h − v T W h . {\displaystyle E(v,h)=-a^{\mathrm {T} }v-b^{\mathrm {T} }h-v^{\mathrm {T} }Wh.} This energy function is analogous to that of a Hopfield network. As with general Boltzmann machines, the joint probability distribution for the visible and hidden vectors is defined in terms of the energy function as follows, P ( v , h ) = 1 Z e − E ( v , h ) {\displaystyle P(v,h)={\frac {1}{Z}}e^{-E(v,h)}} where Z {\displaystyle Z} is a partition function defined as the sum of e − E ( v , h ) {\displaystyle e^{-E(v,h)}} over all possible configurations, which can be interpreted as a normalizing constant to ensure that the probabilities sum to 1. The marginal probability of a visible vector is the sum of P ( v , h ) {\displaystyle P(v,h)} over all possible hidden layer configurations, P ( v ) = 1 Z ∑ { h } e − E ( v , h ) {\displaystyle P(v)={\frac {1}{Z}}\sum _{\{h\}}e^{-E(v,h)}} , and vice versa. Since the underlying graph structure of the RBM is bipartite (meaning there are no intra-layer connections), the hidden unit activations are mutually independent given the visible unit activations. Conversely, the visible unit activations are mutually independent given the hidden unit activations. That is, for m visible units and n hidden units, the conditional probability of a configuration of the visible units v, given a configuration of the hidden units h, is P ( v | h ) = ∏ i = 1 m P ( v i | h ) {\displaystyle P(v|h)=\prod _{i=1}^{m}P(v_{i}|h)} . Conversely, the conditional probability of h given v is P ( h | v ) = ∏ j = 1 n P ( h j | v ) {\displaystyle P(h|v)=\prod _{j=1}^{n}P(h_{j}|v)} . The individual activation probabilities are given by P ( h j = 1 | v ) = σ ( b j + ∑ i = 1 m w i , j v i ) {\displaystyle P(h_{j}=1|v)=\sigma \left(b_{j}+\sum _{i=1}^{m}w_{i,j}v_{i}\right)} and P ( v i = 1 | h ) = σ ( a i + ∑ j = 1 n w i , j h j ) {\displaystyle \,P(v_{i}=1|h)=\sigma \left(a_{i}+\sum _{j=1}^{n}w_{i,j}h_{j}\right)} where σ {\displaystyle \sigma } denotes the logistic sigmoid. The visible units of Restricted Boltzmann Machine can be multinomial, although the hidden units are Bernoulli. In this case, the logistic function for visible units is replaced by the softmax function P ( v i k = 1 | h ) = exp ⁡ ( a i k + Σ j W i j k h j ) Σ k ′ = 1 K exp ⁡ ( a i k ′ + Σ j W i j k ′ h j ) {\displaystyle P(v_{i}^{k}=1|h)={\frac {\exp(a_{i}^{k}+\Sigma _{j}W_{ij}^{k}h_{j})}{\Sigma _{k'=1}^{K}\exp(a_{i}^{k'}+\Sigma _{j}W_{ij}^{k'}h_{j})}}} where K is the number of discrete values that the visible values have. They are applied in topic modeling, and recommender systems. === Relation to other models === Restricted Boltzmann machines are a special case of Boltzmann machines and Markov random fields. The graphical model of RBMs corresponds to that of factor analysis. == Training algorithm == Restricted Boltzmann machines are trained to maximize the product of probabilities assigned to some training set V {\displaystyle V} (a matrix, each row of which is treated as a visible vector v {\displaystyle v} ), arg ⁡ max W ∏ v ∈ V P ( v ) {\displaystyle \arg \max _{W}\prod _{v\in V}P(v)} or equivalently, to maximize the expected log probability of a training sample v {\displaystyle v} selected randomly from V {\displaystyle V} : arg ⁡ max W E [ log ⁡ P ( v ) ] {\displaystyle \arg \max _{W}\mathbb {E} \left[\log P(v)\right]} The algorithm most often used to train RBMs, that is, to optimize the weight matrix W {\displaystyle W} , is the contrastive divergence (CD) algorithm due to Hinton, originally developed to train PoE (product of experts) models. The algorithm performs Gibbs sampling and is used inside a gradient descent procedure (similar to the way backpropagation is used inside such a procedure when training feedforward neural nets) to compute weight update. The basic, single-step contrastive divergence (CD-1) procedure for a single sample can be summarized as follows: Take a training sample v, compute the probabilities of the hidden units and sample a hidden activation vector h from this probability distribution. Compute the outer product of v and h and call this the positive gradient. From h, sample a reconstruction v' of the visible units, then resample the hidden activations h' from this. (Gibbs sampling step) Compute the outer product of v' and h' and call this the negative gradient. Let the update to the weight matrix W {\displaystyle W} be the positive gradient minus the negative gradient, times some learning rate: Δ W = ϵ ( v h T − v ′ h ′ T ) {\displaystyle \Delta W=\epsilon (vh^{\mathsf {T}}-v'h'^{\mathsf {T}})} . Update the biases a and b analogously: Δ a = ϵ ( v − v ′ ) {\displaystyle \Delta a=\epsilon (v-v')} , Δ b = ϵ ( h − h ′ ) {\displaystyle \Delta b=\epsilon (h-h')} . A Practical Guide to Training RBMs written by Hinton can be found on his homepage. == Stacked Restricted Boltzmann Machine == The difference between the Stacked Restricted Boltzmann Machines and RBM is that RBM has lateral connections within a layer that are prohibited to make analysis tractable. On the other hand, the Stacked Boltzmann consists of a combination of an unsupervised three-layer network with symmetric weights and a supervised fine-tuned top layer for recognizing three classes. The usage of Stacked Boltzmann is to understand Natural languages, retrieve documents, image generation, and classification. These functions are trained with unsupervised pre-training and/or supervised fine-tuning. Unlike the undirected symmetric top layer, with a two-way unsymmetric layer for connection for RBM. The restricted Boltzmann's connection is three-layers with asymmetric weights, and two networks are combined into one. Stacked Boltzmann does share similarities with RBM, the neuron for Stacked Boltzmann is a stochastic binary Hopfield neuron, which is the same as the Restricted Boltzmann Machine. The energy from both Restricted Boltzmann and RBM is given by Gibb's probability measure: E = − 1 2 ∑ i , j w i j s i s j + ∑ i θ i s i {\displaystyle E=-{\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{i,j}{w_{ij}{s_{i}}{s_{j}}}+\sum _{i}{\theta _{i}}{s_{i}}} . The training process of Restricted Boltzmann is similar to RBM. Restricted Boltzmann train one layer at a time and approximate equilibrium state with a 3-segment pass, not performing back propagation. Restricted Boltzmann uses both supervised and unsupervised on different RBM for pre-training for classification and recognition. The training uses contrastive divergence with

  Read more →
• 

  Interacting particle system

  In probability theory, an interacting particle system (IPS) is a stochastic process ( X ( t ) ) t ∈ R + {\displaystyle (X(t))_{t\in \mathbb {R} ^{+}}} on some configuration space Ω = S G {\displaystyle \Omega =S^{G}} given by a site space, a countably-infinite-order graph G {\displaystyle G} and a local state space, a compact metric space S {\displaystyle S} . More precisely IPS are continuous-time Markov jump processes describing the collective behavior of stochastically interacting components. IPS are the continuous-time analogue of stochastic cellular automata. Among the main examples are the voter model, the contact process, the asymmetric simple exclusion process (ASEP), the Glauber dynamics and in particular the stochastic Ising model. IPS are usually defined via their Markov generator giving rise to a unique Markov process using Markov semigroups and the Hille-Yosida theorem. The generator again is given via so-called transition rates c Λ ( η , ξ ) > 0 {\displaystyle c_{\Lambda }(\eta ,\xi )>0} where Λ ⊂ G {\displaystyle \Lambda \subset G} is a finite set of sites and η , ξ ∈ Ω {\displaystyle \eta ,\xi \in \Omega } with η i = ξ i {\displaystyle \eta _{i}=\xi _{i}} for all i ∉ Λ {\displaystyle i\notin \Lambda } . The rates describe exponential waiting times of the process to jump from configuration η {\displaystyle \eta } into configuration ξ {\displaystyle \xi } . More generally the transition rates are given in form of a finite measure c Λ ( η , d ξ ) {\displaystyle c_{\Lambda }(\eta ,d\xi )} on S Λ {\displaystyle S^{\Lambda }} . The generator L {\displaystyle L} of an IPS has the following form. First, the domain of L {\displaystyle L} is a subset of the space of "observables", that is, the set of real valued continuous functions on the configuration space Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } . Then for any observable f {\displaystyle f} in the domain of L {\displaystyle L} , one has L f ( η ) = ∑ Λ ∫ ξ : ξ Λ c = η Λ c c Λ ( η , d ξ ) [ f ( ξ ) − f ( η ) ] {\displaystyle Lf(\eta )=\sum _{\Lambda }\int _{\xi :\xi _{\Lambda ^{c}}=\eta _{\Lambda ^{c}}}c_{\Lambda }(\eta ,d\xi )[f(\xi )-f(\eta )]} . For example, for the stochastic Ising model we have G = Z d {\displaystyle G=\mathbb {Z} ^{d}} , S = { − 1 , + 1 } {\displaystyle S=\{-1,+1\}} , c Λ = 0 {\displaystyle c_{\Lambda }=0} if Λ ≠ { i } {\displaystyle \Lambda \neq \{i\}} for some i ∈ G {\displaystyle i\in G} and c i ( η , η i ) = exp ⁡ [ − β ∑ j : | j − i | = 1 η i η j ] {\displaystyle c_{i}(\eta ,\eta ^{i})=\exp[-\beta \sum _{j:|j-i|=1}\eta _{i}\eta _{j}]} where η i {\displaystyle \eta ^{i}} is the configuration equal to η {\displaystyle \eta } except it is flipped at site i {\displaystyle i} . β {\displaystyle \beta } is a new parameter modeling the inverse temperature. == The Voter model == The voter model (usually in continuous time, but there are discrete versions as well) is a process similar to the contact process. In this process η ( x ) {\displaystyle \eta (x)} is taken to represent a voter's attitude on a particular topic. Voters reconsider their opinions at times distributed according to independent exponential random variables (this gives a Poisson process locally – note that there are in general infinitely many voters so no global Poisson process can be used). At times of reconsideration, a voter chooses one neighbor uniformly from amongst all neighbors and takes that neighbor's opinion. One can generalize the process by allowing the picking of neighbors to be something other than uniform. === Discrete time process === In the discrete time voter model in one dimension, ξ t ( x ) : Z → { 0 , 1 } {\displaystyle \xi _{t}(x):\mathbb {Z} \to \{0,1\}} represents the state of particle x {\displaystyle x} at time t {\displaystyle t} . Informally each individual is arranged on a line and can "see" other individuals that are within a radius, r {\displaystyle r} . If more than a certain proportion, θ {\displaystyle \theta } of these people disagree then the individual changes her attitude, otherwise she keeps it the same. Durrett and Steif (1993) and Steif (1994) show that for large radii there is a critical value θ c {\displaystyle \theta _{c}} such that if θ > θ c {\displaystyle \theta >\theta _{c}} most individuals never change, and for θ ∈ ( 1 / 2 , θ c ) {\displaystyle \theta \in (1/2,\theta _{c})} in the limit most sites agree. (Both of these results assume the probability of ξ 0 ( x ) = 1 {\displaystyle \xi _{0}(x)=1} is one half.) This process has a natural generalization to more dimensions, some results for this are discussed in Durrett and Steif (1993). === Continuous time process === The continuous time process is similar in that it imagines each individual has a belief at a time and changes it based on the attitudes of its neighbors. The process is described informally by Liggett (1985, 226), "Periodically (i.e., at independent exponential times), an individual reassesses his view in a rather simple way: he chooses a 'friend' at random with certain probabilities and adopts his position." A model was constructed with this interpretation by Holley and Liggett (1975). This process is equivalent to a process first suggested by Clifford and Sudbury (1973) where animals are in conflict over territory and are equally matched. A site is selected to be invaded by a neighbor at a given time.

  Read more →
• 

  Timnit Gebru

  Timnit W. Gebru (Amharic and Tigrinya: ትምኒት ገብሩ; 1982/1983) is an Eritrean Ethiopian-born computer scientist who works in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI), algorithmic bias and data mining. She is a co-founder of Black in AI, an advocacy group that has pushed for more Black roles in AI development and research. She is the founder of the Distributed Artificial Intelligence Research Institute (DAIR). In December 2020, public controversy erupted over the circumstances surrounding Gebru's departure from Google, where she was technical co-lead of the Ethical Artificial Intelligence Team. Gebru had coauthored a paper on the risks of large language models (LLMs) acting as stochastic parrots, and submitted it for publication. According to Jeff Dean, head of Google AI, the paper was submitted without waiting for Google's internal review, which then asserted that it ignored too much relevant research. Google management requested that Gebru either withdraw the paper or remove the names of all the authors employed by Google. Gebru requested the identity and feedback of every reviewer, and stated that if Google refused, she would talk to her manager about "a last date". Google terminated her employment immediately, stating that they were accepting her resignation. Gebru maintained that she had not formally offered to resign, and only threatened to. Gebru has been widely recognized for her expertise in the ethics of artificial intelligence. She was named one of the World's 50 Greatest Leaders by Fortune and one of Nature's ten people who shaped science in 2021, and in 2022, one of Time's most influential people. == Early life and education == Gebru was raised in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Her father, an electrical engineer with a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), died when she was five years old, and she was raised by her mother, an economist. Both her parents are from Eritrea. When Gebru was 15, during the Eritrean–Ethiopian War, she fled Ethiopia after some of her family were deported to Eritrea and compelled to fight in the war. She was initially denied a U.S. visa and briefly lived in Ireland, but she eventually received political asylum in the U.S., an experience she said was "miserable". Gebru settled in Somerville, Massachusetts to attend high school, where she says she immediately started to experience racial discrimination, with some teachers refusing to allow her to take certain Advanced Placement courses, despite being a high-achiever. After she completed high school, an encounter with the police set Gebru on a course toward a focus on ethics in technology. A friend of hers, a Black woman, was assaulted in a bar, and Gebru called the police to report it. She says that instead of filing the assault report, her friend was arrested and remanded to a cell. Gebru called it a pivotal moment and a "blatant example of systemic racism." In 2001, Gebru was accepted at Stanford University. There, she earned her Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in electrical engineering and her PhD in computer vision in 2017. Gebru was advised during her PhD program by Fei-Fei Li. During the 2008 United States presidential election, Gebru canvassed in support of Barack Obama. Gebru presented her doctoral research at the 2017 LDV Capital Vision Summit competition, where computer vision scientists present their work to members of industry and venture capitalists. Gebru won the competition, starting a series of collaborations with other entrepreneurs and investors. Both during her PhD program in 2016 and in 2018, Gebru returned to Ethiopia with Jelani Nelson's programming campaign, AddisCoder. While working on her PhD, Gebru authored a paper that was never published about her concern over the future of AI. She wrote of the dangers of the lack of diversity in the field, centered on her experiences with the police and on a ProPublica investigation into predictive policing, which revealed a projection of human biases in machine learning. In the paper, she scathed the "boy's club culture", reflecting on her experiences at conference gatherings of drunken male attendees sexually harassing her, and criticized the hero worship of the field's celebrities. == Career == === 2004–2013: Software development at Apple === Gebru joined Apple as an intern while at Stanford, working in their hardware division making circuitry for audio components, and was offered a full-time position the following year. Of her work as an audio engineer, her manager told Wired she was "fearless", and well-liked by her colleagues. During her tenure at Apple, Gebru became more interested in building software, namely computer vision that could detect human figures. She went on to develop signal processing algorithms for the first iPad. At the time, she said she did not consider the potential use for surveillance, saying "I just found it technically interesting." Long after leaving the company, during the #AppleToo movement in the summer of 2021, which was led by Apple engineer Cher Scarlett, who consulted with Gebru, Gebru revealed she experienced "so many egregious things" and "always wondered how they manage[d] to get out of the spotlight." She said that accountability at Apple was long overdue, and warned they could not continue to fly under the radar for much longer. Gebru also criticized the way the media covers Apple and other tech giants, saying that the press helps shield such companies from public scrutiny. === 2013–2017: Research at Stanford and Microsoft === In 2013, Gebru joined Fei-Fei Li's lab at Stanford, where she combined deep learning with Google Street View to estimate the demographics of United States neighbourhoods, showing that socioeconomic attributes such as voting patterns, income, race, and education can be inferred from observations of cars. In 2015, Gebru attended the field's top conference, Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), in Montreal, Canada. Out of 3,700 attendees, she noted she was one of only a few Black researchers. When she attended again the following year, she kept a tally and noted that there were only five Black men and that she was the only Black woman out of 8,500 delegates. Together with her colleague Rediet Abebe, Gebru founded Black in AI, a community of Black researchers working in artificial intelligence that aims to increase the presence, visibility, and well-being of Black professionals and leaders within the field. In the summer of 2017, Gebru joined Microsoft as a postdoctoral researcher in the Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics in AI (FATE) lab. In 2017, Gebru spoke at the Fairness and Transparency conference, where MIT Technology Review interviewed her about biases that exist in AI systems and how adding diversity in AI teams can fix that issue. In her interview with Jackie Snow, Snow asked Gebru, "How does the lack of diversity distort artificial intelligence and specifically computer vision?" and Gebru pointed out that there are biases that exist in the software developers. While at Microsoft, Gebru co-authored a research paper called Gender Shades, which became the namesake of a project of a broader Massachusetts Institute of Technology project led by co-author Joy Buolamwini. The pair investigated facial recognition software, finding that in one particular implementation Black women were 35% less likely to be recognized than White men. === 2018–2020: Artificial intelligence ethics at Google === Gebru joined Google in 2018, where she co-led a team on the ethics of artificial intelligence with Margaret Mitchell. She studied the implications of artificial intelligence, looking to improve the ability of technology to do social good. In 2019, Gebru and other artificial intelligence researchers "signed a letter calling on Amazon to stop selling its facial-recognition technology to law enforcement agencies because it is biased against women and people of color", citing a study that was conducted by MIT researchers showing that Amazon's facial recognition system had more trouble identifying darker-skinned females than any other technology company's facial recognition software. In a New York Times interview, Gebru has further expressed that she believes facial recognition is too dangerous to be used for law enforcement and security purposes at present. === Exit from Google === In 2020 Gebru and five co-authors wrote a paper titled "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜". The paper examined risks of very large language models, including their environmental footprint, financial costs, the inscrutability of large models, the potential for LLMs to display prejudice against certain groups, the inability of LLMs to understand the language they process, and the use of LLMs to spread disinformation. In December 2020, her employment with Google ended after Google management asked her to either withdraw the paper before publication, or remove the names of all the Google employees from

  Read more →
• 

  N-jet

  An N-jet is the set of (partial) derivatives of a function f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(x)} up to order N. Specifically, in the area of computer vision, the N-jet is usually computed from a scale space representation L {\displaystyle L} of the input image f ( x , y ) {\displaystyle f(x,y)} , and the partial derivatives of L {\displaystyle L} are used as a basis for expressing various types of visual modules. For example, algorithms for tasks such as feature detection, feature classification, stereo matching, tracking and object recognition can be expressed in terms of N-jets computed at one or several scales in scale space.

  Read more →
• 

  Best AI Background Removers in 2026

  Comparing the best AI background remover? An AI background remover is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI background remover slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.

  Read more →
• 

  Hidden Markov model

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